SOME OXFORD PROFESSORS.

Press, Volume XLVII, Issue 7552, 15 May 1890, Page 2

SOME OXFORD PROFESSORS.

By An Oxonian.

History claims four chairs and three Readerships. Of the occupants of the chairs we have already made mention of Dr Bright, while the Readership in Ecclesiastical History is vacant owing to the death of the lamented Dr Hatch, a scholar who died just when the world was realising his worth. His Bampton lectures in which he sought to show that the hierarchy of the Christian Church had arisen from the structure of the early Christian commune, and chat the bishops are descended • from the treasurers of these associations, are more appreciated by German than by English scholars, whose prejudices do not appear to be shaken by the evidence adduced. Dr Hatch's Hibbert Lectures on'The Influence of Hellenism on Early Christianity " cover* a magnificent field, one which Renan said in his Hibbert Lectures of 1880 was even more important than that on which he himself bad lectured: "The Influence of Roman Institatious on Early Christianity." These are not yet published, but it i» said that the late Dr Hatch had left them already prepared for publication. Dr Hatch's death was said to be due to overwork; this is only another example of a valuable life being sacrificed to the high pressure of the The Camden Professor of Ancient History, H. F. Pelham, h*s only just suci ceeded Canon Rawlinson, who had held the chair for many years, and had increased its reputation by his valuable works on Ancient History. In conjunction with bis famous brother. Sir H. Rawlinson, and i Sir Gardiner Wilkinson, he produced a maniflcent edition of Herodotus, on which too high a value cannot be placed. He has alsopublished works on the seven Oriental monarchies, treating of the history of Western Asia from the Assyrian hegemony to the fall of the Sassanidae. A few months ago he produced a History of the Phoenicians, in which he has collected most of the facts known about that interesting race. Though Canon Rawlinson's work is somewhat marred by his prejudices, we must make due allowance, for what he has given us is valuable. As a churchman he has thought; it proper to write history from a standpoint of Christian philosophy, and what does not fit in with Christianity or rather: with the Messianic theories which the older school choose to read into the Old Testament, must be sacrificed. The present Professor is looked on as a promising historian; he is honest in his convictions, is not afraid of speaking out bis mind, and has realised that truth is more important than sectarian objects. As Proctor he was popular; those who know I what opportunities a Proctor has for earn' ing a hearty dislike will realise what a ■ thoroughly good fellow he must be. There is a Beaderin Foreign History, Mr Boase, who is reputed to nave a unique acquaintance with Greece and the ArchiEelago. At the end of last year he unurtnened himself of some of his stores of knowledge and published a book on the Greek Islands, which shouK prove of deep interest. Mr Owen, the Reader in Indian History,has never made any great stir; he performs his duties conscientiously, and has been meditating a History of India for a long time. It is now under announcement, and we may shortly hope to see a valuable contribution to our knowledge of our great dependency. Theßegiua Professor of Modern History, E. A. Freeman, is a very prominent figure in the University. Wherever he is, he makes his personality felt, be it for good or for evil. He is a man full of crotchets, has strong prejudices which no amount of evidence to the contrary can shake. But before, discussing the very interesting personality of Professor Freeman—one always associates the title of "Professor" with him, for he is so dogmatic—we will .review his two illustrious predecessors, Goldwin Smith and Bishop Stubbs. When Goldwin Smith succeeded to the Chair, it had" lost some of the reputation earned by previous occupants. By his able and lively treatment cf the subject, Mr Goldwin Smith attracted considerable notice from the outside world, and mere especially from politicians. For some reason he resigned and migrated to Canada, where he ha* been acting the role of " Stormy petrel." Hβ is astrong Liberal in poUtics.out has turnedastrong Unionist, finding Mr Gladstone's later ideas too wild to follow. Somewhat inconsistently, while he strongly advocates the Union he is busily engaged in promoting the dismemberment of the Empire, for he takes every opportunity to persuade the Canadians that a union with the United States s more to their interests than that with Great Britain. He is as constant a contributor to periodical literature as Mr Gladstone himself, and has a fine incisive style. He was succeeded by Dr Stubbs, whose merits Professor Freeman claims to have discovered, and to have made known to the world. Hβ also claims to have done the same for the late- J. B. Green. The Professor was , t never troubled with modesty, still, we feel quite sure that the transcendent merits of Dr Stubbs would have forced him to the front even withbut the patronage of a Professor Freeman. If there is a modest man it is Dr Stubbs; he seems quite unaware of bis very great value, but fortunately the world at Targe has found out his real worth, and appreciates him accordingly. It was felt that his learning would: be an ornament to the Bench, and he was offered the see of