Produced by David Clarke, Jens Nordmann and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries) HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION IN ENGLAND. BY HENRY THOMAS BUCKLE. IN THREE VOLUMES. VOL. III. _NEW EDITION._ TORONTO: ROSE-BELFORD PUBLISHING COMPANY, 60 YORK STREET. 1878. ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. CONDITION OF SCOTLAND TO THE END OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. PAGE Scotland and Spain are very dissimilar in regard to loyalty 1 But are very similar in regard to superstition 4 The Scotch unite liberality in politics with illiberality in religion. This is the largest and most important fact in their history; and the rest of the Volume will be occupied in investigating its causes 5 Influence of physical geography 5-7 Roman invasion of Scotland 7-9 Irish invasion of Scotland 9 Norwegian invasion of Scotland 11-12 English invasion of Scotland 12-17 The injury which these invasions inflicted upon Scotland stopped the growth of towns, and thereby favoured the power of the nobles 18 The power of the nobles was still further favoured by the physical structure of the country 19-20 And by the weakness of the Crown 20-21 Hence their authority had, before the close of the fourteenth century, become enormous. The Crown, completely overshadowed by them, could derive no aid from the citizens, because, owing to the circumstances just mentioned, there were no cities 21-23 For, industry was impossible, and the commonest arts were unknown 23-26 Evidence of the scanty population of the Scotch towns 26-30 They were too feeble and insignificant to elect their own magistrates 32-33 The municipal element being thus imperfect, the only ally, which the Crown could possibly find, was the Church 34-35 Hence, a coalition between the kings and the clergy against the nobles 34 The clergy were the only body who could withstand the nobles. Causes of the great influence of the clergy 35-44 CHAPTER II. CONDITION OF SCOTLAND IN THE FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES. Early in the fifteenth century, the alliance between the Crown and the Church against the nobles, became obvious 45 James I. attacked the nobles, and favoured the Church; hoping thereby to establish the supremacy of the throne 46-47 But his policy failed, because it was opposed by the operation of general causes 47-48 Besides failing, it produced his own destruction 49 Power of the Douglases, who were at the head of the southern nobility 49-50 James II. murdered the chiefs of that family 51-52 The Crown, in its efforts against the nobles, was encouraged by the clergy; and before the middle of the fifteenth century, the Church and the aristocracy were completely estranged from each other 52-54 James III., like James II. and James I., allied himself with the clergy against the nobles 55-56 Their power, however, was too deeply rooted to be shaken; and in 1488, they put the king to death 55 Still, and notwithstanding these successive failures, James IV. followed the same policy as his predecessors 56 So did James V. Consequently the nobles imprisoned him, and ejected the clergy from all offices in the state 57 In 1528, James V. escaped; the Crown and the Church regained the ascendant, and the principal nobles were banished 58 From this moment, the nobles hated the Church more than ever. Their hatred brought about the Reformation 58-59 Active measures of the government against the nobles 60-61 The nobles revenged themselves by becoming Reformers 62 James V., on the other hand, threw himself entirely into the arms of the Church 62-63 As the nobles took the opposite side, and as the people had no influence, the success or failure of the Reformation in Scotland was simply a question of the success or failure of the aristocratic power 65-68 In 1542, the nobles openly refused obedience to James V.; and their treatment of him at this critical period of his life, broke his heart 68-69 Directly he died, they regained authority. The clergy were displaced, and measures favourable to Protestantism were adopted 69-72 In 1546, Cardinal Beaton was assassinated, and Knox began his career 74-75 Subsequent proceedings of Knox 76-77 While Knox was abroad, the nobles established the Reformation 78 He returned to Scotland in 1559, by which time the struggle was nearly over 79 In 1559, the queen regent was deposed; the nobles became supreme; and, in 1560, the Church was destroyed 80-84 Immediately this revolution was completed, the nobles and the preachers began to quarrel about the wealth of the Church 84 The nobles, thinking that they ought to have it, took it into their own hands 85-88 Thereupon, the Protestant preachers said that the nobles were instigated by the devil 88-90 Morton, who was at the head of the nobility, became enraged at the proceedings of the new clergy, and persecuted them 91-92 A complete rupture between the two classes 93 The clergy, finding themselves despised by the governing class, united themselves heartily with the people, and advocated democratic principles 93 In 1574, Melville became their leader. Under his auspices, that great struggle began, which never stopped until, sixty years later, it produced the rebellion against Charles I. 94 The first manifestations of this rebellious spirit was the attack on the bishops 94 In 1575, the attack began. In 1580, episcopacy was abolished 96-97 But the nobles upheld that institution, because they loved inequality for the same reasons which made the clergy love equality 97-100 Struggle between the upper classes and the clergy respecting episcopacy 100-103 In 1582, James VI. was imprisoned; and his captivity was justified by the clergy, whose democratic principles were now openly proclaimed 103-104 Violent language used by the clergy against the king and against the nobles 104-109 Their leader, Melville, personally insulted the king, and they were probably privy to the Gowrie conspiracy in 1600 110 Still, the clergy, notwithstanding the indecency of their conduct, conferred the greatest of all boons upon Scotland, by keeping alive and nurturing the spirit of liberty 111-114 CHAPTER III. CONDITION OF SCOTLAND DURING THE SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES. In 1603, the King of Scotland became also King of England, and determined to use his new resources in curbing