CHAPTER X

NATURE AND FORMS OF PROSE

62. Definition. Prose is the ordinary form of discourse. It is distinguished from poetry not only by more commonplace thought but also by the absence of regular metrical structure. Prose and poetry together constitute the great body of literature; but at the present time, which is characterized by the predominance of material and commercial interests, prose forms by far the larger part. In our popular magazines, poetry is relegated to a very subordinate place.

ence.

The forms of prose are various. They may be approximately classified under history, essays, oratory, fiction, science, philosophy, and epistolary correspondThese classes, as will be seen later, are subject to numerous subdivisions. The last three classes science, philosophy, and epistolary correspondence do not come within the scope of the present work, but in general it may be said that they are subject to the same laws of truth and beauty that govern other forms of literary composition.

63. History. History is a systematic record of past events. It rests upon contemporary testimony, which may exist in the form of written documents or of oral tradition. History passes into mythology when it treats of legendary heroes and divinities, and into

156

Metrical

fiction when it treats of imaginary events. chronicles, however valuable may be the historical materials they contain, are not to be regarded as history in the true sense of the word. History presupposes change, which may take the form of progress or decadence. Without the element of change, there is nothing to relate beyond the existing state of things. English literature is very rich in historical writing of every kind, and in the century that has just passed, we meet in England with the names of Macaulay, Carlyle, and Froude, and in America with the names of Bancroft, Prescott, and Motley.

As to time, history has a well-defined and generally accepted division. This division recognizes three great periods, namely, ancient, medieval, and modern. In each of these periods a general type of social condition, varying somewhat in different countries, prevailed without essential change. Ancient history extends from the beginning of trustworthy records to the fall of the Roman empire in A.D. 476; medieval history extends from that date to the revival of learning and the beginning of the Protestant Reformation in 1517; and modern history embraces the period extending from that time down to the present.

As to subject-matter, history has been variously divided. When it treats of human progress in all nations and ages it is called general or universal history. When it deals with a single country it becomes national history; thus we have histories of England and of the United States. When it treats of separate institutions or interests it may be regarded as special

history, as church history or a history of literature. Again, history may be divided according to the sources from which it derives its data. When based on the facts supplied in the Scriptures it is known as sacred history; when based on other sources of information it is called profane or secular history. This, however, is only an arbitrary though convenient distinction; for all history, as a record of the unfolding purposes of God, is sacred.

As to form, history is divided into several classes. A chronicle is a register of facts and events in the order of time in which they occurred. It does not enter into a discussion either of causes or effects. It is rather a source of historical materials than history itself. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle," for example, contains valuable facts, but can hardly be regarded as a history of the Anglo-Saxons. Annals are chronicles that give the events year by year.

66

As to method, history may be divided into narrative, descriptive, and philosophical. Each has its definite object, by which its treatment of materials is determined. Narrative history is chiefly concerned with a systematic presentation of the facts. It is satisfied when these are clearly presented in due perspective, and afford a comprehensive survey of the period or subject treated of. Nearly all the manuals of history in common use belong to this class.

Descriptive history aims at presenting a graphic portraiture of the past. Its method is not so much narration as description. Men and events are brought forward in vivid colors. It makes the past live again

before our eyes like a moving pageant; and better to accomplish this result, perspective, and even a full statement of events, are sometimes sacrificed. While narrative history is concerned mostly with the succession of important public events, wars, changes of administration, and far-reaching legislative enactments,

descriptive or scenic history introduces, in large measure, the social life and manners. Macaulay is a prince among descriptive historians, though no better example of scenic history can be found than Carlyle's "French Revolution."

Philosophic history is concerned less with narration and description than with the underlying causes and effects of events. It regards all human events as an outward movement or evolution, which proceeds according to fixed and ascertainable laws. It looks upon history, to use the words of Macaulay, as "philosophy teaching by example." Philosophic history is a product of recent times; and among the best examples are Hegel's "Philosophy of History," Guizot's "History of Civilization," and Lecky's "History of European Morals.”

It is evident that an ideal history will be a combination of the narrative, descriptive, and philosophic. The first gives the events in due order and proportion; the second clothes them in living reality; and the third explains their causes and results. But the production of such a history requires a rare combination of mental gifts; the vivid imagination required in scenic description is not usually found associated with philosophic depth. Perhaps Green's "History of England" and Bancroft's "History of the United States

are as good examples of the highest type of historical writing as can be found.

There is a very noticeable difference between the methods of ancient and modern historians. The former, it has been said, were artistic, and the latter sociological. These terms, while aiming at the facts, are neither accurate nor happy. The ancient historians, as Herodotus and Thucydides, aimed at a pleasing narrative. To attain this end, neither an exhaustive investigation of facts nor a conscientious abstention from fiction was necessary. Hence we find the works of the one filled with impossible events, and those of the other with orations confessedly fictitious; but in both cases the introduction of legend and fiction has imparted an interest that would otherwise be lacking in their works.

With modern historians, especially in the presence of the existing dominant scientific spirit, it is different. The first requisite of historical writing at the present day is absolute truth, as nearly as it can be ascertained. The modern historian is not allowed to draw upon his imagination for facts; he is held to a laborious and exhaustive investigation of the sources of information. He writes out of abundant stores of accurate information; and not content with the mere chronological narration of facts, he seeks beneath them the principles or laws that bind them together as a whole. Modern history, particularly that of the last fifty years, has a breadth, accuracy, and depth, of which the historians of Greece and Rome hardly dreamed.

64. Biography. Biography is that department of history that gives the facts and events of an individual