"TEE MODEL ENGLISHMAN."
ON the top of a wild Wiltshire down stands a triangular red- brick tower—the eccentric architect thought he would save a fourth of the bricks and yet get all the monumental results of a tower—erected to commemorate Alfred's crown- ing victory over the Danes. If we remember rightly, the somewhat grandiloquent inscription declares that the tower was erected to the memory of ,Alfred the Great, the founder of trial by jury and of British naval supremacy. The con- stitutional historian may smile at the inscription, but never- theless it represents a real and most important fact,—the immense impression made upon England and the English kin by Alfred. To Englishmen in all times he has always been what Professor Freeman called him in all seriousness, "the model Englishman." Daring all periods of our history Alfred has stood in the popular mind for the righteous, valiant, just, and God-fearing man who loved his country and did her service not only with his sword, but with his brain. We are said by our enemies, and even sometimes by those of our own house, to be a brutal and unintelligent, even if a strong and upright, people,—dull and just, morose and brave. But if that is so, how comes it that the mixture of the soldier and of the scholar—of the scholar, of course, in the old sense—is always so extraordinarily attractive to English people? Shakespeare when he wishes to heap praises on Hamlet and enlist our fullest sympathies keeps on insisting that Hamlet was the scholar as well as the soldier. So with Alfred. Englishmen have always loved and admired him equally as soldier, scholar, and law-giver. He, indeed, is the man who, if the popular con- ception is true, most fully carries out the national aspirations, —is most indubitably the national hero, the Englishman whom , all can agree to love and honour. But is the popular conception true, or has the world been worshipping a chimera and a shadow, a mere peg on which to hang myths and legends P Happily, there is every ground
to believe that it is true. When so competent and so un- prejudiced an historian as Mr. Frederic Harrison, after seriously examining the recorded facts, can come to the con- clusion that Alfred more than deserves the honour that has been accorded him, there is surely little or no ground left for the belittling criticism which loves to daub every historic figure with a coat of drab-coloured paint. Lest there should be any mistake about the true view of the matter, Mr. Frederic Harrison in his delightful address lately delivered at the Midland Institute, Birmingham, an address which we advise all our readers to study (Osborne and Son, Birmingham), declares it to be a commonplace with historians "that our English Alfred was the only perfect man of action in history." "Of all the hyperboles of praise," he continues, "there is but one that we can safely justify with the strictest canons of historic research. Of all the names in history there is only our English Alfred whose record is without stain and without weakness,—who is equally amongst the greatest of men in genius, in magnanimity, in valour, in moral purity, in intellectual force, in practical wisdom, and in beauty of soul I have been studying of late the whole series of the authentic sources for his recorded career from infancy to death, and I have found no single trait that is not noble and suggestive, nor a single act or word that can be counted as a flaw." Strong as these words are, Mr. Harrison is able to justify them. In his brilliant shorthand sketch of Alfred's career he manages to indicate the sure grounds which exist for the belief that Alfred was, in truth, that happy warrior whom Wordsworth drew,--the lover of God, as of his country, the scholar and the soldier, the man whose mind remains serene in moments of danger and difficulty, who is never a self- seeker, and who cares for power and dominion not for them- selves, but only for the opportunities to serve the Mother-land which they bring to her true son. Wordsworth probably had no thought of Alfred when he wrote "The Happy Warrior," yet see how well the mother-thought of the poem fits the English King. And mark, it is not the Alfred of legend that fits the poem, but the true Alfred; for, as Mr Harrisonsays, "modern research has given us a portrait both nobler and more definite than that drawn by the patriotic imagination of a less critical age." What could suit Alfred better than the lines which describe the happy warrior as
one—-
"Whose high endeavours are an inward light That makes the path before him always bright : Who, with a natural instinct to discern What knowledge can perform, is diligent to learn; Abides by this resolve, and stops not there, But makes his moral being his prime care;"
or the lines which follow later, and mark the happy warrior also as the man— "Whose powers shed round him in the common strife, - •
Or mild concerns of ordinary life, A constant influence, a peculiar grace ; But who, if he be called upon to face Some awful moment to which Heaven has joined Great issues, good or bad for human kind, Is happy as a lover ; and attired With sudden brightness, like a man inspired."
The " Chronicle " tells us how Alfred faced the crisis of his fate in just this noble spirit. When the Danes overran Wessex and carried all before them, the people submitted and gave over the struggle,—" all save King Alfred:" Again, how eminently did Alfred show the "instinct to discern what knowledge can perform." He realised that the land wits
at the mercy of the Danes because he had no army and no
fleet, and he was diligent to learn" how to attain these objects. He discerned that the inefficient levy en masse could not meet the army of the invaders, and he therefore copied
their organisation and created an army of his own. He had at first no fleet and no seamen, but he invented a new form of battleship, and till he could train his own Englishmen to be sailors he manned his ships with Frisians. Exactly has
Wordsworth described Alfred's character when he tells us that the happy warrior is— He who though thus endued as with a sense
And faculty for storm and turbulence, Is yet a Soul whose master-bias leans To home-felt pleasures and to gentle scenes."