and chastising the Scotch clergy 115-122 His cruel treatment of them 122-124 In 1610, James, backed by the power of England, forced episcopacy upon Scotland. Courts of High Commission were also set up 125-127 Tyrannical conduct of the bishops 127-129 Meanwhile, a reaction was preparing 129-132 In 1637, the reaction declared itself, and, in 1638, the bishops were overthrown 132-133 The movement being essentially democratic, could not stop there, but quickly spread from the Church to the State. In 1639, war was made upon Charles I. by the Scotch, who, having defeated the king, sold him to the English, who executed him 134-136 The Scotch, before they would crown Charles II., compelled him to humble himself, and to confess his own errors and the errors of his family 136-137 But, after Charles II. mounted the throne of England, he became powerful enough to triumph over the Scotch. He availed himself of that power to oppress Scotland even more grievously than his two predecessors had done 137-140 Happily, however, the spirit of liberty was strong enough to baffle his attempts to establish a permanent despotism 140 Still, the crisis was terrible, and the people and their clergy were exposed to every sort of outrage 141-146 Now, as before, the bishops aided the government in its efforts to enslave Scotland. Being hated by the people, they allied themselves with the Crown, and displayed the warmest affection towards James II., during whose reign cruelties were perpetrated worse than any previously known 147-150 In 1688, another reaction, in which the Scotch again freed themselves from their oppressors 151 The only powerful friends of this bad government were the Highlanders 151 Reasons which induced the Highlanders to rebel in favour of the Stuarts 151-153 The Highland rebellions of 1715 and 1745 were not the result of loyalty 153-159 After 1745, the Highlanders sank into complete insignificance, and the progress of Scotland was uninterrupted 159 Beginning of the trading spirit 160-161 Connexion between the rising of the trading spirit and the abolition, in 1748, of hereditary jurisdictions 161-162 The abolition of these jurisdictions was a symptom of the declining power of the Scotch nobles, but not a cause of it 161 One cause of the decline of their power was the union with England, in 1707 162-167 Another cause was the failure of the Rebellion of 1745 167 The nobles being thus weakened, were, in 1748, easily deprived of their right of jurisdiction. In this way, they lost the last emblem of their old authority 169-170 This great democratic and liberating movement was aided by the growth of the mercantile and manufacturing classes 171-172 And their growth was itself assisted by the Union with England 172 Evidence of the rapid progress of the industrious classes in the first half of the eighteenth century 173-183 During the same period, a new and splendid literature arose in Scotland 183-184 But, unfortunately, this literature, notwithstanding its bold and inquisitive spirit, was unable to diminish national superstition 184-186 It is the business of the historian to ascertain the causes of its failure. If he cannot do this, he cannot understand the history of Scotland 186 The first and most essential quality of an historian, is a clear perception of the great scientific doctrine of Law. But whoever seeks to apply this doctrine to the whole course of history, and to elucidate, by its aid, the march and theory of affairs, is met by obstacles which no single mind can remove 186-190 CHAPTER IV. AN EXAMINATION OF THE SCOTCH INTELLECT DURING THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY. The rest of the Volume will be occupied with a still closer investigation of the double paradox presented by the history of Scotland; namely, 1st, that the same people should be liberal in politics, and illiberal in religion; and, 2nd, that the free and sceptical literature which they produced in the eighteenth century, should have been unable to lessen their religious illiberality 191 Their religious illiberality was the result of the immense power possessed by their clergy in the seventeenth century. The causes of that power will be examined in the present chapter 192 The failure of their literature in diminishing this illiberality during the eighteenth century, was the result of the peculiar method of the inquiry adopted by the Scotch philosophers. The causes of the universal diffusion of that method, the nature of the method, and the consequences of it, will be examined in the next chapter, which will conclude the Volume 192-193 Circumstances in the seventeenth century favourable to the influence of the Scotch clergy 193-197 While the English war against Charles I. was essentially political, the Scotch war against him was essentially religious 197-200 Though this was the effect of Scotch superstition, it was also a cause of its further progress 201-202 Hence, in the seventeenth century, secular interests were neglected, and theological ones became supreme. Illustration of this, from the zeal of the people to hear sermons of inordinate frequency and of terrible length; so that they passed the greater part of their lives in what were erroneously termed religious exercises 203-206 The clergy availed themselves of these habits to extend and consolidate their own authority 205-206 Their great engine of power was the Kirk-Session. Tyranny of the Kirk-Sessions 206-210 Monstrous pretensions of the clergy 210-212 Cases in which it was believed that these pretensions were upheld and vindicated by miracles 212-220 The clergy, becoming elated, indulge in language of extraordinary arrogance 221-227 They asserted that miracles were wrought in their behalf, and often on their persons 228-229 Effect of these proceedings upon the Scotch mind 230-232 The clergy, to intimidate the people, and bring them completely under control, advocated horrible notions concerning evil spirits and future punishments 232-243 With the same object they propounded notions more horrible still, respecting the Deity, whom they represented as a cruel, passionate, and sanguinary Being 245-252 They moreover declared that harmless and even praiseworthy actions were sinful, and would provoke the Divine wrath 251-262 To prevent such imaginary sins, the clergy made arbitrary regulations, and punished those who disobeyed