A biographical dictionary of eminent Scotsmen/Anderson, Walter, D.D.

ANDERSON, Walter, D.D. The era of this gentleman's birth is unknown; he died at an advanced age, July, 1800, after having been minister of the parish of Chirnside for fifty years. He is a remarkable specimen of that class of authors, who, without the least power of entertaining or instructing their fellow-creatures, yet persist in writing and publishing books, which nobody ever reads, and still, like the man crazed by the lottery, expect that the next, and the next, and the next will be attended with success. Perhaps Anderson's cacoethes scribendi received its first impulse from the following ludicrous circumstance. His parish comprehending the house of Ninewells, he was often entertained there, in company with the brother of the proprietor—the celebrated David Hume The conversation having turned one day on the successes of Mr Hume as an author, Anderson said, "Mr David, I dare say other people might write books too; but you clever fellows have taken up all the good subjects. When I look about me, I cannot find one unoccupied." Hume, who liked a joke upon an unsuspecting clergyman, said, "what would you think, Mr Anderson, of a history of Crœsus, king of Lydia? that has never yet been written." Mr Anderson was delighted with the idea, and, in short, "upon that hint he wrote." In 1755 was published, "The History of Crœsus, king of Lydia, in four parts; containing observations on the ancient notion of destiny, or dreams, on the origin and credit of the oracles, and the principles upon which their oracles were defended against any attack." What is perhaps the best part of the jest, the work was honoured with the following serio-burlesque notice in the Edinburgh Review, then just started by Hume, Smith, Carlyle, and other wits the article being written, we have no doubt, by the very man who incited the unhappy author to his task:—

"Crœsus king of Lydia is a prince whom we never expected to have met with, as the hero of a serious history. Mankind seem at last to feel the necessity of contracting rather than enlarging that period of history, which ought to be the object of their study and attention. If this sentiment be just, how unfortunate and ill-timed is our author's attempt to recall from oblivion the name and adventures of a monarch of such distant and dubious fame. He himself seems aware of this objection to his work; and it is but just to hear what he can plead in his own defence. 'The enthusiastic principles of ages long past, and the artificial devices then used to work upon the passions of men, may appear to some a subject of history not enough interesting in these times. But if the most essential part of knowledge, derived from history, be that of mankind, it surely cannot well be learned, without thoroughly considering the various sentiments and opinions embraced by them in different ages of the world. Our views of human nature must be partial and confined, if they be only directed to some of its late and present appearances. By carrying our thoughts back into ancient times, we may see reason for abating much of the amazement or dislike which is apt to arise in our minds, when we read the religious or political violences marked out in modern history.'

"If the reader shall sustain this apology for the subject, (which we by no means require him to do,) we can assure him that he will find our author neither destitute of skill in composition, nor a stranger to propriety and neatness of language. He has treated his subjects with abundance of erudition, and by his manner of relating it, renders an old tale somewhat tolerable.

"We cannot, however, imagine our readers to be so much interested in the Lydian monarch, as to make it necessary for us to enter into any detail of his actions. We approve of our author's choice of Herodotus rather than Xenophon; * * but at the same time, our author's history has derived, from Herodotus, an air and character which will appear uncouth to a modern reader; oracles, dreams, prodigies, miraculous interpositions of the gods, and no less miraculous instances of credulity and folly among men, are the objects perpetually before him. The rage of reading novels, which has spread so wonderfully over Britain, may perhaps have accustomed the public ear to such improbabilities. To all true lovers of the marvellous, we therefore recommend our author's hero. His adventures, though related in a better style, are as far removed from truth, and very near as much connected with instruction, as most of those which of late years have been so diligently studied by a great part of the nation.

"We conclude this article with an admonition to the author. In any future performance, we advise him either to venture into the region of pure fiction, or to confine himself within the precincts of real history. In the former, by his talents for composition, he may become an agreeable writer; in the latter his industry may render him an instructive one."

It happens that the work thus noticed in the second number of the Edinburgh Review, was also the subject of a critique in the second number of the Critical Review, which had then been just started in London by Smollett. The article in the latter work bears such evident marks of the pen of the distinguished editor, and refers to such an extraordinary work, that we shall make no apology for the following extracts.