It is impossible to read the records of Alfred's life, or any of ; his own literary works, without feeling that this is exactly true. He was no mere Berserker like Charles XII. of Sweden, or even our own Henry V., but a man of great and humane genius whom destiny happened to make a mighty warrior. Mr. Harrison notes the distracted kingdom, the never-ending cares, the ferocious enemies, and yet adds :—" And amidst it all we have the King in his silent study pouring out poetic thoughts upon married love, or friendship, on true happiness, or the inner life, composing pastoral poetry, or casting into English old idylls from Greek epic or myth, ending with some magnificent Te Deum of his own composition." Bat though Alfred's master-bias may have leant to home-felt pleasures, he had little time to indulge the gentler aide of his nature. The land was on fire, and as soon as he had got the flames under he had to reorganise his kingdom. He had not only to rebuild the ruined towns and churches, but, more difficult, to re- civilise a people demoralised by war. He had to restore religion and learning, as well as to remake the laws and the in- stitutions upon which society rests. His task was, indeed, not unlike that of Peter the Great, and, like Peter the Great, Alfred's hand had to be everywhere. He had to take the lead personally in every department of life, to put his own shoulder to every wheel, and to plan, devise, encourage, and execute from morning till night. "Without baste and without rest" was his motto, for there was so much to be done and so little time to do it in. Yet it is almost a desecration to compare the wise and humane Alfred to the furious, savage Peter, a despot as bad as he was mad, and as cruel and mean as he was energetic. The comparison, however, is very interesting from one point of view. We are apt to excuse Peter because he and his people still belonged to the dark ages, and because they had been demoralised by wars and tumults. But in Alfred's day England was more uncivilised than Russia two hundred years ago, and had received worse injuries from foreign foemen. When, then, we remember Alfred, it is difficult to look forgivingly on Peter's bestial life and frenzied cruelty. But, after all, one must not be too hard on the creator of modern Russia, for, with all his faults, he had the mark of a true patriot. He never spared himself in his efforts to do what he thought was his duty to his country.
It is interesting to note that though it is not true to say that Alfred was the founder of trial by jury, it is true to say that he, like all great English rulers and statesmen since his day, realised that our strength and safety rest lathe end on sea-power. He saw that unless we were supreme at sea we could not be safe, for to an island lead a thousand roads open and easy of travel to those who are willing to run the risks of wind and wave,—risks of small account to the lords of armies. In the matter of trial by jury Alfred has, however, hardly received justice. No doubt he did not devise the sys- tem—it has its roots deep in the old Teutonic polity—but he did reorganise the English institutions on the true lines, on lines, that is, which allowed them to grow in accordance with their nature, and to obtain their fullest development. Before we leave the subject of Alfred's character, it may be as well to point out that other historians testify quite as strongly to Alfred's virtues as does Mr. Harrison. Take, for example, the following passage from Mr. J. R. Green's history :—" Alfred," says Mr. Green, "was the noblest, as he was the most complete embodiment of all that is great, all that is lovable, in the English temper. He combined as no other man has ever combined its practical energy, its patient and enduring force, its profound sense of duty, the reserve and self-control that steadies in it a wide outlook and a restless daring, its' temperance and fairness, its frank geniality, its sensitiveness to affection, its poetic tender- ness, its deep and passionate religion." That is true, and Mr. Frederic Harrison's praise of Alfred does not in the least go beyond it.
Mr. Frederic Harrison ends his address by urging the nation to commemorate in some well-marked manner the thousandth anniversary of Alfred's death, which will take place in 1901. He wants either an Alfred mausoleum, i.e., memorial building, or else a colossal statue, to be placed on the Downs near Winchester. We are not, as a rule, favour- able to centenaries or millenaries, but we confess to being . moved by Mr. Harrison's appeal. If ever a King was . worth commemorating it was Alfred. In our opinion a colossal statue or open-air monument combining sculpture ..sad architecture would probably be the best memorial. Flaxman at the close of the great war wanted to erect on Greenwich Hill a colossal statue of Britannia 200 ft. high, which should commemorate our naval victories and our. sea-power. Might not his ides be carried out, only with Alfred rather than that cold abstraction, Britannia, as the chief. figure? A great naval monument surmounted by a. figure of Alfred in armour would be a reminder to the nation of the great political idea so early grasped and acted on by Alfred. No doubt Mr. Frederic Harrison is right in saying that Winchester, Alfred's capital, would be the most appropriate place historically, but for all that we should prefer to set his monument in London, the great town refounded by Alfred. If the monument stood on Greenwich Hill it would be "seeable," if not seen, by all London, it would look down upon the thousand masts of Thames, and it would be within the borders of that kingdom of Wessex which Alfred struggled so heroically to preserve, and did preserve, that it might become the mother of nations. In Winchester the statue would become a local possession. In London it would be the heritage of all. But Alfred belongs to all who speak the English tongue, and his monu- ment should stand, therefore, at the centre and capital of the race. That London is, and is acknowledged to be, from New York to Melbourne, and from Cape Town to Vancouver.
Previous page