them, sometimes by flogging, and sometimes by branding with hot irons, and sometimes in other ways 262-263 Specimens of the sins which the clergy invented 264-268 The result was, that all mirth, all innocent gaiety, all demonstrations of happiness, and nearly all physical enjoyments, were destroyed in Scotland 268-269 Hence, the national character was mutilated. For, the pleasures of the body are, in our actual condition, as essential a part of the great scheme of life, and are as necessary to human affairs, as are the pleasures of the mind 269-271 But the clergy, by denouncing these pleasures of the senses, do what they can, in every country, to diminish the total amount of happiness of which humanity is susceptible, and which it has a right to enjoy 271-275 In no Protestant country have the clergy pushed these narrow and unsocial tenets so far as in Scotland 275-276 Indeed, in some respects, the Scotch clergy were more ascetic than those of any branch of the Catholic Church, except the Spanish; since they attempted to destroy the affections, and to sever the holiest ties of domestic love 276-279 CHAPTER V. AN EXAMINATION OF THE SCOTCH INTELLECT DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. The Scotch philosophical literature of the eighteenth century, was a reaction against the theological spirit of the seventeenth 281 But the peculiarity of the philosophy which now arose, is that, instead of being an inductive philosophy, it was a deductive one 281-282 This is well worthy of notice; because the inductive method being essentially anti-theological, it might have been expected that the opponents of the theological spirit would have followed that method 282-284 The truth, however, was, that the theological spirit had taken such hold of the Scotch mind, that it was impossible for the inductive method to gain a hearing 284-289 Hence, the secular philosophy of the eighteenth century, though new in its results, was not new in the method by which those results were obtained 289 In this respect, Scotland is similar to Germany, but dissimilar to England 289-290 Summary of the most important distinctions between induction and deduction 291 The whole of the Scotch philosophy, physical as well as metaphysical, is deductive 291 Hutcheson's philosophy 292-304 Its results and tendency 292-299 Its method 299-304 Adam Smith's philosophy 304-330 His _Theory of Moral Sentiments_ and his _Wealth of Nations_ are different parts of one subject. To understand either, we must study both 304-305 His deductive method depended upon a suppression of premisses 304-309 Account of his _Theory of Moral Sentiments_ 309-314 Account of his _Wealth of Nations_ 314-330 Hume's philosophy 331-349 His want of imagination 331-332 Importance and novelty of his doctrines 333-337 His method was eminently deductive; and he, like Adam Smith, cared little for experience 337-341 Hence, his injustice to Bacon, whose method was diametrically opposed to his own 338-339 His _Natural History of Religion_ 342-348 Comparison between the method of this work, and the method employed by Cudworth 348 Reid's philosophy 349-361 His timidity made him look at the practical tendency of speculative doctrines, instead of confining himself to the question of their truth or falsehood 349-354 But a philosopher should deem it his business to ascertain new truths, without regard to their consequences 349-350 Reid attacked Hume's method, because he disliked the results to which that method had led 354-355 And yet, in raising his own philosophy, he followed the very same method himself 355-359 Estimate of the value of what Reid effected 359-360 Opposition between the method of Reid and that of Bacon 360-361 In physical philosophy, the deductive method was equally prevalent in Scotland 361-seq. The laws of heat 362 Indestructibility of force. Interchange of forces 362-365 Black's philosophy 367-377 His theory of latent heat prepared the way for subsequent discoveries 367-371 His method was deductive, and does not come under any of the rules of the Baconian philosophy 371-372 He reasoned from his principles speculatively, instead of occupying himself with a long course of experiments 372-377 To do this was to indulge the imagination, which is deemed dangerous by the inductive school of English physicists. But, in the pursuit of truth, we need all our powers; and the advance of physical science is retarded by our neglect of the imaginative and emotional faculties 377-382 Black, therefore, did immense service by giving free scope, to the imagination. The same plan was pursued by his successor, Leslie 383 Leslie's philosophy of heat 383-388 He derived great aid from poetry 385 And was unjust to Bacon, whose inductive views he disliked 388 Hutton's geological philosophy 388-402 Fire and water are the two causes which have altered, and are still altering, the crust of the earth. The supposition that volcanic action was formerly more powerful than at present, is quite consistent with the doctrines of an unbroken sequence of events, and of the uniformity of natural laws 388-390 The action of fire and water on the crust of the earth, may be studied deductively, by computing separately the probable operation of each. Or they maybe studied inductively, by observing their united effects, and rising from the effects to the causes; while the deductive plan is to descend from the causes to the effects 390-391 Of these two methods, the English followed the inductive; the Scotch and Germans followed the deductive 391 English geology founded by William Smith 391-393 German geology founded by Werner 393-395 Scotch geology founded by Hutton 396 The English observed effects in order to ascertain causes. The Germans, assuming water to be the cause, reasoned from it to the effects. The Scotch, assuming heat to be the cause, made its principles the first step in their argument 391-396 Reasons which made the Scotch geologists argue from the principles of heat, instead of, like the German geologists, arguing from the principles of water 396 Though Hutton founded the theory of metamorphic rocks, and ascribed such immense importance to heat, he would not take the trouble of examining a single region of active volcanos, where he might have seen those very operations of nature, respecting which he speculated 398 But, by a deductive application