On the very first page of this work (originally delivered as a series of lectures at early-mid19th century), Carlyle proclaims,
They were the leaders of men, these great ones; the modellers, patterns,
and in a wide sense creators, of whatsoever the general mass of men
contrived to do or attain; all things that we see standing accomplished
in the world are properly the outer material result, the practical realization
and embodiment, of Thoughts that dwell in the Great Men sent into the
world: the soul of the whole world’s history, it may be justly considered,
were the history of these.
Thus did Thomas Carlyle offer the progenitor of the Great Man Theory of History, later to be counterposed by a view, notably held by the late 19th century social theorist Herbert Spencer, that change results not from the exertions and ideas of Great Men but from social evolution over the many centuries of humanity, producing the prevailing circumstances of life and the notable figures themselves at any given point in history.
Carlyle’s outline for his lectures, featuring certain oddities of punctuation, is as follows
I. The Hero as Divinity. Odin. Paganism: Scandinavian Myth
II. The Hero as Prophet. Mahomet. Islam.
III. The Hero as Poet. Dante: Shakespeare.
IV. The Hero as Priest. Luther: Reformation: Knox.
V. The Hero as Man of Letters. Johnson. Rousseau, Burns.
VI. The Hero as King. Cromwell, Napoleon: Modern Revolutionism
I. The Hero as Divinity. Odin. Paganism: Scandinavian Myth
Carlyle names Odin as his first hero for discussion, finding in this god at the top of the Scandinavian mythological deities an eminence of towering sincerity, valor, and vigor who summed up the values of Norse society in the centuries prior to the Common Era. Norse mythology is held by Carlyle to provide allegories for what was known about the Universe. Before the development of monotheistic theologies, certain human beings were considered the embodiment of Divinity in Nature. Over time, these human beings took on the status of gods, worshiped often via Edda (poetic chants) for their exalted characteristics and as benevolent forces of good who confronted the dark, hostile entities known as Jotun.
Carlyle is of the conviction that Odin originated as a human being who more than any other the Norse had known represented their most cherished qualities and thus became to them the highest deity in their pantheon. Carlyle considers Norse mythology to offer a crude but noble recognition of Divinity in the universe, a fundamental recognition that in his view would later gain greater sophistication in the monotheistic religions, especially in Christianity.
II. The Hero as Prophet. Mahomet. Islam.
Born six centuries after Jesus proclaimed the essential ideas of Christianity, Mahomet (the early-mid 19th century rendering of Muhammed) received revelation of the supreme greatness of Allah (God) during his secluded spiritual ponderings in the mountain wilderness at the age of forty. Carlyle extols Mahomet as a paragon of the Prophet Hero who advances the spiritual understanding of his people. Mahomet in the Carlyle view presented to the tribes of Arabia a crude form of Christianity that despite theological errors carried the human beings in the wild, desert expanses of his region to the east of Judeo-Christian Palestine to a level of Spiritual Truth surpassing the competing polytheisms that he had witnessed before his revelations.
Mohamed possessed the qualities of sincerity, courage, and spiritual vigor present in all heroes and only he among other humans at his time and place was able to embody the principles of a greater Truth and advance his society in the manner of Great Men.
III. The Hero as Poet. Dante: Shakespeare.
In Dante and Shakespeare, Carlyle finds poets able to penetrate to the mysteries of Life in the context of what Carlyle regarded as the most advanced societies theretofore witnessed on the globe.
In his Divine Comedy, Dante provides a highly detailed and sophisticated, sustained metaphorical scheme for the essential conceptions in Christian Theology of late 13th century Europe. Born an Florentine aristocrat who was exiled by opponents amid political struggles in Florence, Dante thereafter lived a patron-dependent peripatetic existence, ultimately drawing from his personal sorrows in articulating the path to salvation in proceeding from Inferno to Purgatorio to Paradiso. For Carlyle, Dante was uniquely gifted in his ability to become the spokesperson of the Middle Ages, one who offered an unprecedentedly cohesive statement of life, death, and salvation of the core beliefs of medieval humanity.
Shakespeare, in Carlyle’s view was an even greater eminence than Dante for being able to overcome the type of sorrows that Dante retained and utilized for such powerful poetic formulations. Shakespeare was the great intellect in the years hovering around 1600 C.E., a Bringer of Light to a darkness that he had overcome, a person of great virtue, an eminence of penetrating insight who articulated all human dilemmas and suggested courageous and spiritually apt responses to these vexations. He possessed the unique ability of the Hero to move humanity forward as no other personage of his time could do.
IV. The Hero as Priest. Luther: Reformation: Knox
In Martin Luther and John Knox, Carlyle discerns the Hero who rises above circumstances of birth and seeming preference for the secluded life or the life away from public notability to become leaders impelled to confront systemic corruption on the part of those heading religious bureaucracies.
