t at the same time, when one writes upon any particular period,
it is both necessary and decent for him to consult every book relating to
it upon which he can lay his hands." This avowal proves that Robertson
knew little of the history of Charles V. till he began the task; and he
further confesses that "he had no knowledge of the Spanish or German,"
which, for the history of a Spanish monarch and a German emperor, was
somewhat ominous of the nature of the projected history.
Yet Robertson, though he once thus acknowledged, as we see, that he "never
had access to any copious libraries, and did not _pretend to any extensive
knowledge of authors_," seems to have acquired from his friend, Dr. Birch,
who was a genuine researcher in manuscripts as well as printed books, a
taste even for bibliographical ostentation, as appears by that pompous and
voluminous list of authors prefixed to his "History of America;" the most
objectionable of his histories, being a perpetual apology for the Spanish
Government, adapted to the meridian of the court of Madrid, rather than to
the cause of humanity, of truth, and of philosophy. I understand, from
good authority, that it would not be difficult to prove that our historian
had barely examined them, and probably had never turned over half of that
deceptive catalogue. Birch thought so, and was probably a little disturbed
at the overwhelming success of our eloquent and penetrating historian,
while his own historical labours, the most authentic materials of history,
but not history itself, hardly repaid the printer. Birch's publications
are either originals, that is, letters or state-papers; or they are
narratives drawn from originals, for he never wrote but from manuscripts.
They are the true _materia historica_.
Birch, however, must have enjoyed many a secret triumph over our popular
historians, who had introduced their beautiful philosophical history into
our literature; the dilemma in which they sometimes found themselves must
have amused him. He has thrown out an oblique stroke at Bobertson's "pomp
of style, and fine eloquence," "which too often tend to disguise the real
state of the facts."[A] When he received from Robertson the present of his
"Charles V.," after the just tribute of his praise, he adds some regret
that the historian had not been so fortunate as to have seen Burghley's
State-papers, "published since Christmas," and a manuscript trial of Mary,
Queen of Scots, in Lord Boyston
|