of the principles unfolded by Black, he arrived at a conclusion concerning the consolidation of strata by heat 399-400 That conclusion was entirely speculative, and unsupported by experience 399 Though experiment might perhaps verify it, no one had yet made the trial; and Hutton was too averse to the inductive method to undertake the investigation himself 400-401 Sir James Hall afterwards took the matter up, and empirically verified the great idea which Hutton had propounded 401-402 Watt's invention of the steam-engine, and discovery of the composition of water 402-406 Contrast between the method by which he, as a Scotchman, discovered the composition of water, and the opposite method by which the Englishman, Cavendish, made the same discovery at the same time 404-406 Nature of the evidence of the supposed difference between the organic and inorganic world. Life is probably a property of all matter 406-410 Assuming, however, for the purposes of classification, that the organic world is fundamentally different from the inorganic, we may divide organic science into physiology and pathology 410-412 The two great Scotch pathologists are Cullen and John Hunter. Hunter, having a larger mind than Cullen, was also a physiologist 412 Account of Cullen's philosophy 413-427 His love of theory 413 Theory, though necessary in science, is dangerous in practice 414-416 Difference between the science of pathology and the art of therapeutics 417-418 Comparison between the method of Cullen's pathology and the method employed by Adam Smith 417-419 Cullen's theory of the solids 420-seq. He refused to inquire into the truth of the principles from which he argued 421-422 His conclusions, like his premisses, represent only a part of the truth, and were extremely one-sided. Still, their value is unquestionable, forming, as they did, a necessary part of the general progress 423-424 His theory of fever 424-426 His nosology 426-427 The philosophy of John Hunter 428-458 His grandeur, and, unfortunately, his obscurity of language 428-430 In his mind, the inductive and deductive methods struggled for mastery. Their conflict oppressed him. This is one of the causes of the darkness of his thoughts and consequently of his style 429-432 His natural disposition was towards deduction 432 But circumstances made him inductive, and he collected facts with untiring industry 432-434 By this means he made a large number of curious physiological discoveries 434-436 He traced the history of the red globules of the blood, and arrived at the conclusion that their function is to strengthen the system rather than to repair it 436-437 Long after his death, this inference was corroborated by the progress of miscroscopical and chemical researches. It was especially corroborated by Lecanu's comparison of the blood in different sexes, and in different temperaments. 439 Hunter's inquiries concerning the movements of animals and vegetables 439-441 He recognized the great truth that the sciences of the inorganic world must be the foundation of those of the organic 443 His object was, to unite all the physical sciences, in order to show that, the operations of nature being always uniform, regularity prevails even amidst the greatest apparent irregularity 443-444 Hence, aiming chiefly at a generalization of irregularities, his favourite study was pathology 444 In his pathological inquiries, he took into account the malformations of crystals 445 As a physiologist, he was equalled or excelled by Aristotle; but as a pathologist, he is unrivalled for the grandeur of his views 446-447 In pathology, his love of deduction was more obvious than in physiology 447 His pathological speculations respecting the principles of action and the principles of sympathy 448-452 But his English contemporaries, being eminently inductive, so disliked his method, that he exercised scarcely any influence over them 453 This is the more observable, because his discoveries respecting disease have caused him to be recognized as the founder of modern surgery, and the principal author of the doctrines now taught in the medical profession 454-457 Such were the great results achieved by Scotchmen in the eighteenth century. Difference between this splendid literature and the wretched productions of the Scotch mind in the seventeenth century. 458-460 Notwithstanding this difference, the deductive method was supreme in both centuries 461 The deductive method strikes the senses less than the inductive. Hence, induction being more accessible to average understandings, is more popular than deduction. Hence, too, the teachings of an inductive philosophy are more likely to affect national character than the teaching of a deductive philosophy 461-464 Theology forms the only exception to this rule 464-465 The Scotch literature of the eighteenth century, being essentially deductive, was, on that account, unable to affect the nation. It was, therefore, unable to weaken national superstition 465-469 Superstition and religious illiberality still existing in Scotland 469-471 The notions countenanced there respecting the origin of epidemics. Correspondence which, in consequence of those notions, took place, in 1853, between the Scotch Church and the English Government 471-476 These superstitions are eminently irreligious, and are everywhere becoming effaced, as physical science advances. Nothing else can touch them. Hence the gradual liberation of the human mind from the slavish and unmanly fears by which it has long been oppressed 476-482 HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION IN ENGLAND. CHAPTER I. CONDITION OF SCOTLAND TO THE END OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. In the preceding view of the rise and decay of Spain, I have sought to exhibit the successive steps by which what was formerly one of the greatest nations of the earth, was broken, and cast down from its high estate. As we look back on that scene, the picture is, indeed, striking. A country rich in all natural productions, inhabited by a brave, a loyal, and a religious people, removed, too, by its geographical position from the hazards of European revolutions, did, by the operation of those general causes which I have indicated, suddenly rise to unparalleled grandeur; and then, without the occurrence of any new combination, but by a mere continuance of the same