History of the World/History of the World (Bureau Development, Inc.)(1992).BIN/dp/0384/03846.txt

Text File | 1992-10-12 | 7KB | 133 lines

$Unique_ID{how03846}
$Pretitle{}
$Title{Philosophy Of History
Preface To The Second Edition.}
$Subtitle{}
$Author{Hegel, G.W.F.}
$Affiliation{}
$Subject{first
hegel's
history
edition
new
course
lectures
readings
thought
work}
$Date{1857}
$Log{}
Title:       Philosophy Of History
Book:        Preface And Introduction
Author:      Hegel, G.W.F.
Date:        1857
Translation: Sibree, J., M.A.

Preface To The Second Edition.

     The changed form in which Hegel's lectures on the Philosophy of History
are re-issued, suggests the necessity of some explanation respecting the
relation of this second edition both to the original materials from which the
work was compiled, and to their first publication.

     The lamented Professor Gans, the editor of the "Philosophy of History,"
displayed a talented ingenuity in transforming Lectures into a Book; in doing
so he followed for the most part Hegel's latest deliveries of the course,
because they were the most popular, and appeared most adapted to his object.

     He succeeded in presenting the lectures much as they were delivered in
the winter of 18 30/31; and this result might be regarded as perfectly
satisfactory, if Hegel's various readings of the course had been more uniform
and concordant, if indeed they had not rather been of such a nature as to
supplement each other.  For however great may have been Hegel's power of
condensing the wide extent of the phenomenal world by Thought, it was
impossible for him entirely to master and to present in an uniform shape the
immeasurable material of History in the course of one semester.  In the first
delivery in the winter of 18 22/23, he was chiefly occupied with unfolding the
philosophical Idea, and shewing how this constitutes the real kernel of
History, and the impelling Soul of the World-Historical Peoples.  In
proceeding to treat of China and India, he wished, as he said himself, only to
shew by example how philosophy ought to comprehend the character of a nation;
and this could be done more easily in the case of the stationary nations of
the East, than in that of peoples which have a bona fide history and an
historical development of character.  A warm predilection made him linger long
with the Greeks, for whom he always felt a youthful enthusiasm; and after a
brief consideration of the Roman World he endeavoured finally to condense the
Mediaeval Period and the Modern Time into a few lectures; for time pressed,
and when, as in the Christian World, the Thought no longer lies concealed
among the multitude of phenomena, but announces itself and is obviously
present in History, the philosopher is at liberty to abridge his discussion of
it; in fact, nothing more is needed than to indicate the impelling Idea.  In
the later readings, on the other hand, China, India, and the East generally
were more speedily dispatched, and more time and attention devoted to the
German World.  By degrees the Philosophical and Abstract occupied less space,
the historical matter was expanded, and the whole became more popular.

     It is easy to see how the different readings of the course supplement
each other, and how the entire substance cannot be gathered without uniting
the philosophical element which predominates in the earlier, and which must
constitute the basis of the work, with the historical expansion which
characterizes the latest deliveries.

     Had Hegel pursued the plan which most professors adopt, in adapting notes
for use in the lecture room, of merely appending emendations and additions to
the original draught, it would be correct to suppose that his latest readings
would be also the most matured.  But as, on the contrary, every delivery was
with him a new act of thought, each gives only the expression of that degree
of philosophical energy which animated his mind at the time; thus, in fact,
the two first deliveries of 18 22/23 and 18 24/25, exhibit a far more
comprehensive vigour of idea and expression, a far richer store of striking
thoughts and appropriate images, than those of later date; for that first
inspiration which accompanied the thoughts when they first sprang into
existence, could only lose its living freshness by repetition.

     From what has been said, the nature of the task which a new edition
involved is sufficiently manifest.  A treasury of thought of no trifling value
had to be recovered from the first readings, and the tone of originality
restored to the whole.  The printed text therefore was made the basis, and the
work of inserting, supplementing, substituting, and transforming, (as the case
seemed to require,) was undertaken with the greatest possible respect for the
original.  No scope was left for the individual views of the Editor, since in
all such alterations Hegel's manuscripts were the sole guide.  For while the
first publication of these lectures - a part of the Introduction excepted -
followed the notes of the hearers only, the second edition has endeavoured to
supplement it by making Hegel's own manuscripts the basis throughout, and
using the notes only for the purpose of rectification and arrangement.  The
editor has striven after uniformity of tone through the whole work simply by
allowing the author to speak everywhere in his own words; so that not only are
the new insertions taken verbatim from the manuscripts, but even where the
printed text was retained in the main, peculiar expressions which the hearer
had lost in transcription, were restored.

     For the benefit of those who place vigour of thought in a formal
schematism, and with polemical zeal assert its exclusive claim against other
styles of philosophizing, the remark may be added that Hegel adhered so little
to the subdivisions which he had adopted, that he made some alterations in
them on occasion of every reading of the course - treated Buddhism and
Lamaism, e. g., sometimes before, sometimes after India, sometimes reduced the
Christian World more closely to the German nations, sometimes took in the
Byzantine Empire, and so on.  The new edition has had but few alterations to
make in this respect.

     When the association for publishing Hegel's works did me the honour to
entrust me with the re-editing of my Father's Philosophy of History, it also
named as advocates of the claims of the first edition, and as representatives
of Prof. Gans, who had been removed from its circle by death, three of its
members, Geh. Ober-Regierungs Rath Dr. Schulze, Prof. von Henning, and Prof.
Hotho, to whose revision the work in its new shape was to be submitted.  In
this revision, I not only enjoyed the acquiescence of those most estimable men
and valued friends in the alterations I had made, but also owe them a debt of
thanks for many new emendations, which I take the opportunity of thus publicly
discharging.

     In conclusion, I feel constrained to acknowledge that my gratitude to
that highly respected association for the praiseworthy deed of love to
science, friendship, and disinterestedness, whose prosecution originated it
and still holds it together, could be increased only by the fact of its having
granted me also a share in editing the works of my beloved Father.

     Charles Hegel.

     Berlin, May 16, 1840.