Hostile Witnesses Research Articles

The Hostile Witness

The Hostile Witness

The Upstart Earl: A Study of the Social and Mental World of Richard Boyle, First Earl of Cork, 1566-1643

Preface 1. The enigmatic career of Richard Boyle, 1566-1643 2. The hostile witness: Boyle's career through the eyes of his enemies 3. The mental world of Richard Boyle 4. Social ascent and social adjustments in the career of Richard Boyle 5. The family lief of Richard Boyle 6. Richard Boyle: Anglo-Irishman 7. Conclusion: the Boyles, Ireland and the 'New Science'.

W. E. Gladstone and Liberal-Nationalist Movements

Historians have traditionally emphasized Gladstone's support for liberalnationalist movements, especially in Europe. His great biographer, John Morley, saw him as being captivated by the new doctrine of “nationality” after one of his frequent visits to Italy. Philip Magnus described him as an enthusiastic champion of freedom; and Paul Knaplund made an extraordinary fuss over his gospel of “freedom and voluntaryism.” Even G. E. Buckle, who must be considered a hostile witness, conceded that Gladstone was much more sympathetic to national movements than his famous rival, Disraeli. Gladstone is generally depicted in Victorian historiography as the outstanding champion of liberal and national ideas, especially in Italy, Ireland, Greece, and the Danubian principalities. There survives a vivid picture of the Grand Old Man fighting to the end to save the hapless Armenians from the butchery of the Turks. This image of an unusually devout Christian striving against overwhelming odds to promote the cause of liberty, justice, and humanity is still an integral part of the Victorian mythology.Yet, as long ago as 1961, Derek Beales did his best to show that Gladstone's approach to the Italian question was, at best, ambivalent. Even before that, S. Gopal had suggested that Gladstone's contribution to Italian unification was inferior to that of Palmerston, Russell or Sir James Hudson. Two Polish sympathizers have drawn attention to Gladstone's failure to promote the Polish cause. A. J. P. Taylor, for all his wit and wisdom, failed to put more than a minor dent in Gladstone's reputation when, in 1957, he dissected that statesman's foreign policy only to find incompatible elements of Cobdenism and Palmerstonianism. Modern scholars, like C. J. Lowe and D. M. Schreuder, have also argued that Gladstone's attitude towards nationalism was suspiciously flexible. But, in curious defiance of all this scholarship, the Gladstonian myth persists. It is the purpose of this article to put this myth to rest by demonstrating that Gladstone was cautiously conservative in his attitude toward nationalist movements and that he put much more store on order and stability than on national liberty.

The heart as hostile witness.

The heart as hostile witness.

The Character of Domitian

ONE OF THE MOST persistent traits of human thought is the categorizing of individuals (and institutions) into good and bad. Now while this is to be expected from that class of students of history so brilliantly satirized by Sellars and Yeatman, scholars, ancient or modern, should be able to free themselves from its grip. The ancient writers on the Flavian era, with the possible exception of Suetonius, were all subject to this mode of thought, or assumed it for their own purposes. The dichotomy, villains and heroes, is as complete as that of the Western film.' According to the prevailing literary trend of those times, Domitian was a bad ruler; therefore, the tacit argument runs, he must have been a bad man. Of course their readers are expected to take the argument in reverse; so evil a man must have been a bad ruler-for their purpose is not moral but political. The same treatment was accorded to Tiberius; but modern studies have made it very plain that from the point of view of character Tiberius was far from being bad; even if there is still room for some disagreement as to his performance as ruler of the Roman Empire, no serious scholar now accepts the ancient calumnies upon his virtue.2 The rehabilitation of Domitian's government began long ago, with Mommsen, but has not proceeded as fast as in the case of Tiberius, though it has lately received a substantial impulse, in particular from an article by H. W. Pleket.3 His character however is still allowed to be painted in terms of the malevolent attacks of hostile witnesses, especially Pliny. But the current is setting in his favour, so I may feel safe in following the example of his adviser Vibius Crispus, and swimming with the stream.