causes, fall with an equal velocity. Yet, these vicissitudes, strange and startling as they appear, were perfectly regular. They were the legitimate consequence of a state of society, in which the spirit of protection had reached its highest point, and in which, every thing being done for the people, nothing was done by the people. Whenever this happens, there may be great political progress, but there can be no really national progress. There may be accessions of territory, and vast increase of fame and of power. There may be improvements in the practice of administration, in the management of finances, in the organization of armies, in the art and theory of war, in the tricks of diplomacy, and in those various contrivances by which one nation is able to outwit and insult another. So far, however, from this benefiting the people, it will injure them in two different ways. In the first place, by increasing the reputation of the ruling classes, it encourages that blind and servile respect which men are too apt to feel for those who are above them, and which, wherever it has been generally practised, has been found fatal to the highest qualities of the citizen, and therefore to the permanent grandeur of the nation. And, in the second place, it multiplies the resources of the executive government, and thus renders the country unable, as well as unwilling, to correct the errors of those who are at the head of affairs. Hence, in Spain, as in all countries similarly circumstanced, it was at the very moment when things were most prosperous at the surface, that they were most rotten at the foundation. In presence of the most splendid political success, the nation hastened to its downfall, and the crisis was fast approaching, in which, the whole edifice being overturned, nothing would be left, except a memorable warning of the consequences which must ensue, when the people, giving themselves up to the passions of superstition and loyalty, abdicate their own proper functions, forego their own responsibility, renounce their highest duties, and degrade themselves into passive instruments to serve the will of the Church and the throne. Such is the great lesson taught by the history of Spain. From the history of Scotland, we may gather another lesson, of a different, and yet of a similar, kind. In Scotland, the progress of the nation has been very slow, but, on the whole, very sure. The country is extremely barren; the executive government has, with rare exceptions, been always weak; and the people have never been burdened with those feelings of loyalty which circumstances had forced upon the Spaniards. Certainly, the last charge that will be brought against the Scotch, is that of superstitious attachment to their princes.[1] We, in England, have not always been very tender of the persons of our sovereigns, and we have occasionally punished them with what some consider excessive severity. With this, we have been frequently taunted by the more loyal nations of the Continent; and, in Spain in particular, our conduct has excited the greatest abhorrence. But, if we compare our history with that of our northern neighbours, we must pronounce ourselves a meek and submissive people.[2] There have been more rebellions in Scotland than in any other country; and the rebellions have been very sanguinary, as well as very numerous. The Scotch have made war upon most of their kings, and put to death many. To mention their treatment of a single dynasty, they murdered James I. and James III. They rebelled against James II. and James VII. They laid hold of James V., and placed him in confinement. Mary, they immured in a castle, and afterwards deposed. Her successor, James VI., they imprisoned; they led him captive about the country, and on one occasion attempted his life. Towards Charles I., they showed the greatest animosity, and they were the first to restrain his mad career. Three years before the English ventured to rise against that despotic prince, the Scotch boldly took up arms, and made war on him. The service which they then rendered to the cause of liberty it would be hard to overrate; but the singular part of the transaction was, that having afterwards got possession of the person of Charles, they sold him to the English for a large sum of money, of which they, being very poor, had pressing need. Such a sale is unparalleled in history; and although the Scotch might have plausibly alleged that this was the only gain they had derived, or ever could derive, from the existence of their hereditary prince, still the event is one which stands alone; it was unprecedented; it has never been imitated; and its occurrence is a striking symptom of the state of public opinion, and of the feelings of the country in which it was permitted. [1] One of their own historians complacently says, 'but the Scots were seldom distinguished for loyalty.' _Laing's History of Scotland_, vol. iii. p. 199, edit. 1819. See also p. 366. To the same effect, Brodie (_History of the British Empire_, Edinburgh, 1822, vol. i. p. 388): 'The little respect paid to royalty is conspicuous in every page of Scottish history.' Or, as Wilkes expressed himself in the House of Commons, 'Scotland seems, indeed, the natural _foyer_ of rebellion, as Egypt is of the plague.' _Parliamentary History_, vol. xix. p. 810, London, 1814; and Nimmo (_History of Stirlingshire_, Edinburgh, 1777, p. 219): 'Never was any race of monarchs more unfortunate than the Scottish. Their reigns were generally turbulent and disastrous, and their own end often tragical.' [2] Indeed, a well-known Scotchman of the seventeenth century, scornfully says of the English, 'such is the obsequiousness, and almost superstitious devotion of that nation towards their prince.' _Baillie's Letters_, vol. i. p. 204, edit. Laing, Edinburgh, 1841. This, however, was written in 1639, since which we have effectually wiped off that reproach. On the other hand, an English writer of the seventeenth century, indignantly, though with evident exaggeration, imputes to the Scotch that 'forty of their kings have been barbarously murdered by them; and half as many more have either made away with themselves, for fear of their torturing of them, or have died miserably in strait imprisonment.' _Account of Scotland in_ 1670, in _Harleian Miscellany_, vol. vi. p. 140, edit. Park, 