OPINIONS OF WRITERS ON ENGLISH HISTORY, NO. 1.
"Oh, do not read history, for that I know must be false."—SIR ROBERT WALPOLE.
Sir,—I have, from time to time, made a few notes on our historical writers—rather I should say the conflicting opinions of critical writers on their relative value, and the dependence to be placed on them as historical guides. They are so opposite, as would in a great measure confirm the opinion of the celebrated statesman above quoted. I send, as a specimen, the opinions upon Burnet, and should its insertion in your "NOTES AND QUERIES" be deemed advisable, I will from time to time send others which I have in my note-book.
M.
Burnet, "A good historian and an honest man."—Lord Brougham.
"The History of his Own Times, which Burnet left behind him, is a work of great instruction and amusement.... His ignorance of parliamentary forms has led him into some errors, it would be absurd to deny, but these faults do not detract from the general usefulness of his work."—Lord John Russell.
"The most partial, malicious heap of scandal and misrepresentation, that was ever collected for the laudable design of giving a false impression of persons and things to all future ages."—Lord Dartmouth: note in Dr. Routh's edition.
"A rash and partial writer."[7]— Macaulay.
"It is a piece of justice I owe to historical truth to say, that I have never tried Burnet's facts by the tests of dates and of original papers, without finding them wrong."—Sir J. Dalrymple.
"Burnet had all the merits and all the faults of an ardent, impetuous, headstrong man, whose mind was honest, and whose objects were noble. Whatever he reports himself to have heard or seen, the reader may be assured he really did hear and see. But we must receive his representations and conclusions with that caution which must ever be observed when we listen to the relation of a warm and busy partizan, whatever be his natural integrity and good sense."—Smyth's Lectures on Modern History.