第3部分(第1/7 页)

writing　history；　we　are　always　beating　our　brains　to　discover　how　history　ought　to　be　written。　This

first　kind　of　Reflective　History　is　most　nearly　akin　to　the　preceding；　when　it　has　no　farther　aim　than

to　present　the　annals　of　a　country　plete。　Such　pilations　（among　which　may　be　reckoned

the　works　of　Livy；　Diodorus　Siculus；　Johannes　von　Müller's　History　of　Switzerland）　are；　if　well

performed；　highly　meritorious。　Among　the　best　of　the　kind　may　be　reckoned　such　annalist　as

approach　those　of　the　first　class；　who　give　so　vivid　a　transcript　of　events　that　the　reader　may　well

fancy　himself　listening　to　contemporaries　and　eye…witnesses。　But　it　often　happens　that　the

individuality　of　tone　which　must　characterise　a　writer　belonging　to　a　different　culture；　is　not

modified　in　accordance　with　the　periods　such　a　record　must　traverse。　The　spirit　of　the　writer　is

quite　other　than　that　of　the　times　of　which　he　treats。　Thus　Livy　puts　into　the　mouths　of　the　old

Roman　kings；　consuls；　and　generals；　such　orations　as　would　be　delivered　by　an　acplished

advocate　of　the　Livian　era；　and　which　strikingly　contrast　with　the　genuine　traditions　of　Roman

antiquity　（e。g。　the　fable　of　Menenius　Agrippa）。　In　the　same　way　he　gives　us　descriptions　of　battles；

as　if　he　bad　been　an　actual　spectator；　but　whose　features　would　serve　well　enough　for　battles　in

any　period；　and　whose　distinctness　contrasts　on　the　other　hand　with　the　want　of　connection　and

the　inconsistency　that　prevail　elsewhere；　even　in　his　treatment　of　chief　points　of　interest。　The

difference　between　such　a　piler　and　an　original　historian　may　be　best　seen　by　paring

Polybius　himself　with　the　style　in　which　Livy　uses；　expands；