diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-03-15 08:21:05 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-03-15 08:21:05 -0700 |
| commit | 0587de1f364a2f4959aa7339123773712cdba41e (patch) | |
| tree | cf238c83f70a91f2edce9f37c0e4a41725df3b9d | |
| parent | f713e646e2d2fb9c7b778906125394d766d56526 (diff) | |
| -rw-r--r-- | old/34370-0.txt | 9645 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/34370-0.zip | bin | 210463 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/34370-h.zip | bin | 233446 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/34370-h/34370-h.htm | 13515 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/34370.txt | 9636 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/34370.zip | bin | 208305 -> 0 bytes |
6 files changed, 0 insertions, 32796 deletions
diff --git a/old/34370-0.txt b/old/34370-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index bd9db8f..0000000 --- a/old/34370-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,9645 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Ephemera Critica, by John Churton Collins - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - - -Title: Ephemera Critica - or plain truths about current literature - -Author: John Churton Collins - -Release Date: November 19, 2010 [EBook #34370] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EPHEMERA CRITICA *** - - - - -Produced by Juliet Sutherland, Hannah Joy Patterson and -the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at -http://www.pgdp.net - - - - - - - - - --------------------- -Transcriber’s Note: - -This text uses UTF-8 (Unicode) file encoding for Greek and other -non-ASCII characters such as Œ. If they don't appear correctly, -you may need to change your browser settings. Make sure that your -browser's "character set" or "file encoding" is set to Unicode (UTF-8). - -For clarity, some footnotes have been placed under the chapter -headings where they are referenced. Other footnotes will be -found at the end of each chapter. - -Typographical errors corrected are listed at the end of the text. --------------------- - - - - - EPHEMERA CRITICA - - OR PLAIN TRUTHS ABOUT - CURRENT LITERATURE - - BY JOHN CHURTON - COLLINS - - - Non verebor nominare singulos, quo facilius, propositis exemplis, - appareat, quibus gradibus fracta sit et deminuta eloquentia. - _--Dial. de Orat._ - - - αινεων αινητα, μομφαν δι’ επισπειρων αλιτροις. - _--Pindar_ - - - FOURTH EDITION - - - NEW YORK - E. P. DUTTON & COMPANY - ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE AND CO LTD - 2 WHITEHALL GARDENS, WESTMINSTER - - 1902 - - - BUTLER & TANNER, - THE SELWOOD PRINTING WORKS, - FROME, AND LONDON. - - - - -PREFACE - - -It is time for some one to speak out. When we compare the condition and -prospects of Science in all its branches, its organization, its -standards, its aims, its representatives with those of Literature, how -deplorable and how humiliating is the contrast! In the one we see an -ordered realm, in the other mere chaos. The one, serious, strenuous, -progressive, is displaying an energy as wonderful in what it has -accomplished as in what it promises to accomplish; the other, without -soul, without conscience, without nerve, aimless, listless and decadent, -appears to be stagnating, almost entirely, into the monopoly of those -who are bent on futilizing and degrading it. - -Science stands where it does, not simply by virtue of the genius, the -industry, the example of its most distinguished representatives, but -because by those representatives the whole sphere of its activity is -being directed and controlled. The care of the Universities, the care of -learned societies, the care of devoted enthusiasts, its interests and -honour are watchfully and jealously guarded. The qualifications of its -teachers are guaranteed by tests prescribed by the highest authorities -on the subjects professed. To standards fixed and maintained by those -authorities is referred every serious contribution to its literature. -Even a popular lecturer, or a popular writer, who undertook to be its -exponent would be exploded at once if he displayed ignorance and -incompetence. Such, indeed, is the solidarity of its energies that it is -rather in the degrees and phases of their manifestation than in their -essence and characteristics that they vary. There is not a scientific -institution in England the regulations and aims of which do not bear the -impress of such masters as Huxley and Tyndall and their disciples; not a -work issuing from the scientific Press which is not a proof of the -influence which such men have exercised and are exercising, and of the -high standard exacted and attained wherever Science is taught and -interpreted. - -It is far otherwise with Literature. Those who represent it, in a sense -analogous to that in which the men who have been referred to represent -Science, have neither voice nor influence in its organization, as a -subject of instruction, at the centres of education. They neither give -it the ply, nor in any way affect its standards and its character in -practice and production. As examples few follow them, as counsellors no -one heeds them. They constitute what is little more than an esoteric -body, moving in a sphere of its own. - -And yet there is no reason at all why there should not be the same -solidarity in the activity of Literature as there is in the activity of -Science, and why the standard of aim and attainment in the one should -not be as high as in the other. But this can never be accomplished until -certain radical reforms are instituted, and the first step towards -reform is to demonstrate the necessity for it. I have done so here. I -have drawn attention to the state of things in our Universities,--in -other words, to what I must take leave to call the scandalous and -incredible indifference of the Councils of those Universities to the -appeals which have, during the last fifteen years, been made to them to -place the study of Literature, in the proper sense of the term, upon the -footing on which they have placed other studies. I