Thomas Carlyle 'you are there' 19c writing style: Explain

I got a hold of Carlyle’s History of the French Revolution, he uses a ‘you are there’ present tense and specific images to tell the story. He uses formal and sometimes archaic, poetic style prose.

How can I write like this? Does anyone else write like this? (or did?) Is it good? What kind of style is this called? I don’t get it. Explain.

A sample, writing about the impending brankruptcy of Ancien Regime

Tam’s style is practically unique — although I would perversely argue that he owes a lot in developing it to Jean-Paul Richter, who is even more obscure and difficult to grasp ( Carlyle, like Emerson, was strongly influenced by German modes of thought ) — it can only be described as Grotesquery; if to continue with a German metaphor, if ‘Architecture is Frozen Music’ , Carlyle’s prose is what the gargoyles on Notre Dame might be in type.
It is good because it is strong and unique, and he was a powerful thinker, but I find it valueless because even in expounding his dodgy opinions, let alone conveying history or events, it is confused, ambiguous and bombastic. However, it did break from the purely narrative histography of the past and to many gave a feeling of immediacy as if present at the time described. The difficulty might be that his endless unstoppable allusiveness meant one had to have studied the people and events beforehand to get what he was alluding to ( as in the ‘Duke de Coigny’ above ). This though would be very valuable in impressing gullible people ignorant of facts. The whirlwind of words suffices for the simple.
I would describe him as a Victorian Carnival Snake-Oil Salesman Fatally Addicted to His Own Fake Medicament.

I would say Tom Wolfe is somewhat like this, but I don’t think he was necessarily influenced by Carlyle so I’m not sure.

I’ve never read Carlyle before, but the quote reminds me of Finengan’s Wake.