4to, 1810. Compare two curious passages in _Shields' Hind let loose_, 1687, pp. 8, 9, 15. While, however, in regard to loyalty, the opposition between Scotland and Spain is complete, there is, strange to say, the most striking similarity between those countries in regard to superstition. Both nations have allowed their clergy to exercise immense sway, and both have submitted their actions, as well as their consciences, to the authority of the Church. As a natural consequence, in both countries, intolerance has been, and still is, a crying evil; and in matters of religion, a bigotry is habitually displayed, discreditable indeed to Spain, but far more discreditable to Scotland, which has produced many philosophers of the highest eminence, who would willingly have taught the people better things, but who have vainly attempted to remove from the national mind that serious blemish which mars its beauty, and tends to neutralize its many other admirable qualities. Herein lies the apparent paradox, and the real difficulty, of Scotch history. That knowledge should not have produced the effects which have elsewhere followed it; that a bold and inquisitive literature should be found in a grossly superstitious country, without diminishing its superstition; that the people should constantly withstand their kings, and as constantly succumb to their clergy; that while they are liberal in politics, they should be illiberal in religion; and that, as a natural consequence of all this, men who, in the visible and external department of facts and of practical life, display a shrewdness and a boldness rarely equalled, should nevertheless, in speculative life, and in matters of theory, tremble like sheep before their pastors, and yield assent to every absurdity they hear, provided their Church has sanctioned it; that these discrepancies should coexist, seems at first sight a strange contradiction, and is surely a phenomenon worthy of our careful study. To indicate the causes of this anomaly, and to trace the results to which the anomaly has led, will be the business of the remaining part of this volume; and although the investigation will be somewhat lengthy, it will not, I hope, be considered prolix, by those who recognise the importance of the inquiry, and are aware how completely it has been neglected, even by those who have written most fully on the history of the Scottish nation. In Scotland, as elsewhere, the course of events has been influenced by its physical geography; and by this I mean, not only its own immediate peculiarities, but also its relation to adjoining countries. It is close to Ireland; it touches England; and by the contiguity of the Orkney and Shetland Isles, it was eminently exposed to the attacks of that great nation of pirates, which for centuries inhabited the Scandinavian peninsula. Considered merely by itself, it is mountainous and sterile; nature has interposed such obstacles, that it was long impossible to open regular communications between its different parts, which, indeed, in regard to the Highlands, was not effected till after the middle of the eighteenth century.[3] Finally, and this, as we shall presently see, was a matter of great importance, the most fertile land in Scotland is in the south, and was, therefore, constantly ravaged by the English borderers. Hence, the accumulation of wealth was hindered; the growth of towns was discouraged, by the serious hazards to which they were liable; and it was impossible to develop that municipal spirit, which might have existed, if the districts most favoured by nature had been situated in the north of Scotland, instead of in the south. If the actual state of things had been reversed, so that the Highlands were in the south,[4] and the Lowlands in the north, it can hardly be doubted, that, after the cessation in the thirteenth century of the great Scandinavian invasions, the most fertile parts of Scotland, being comparatively secure, would have been the seat of towns, which the active spirit of the people would have caused to prosper, and the prosperity of which would have introduced a new element into Scotch affairs, and changed the course of Scotch history. This, however, was not to be; and, as we have to deal with events as they actually are, I will now endeavour to trace the consequences of the physical peculiarities which have just been noticed; and by coördinating their results, I will, so far as I am able, show their general meaning, and the way in which they have shaped the national character. [3] In England, the travelling was bad enough; in Scotland, it was far worse. Morer, stating what he saw in 1689, says 'Stage-coaches they have none; yet there are a few Hackney's at Edinburgh, which they may hire into the country upon urgent occasions. The truth is, the roads will hardly allow 'em those conveniences, which is the reason that their gentry, men and women, chuse rather to use their horses.' _Morer's Account of Scotland_, London, 1702, p. 24. As to the northern parts, we have the following account, written in Inverness, between 1726 and 1730. 'The Highlands are but little known even to the inhabitants of the low country of Scotland, for they have ever dreaded the difficulties and dangers of travelling among the mountains; and, when some extraordinary occasion has obliged any one of them to such a progress, he has, generally speaking, made his testament before he set out, as though he were entering upon a long and dangerous sea-voyage, wherein it was very doubtful if he should ever return.' _Letters from a Gentleman in the North of Scotland_, edit. London, 1815, vol. i. p. 4. Between 1720 and 1730, military roads were cut through parts of the Highlands, but they were 'laid down by a practical soldier, and destined for warlike purposes, with scarcely any view towards the ends for which free and peaceful citizens open up a system of internal transit,' _Burton's History of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 255. See also _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. ii. p. 36. This is confirmed by the fact, that even between Inverness and Edinburgh, 'until 1755, the mail was conveyed by men on foot.' Account of Inverness-shire, in _M^cCulloch's British Empire_, London, 1847, vol. i. p. 299; to which I may add, that in _Anderson's Essay on the Highlands_, Edinburgh, 