have pointed out what -have been, and what must continue to be, the effects of that -indifference. I have given specimens of the books to which the -Universities are not ashamed to affix their _imprimatur_, and I have -shown that, so far from them considering even their reputation involved -in such a matter, they do not scruple to circulate works teeming with -blunders and absurdities of the grossest kind, blunders and absurdities -to which their attention has been publicly called over and over again. I -have given specimens of the kind of works which the occupants of -distinguished Chairs of Literature can, with perfect impunity, address -to students; and I would ask any scientific man what would be thought of -a Professor, say, of the Royal Naval College, or of the City and Guilds -of London Institute, who should put his name to analogous -publications--to publications, that is to say, as unsound in their -theories, as inaccurate in their facts, as slovenly and perfunctory in -general execution, as those to which I have here directed attention? If -such things are done in the green tree, what is likely to be done in the -dry? or, as Chaucer puts it, “if gold ruste, what schal yren doo?” That -is one of the questions on which these essays may, perhaps, throw some -light. - -To be misrepresented and misunderstood is the certain fate of a book -like this, and I am well aware of the responsibilities incurred in -undertaking it. It is very distasteful to me to give pain or cause -annoyance to any one, and, whether I am believed or not, I can say, with -strict truth, that I have not the smallest personal bias against any of -those whom I have censured most severely. I believe, for the reasons -already explained, that Belles Lettres are sinking deeper and deeper -into degradation, that they are gradually passing out of the hands of -their true representatives, and becoming almost the monopoly of their -false representatives, and that the consequence of this cannot but be -most disastrous to us as a nation, to our reputation in the World of -Letters, to taste, to tone, to morals. It is surely a shame and a crime -in any one, and more especially in men occupying positions of influence -and authority, to assist in the work of corruption, either by -deliberately writing bad books or by conniving, as critics, at the -production of bad books; and I am very sure it has become a duty, and an -imperative duty, to expose and denounce them. - -These essays are partly a protest and partly an experiment. As a protest -they explain, and, I hope, justify themselves; as an experiment they are -an attempt to illustrate what we should be fortunate if we could see -more frequently illustrated by abler hands. They are a series of studies -in serious, patient, and absolutely impartial criticism, having for its -object a comprehensive survey of the vices and defects, as well as of -the merits, characteristic of current Belles Lettres. I do not suppose -that anything I have said will have the smallest effect on the present -generation, but on the rising generation I believe that much which has -been said will not be thrown away. In any case, what I was constrained -to write I have written. And it is my last word in a long controversy. - -It remains to add that most of these essays appeared originally in the -_Saturday Review_, and I desire to express my thanks to the late and -present Editors, not merely for permission to reproduce the essays, but -for much kindness besides. Three appeared in the _Pall Mall Gazette_, -and one, the first essay on “English Literature at the Universities,” in -the _Nineteenth Century_; and my thanks are due to the Editor of the -_Pall Mall Gazette_ and to Mr. Knowles. But all of them have been -carefully revised and greatly enlarged, in some cases to more than -double their original form. The introductory essay is, with the -exception of the opening pages, in which I have drawn on an old article -of mine in the _Quarterly Review_, quite new; and, indeed, that may be -said of a great part of the volume. - - -NOTE TO THE SECOND EDITION - -I regret to find that I have done M. Jusserand grave injustice in -censuring him for being ignorant of the existence of the _Speculum -Meditantis_, the MS. of which was identified after the publication of -his work. - - - - -LIST OF CONTENTS - - - CHAPTER PAGE - - I. THE PRESENT FUNCTIONS OF CRITICISM 13 - - II. ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES. PART I. 45 - - III. ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES. PART II. 76 - - IV. ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES. PART III. 84 - - V. OUR LITERARY GUIDES. PART I. 93 - - VI. OUR LITERARY GUIDES. PART II. 110 - - VII. LOG-ROLLING AND EDUCATION 133 - - VIII. OUR LITERARY GUIDES. PART III. 145 - - IX. THE NEW CRITICISM 151 - - X. THE GENTLE ART OF SELF-ADVERTISEMENT 158 - - XI. R. L. STEVENSON’S LETTERS 165 - - XII. LITERARY ICONOCLASM 172 - - XIII. WILLIAM DUNBAR 183 - - XIV. A GALLOP THROUGH ENGLISH LITERATURE 193 - - XV. DE QUINCEY AND HIS FRIENDS 203 - - XVI. LEE’S LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE 211 - - XVII. SHAKESPEARE’S SONNETS 219 - - XVIII. LANDSCAPE IN POETRY 236 - - XIX. AN APPRECIATION OF FRANCIS TURNER PALGRAVE 250 - - XX. ANCIENT GREEK AND MODERN LIFE 255 - - XXI. THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICISM 270 - - XXII. WOMEN IN GREEK POETRY 283 - - XXIII. MR. STEPHEN PHILLIPS’ POEMS 294 - - XXIV. THE ILLUSTRIOUS OBSCURE 301 - - XXV. VIRGIL IN ENGLISH HEXAMETERS 308 - - XXVI. THE LATEST EDITION OF THOMSON 318 - - XXVII. CATULLUS AND LESBIA 335 - - XXVIII. THE RELIGION OF SHAKESPEARE 351 - - - - -THE PRESENT FUNCTIONS OF CRITICISM - - -It may sound paradoxical to say that the more widely education spreads, -the more generally intelligent a nation becomes, the greater is the -danger to which Art and Letters are exposed. And yet how obviously is -this the case, and how easily is this explained. The quality of skilled -work depends mainly on the standard required of the workman. If his -judges and patrons belong to the discerning