Chester on the death of Bishop Jacobson. It was of Bishop Jacobson that Bishop Wilberforce made the remark: "I have often heard of the milk of human kindness, but I never saw the cow before." Though acknowledging that Dr Stubbs would adorn the Beach, most men thought bis elevation was a pity* for at Chester he would have small leisure and but little opportunity for historical studies. There are plenty of men good ' enough to be Bishop of Chester; but the I English School of History has but one I Stubbs. Accordingly, when the See of 1 Oxford fell vacant/Se was offered it and I accepted; a suffragan was appointed to do i the work, so that toe Bishop could devote more time to historical research. Of burly figure, with iro»-fp»y hair and ragged face, he reminded us somewhat of a genial bear, the more so as his movements, were somewhat slow and heavy. He would come Into hie lecture room laden with ponderous tomes for reference, co ponderous, indeed, that sometimes a four-wheeler wae required. A kindly smile would spread over his face when he saw his gcodents, most of whom were as glad to see him as he them. Taking nia stand at hie desk he would take some time to get into the subject, for he liked a little chat before beginning work. His delivery was very poor, even in the lecture room Lβ was frequently indistinct. But we knew his value and were keenly attentive so as to miss nothing, for whatever he said wae worth listening to. He would take the greatest paiaa to make hi* mc&aina: pfafp and in, some of cue i

courses he delivered ifc was necessary. When, he delivered an exceedingly interesting course on the Early History of Ireland, Scotland and Wales, half his time was spent in spelling out Celtic names for his hearers, nor was his patience ever exhausted though asked to repeat the same thing again and attain. One of the most Interesting courses he ever delivered was on the Political Writings ot the Middle Ages, when he introduced hie hearers to the philosophy of medieval politics, a somewhat difficult subject, but of the highest interest to thoae who wish to study the political development of mankind. He -would often stop and introduce little anecdotes apropos of nothing in ! particular, possibly to relax the youthful mind; and aftei his nomination to a stall in St. Paul's he often gave curious and interesting information about the I chapter in illustration of the life and manners of olden times. When lecturing on the Early Tudora, he actually brought himself to say something sarcastic about a rival historian; but though he began in a i very sarcastic voice, his good nature got the better of him before he ended. It was his custom to give a short resunu of the authorities for the period on which he I was going to lecture, and in mentioning j the " history" of Mr Froude, he rei marked that the only qualification Mr Froude brought for writing English history was a superficial acquaintance with the works of Julius Caasar. Now, the outside world is probably unaware of the somewhat bitter feeling that there is ! between the schools of Froude and of Stubhs-Freeman. Dr. Stubbi of himself would never have provoked anyone, but Professor Freeman is a very good hand at stirring up evil passions. He is so very dogmatic that one longs to contradict him. Even if right, there is no need to be so in an aggressive manner; but even Professor Freeman is not infallible, hence hie manner is not acceptable to most persons. The two, with the late J. R. Green, were not on terms with the Frouderian school. There was also a strong suspicion that Professor Freeman used his position on the Saturday to draw attention to Mr Green aud his works. There is no mistaking his style, a mixture of affectation and purism strongly leavened with dogmatism. When Mr Green's Short History was first published there were very many small mistakes, mostly due to hurry ana misprints, though some facts were handled rather loosely. All this was enough to save ground to a very lively critique by Mr , of Dublin; of course all the mistakes and errors put in a list made an appearance more formidable than the case warranted. That lively free-lance, Mr Thorold Rogers, who does not love anybody in particular, and seems to hate everybody in general, wrote a little skit in Punch, each stanza of which ended with the refrain: The public was sold and the book. There were also allusions about Freeman, Greeu, and Stubbs ladling butter on each other out of tubs, and so on. Naturally, this provoked a reply, and the wordy warfare grew more rancorous and bitter, lhe Freemanites retorted about " an unfrocked parson " and so on. In this display of pettiness the chief blame must be awarded to Professor Freeman, though of course Mr Rogers' conduct cannot be defended. Why the first edition of the Short History was so full of. small errors is said to be that the work was produced in a hurry to meet; the demands of creditors, and the author was in poor health. But we cannot vouch ior the truth of the statement. The New Zealand public is hardly likely to sympathise with Mr Froude and his disciples after Oceana, which many think a libel pure and simple on the co o iy. Yet we do not think that the historian is so much to blame as those ! to whom he applied for information. Sir ! George Grey and Mr J. C. Firth are to blame as much as anybody. After all, Mr Froude's remarks apply to Auckland, which he did see, and can hardly be