After remarking that the volume has-been chiefly compiled from the episodes of Herodotus, that it exhibits a miserable flatness of style, and that all the facts scattered throughout its two hundred and thirty-five pages might have been related in three or four, the critic proceeds to say—"we are apt to believe that this is the first essay of some young historian, who has been more intent upon forming his style and displaying his learning, than careful in digesting his plan, and combining his materials; the subject is too meagre to afford nourishment to the fancy or understanding; and one might as well attempt to build a first-rate man of war from the wreck of a fishing-boat, as to compose a regular history from such a scanty parcel of detached observations. The compiler has been aware of this deficiency, and has filled up his blank paper with unnecessary argument, and a legion of eternal truths, by way of illustration. What could be more unnecessary, for example, than a detail of reasons for doubting the divinity or daemoniacism of the ancient oracles? who believes, at this time of day, that they were either inspired by the deity, or influenced by the devil? What can be more superfluous than a minute commentary and investigation of the absurdities in the plea of the priestess, when she was taxed with falsehood and equivocation? But we beg the author's pardon; he wrote for readers that dwell beyond the Tweed, who have not yet renounced all commerce with those familiar spirits, which are so totally discarded from this part of the island. There is still a race of soothsayers in the Highlands, derived, if we may believe some curious antiquaries, from the Druids and Bards, that were set apart for the worship of Apollo. The author of the history now before us, may, for ought we know, be one of these venerable seers; though we rather take him to be a Presbyterian teacher, who has been used to expound apothegms that need no explanation."

The history of Crœsus king of Lydia, one of the most curious productions recognised in the history of literary mania, is now extremely rare—not by any means from the absorbing appreciation of the public, but rather, apparently, from the very limited extent of its first circulation.

The worthy author, though perhaps daunted a little by the reception of his first attempt, in time recovered the full tone of his literary ambition; and he next attempted a work of much larger compass, which appeared in 1769, in two quarto volumes, under the title of "The History of France during the reigns of Francis II. and Charles IX., to which is prefixed a Review of the General History of the Monarchy from its origin to that period." The success of this work was much like that of its predecessor; yet in 1775 the author published a continuation in one volume, under the title, "The History of France, from the commencement of the reign of Henry III., and the rise of the Catholic League, to the peace of Worms and the establishment of the famous edict of Nantes in the reign of Henry IV." In 1783, appeared two further volumes, embracing the history from the commencement of the reign of Louis XIII. to the general peace of Munster. But these continuous efforts were not drawn forth by the encouragement of the public; they were solely owing to the desperate cacoethes of the worthy writer, which would take no hint from the world—no refusal from fame. It is said that he was solely enabled to support the expense of his unrequited labour by a set of houses belonging to himself in Dunse, (too appropriate locality!) one of which was sold for every successive quarto, till at last something like a street of good habitable tenements in that thriving town was converted into a row of unreadable volumes in his library. "Dr Anderson," says the Gentleman's Magazine, "displays none of the essential qualities of historic writing, no research into the secret springs of action, no discrimination of character, and no industry in accumulating and examining authorities. Even as a compiler he is guided only by one set of materials which he found in the French writers, and may therefore be consulted by the English reader, as a collection of their opinions, while he is highly censurable in not having recourse to original papers and documents respecting the affairs of his own country. His style is uniformly tame, and defaced by colloquial barbarisms."

In a literary history of this deplorable character, it is gratifying to find that one effort was at length judged worthy of some praise. 'Ihis was a work subsequent to the above, entitled, "The Philosophy of Ancient Greece investigated, in its origin and progress, to the eras of its greatest celebrity, in the Ionian, Italic, and Athenian schools, with remarks on the delineated system of their founders." His principle in this work, according to the authority just quoted, appears to have been to supply the deficiencies in Mr Stanley's work, and to give place to remarks upon the meaning employed by the most eminent Grecian philosophers, in support of their physical, theological, and moral systems; and to give a fuller and more connected display of their theories and arguments, and to relieve the frigidity of their bare details by interspersing observations." In this work he displays much learning, and is in general both accurate and perspicuous, although he is still deficient in the graces of style. Perhaps it would have been more successful had it not appeared at the same time with Dr Enfield's excellent abridgment of Brucker's History of Philosophy.

One of the last attempts of Dr Anderson was a pamphlet against the principles of the French Revolution. This being not only written in his usual heavy style. but adverse to the popular sentiments, met with so little sale, that it could scarcely be said to have been ever published. However, the doctor was not discouraged; adopting rather the maxim, "contra audentior ito," he wrote a ponderous addition or appendix to the work, which he brought .with him to Edinburgh, in order to put it to the press. Calling first upon his friend Principal Robertson, he related the whole design, which, as might be expected, elicited the mirthful surprise of the venerable historian. "Really," said Dr Robertson, "this is the maddest of all your schemes—what! a small pamphlet is found heavy, and you propose to lighten it by making it ten times heavier! Never was such madness heard of!" "Why, why," answered Dr Anderson, "did you never see a kite raised by boys?" "I have," answered the principal. "Then, you must have remarked that, when you try to raise the kite by itself, there is no getting it up: but only add a long string of papers to its tail, and up it goes like a laverock!" The reverend principal was completely overcome by this argument, which scarcely left him breath to reply, so heartily did he laugh at the ingenuity of the resolute author. However, we believe, he eventually dissuaded Dr Anderson from his design.