few who, knowing what is -excellent, are intolerant of everything which falls short of excellence, -the standard required will necessarily be a high one, and the standard -required will be the standard attained. In past times, for example, the -only men of letters who were respected formed a portion of that highly -cultivated class who will always be in the minority; and to that class, -and to that class only, they appealed. A community within a community, -they regarded the general public with as much indifference as the -general public regarded them, and wrote only for themselves, and for -those who stood on the same intellectual level as themselves. It was so -in the Athens of Pericles; it was so in the Rome of Augustus; it was so -in the Florence of the Medici; and a striking example of the same thing -is to be found in our own Elizabethan Dramatists. Though their bread -depended on the brutal and illiterate savages for whose amusement they -catered, they still talked the language of scholars and poets, and -forced their rude hearers to sit out works which could have been -intelligible only to scholars and poets. Each felt with pride that he -belonged to a great guild, which neither had, nor affected to have, -anything in common with the multitude. Each strove only for the applause -of those whose praise is not lightly given. Each spurred the other on. -When Marlowe worked, he worked with the fear of Greene before his eyes, -as Shakespeare was put on his mettle by Jonson, and Jonson by -Shakespeare. We owe _Hamlet_ and _Sejanus_, _Much Ado about Nothing_ and -the _Alchemist_, not to men who bid only for the suffrage of the mob, -but to men who stood in awe of the verdict which would be passed on them -by the company assembled at the Mermaid and the Devil. - -As long as men of letters continue to form an intellectual aristocracy, -and, stimulated by mutual rivalry, strain every nerve to excel, and as -long also as they have no temptation to pander to the crowd, so long -will Literature maintain its dignity, and so long will the standard -attained in Literature be a high one. In the days of Dryden and Pope, in -the days even of Johnson and Gibbon, the greater part of the general -public either read nothing, or read nothing but politics and sermons. -The few who were interested in Poetry, in Criticism, in History, were, -as a rule, those who had received a learned education, men of highly -cultivated tastes and of considerable attainments. A writer, therefore, -who aspired to contribute to polite literature, had to choose between -finding no readers at all, and finding such readers as he was bound to -respect--between instant oblivion, and satisfying a class which, -composed of scholars, would have turned with contempt from writings -unworthy of scholars. A classical style, a refined tone, and an adequate -acquaintance with the chief authors of Ancient Rome and of Modern -France, were requisites, without which even a periodical essayist would -have had small hope of obtaining a hearing. Whoever will turn, we do not -say to the papers of Addison and his circle in the early part of the -last century, or to those of Chesterfield and his circle later on, but -to the average critical work of Cave’s and Dodsley’s hack writers, -cannot fail to be struck with its remarkable merit in point of literary -execution. - -But as education spreads, a very different class of readers call into -being a very different class of writers. Men and women begin to seek in -books the amusement or excitement which they sought formerly in social -dissipation. To the old public of scholars succeeds a public, in which -every section of society has its representatives, and to provide this -vast body with the sort of reading which is acceptable to it, becomes a -thriving and lucrative calling. An immense literature springs up, which -has no other object than to catch the popular ear, and no higher aim -than to please for the moment. That perpetual craving for novelty, which -has in all ages been characteristic of the multitude, necessitates in -authors of this class a corresponding rapidity of production. The writer -of a single good book is soon forgotten by his contemporaries; but the -writer of a series of bad books is sure of reputation and emolument. -Indeed, a good book and a bad book stand, so far as the general public -is concerned, on precisely the same level, as they meet with precisely -the same fate. Each presents the attraction of a new title-page. Each is -glanced through, and tossed aside. Each is estimated not by its -intrinsic worth, but according to the skill with which it has been -puffed. Till within comparatively recent times this literature was, for -the most part, represented by novels and poems, and by those light and -desultory essays, sketches and _ana_, which are the staple commodity of -our magazines. And so long as it confined itself within these bounds it -did no mischief, and even some good. Flimsy and superficial though it -was, it had at least the merit of interesting thousands in Art and -Letters, who would otherwise have been indifferent to them. It afforded -nutriment to minds which would have rejected more solid fare. To men of -business and pleasure who, though no longer students, still retained the -tincture of early culture, it offered the most agreeable of all methods -of killing time, while scholars found in it welcome relaxation from -severer studies. It thus supplied a want. Presenting attractions not to -one class only, but to all classes, it grew on the world. Its patrons, -who half a century ago numbered thousands, now number millions. - -And as it has grown in favour, it has grown in ambition. It is no longer -satisfied with the humble province which it once held, but is extending -its dominion in all directions. It has its representatives in every -department of Art and Letters. It has its poets, its critics, its -philosophers, its historians. It crowds not our club-tables and -news-stalls only, but our libraries. Thus what was originally a mere -excrescence on literature, in the proper sense of