Guizot, on the whole, was the greatest name connected with the reign of Louis Philippe, although his elevation to the premiership was long delayed.  In solid learning, political ability, and parliamentary eloquence he had no equal, unless it were Thiers.  He was a native of Switzerland, and a Protestant; but all his tendencies were conservative.  He was cold and austere in manners and character.  He had acquired distinction in the two preceding reigns, both as a political writer for the journals and as a historian.  The extreme Left and the extreme Right called him a “Doctrinaire,” and he was never popular with either of these parties.  He greatly admired the English constitution and attempted to steer a middle course, being the advocate of constitutional monarchy surrounded with liberal institutions.  Amid the fierce conflict of parties which marked the reign of Louis Philippe, Guizot gradually became more and more conservative, verging on absolutism.  Hence he broke with Lafayette, who was always ready to upset the throne when it encroached on the liberties of the people.  His policy was pacific, while Thiers was always involving the nation in military schemes.  In the latter part of the reign of Louis Philippe, Guizot’s views were not dissimilar to those of the English Tories.  His studies led him to detest war as much as did Lord Aberdeen, and he was the invariable advocate of peace.  He was, like Thiers, an aristocrat at heart, although sprung from the middle classes.  He was simple in his habits and style of life, and was greater as a philosopher than as a practical statesman amid popular discontents.

Guizot was the father of what is called philosophical history, and all his historical writings show great research, accuracy, and breadth of views.  His temperament made him calm and unimpassioned, and his knowledge made him profound.  He was a great historical authority, like Ranke, but was more admired fifty years ago than he is at the present day, when dramatic writings like those of Motley and Froude have spoiled ordinary readers for profundity allied with dulness.  He resembles Hallam more than Macaulay.  But it is life rather than learning which gives immortality to historians.  It is the life and the individuality of Gibbon which preserve his fame and popularity rather than his marvellous learning.  Voltaire lives for his style alone, the greatest of modern historical artists.  Better it is for the fame of a writer to have a thousand faults with the single excellence of living power, than to have no faults and no remarkable excellences.  Guizot is deficient in life, but is wonderful for research and philosophical deductions, and hence is to be read by students rather than by the people.  As a popular historian he is inferior to Thiers, but superior to him in general learning.

Guizot became the favorite minister of Louis Philippe for his conservative policy and his love of peace rather than for his personal attractions.  He was less independent than Thiers, and equally ambitious of ruling, and was also more subservient to the king, supporting him in measures which finally undermined his throne; but the purity of Guizot’s private life, in an age of corruption, secured for him more respect than popularity, Mr. Fyffe in his late scholarly history sneers at him as a sanctimonious old Puritan,—­almost a hypocrite.