The Fortnightly Review: No. CCCCLXIII, New Series [‎618v] (127/239)

96
SCOTLAND AND JOHN KNOX.
relating to Knox which have appeared in recent years indicate only
too clearly that the blind are still to be found engaged in their old
occupation of leading the blind. The love and reverence with
w T hich Knox is regarded in Scotland would be, if it w T ere confined
to his admirers among the few who read the history of their
country, a factor in the national life easy to ignore and unworthy of
the attention of the politician. That it cannot be ignored is
obvious enough, and the analysis of the feeling is rendered the more
interesting by the fact that the love is not based on knowledge
“ far brought from out the storied past.” Is its basis sheer ignor
ance, invincible prejudice, the result of long tradition consciously
inspired by Knox himself, and cherished by his successors in the
ministry, or does it correspond to something like a national in
stinct, an almost intuitive appreciation of an historical truth?
It is no grateful task to attempt such an investigation. Those of
us who are Scotsmen would much rather rejoice that, four hundred
years ago, a great man was born into Scotland. The date of the
actual quater-centenary is unknown; recent criticism has shown
that it will probably not arrive for the better part of a decade ; but
the traditional date will do as well as another, and Scotland has
chosen this year for her tribute to Knox. Were the conclusions of
history clear and definite, it might be possible to silence, at such
a moment, any criticism, and to join in the chorus of jubilation
which the present year has produced. But praise is good and
comely only in so far as it is intelligent and instructed, and he who
would form a true or fair judgment cannot adopt, even for a time,
an attitude of unmeaning eulogy. It may seem hard that the
occurrence of such an anniversary should always become the
occasion of bringing the illustrious dead once more to the bar of
history, there to be judged of the deeds done in the body ; but it
must ever be so if there is any use or progress in man s investiga
tion into his past. The development of historical studies in
evitably results in the creation of a succession of Courts of Appeal,
for ever occupied in revising former conclusions, and arriving at
verdicts which will themselves ere long be subjected to revision.
In this constant process of change, there is always some gain of
certainty, and it is the duty of each generation to attempt to dis
cover and to register the truth according to its own lights. Much
in the edifice it builds may prove to be w T ood, hay, stubble; but if
only the work be honest, there is always something that may be
tried in the furnace. There is no lesson which has been more
deeply impressed upon this generation than the necessity of abso
lute honesty in this regard, for at no time have exposures of a
partisan ‘ ‘ economy of truth ’ ’ been more frequent or more merci
less, and on no point have recent historical teachers been so un-