the term, has now -assumed proportions so gigantic, that it has not merely overshadowed -that literature, but threatens to supersede it. - -No thoughtful man can contemplate the present condition of current -literature without disgust and alarm. We have still, indeed, lingering -among us a few masters whose works would have been an honour to any age; -and here and there among writers may be discerned men who are honourably -distinguished by a conscientious desire to excel, men who respect -themselves, and respect their calling. But to say that these are in the -minority, would be to give a very imperfect idea of the proportion which -their numbers bear to those who figure most prominently before the -public. They are, in truth, as tens are to myriads. Their comparative -insignificance is such, that they are powerless even to leaven the mass. -The position which they would have occupied half a century ago, and -which they may possibly occupy half a century hence, is now usurped by a -herd of scribblers who have succeeded, partly by sheer force of numbers, -and partly by judicious co-operation, in all but dominating literature. -Scarcely a day passes in which some book is not hurried into the world, -which owes its existence not to any desire on the part of its author to -add to the stores of useful literature, or even to a hope of obtaining -money, but simply to that paltry vanity which thrives on the sort of -homage of which society of a certain kind is not grudging, and which -knows no distinction between notoriety and fame. A few years ago a man -who contributed articles to a current periodical, or who delivered a -course of lectures, had, as a rule, the good sense to know that when -they had fulfilled the purpose for which they were originally intended, -the world had no more concern with them, and he would as soon have -thought of inflicting them in the shape of a volume on the public, as he -would have thought of issuing an edition of his private letters to his -friends. Now all is changed. The first article in the creed of a person -who has figured in either of these capacities, appears to be, that he is -bound to force himself into notice in the character of an author. And -this, happily for himself, but unhappily for the interests of -literature, he is able to do with perfect facility and with perfect -impunity. Books are speedily manufactured and as speedily reduced to -pulp. A worthless book may be as easily invested with those superficial -attractions which catch the eye of the crowd as a meritorious one. As -the general public are the willing dupes of puffers, it is no more -difficult to palm off on them the spurious wares of literary charlatans, -than it is to beguile them into purchasing the wares of any other kind -of charlatan. No one is interested in telling them the truth. Many, on -the contrary, are interested in deceiving them. As a rule, the men who -write bad books are the men who criticise bad books; and as they know -that what they mete out in their capacity of judges to-day is what will -in turn be meted out to them in their capacity of authors to-morrow, it -is not surprising that the relations between them should be similar to -those which Tacitus tells us existed between Vinius and -Tigellinus--“nulla innocentiæ cura, sed vices impunitatis.” - -Meanwhile all those vile arts which were formerly confined to the -circulators of bad novels and bad poems are practised without shame. It -is shocking, it is disgusting to contemplate the devices to which many -men of letters will stoop for the sake of exalting themselves into a -factitious reputation. They will form cliques for the purpose of mutual -puffery. They will descend to the basest methods of self-advertisement. -And the evil is fast-spreading. Indeed, things have come to such a pass, -that persons of real merit, if they have the misfortune to depend on -their pens for a livelihood, must either submit to be elbowed and -jostled out of the field, or take part in the same ignoble scramble for -notoriety, and the same detestable system of mutual puffery. Thus -everything which formerly tended to raise the standard of literary -ambition and literary attainment has given place to everything which -tends to degrade it. The multitude now stand where the scholar once -stood. From the multitude emanate, to the multitude are addressed -two-thirds of the publications which pour forth, every year, from our -presses. - - Viviamo scorti - Da mediocrità: sceso il sapiente, - E salita è la turba a un sol confine - Che il mondo agguaglia. - -Matthew Arnold very truly observed, that one of the most unfortunate -tendencies of our time was the tendency to over-estimate the -performances of “the average man.” The over-estimation of these -performances is no longer a tendency, but an established custom. -Literature, in all its branches, is rapidly becoming his monopoly. As -judged and judge, as author and critic, there is every indication that -he will proceed from triumph to triumph, and establish his cult wherever -books are read. Now the only sphere in which “the average man” is -entitled to homage is a moral one, and he is most venerable when he is -passive and unambitious. But if ambition and the love of fame are -awakened in him, he is capable of becoming exceedingly corrupt and of -forfeiting every title to veneration. He is capable of resorting to all -the devices to which men are forced to resort in manufacturing -factitious reputations, to imposture, to fraud, to circulating false -currencies of his own, and to assisting others in the circulation of -theirs. Even when he is free from these vices, so far as their -deliberate practice is concerned, he is scarcely less mischievous, if he -be uncontrolled. To say that his standard is never likely to be a high -one, either with reference to his own achievements or with reference to -what he exacts from others, and to say that the systematic substitution -of inferior standards for high ones must affect literature and all that -is involved in its influence, most disastrously, is to say what will be -generally