An Advanced History of England

introduced into the text the exact words of such great documents as the Petition of Right and Habeas Corpus Act; and throughout the narrative quotation marks, except in a few obvious cases, mean that the words enclosed come from some good contemporary authority.

In arranging the material my rule has been as far as possibleand it is a most difficult thing to do especially in the later partto treat each matter as a whole, and to avoid the fatal error of having notices of a closely-connected series of events scattered about disconnectedly in the course of the general narrative. For example, the events which led to the Scottish and Irish Unions are respectively grouped together.

In dealing with

As a vivid idea of great national heroes ought to be one of the most valued treasures of the nation, I have throughout laid great stress on biography and character-sketching. those great men, such as Strafford, Laud, and Cromwell, whose actions still provoke bitter controversy, I have followed as far as possible the rule of letting them speak for themselves, and, where I have been compelled to express an opinion on their actions, have endeavoured to give them credit for the best motives.

The same rule applies even more forcibly to the statesmen of our own age and of that immediately preceding it. The dictum of John Bright that there is no part of history so difficult for a young man to make himself acquainted with as that just beyond his own personal memory is undoubtedly true, and I have endeavoured to aid such persons by bringing the narrative down to the resignation of Lord Rosebery in 1895.1 In dealing, however, with such recent history the difficulties are enormous, but I hope I may be thought to have, at any rate, made an honest attempt to overcome them.

One error of historians is to give to the minor details of modern politics a space wholly disproportioned to their relative importance. This I have tried to avoid, and have endeavoured to make the space allotted to any subject, wherever it may come in, bear a close relationship to its importance.

There is, however, one subject in which it is almost impossible

1 See note to p. viii.

to do this. Probably the greatest event in modern history is the development of the British colonial empire; but it is most difficult to make colonial history occupy a space at all commensurate with its importance. With India the case is otherwise, for few events give greater opportunities for dramatic narrative than it; but no one can make the history of Australia exciting, and though the same remark does not apply to the early history of Canada, its development of late years has been along the happy but uneventful lines of peaceful progress.

In dealing with the question of religion, I have avoided, as far as possible, doctrinal points, and where they have been unavoidable have stated them in the words of the original documents, and have throughout used terms which I believe to be acceptable to the various religious bodies of whom history treats.

Similarly, in treating of points where the national feeling or prejudices of the various races who now share the common name of British may be touched, I have endeavoured to avoid anything which may add bitterness, have laid stress on such exploits as each remembers with pride, and have been careful by the use of the word British to draw attention to the common share in common glories and common dangers in which we have all participated.

One great difficulty has been to determine the amount of space to be allotted to literature. This I would gladly have increased had it been possible; but have been compelled to refrain, my rule being that in the earlier part of the history, say to the beginning of the Elizabethan period, literature is so closely connected with the history of the nation that it is impossible to separate them, but that after that date not only do considerations of space become more exacting, but also, as a matter of fact, the class of readers I have in view are in the habit of studying literature in a different text-book. Only where the literature bears a very close relation to politics have I ventured to allow myself a few lines on the subject. The same rule applies to manners and customs.

The maps are numerous, and each contains the minimum of

necessary names, so as to enable its general effect to be seen at a glance. In deciding which battles should have plans allotted to them, I have acted on the principle that where the arrangements of a battle are fairly known, and cannot well be understood without a map of the ground, as in the case of Dunbar and Salamanca, there ought to be a map; in the case of a battle like Naseby, which though very important is perfectly easy to understand, there should not. In each plan I have endeavoured to picture some definite event in the course of the battle, and not tried to get in everything at once. In the case of Waterloo and Poitiers, in which latter battle I have followed the narrative of Galfrid le Baker, I have given two plans, showing the position of the forces at different times.

The names are spelt in the manner sanctioned by the only satisfactory rule-long usage-but in some of the earlier names, to avoid the possibility of mistake, the less familiar form has been added in a bracket.

As I hope the book may be largely used for reference, great pains has been taken with the index, and to aid those who are reading special periods numerous references have been inserted in the text, and even a certain amount of repetition has been introduced.

The figures at the top of the pages represent with a few obvious exceptions the furthest dates reached by the general narrative at the beginning of the left-hand page and the end of the right. The Handbook in Outline of the English Political History, by Acland end Ransome, now published by Longmans and Co., will be found a great assistance in following the chronology.