1827, pp. 119, 120, it is stated, that 'A postchaise was first seen in Inverness itself in 1760, and was, for a considerable time, the only four-wheeled carriage in the district.' As to the communications in the country about Perth, see _Penny's Traditions of Perth_, pp. 131, 132, Perth, 1836; and as to those from Aberdeen to Inverness, and from Aberdeen to Edinburgh, see _Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen_, vol. ii. pp. 269, 270, London, 4to, 1818. The history of the improvement of the roads during the latter half of the eighteenth century, has never been written; but it is of the greatest importance for its intellectual results, in causing national fusion, as well as for its economical results, in helping trade. Some idea may be formed of the extraordinary energy displayed by Scotland in this matter, by comparing the following passages: _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. ii. pp. 494, 865, 939, vol. iii. pp. 599, 799; _Crawfurd's History of the Shire of Renfrew_, part ii. pp. 128, 160; _Irving's History of Dumbartonshire_, pp. 245, 246; _Sinclair's Statistical Account of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 109, 210, 367, 430, 496; vol. ii. p. 498; vol. iii. pp. 331, 352, 353; vol. iv. p. 313; vol. v. pp. 128, 234, 235, 315, 364, 365; vol. vi. pp. 107, 154, 180, 458; vol. vii. pp. 135, 251, 275, 299, 417; vol. viii. pp. 81, 243, 344, 345, 541; vol. ix. pp. 414, 530; vol. x. pp. 221, 237, 238, 466, 618; vol. xi. pp. 127, 380, 418, 432, 522, 541; vol. xii. p. 59; vol. xiii. pp. 42, 141, 488, 542, 663; vol. xiv. pp. 217, 227, 413, 443, 466, 506; vol. xv. pp. 54, 88, 276; vol. xvi. p. 120; vol. xvii. pp. 5, 267, 297, 377, 533; vol. xviii. p. 309; vol. xx. p. 156. [4] I use the word Highlands, in the common, though improper, sense of including all Scotland from the Pentland Firth to the beginning of the mountains, a few miles north of Glasgow, Stirling, Perth, and Dundee. All such distinctions are necessarily somewhat vague, because the boundaries of nature are never clearly marked. Compare _Macky's Scotland_, p. 124, London, 1732, with _Anderson's Guide to the Highlands_, Edinburgh, 1847, pp. 17, 18. The earliest fact with which we are acquainted respecting the history of Scotland, is the Roman invasion under Agricola, late in the first century. But neither his conquests, nor those of his successors, made any permanent impression. The country was never really subjugated, and nothing was effected except a military occupation, which, in spite of the erection of numerous forts, walls, and ramparts, left the spirit of the inhabitants unbroken. Even Severus, who, in the year 209, undertook the last and most important expedition against Scotland, does not appear to have penetrated beyond the Firth of Moray;[5] and directly he retired, the natives were again in arms, and again independent. After this, nothing was attempted upon a scale large enough to give a chance of success. Indeed, the Romans, far from being equal to such an effort, were themselves deteriorating. In their best days, their virtues were the virtues of barbarians, and even those they were now about to lose. From the beginning, their scheme of life was so one-sided and imperfect, that the increase of wealth, which improves the civilization of really civilized countries, was to the Romans an irreparable mischief; and they were corrupted by luxury, instead of being refined by it. In our time, if we compare the different nations of Europe, we find that the richest are also the most powerful, the most humane, and the most happy. We live in that advanced state of society, in which wealth is both the cause and the effect of progress, while poverty is the fruitful parent of weakness, of misery, and of crime. But the Romans, when they ceased to be poor, began to be vicious. So unstable was the foundation of their greatness, that the very results which their power produced, were fatal to the power itself. Their empire gave them wealth, and their wealth overthrew their empire. Their national character, notwithstanding its apparent strength, was in truth of so frail a texture, that it was ruined by its own development. As it grew, it dwarfed. Hence it was, that, in the third and fourth centuries, their hold on mankind visibly slackened. Their authority being undermined, other nations, of course, stepped in; so that the inroads of those strange tribes which came pouring from the north, and to whose appearance the final catastrophe is often ascribed, were at best the occasion, but by no means the cause, of the fall of the Roman Empire. Towards that great and salutary event, every thing had long been pointing. The scourgers and oppressors of the world, whom a false and ignorant sympathy has invested with noble qualities which they never possessed, had now to look to themselves; and when, after receding on all sides, they, in the middle of the fifth century, withdrew their forces from the whole of Britain, they merely executed a movement, which a train of circumstances, continued through several generations, had made inevitable. [5] Browne (_History of the Highlands_, vol. i. p. 33) says that 'he traversed the whole of North Britain, from the wall of Antoninus to the very extremity of the island.' The same thing is stated in _Pennant's Scotland_, vol. i. p. 90. Neither of these writers quote their authority for this; but they probably relied on a passage in _Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum Historia_, lib. iv. p. 94. 'Neque tamen desideratis quinquaginta millibus (ut scribit Dion) prius ab inc[oe]pto destiterunt, quam ad finem insulæ penetrassent.' I believe, however, that Scotch antiquaries are now agreed that this is wrong, as Chalmers was one of the first to perceive. See his _Caledonia_, vol. i. p. 187; a very valuable and learned, but unhappily ill-arranged, book, and written in a style which is absolutely afflicting. See also _Irving's History of Dumbartonshire_, 4to, 1860, p. 14. It is at this point that we begin to discern the operation of those physical and geographical peculiarities which I have mentioned as influencing the fortunes of Scotland. The Romans, gradually losing ground, the proximity of Ireland caused repeated attacks from that fertile island, whose rich soil and great natural advantages gave rise to an exuberant, and therefore a restless, population. An overflow, which, in civilized times, is an emigration, is, in barbarous times, an invasion. Hence the Irish, or Scotti as they were termed, established themselves by force of arms in the west of Scotland, and came into collision with the Picts, who occupied the eastern part. A deadly struggle ensued, which lasted four centuries after the withdrawal of the Romans, and plunged the country into the greatest confusion. At length, in the middle of the ninth century, Kenneth M'Alpine, king of the Scotti, gained the upper hand, and reduced the Picts to complete submission.