acknowledged. And he has everything, unhappily, in his -favour--numbers, influence, the spirit of the age. For one who sees -through him and takes his measure, there are thousands who do not: for -one who could discern the justice of an exposure of his shortcomings, -there are thousands who would attribute that exposure to personal enmity -and to dishonest motives. His power, indeed, is becoming almost -irresistible. The one thing which he and his fellows thoroughly -understand is the formidable advantage of co-operation. The consequence -is that there are probably not half a dozen reviews and newspapers now -left which they are not able practically to coerce. An editor is obliged -to assume honesty in those who contribute to his columns, and also to -avail himself of the services of men who can write good articles, if -they write bad books. In the first case, it is not open to him to -question the justice of the verdict pronounced; in the second case, the -courtesy of the gentleman very naturally and properly predominates, -under such circumstances, over public considerations--and how can truth -be told? Nor is this all. Assuming that an editor is free from such -ties, he has to consult the interests of his paper, to study -popularity, and not to estrange those who are, from a commercial point -of view, the mainstays of all our literary journals, those who advertise -in them,--the publishers. “If,” said an editor to me once, “I were to -tell the truth, as forcibly as I could wish to do, about the books sent -to me for review, in six months my proprietors would be in the -bankruptcy court.” It is in the power of the publishers to ruin any -literary journal. There is probably not a single Review in London which -would survive the withdrawal of the publishers’ advertisements. - -A more honourable class of men than those who form the majority of the -London publishers does not exist, nor have the interests of Literature, -as distinguished from commercial interests, ever found heartier and more -ungrudging support, than they have long found in three or four of the -leading firms, and as they are now finding in two or three of the firms -which have been more recently established. But, unhappily, this is not -everywhere the case. While the firms, to which I have referred, have -never, in any way, attempted to interfere with the independence of -reviewers, others have made no secret of their intention to make their -patronage in advertisement dependent on favourable notices of their -publications. The strain of temptation and peril to which editors are -thus exposed may be estimated by the fact that, a flattering review may, -if supplemented by similar ones, put some three hundred a year into the -pockets of their proprietors, while severity and justice would involve a -corresponding loss. It need hardly be said that no editor of a -respectable review would allow any definite understanding of this kind -to exist, or that any publisher would ever dare to suggest it, but there -can be no doubt that such considerations have to be taken into account -almost universally, and place serious restraint on freedom of judgment. - -There is, it is true, another aspect of this question. Publishers must -protect themselves. Though reviews offend much more frequently on the -side of dishonest and interested puffery, they are very often made the -vehicles of equally unscrupulous rancour and spite. If they do their -readers injustice, by attempting to foist bad books on them, they do -every one concerned injustice, by damning good ones. No one could blame -a publisher for declining to support a paper which was continually -making his books the subjects of unmerited attacks. But a publisher who -attempts to prevent the truth from being told, and so secures, or seeks -to secure, currency for his spurious wares, is guilty of an act which -borders closely on fraud. - -Another circumstance very favourable to the encouragement of -inferiority, and not of inferiority only, but of charlatanism and -imposture, is the increasing tendency to regard nothing of importance -compared with the spirit of tolerance and charity. An all-embracing -philanthropy exempts nothing from its protection. Every one must be -good-natured. Severity, we are told, is quite out of fashion. Such -censors as the old reviewers are now mere anachronisms. It is vain to -plead that tolerance and charity must discriminate; that, like other -virtues, they may be abused, and that in their abuse they may become -immoral; that there are higher considerations than the feelings of -individuals; and that, if to give pain or annoyance admits of no -justification but necessity, necessity may exact their infliction as an -exigent duty. - -But this spirit of tolerance and charity has also become attenuated into -the spirit of mere _laissez-faire_. We have no lack of real scholars and -of real critics, who see through the whole thing, and probably deplore -it; but they make no sign, look on with a sort of amused perplexity, and -do their own work, thankful, no doubt, sometimes, when it is oppressive, -that they need not be over-scrupulous about its quality. If, -occasionally, they get a little impatient and indulge their genius, -protest goes no further than sarcasm and irony, so fine that it is -intelligible only among themselves; while the objects of their satire, -as well as the general public, missing the one and misinterpreting the -other, take it all for applause. Resistance, it is said, is useless. -Literature is a trade. What has come was inevitable: _vive la -bagatelle_, and drift with the stream. - -And now let us consider what are the results of all this. The first and -most important is the degradation of criticism. Criticism is to -Literature what legislation and government are to States. If they are in -able and honest hands all goes well; if they are in weak and dishonest -hands all is anarchy and mischief. And as government in a Republic, the -true analogy to the sphere of which we are speaking, is represented not -by those who form the minority in its councils, but by