Born in 1483, Luther resisted familial pressure to study law after his friend Alexis was struck dead by lightning, causing Luther to ask searching questions about existence and his meaning within; he became a monk. Luther traveled to Rome for the first time in 1510, thinking that he would find in the Church leadership moral paragons; instead, he found corruption, veniality, and hypocrisy rampant among those who were putatively ordained as moral exemplars. Luther thenceforth began his life of opposition to the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church, culminating in his valorous confrontation with the powers of the Church at the 1517 Diet of Worms. Luther followed in a tradition of Hus and Wycliff, by the power of his Heroism shaking the society of Europe with nonpareil courage and spiritual fortitude, so that the power of the Roman Catholic Church exercised for thirteen centuries would never recover singular dominance. Those who decided to follow Luther’s exertions to let independent reading of the Bible guide spiritual action ultimately created multiple dominations opposing the singular grip of Rome.
Similarly, John Knox in his native Scotland and in England vigorously opposed the practices of the Anglican Church for being too close to the Catholicism that he abhorred. He also criticized Queen Mary in a confrontational private audience, and railed against Puritan barons with whom he was allied for being religiously lenient toward the queen.
Both Luther and Knox were Breakers of Idols who sought spiritual integrity in the unprecedented manner of the Hero, uniquely changing the course of history.
V. The Hero as Man of Letters. Johnson. Rousseau, Burns.
Carlyle reveals a heightened regard for exemplary people of letters. He spends quite a bit of time in this lecture reviewing the dramatic 15th century development of movable type and what that portended for the spread of the written word.
Carlyle has great regard for Samuel Johnson, he of the huge, erudite dictionary and insightful essays of literary criticism. Beyond Johnson’s magnificent literary talent, Carlyle asserts the status of Hero for his opposing the dominant Skepticism among intellectuals of the 19th century, serving instead as an articulate advocate for traditional Christian values and practices. Able to spread this defense of Christian tradition to a wide audience via the wonder of affordable books, Johnson is viewed by Carlyle as having a priestly function that exceeds the power of the pulpit, magnifying his status as Hero.
Carlyle’s view of Jean Jacques Rousseau is much more constricted. Carlyle regards Rousseau as egotistic, thriving on public admiration and resentful when not receiving what he calculates as his full measure; Rousseau is also viewed by Carlyle as too emotional and many of his ideas not practicable. Still, Carlyle asserts Rousseau as a heroic man of letters for his romantic vision of hope for human improvement that ran counter to intellectual Skepticism.
Similarly, Carlyle greatly admires Robert Burns for his passionate, piercing insight; his graceful, laconic eloquence; and his romantic sensibility, full of wonder at the mystical divinity of Nature. The power of Burns’s poetry, spread via inexpensive collections to a diverse and geographically dispersed readership, elevates him to a unique personage, a Hero without whom life would not be the same.
The presence of these literary Heroes in an age in which letters literally had new power altered History in ways impossible without their singular presence.
VI. The Hero as King. Cromwell, Napoleon: Modern Revolutionism
Finally, Carlyle considers the Hero as King, by which he means a figure able to take control so as to calm societal turbulence, capturing the essence of demands for change while giving form to scattered notions and activity--- or by restoring order when events seem to have ranged out of control.
Carlyle especially admires Oliver Cromwell for his willingness to take responsibility for guiding the events of the English Civil War when Charles I proved recalcitrant in negotiations between the Royalists and the Parliamentarians. Carlyle defends Cromwell’s assumption of the Protectorship as a necessary institutional response for establishing cohesion and asserting leadership to prevent destructive disorder.
As to Napoleon, Carlyle is less laudatory, regarding Napoleon as too personally ambitious and very literally imperial in his aspirations. But in seeking to achieve the intrinsic purpose (liberty, equality, and fraternity) of the French Revolution by advancing political unity and articulating legal principles applicable to all citizens regardless of social position, Napoleon dramatically advanced government as unity of principle and procedure.
Thus does Carlyle celebrate as Heroes two unique personages who embraced the responsibility that others shirked, exhibiting leadership that changed their societies in ways not possible without their presence.
……………………………………………………………………….
Carlyle’s articulates his idea of the Hero in the context of his views of historical change and spiritual values. He seeks to advance favorable societal change in ways that preserve enduring ethical principles. He quarreled with established religions but maintained a keen sense of the mystical divinity of Nature and Life; thus, he found Skepticism abhorrent. He recoiled against social disorder but acknowledged the need for change when venerable institutions had become corrupted. Carlyle had faith that the Hero could guide those of more mundane intellect and degrees of courage in ways that would change society for the better and give citizens hope for the present and future--- and that the Hero was the moving force in history without whom the necessary change and the betterment of the human condition was not possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment