Yetitwastheunexpectedwhichoccurred；anditisinstructivetonotethat，evenattheperiodwhenthechampionsoftheolderthoughtweretoallappearanceimpregnablyintrenchedinEngland，awayhadbeenopenedintotheircitadel，andthatthemosteffectiveagentsinpreparingitwerereallytheverymenintheuniversitiesandcathedralchapterswhohadmostdistinguishedthemselvesbyuncompromisingandintolerantorthodoxy。
Arapidsurveyofthehistoryofgeneralliterarycriticismatthatepochwillrevealthisfactfully。DuringthelastdecadeoftheseventeenthcenturytherehadtakenplacethefamouscontroversyovertheLettersofPhalaris，inwhich，againstCharlesBoyleandhissupportersatOxford，waspittedRichardBentleyatCambridge，whoinsistedthattheletterswerespurious。Intheseriesofbattlesroyalwhichfollowed，althoughBoyle，aidedbyAtterbury，afterwardsonotedforhismingledecclesiasticalandpoliticalintrigues，hadgainedatemporarytriumphbywitandhumour，Bentley’sfinalattackhadprovedirresistible。Drawingfromthestoresofhiswonderfullywideandminuteknowledge，heshowedthattheletterscouldnothavebeenwritteninthetimeofPhalaris——provingthisbyanexhibitionoftheirstyle，whichcouldnotthenhavebeeninuse，oftheirreferencetoeventswhichhadnotthentakenplace，andofamassofconsiderationswhichnoonebutascholaralmostmiraculouslygiftedcouldhavemarshalledsofully。ThecontroversyhadattractedattentionnotonlyinEnglandbutthroughoutEurope。WithBentley’sreplyithadended。InspiteofpublicapplauseatAtterbury’swit，scholarsthroughouttheworldacknowledgedBentley’svictory：hewasrecognisedastheforemostclassicalscholarofhistime；themastershipofTrinity，whichheaccepted，andtheBristolbishopric，whichherejected，werehisformalreward。
Although，inhisnewpositionasheadofthegreatestcollegeinEngland，hewenttoextremelengthsontheorthodoxsideinbiblicaltheology，consentingeventosupportthedoctrinethattheHebrewpunctuationwasdivinelyinspired，thiswasasnothingcomparedwiththeinfluenceofthesystemofcriticismwhichheintroducedintoEnglishstudiesofclassicalliteratureinpreparingthewayfortheapplicationofasimilarsystemtoALL
literature，whethercalledsacredorprofane。
Uptothatperiodtherehadreallybeennoadequatecriticismofancientliterature。Whatevernamehadbeenattachedtoanyancientwritingwasusuallyacceptedasthenameoftheauthor：
whattextsshouldbeimputedtoanauthorwassettledgenerallyonauthority。ButwithBentleybegananewepoch。HisacuteintellectandexquisitetouchrevealedclearlytoEnglishscholarsthenewscienceofcriticism，andfamiliarizedthemindsofthinkingmenwiththeideathatthetextsofancientliteraturemustbesubmittedtothisscience。Henceforwardanewspiritreignedamongthebestclassicalscholars，propheticofmoreandmorelightinthegreaterfieldofsacredliterature。
Scholars，ofwhomPorsonwaschief，followedoutthismethod，andthoughattimes，asinPorson’sowncase，theywerewarnedoff，withmuchlossanddamage，fromtheapplicationofittothesacredtext，theykeptalivethebettertradition。
AhundredyearsafterBentley’smaineffortsappearedinGermanyanotherepoch-makingbook——Wolf’sIntroductiontoHomer。InthiswasbroachedthetheorythattheIliadandOdysseyarenottheworksofasinglegreatpoet，butaremadeupofballadliteraturewroughtintounitybymoreorlessskilfulediting。
InspiteofvariouschangesandphasesofopiniononthissubjectsinceWolf’sday，hedealtakillingblowattheideathatclassicalworksarenecessarilytobetakenatwhatmaybetermedtheirfacevalue。
Moreandmoreclearlyitwasseenthattheideasofearlycopyists，andevenofearlypossessorsofmasterpiecesinancientliterature，wereentirelydifferentfromthosetowhichthemodernworldisaccustomed。Itwasseenthatmanipulationsandinterpolationsinthetextbycopyistsandpossessorshadlongbeenconsiderednotmerelyvenialsins，butmattersofright，andthateventheissuingofwholebooksunderassumednameshadbeenpractisedfreely。
In1811alightakintothatthrownbyBentleyandWolfuponancientliteraturewasthrownbyNiebuhruponancienthistory。
InhisHistoryofRometheapplicationofscientificprinciplestotheexaminationofhistoricalsourceswasforthefirsttimeexhibitedlargelyandbrilliantly。Uptothatperiodthetime-honouredutterancesofancientauthoritieshadbeen，asarule，acceptedasfinal：nobreakingaway，evenfromthemostabsurdofthem，waslookeduponwithfavour，andanyonepresumingtogobehindthemwasregardedastroublesomeandevenasdangerous。
ThroughthissacredconventionalismNiebuhrbrokefearlessly，and，thoughattimesovercritical，hestruckfromtheearlyhistoryofRomeavastmassofaccretions，andgavetotheworldaresidueinfinitelymorevaluablethantheoriginalamalgamofmyth，legend，andchronicle。
Hismethodswereespeciallybroughttobearonstudents’historybyoneofthetruestmenandnoblestscholarsthattheEnglishracehasproduced——ArnoldofRugby——and，inspiteoftheinevitableheavyconservatism，wereallowedtodotheirworkinthefieldofancienthistoryaswellasinthatofancientclassicalliterature。
Theplaceofmythinhistorythusbecamemoreandmoreunderstood，andhistoricalfoundations，atleastsofarasSECULARhistorywasconcerned，werehenceforthdealtwithinascientificspirit。TheextensionofthisnewtreatmenttoALL
ancientliteratureandhistorywasnowsimplyamatteroftime。
Suchanextensionhadalreadybegun；forin1829hadappearedMilman’sHistoryoftheJews。InthisworkcameafurtherevolutionofthetruthsandmethodssuggestedbyBentley，Wolf，andNiebuhr，andtheirapplicationtosacredhistorywasmadestrikinglyevident。Milman，thoughaclergyman，treatedthehistoryofthechosenpeopleinthelightofmodernknowledgeofOrientalandespeciallyofSemiticpeoples。HeexhibitedsundrygreatbiblicalpersonagesofthewanderingdaysofIsraelassheiksoremirsorBedouinchieftains；andthetribesofIsraelasobedientthentothesamegenerallaws，customs，andideasgoverningwanderingtribesinthesameregionnow。HedealtwithconflictingsourcessomewhatinthespiritofBentley，andwiththemythical，legendary，andmiraculoussomewhatinthespiritofNiebuhr。ThistreatmentofthehistoryoftheJews，simplyasthedevelopmentofanOrientaltribe，raisedgreatopposition。
SuchchampionsoforthodoxyasBishopMantandDr。Faussettstraightwaytookthefield，andwithsucheffectthattheFamilyLibrary，averyvaluableseriesinwhichMilman’shistoryappeared，wasputundertheban，anditsfurtherpublicationstopped。ForyearsMilman，thoughamanofexquisiteliteraryandloftyhistoricalgifts，aswellasofmosthonourablecharacter，wasdebarredfromprefermentandoutstrippedbyecclesiasticsvastlyinferiortohimineverythingsaveworldlywisdom；foryearshewaspassedintheraceforhonoursbydivineswhowerecontenteithertoholdbriefsforallthecontemporaryunreasonwhichhappenedtobepopular，ortokeeptheirmouthsshutaltogether。Thisoppositiontohimextendedtohisworks。Formanyyearstheyweresneeredat，decried，andkeptfromthepublicasfaraspossible。
Fortunately，theprogressofeventsliftedhim，beforetheclosingyearsofhislife，aboveallthisopposition。AsDeanofSt。Paul’shereallyoutrankedthecontemporaryarchbishops：helivedtoseehismainideasaccepted，andhisHistoryofLatinChristianityreceivedascertainlyoneofthemostvaluable，andnolesscertainlythemostattractive，ofallChurchhistorieseverwritten。
ThetwogreatEnglishhistoriesofGreece——thatbyThirlwall，whichwasfinished，andthatbyGrote，whichwasbegun，inthemiddleyearsofthenineteenthcentury——cameintostrengthenthisnewdevelopment。Byapplicationofthecriticalmethodtohistoricalsources，bypointingoutmoreandmorefullytheinevitablepartplayedbymythandlegendinearlychronicles，bydisplayingmoreandmoreclearlytheeasewithwhichinterpolationsoftexts，falsificationsofstatements，andattributionstopretendedauthorsweremade，theypavedthewaystillfurthertowardajustandfruitfulstudyofsacredliterature。[480]
[480]ForMr。Gladstone’searlieropinion，seehisChurchandState，andMacaulay’sreviewofit。ForPusey，seeMozley，Ward，Newman’sApologia，DeanChurch，etc。，andespeciallyhisLife，byLiddon。Verycharacteristictouchesaregiveninvol。i，showingtheoriginofmanyofhisopinionsseeletteronp。184。ForthescandaloustreatmentofMr。EverettbytheclericalmobatOxford，seearatherjauntyaccountofthepreparationsandofthewholeperformanceinaletterwrittenatthetimefromOxfordbythelateDeanChurch，inTheLifeandLettersofDeanChurch，London，1894，pp。40，41。ForabriefbutexcellentsummaryofthecharacterandservicesofEverett，seeJ。F。Rhodes’sHistoryoftheUnitedStatesfromtheCompromiseof1850，NewYork，1893，vol。i，pp。291etseq。ForasuccinctandbrillianthistoryoftheBentley-Boylecontroversy，seeMacauley’sarticleonBentleyintheEncyclopaediaBritannica；alsoBeard’sHibbertLecturesfor1893，pp。344，345；alsoDissertationinBentley’swork，editedbyDyce，London，1836，vol。i，especiallythepreface。
ForWolf，seehisProlegomenaadHomerum，Halle，1795；foritseffects，seetheadmirablebriefstatementinBeard，asabove，p。
345。ForNiebuhr，seehisRomanHistory，translatedbyHareandThirlwall，London，1828；alsoBeard，asabove。ForMilman’sview，see，asaspecimen，hisHistoryoftheJews，lastedition，especiallypp。15-27。Foranobletributetohischaracter，seetheprefacetoLecky’sHistoryofEuropeanMorals。ForThirlwall，seehisHistoryofGreece，passim；alsohisletters；
alsohisChargeoftheBishopofSt。David’s，1863。
DowntothemiddleofthenineteenthcenturythetraditionallyorthodoxsideofEnglishscholarship，whileithadnotbeenabletomaintainanyeffectivequarantineagainstContinentalcriticismofclassicalliterature，hadbeenabletokeepupbarriersfairlystrongagainstContinentaldiscussionsofsacredliterature。Butinthesecondhalfofthenineteenthcenturythesebarrierswerebrokenatmanypoints，and，thestreamofGermanthoughtbeingunitedwiththecurrentofdevotiontotruthinEngland，thereappearedearlyin1860amodestvolumeentitledEssaysandReviews。Thisworkdiscussedsundryoftheoldertheologicalpositionswhichhadbeenrendereduntenablebymodernresearch，andbroughttobearuponthemtheviewsofthenewerschoolofbiblicalinterpretation。Theauthorswere，asarule，scholarsintheprimeoflife，holdinginfluentialpositionsintheuniversitiesandpublicschools。Theywereseven——thefirstbeingDr。Temple，asuccessorofArnoldatRugby；andtheothers，theRev。Dr。RowlandWilliams，Prof。BadenPowell，theRev。H。
B。Wilson，Mr。C。W。Goodwin，theRev。MarkPattison，andtheRev。Prof。Jowett——theonlyoneofthesevennotinholyordersbeingGoodwin。Allthearticleswereimportant，thoughthefirst，byTemple，onTheEducationoftheWorld，andthelast，byJowett，onTheInterpretationofScripture，beingthemostmoderate，servedmosteffectuallyasenteringwedgesintotheoldtradition。
Atfirstnogreatattentionwaspaidtothebook，theonlynoticebeingtheusualattemptsinsundryclericalnewspaperstopooh-poohit。ButinOctober，1860，appearedintheWestminsterReviewanarticleexultingintheworkasanevidencethatthenewcriticalmethodhadatlastpenetratedtheChurchofEngland。
TheopportunityfordefendingtheChurchwasatonceseizedbynolessapersonagethanBishopWilberforce，ofOxford，thesamewhoafewmonthsbeforehadsecuredafamemorelastingthanenviablebyhisattacksonDarwinandtheevolutionarytheory。Hisfirstonslaughtwasmadeinachargetohisclergy。ThishefollowedupwithanarticleintheQuarterlyReview，veryexplosiveinitsrhetoric，muchlikethatwhichhehaddevotedinthesameperiodicaltoDarwin。Thebishopdeclaredthattheworktended“towardinfidelity，ifnottoatheism“；thatthewritershadbeen“guiltyofcriminallevity“；that，withtheexceptionoftheessaybyDr。Temple，theirwritingswere“fullofsophistriesandscepticisms。”HewasespeciallybitteragainstProf。Jowett’sdictum，“InterprettheScripturelikeanyotherbook“；heinsistedthatMr。Goodwin’streatmentoftheMosaicaccountoftheoriginofman“sweepsawaythewholebasisofinspirationandleavesnoplacefortheIncarnation“；andthroughthearticlewerescatteredsuchrhetoricaladornmentsasthewords“infidel。”
“atheistic。”“false。”and“wanton。”Itatonceattractedwideattention，butitsmostimmediateeffectwastomakethefortuneofEssaysandReviews，whichwasstraightwaydemandedoneveryhand，wentthrougheditionafteredition，andbecameapowerintheland。Atthisapanicbegan，andwiththeusualresultsofpanic——muchfollyandsomecruelty。Addressesfromclergyandlaity，manyofthemfranticwithrageandfear，pouredinuponthebishops，beggingthemtosaveChristianityandtheChurch：astormofabusearose：thesevenessayistswerestigmatizedas“thesevenextinguishersofthesevenlampsoftheApocalypse。”