those who form -the majority, so in criticism, it is not on the few but on the many -among those who represent it, that its authority and influence depend. -And what are its characteristics in the hands of its prevailing -majority--in the hands of those who are its legislators in a realm -co-extensive with the reading world? It is not criticism at all. To -criticism, in the true sense of the term, it has no claim even to -approximation. It seems to have resolved itself into something which -wants a name,--something which is partly dithyramb and partly rhetoric. -Without standards, without touchstones, without principles, without -knowledge, it appears to be regarded as the one calling for which no -equipment and no training are needed. What a master of the art has -called the final fruit of careful discipline and of much experience is -assumed to come spontaneously. A man of literary tastes is born -cultured. A critic, like a poet, is the pure product of nature. Such -canons as these “critics” have are the mysterious and somewhat -perplexing evolutions of their own inner consciousness, or derived, not -from the study of classical writers in English or in any other language, -of all of whom they are probably profoundly ignorant, but from a current -acquaintance with the writings of contemporaries, who are, in -intelligence and performance, a little in advance of themselves. But -what they lack in attainments they make up in impudence. The effrontery -of some of these “critics,” whose verdicts, ludicrous to relate, are -daily recorded as “opinions of the Press,” literally exceeds belief. -They will sit in judgment on books written in languages of whose very -alphabets they are ignorant. They will pose as authorities and pronounce -_ex cathedrâ_ on subjects literary, historical, and scientific of which -they know nothing more than what they have contrived to pick up from the -works which they are “reviewing.” Their estimates of the books, on the -merits and demerits of which they undertake to enlighten the public, -correspond with their qualifications for forming them. Books displaying -in their writers the grossest ignorance of the very rudiments of the -subjects treated, and literally swarming with blunders and absurdities, -all of which pass undetected and unnoticed, are made the subjects of -elaborate panegyrics, which would need some qualification if applied to -the very classics in the subjects under discussion. Books, on the other -hand, of unusual and distinguished merit are despatched summarily in a -few lines of equally undeserved depreciation; books written in the worst -taste and in the vilest style are pronounced to be models of both. -Sobriety, measure, and discrimination have no place either in the creed -or in the practice of these writers. They think in superlatives; they -express themselves in superlatives. It never seems to occur to them that -if criticism has to reckon with Mr. Le Gallienne it has also to reckon -with Shakespeare; that if it has to take the measure of Mr. Hall Caine, -it has likewise to take the measure of Cervantes and Fielding, and that -of some dozen prose writers and poets, it cannot be pronounced, at the -same time of each, that he is “the greatest living master of English -prose,” or “without parallel for his superlative command of all the -resources of rhythmical expression.” There is one accomplishment in -which these critics are particularly adroit, and that is in keeping out -of controversy, and so avoiding all chance of being called to account. -For this reason they deal more in eulogy than in censure, for the public -is less likely to complain of a bad book being foisted on them for a -good one, than its irate author to sit silent under reproof. - -If we go a little higher, things are almost as bad, if not quite so -ridiculous. In everything but in criticism it is necessary to -specialize. A man who posed as an authority on all the literatures of -the world, and on the history of every nation in the world, would be -very justly set down as an impostor. And yet pretentions which men would -be the first to ridicule, as private individuals, they do not scruple to -claim, as critics. An historical student enriches History with a volume -throwing new and important light on some obscure episode or period; a -classical student deserves the gratitude of scholars for an invaluable -monograph; English Literature or one of the Continental Literatures is -illustrated by a series of dissertations as instructive as they are -original; or a truly memorable contribution has been made to political -philosophy, to æsthetics, or to ethics. What is their fate? It is by no -means improbable that they will be ‘reviewed,’ in the course of a few -days, by the same man for three or four, or it may be for five or six, -daily and weekly journals, and their fortune in the market made or -marred by a censor who has probably done no more than glance at their -half-cut pages, and who, if he had studied them from end to end, would -have been no more competent to take their measure than he would have -been to write them. This leads, it is needless to say, to every kind of -abuse: to works which deserve to be authorities on the subjects of which -they treat dropping at once into oblivion, to works which every scholar -knows to be below contempt usurping their places; to the deprivation of -all stimulus to honourable exertion on the part of authors of ability -and industry; to the encouragement of charlatans and fribbles; to gross -impositions on the public. A very amusing and edifying record might be -compiled partly out of a selection of the various verdicts passed -contemporaneously by reviews on particular works, and partly out of -comparisons of the subsequent fortunes of works with their fortunes -while submitted to this censorship. - -But it is not these causes only which contribute to the degradation of -criticism. A very important factor is the prevalence, or rather the -predominance, of mere prejudice, the prejudice of cliques in favour of -cliques, the prejudice of cliques against cliques, the