stretched to apply to the whole of the colony; and how right he was in respect to Auckland later events have shown. Still he must bear some of the blame, tor he should not have allowed himself to be exploited by one particular party, but should have tried to draw his information from a more extended basis. To come back to Professor Freeman. He is a big man, with a big red beard, a beard that stands out and bristles when .anyone ventures to hold a different opinion from him. His manner is dictatorial, any one who differs from him must be wrongneaded, nay, must be inspired by bad motives—in fact is a child of darkness. On some subjects he is reallyquite crazed. He is a violent Slavophile; the Turk to him is like a red rag to a bull. There is a humble follower of his and of Mr Gladstone, who by his violent Turkophile effu- ■' sions succeeded in getting that eccentric politician to throw him the meagre bone of a minor canonry. This is one, the $Rev. Malcolm Mac Coll, who, in 1877, wrote some very violent letters to the papers on the atrocities of the terrible Turk. The worthy ecclesiastic was voyaging down the Danube and saw on the Servian shore some miserable-looking objects tied to stakes. On enquiring what these were some wag told him that they were the.victims of Turkish atrocities; they were men and women who had been tied to stakes by Baehl Bazouks and burnt alive. This startling information api peared in a letter to the Times, with comments worthy of the occasion. And what a sermon Mr Gladstone preached on the text I This is believed to have earned that minor canonry, and Is a comment on how some people earn promotion. When enquiry was made these objects turned out to be scare-crows put up by the peasant owners; but the evidence of consuls or ambassadors was beneath the notice of those atrocity-mongers. To parody an old song, we may express Professor Freeman's attitude, to things in general thus :— - That this is law I will maintain Until my dying day, sirs: "Whatever view the oar may sain, Tis Freeman muet be right, sire. He has a fine polemic style, which has been perfected by long and continuous practice. As a controversialist one must treat him with due respect, for he can state his case vigorously and marshal hla evidence—of ten unreliable—with great skill. The great drawback is that he will insist on addressing his opponents in a way thatthe Almighty—according to a late learned judge—would hesitate to employ to a blackbeetle. Professor Freeman lives a good deal in the past, so much so.that to all questions of practical politics he brings a mind but half awakened from the pleasing dreams of the middle ages, while on matters like the Norman Conquest he is right enough, though then he exhibits his pedantry and dogmatism on every reasonable opportunity. His " Early Eaglish History for Children" Is a very fine sample of what such a history should not be. The present Master of University need to say that reading his work required cold green tea and wet towels, the reason being the awfulness of the correct A.S. proper names. Professor Freeman has never condescended to give any reason why the correct spelling of proper names should cease after the battle of Hastings—we beg his pardon, the battle of Senlac After that momentous date William is spelt in a way underatanded of the vulgar, likewise Edward, which previously had been Eadweard. In our younger days we were beguiled with pleasing legends of how-Edith of the Swan's neck recognised the battered corpse of her royal lover the night after the battle. "But the Professor will have it that the lady should be called Eadgyth Swannewhals. Unless the lady has appeared to him in a seance and requested him to set things right, he might jasfc as well leave us our romantic story untroubled with uncouth names. But this is a matter that abler pens than ours have addressed remonstrances on—and in vain;, tor the leopard can no more change his spots than will the Professor yield » point. To give an instance of the Professor's method of applying history to modern politics—and this ins Cancels characteristic —take the bitter controversy that took place a few months back in the Fortnightly ! between a Mr Bourchier and the Professor. ■ Mr Bourchier, who was evidently behind I the pcenes of the Hapsburg Court, wrote an ! articleon the Austro-Hdngarianmonarchy, airing great praise to the political eagacltyof the Emperor for having been able to knit together the bonds of his realms that contain so many discordant and diverwent interests. The article is appreciative and pleasant, and no ordinary man would think that there was an opening for a bitter attack or room for insinuation in what is apparently not meant for a controversial essay Certainly the writer stated that the Slav element was loyal to the Emperor* person, and that the Austrian Slavs enjoyed far more liberty and national wei« fare than those under other flags. The Professor wrote a reply and began by insinuating that Mr Bourchier s judgment was blinded by the fascination exercised by arehdokes, "and piously thanked Provi. dence that he not mixed with such wicked people. The wickedness apparently lay in the fact that the Austrian dominions include some territories which once had belonged to the old Serb empire. He insinuates that Mr Bourcnier has been "got at" and was making an ex part* statement. Having thanked Providence — he Often does so In Mβ polemical Writings—we get to the expected Turk, far a curse trenaraJlv follows on an exhibi-

tlon of piety. An elegiac on the beauties and grandeur of the old Serb empire follows, wtthexeursee into the history of Ba«usa and other corners of the Dalmatian coast, highly interesting from an antiquarian point of view; the whole winding up with a proposed redistribution of the Balkan Peninsula, in which scheme the wicked Turk Is to be expelled —a new sub-empire to be revived with that prince of brigands—Nicholas of Montenegro—as sovereign, the Anstrians to recroes the Saav, and the Italian Kingdom to have the Trentino, Trieste, and other territories that once belonged to Venice. And lastly comes an euloglum on the disinterested humanity of the Colossus of the North. (What kind of article that is the Siberian massacres have further enlightened as of late). Mr Bourchier replies that this historical disquisition has nothing to do with the facts of to-day; whereon the Professor grieves muchly that any man should be blinded by the glamour of archdukes and ogres and monsters of that kidney, sheds some inky tears over the aforesaid Serb empire, mutters curses on the unspeakable one, insinuates that Mr Bourchier will not understand him because he Is beyond salvation—d Iα Freeman—and finally retires tearful at such perversity, for he says he is engaged on a History of Sicily. The best of us will get hazy when his case ia bad, but usually a man is ready to retire without scattering Insinuations all round, flavoured with cuises, on those who decline to see things from his point of view—which may be peculiar. And it is not honest. Besides the unspeakable Turk, the Professor haaanother object of hatred, namely, science in general and vivisection in particular. This amiable trait he had a good opportunity of exhibiting, when a vote of jeIO.OOO was proposed ia Convocation to finish the scientific equipment of the Museum and to provide for maintenance. The Anti-vivisection party ca.ne out very strong, and was headed by the Professor and Bodley's Librarian, Mr Nicholson. Now these good people exhibited that want of common sense which is a marked characteristic of faddists. They had no objection to the expenditure of £100,000 or more over the Museum, but they declined to vote the money, which was absolutely required to make the Museum of any use for teaching purposes. Nor did they condescend to explain this line of action. There was an immense amount of talk about torturiug dogs, rabbits, and frogs ; they gushed over with humanitarian sentiments, and wound up with wild and wholesale accusations against the stood faith of their opponents. We rather think the Professor contrived to drag in the atrocities of the Turk, and wept over the goodness of the Tsar. Of course every mau has a right to his own opinions, and as Mr Froude says, the informed man should be listened to with more respect than the ignorant man. Quite so. The Professor is undoubtedly a deeply read and highly-informed man, but those who have also studied the subjects to which he has given attention, are not all knaves or fools; andsome, atleast, bringing no prejudices to bear on these subjects are better able to examine the political problems of eastern Europe, No one will deny that the Professor has done good work; one would be foolish to do so. His Norman Conquest is a work of the highest value, though there are some matters on which all are not at one with him. His Historical Essays and Lectures are full of solid material, and are a pleasure to read; only when the Turk or the Slav is introduced we may go on to the next subject, for there will be nothing but nauseous abuse or fulsome praise. And another good work the Professor does is to Impress on the public the continuity of history, that ancient and modern history are merely terms of convenience, that since man appeared on this earth he has been making history, and that if we would rightly understand the evolution of man as a social animal we must study his history from the beginning. This by no means implies that a student should not devote himself to a small and definite period; but before doing so, he should get a grasp of the outlines of his subject. No man has done more to try to kill the absurd idea that English history or French history is a thing p*r se, and can be studied apart, and he deserves full credit for the manful part he has borne in this fight against ingrained prejudice and ignorance; but even in fighting the good fight there should be moderation in language, and a show of consideration for the feelings of others.. Even the elderly proprietresses of a "Select School for Ladles do not like their prejudices to be ruthlessly uprooted and borne away on the blast of the Professor's thunderous inveotive; better, far better, and much more effective is the genial Addisonian satire. Kindly Mr Spectator has a fellow-feeling for human weaknesses, but Professor Freeman would deny all hopes of a happy hereafter to such as do not know that Charlemagne should always be written Karl the Great, and that modern France does not represent the Frankish Empire. To one who knows better, and yet will take of Charlemagne, or who will talk of Alfred the Great, or Godlva, instead of saying iElfred or Godglfa, he believes there is reserved a fate similar to that which pious Musselmans. bold will overtake one born in Islam who has fallen from the faith of the Prophet.