[6] The country was now united under one rule; and the conquerors, slowly absorbing the conquered, gave their name to the whole, which, in the tenth century, received the appellation of Scotland.[7] [6] The history of Scotland, in this period, is in great confusion, and perhaps will never be recovered. For the statements made in the text, I have chiefly used the following authorities: _Fordun's Scotichronicon_, vol. i.; _Buchanan's Rerum Scoticarum Historia_, lib. v. pp. 121-132, and the beginning of the sixth book. Also various parts of _Bede_; _Pinkerton's Enquiry into the Early History of Scotland_; _Chalmers' Caledonia_; the first volume of _Browne's History of the Highlands_; and, above all, Mr. Skene's acute and learned work on the Highlanders. In the last-named book, the western boundary of the Picts is traced with great ingenuity, though perhaps with some uncertainty. _Skene's Highlanders of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 26-33, London, 1837. [7] Here, again, we are involved in doubt; it being uncertain when the name Scotia was first applied to Scotland. The date, therefore, which I have given, is only intended as an approximative truth. In arriving at it, I have compared the following different, and often conflicting, passages: _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. i. p. 339. _Browne's History of the Highlands_, vol. i. p. 34. _Pinkerton's Enquiry into the Early History of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 253, 254, vol. ii. pp. 151, 228, 237, 240. _Spottiswoode's History of the Church of Scotland_, edit. Russell, 1851, vol. i. p. 16, note, where, however, Pinkerton's authority is appealed to for an assertion which he did not make. _Skene's Highlanders_, vol. i. pp. 45, 61, 244. _Anderson's Prize Essay on the Highlands_, p. 34. But the kingdom was to have no rest. For, in the mean time, circumstances, which it would be tedious to relate, had raised the inhabitants of Norway to be the greatest maritime power in Europe. The use which that nation of pirates made of their strength, forms another and a very important link in the history of Scotland, and moreover illustrates the immense weight, which, in an early period of society, should be assigned to mere geographical considerations. The nearest land to the centre of the long coast of Norway is the Shetland Isles, whence it is an easy sail to the Orkneys. The northern pirates naturally seized these small, but, to them, most useful islands, and, as naturally, made them intermediate stations, from which they could conveniently pillage the coasts of Scotland. Being constantly reinforced from Norway, they, in the ninth and tenth centuries, advanced from the Orkneys, made permanent settlements in Scotland itself, and occupied not only Caithness, but also great part of Sutherland. Another body of them got possession of the Western Islands; and as Skye is only separated from the mainland by a very narrow channel, these pirates easily crossed over, and fixed themselves in Western Ross.[8] From their new abodes, they waged incessant and destructive war against every district within their reach; and, keeping a large part of Scotland in constant alarm, they, for about three centuries, prevented the possibility of its social improvement. Indeed, that unhappy country was never free from the dangers of Norwegian invasion, until the failure of the last great attack, in 1263, when Haco left Norway with a prodigious armament, which he further strengthened by reinforcements from the Orkneys and Hebrides. Scotland could offer but little resistance. Haco, with his allies, sailed along the western coast to the Mull of Kentire, wasted the country with fire and sword, took Arran and Bute, entered the Firth of Clyde, suddenly fell upon Loch Lomond, destroyed all the property on its shores and on its islands, ravaged the whole county of Stirling, and threatened to descend with all his force upon Ayrshire. Fortunately, the inclemency of the weather broke up this great expedition, and scattered or destroyed the entire fleet.[9] After its dispersal, the course of affairs in Norway prevented the attempt from being renewed; and danger from that quarter being over, it might have been hoped that Scotland would now enjoy peace, and would have leisure to develop the natural resources which she possessed, particularly those in the southern and more favoured districts. [8] _Pinkerton's Enquiry into the Early History of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 136, 317, vol. ii. pp. 179, 298. _Skene's Highlanders_, vol. i. pp. 90, 91, 94, 106, 114, 258, 259. _Chalmers' Caledonia_, vol. i. pp. 340-347. [9] _Tytler's History of Scotland_, vol. i. pp. 38-54. The account in _Hollinshead's Scottish Chronicle_, vol. i. pp. 399-403, ascribes too much to the prowess of the Scotch, and too little to the elements which dispersed the fleet. Compare _Irving's History of Dumbartonshire_, second edition, 4to, 1860, pp. 48, 49. This, however, was not to be. For, scarcely were the attacks from Norway at an end, when those from England began. Early in the thirteenth century, the lines of demarcation which separated Normans from Saxons, were, in our country, becoming so obliterated, that in many cases it was impossible to distinguish them.[10] By the middle of the same century, the two races were fused into one powerful nation; and, as that nation had a comparatively feeble neighbour, it was certain that the stronger people would try to oppress the weaker.[11] In an ignorant and barbarous age, military success is preferred to all other kinds of fame; and
{'title': 'History of Civilization in England, Vol. 3 of 3 by Henry Thomas Buckle', 'source': 'Project Gutenberg', 'lang': 'en'}