prejudice of the -veteran against or in favour of the novice, the subsequent compensation, -in corresponding prejudice on the part of the novice, when his novitiate -is over. The two things which never seem to be considered are the -interests of Literature and the interests of the public. The appearance -of a work by the member of a particular coterie is the signal, on the -one hand, for a series of preposterously intemperate eulogies, and for a -series, on the other hand, of equally intemperate depreciations, in such -organs as are accessible to both parties. If a work, with any pretension -to originality, by a previously unknown author makes its appearance, it -is pretty sure to fare in one of three ways: it will scarcely be noticed -at all; it will be made the theme of a philippic against innovating -eccentricities and newfangled notions; or it will fall into the hands of -a critic who is on the look-out for a “discovery.” Its fortune, so far -as notoriety is concerned, will, in that case, be made. The critic, thus -on his mettle and with his character for discernment at stake, will not -only become proportionately vociferous but will rally his equally -vociferous partisans. Hyperbole will be heaped on hyperbole, rodomontade -on rodomontade, till real merit will be made ridiculous, and the unhappy -author awake at last, to assume his true proportions, in a Fool’s -Paradise. - -And to this pass has criticism come, and Literature generally, in almost -all its branches, is necessarily following suit. It would be no -exaggeration to say, that the sole encouragement now left to authors to -produce good books is the satisfaction of their own conscience, and the -approbation of a few discerning judges; and this attained, they must -starve if their bread depends upon their pen. It is not that a good book -will not be praised, but that bad books are praised still more; it is -not that it will fail to find fair and competent reviewers, but that for -one fair and competent reviewer it will find fifty who are unfair and -incompetent. It is on its acceptance, not with the few who can estimate -its merits, but with the many who take that estimate on trust from -judges, whose competence or incompetence they are equally unable to -gauge, that the possibility of a book yielding any return to its author -depends. The public neither can nor will distinguish. A book which has -two or three favourable press notices which are merited cannot stand -against a book having twenty or thirty which are unmerited. Nor is this -all. Measured and discriminating eulogy, which means precisely what it -expresses, and which is always the note of sound and just criticism, is -to the uninitiated poor recommendation compared with that which has no -limitation but extremes. How can the still small voice of truth expect -to get a hearing amid a bellowing Babel of its undistinguishable mimic? -What inducement has an author to aim at excellence, to spend three or -four years on a monograph or a history that it may be sold for waste -paper, when some miserable compilation, vamped up in as many weeks, -will, with a little management, give him notoriety and fill his purse? -There is not a scholar, not a discerning reader in England who will not -bear me witness when I say that, as a rule, the best books produced in -Belles Lettres are those of which the general public knows nothing, and -that he has been guided to them sometimes by pure accident, and -sometimes, it may be, by a depreciatory notice or curt paragraph in -“our library table” limbo. And what does this mean? It means that a -writer has discovered that it is impossible for him to have a -conscience, or aim at an honourable reputation, unless he can afford to -lose money. It means more; it means that publishers are obliged to -discourage the production of solid and scholarly works. It is notorious -that the Delegates of the Clarendon Press at Oxford, and one or two -firms in London, having regard to the honourable traditions of their -predecessors, have wished to maintain those traditions by encouraging -the production of such works, and have, at a great pecuniary loss, -persevered in this ambition. But no publisher can continue to multiply -books which do not pay their expenses, and whose sale begins and ends in -the remainder market. - -This state of things is the more deplorable when we consider its effect, -not merely in degrading and corrupting Literature on its productive -side, but in detracting so seriously from its efficacy on its -influential side. During the last few years the rapid spread of higher -education, the popularization of liberal culture through such agencies -as the University Extension Lectures, the National Home Reading Union -and similar institutions have called into being an immense and -constantly multiplying class of serious readers and students. These -already number tens of thousands, they will before long number hundreds -of thousands. Now it is of the utmost importance that these readers, who -are quite prepared to appreciate what is excellent, should be guided to -what is excellent, and discouraged in every way from conversing with -what is bad and inferior in Literature. But how is this to be done when -those who are striving, in every way, to raise the standard of popular -taste and of popular culture, as teachers, find all their efforts -counteracted by the intense activity of those who are doing their utmost -to degrade both, as writers. It is only those engaged in education, and -more particularly in popular education, who can understand the extent of -the mischief which bookmakers and the puffers of bookmakers are doing, -who can understand the tone, the taste, the temper induced by the -habitual and exclusive perusal of the writings characteristic of these -pests,--the inaccuracies and errors, the misrepresentations and -absurdities, to which these writings give currency. - -In the days of our forefathers, a reader of literary tastes, if he -wished to acquaint himself with an English classic, went to the fountain -head and read Spenser or Milton, Pope or Addison for himself. If he -desired to know what criticism had said about them, he had criticism of -authority at hand, and he consulted it. In our day it is about an even -chance whether the ordinary reader would trouble himself to turn to the -originals or not: he would probably content himself with the notices of -them in some current manual of English Literature, or with some essay or -monograph. Now, in the myriads of such publications, in vogue or out of -vogue, knocked under by their successors or scuffling with their -contemporaries, he might have the luck to light on a good guide; he -might have the luck to light on Dean Church, or Mark Pattison, or Mr. -Leslie Stephen, or Professor Courthope, or Mr. Frederic Harrison; but he -is much more likely to make his way to a luminary in the last -well-puffed “series.” The first article in the creed of the modern -book-maker seems to be that the appearance or existence of a good book -is a sufficient justification for the production of a bad one to take -its place. An excellent monograph is published, and is popular. This is -the signal for the manufacture of half a dozen inferior ones, which are -mutually destructive, and serve no end except to substitute bad books -for a good one, and to make the good one forgotten. Again, a work which -has long been classical in criticism is assumed not to be “up to date,” -and is either edited on this hypothesis, or we have another substituted -for it. This in turn yields its vogue--for fashions change quickly in -modern taste--to a similar experiment, till a third is announced. Of the -relation of criticism to principles, or indeed to anything else but to -their own whims or impressions, these iconoclasts appear to be -profoundly unaware. - -It requires, needless to say, the utmost wariness and care on the part -of those who regulate, and on the part of those who are engaged in, -education, to keep this inferior literature in its place. If it were -allowed to make its way authoritatively into our schools and -Universities, or indeed into any of our educational institutions, the -consequences would be most disastrous. It is not so much that it would -disseminate error as that it would become influential in more serious -ways, æsthetically in its influence on taste, morally in its influence -on tone and character, intellectually in lowering the whole standard of -aim and attainment in studies. - -That the evils which have been described admit of no remedy at present, -or perhaps in the present generation, may be fully conceded. But they -may be palliated if they cannot be cured, and they must be palliated by -the agents to whom we may ultimately look for their cure, education and -fearless criticism. As their origin may be mainly ascribed to the -failure of the Universities to adapt themselves to new conditions, so on -the willingness of the Universities to repair their error must depend -all possibility of rectifying the results of it. From its organization -at the Universities everything comprehended in the system of liberal -study takes its ply; its standards are there determined, its methods -formulated, its aims defined. As a subject of teaching, and as the -result of teaching, in its relation to theory and in its relation to -practice, it there receives an impression which is permanent. It has -been so with classical scholarship, and with Philology; it has been so -with Philosophy and Theology, with Jurisprudence and History. What has -been imparted in the lecture-rooms of Oxford and Cambridge has orally, -and by the pen, become influential wherever these subjects are -represented. There is not an educational institute in Great Britain or -in the colonies, there is not a serious magazine or review on which it -has not set its seal. We have a striking illustration of this in the -case of Modern History. Some thirty years ago it was practically -unrepresented, either at Oxford or Cambridge. Since then its study has -been organized. What has been the result? It has become one of the most -flourishing branches of learning. It has reduced chaos to order; it has -raised its teaching, and by implication its literature, to a very high -standard; it has put the _canaille_ of sciolists and fribbles into their -proper place; while disciplining energy it has directed it to fruitful -objects; it has revolutionized the study of the whole subject. - -Thus the condition and fortune of everything which is affected by -education depend on the Universities. All that they do, or neglect to -do, passes into precedent. There is nothing susceptible of educational -impression which does not take its colour and its characteristics from -them. They have made the subjects which are represented in their schools -what they are, and every intelligent English citizen proud and grateful. - -But, owing to a disastrous confusion between two branches of study which -are radically and essentially distinct,--Philology and Belles -Lettres,--both Oxford and Cambridge have not only left unorganized, but -assisted in the degradation of studies, which are of as much concern, -and vital concern, to national life as any which are represented in -their Schools. To leave an important department of education -unrecognised in their system, is sufficient cause for surprise and -regret; but that they should be doing all in their power to prevent any -possibility of such a defect being supplied is deplorable. And yet this -is what is being done. That Chairs, Schools and Degrees may be -established in the interests of Philology, Philology is, by a palpable -fiction, identified with Literature. As the result of what the late -Professor Huxley denounced as “a fraud upon letters,” a Chair founded in -the interests of Literature was at Oxford appropriated by the -philologists. This has been followed by the establishment of a School, -in which all that can provide for the honour of Philology is blended -with all that contributes to the degradation of Literature; while, to -give further currency and authority to this absurd complication, the -approval of a thesis, on some subject pertaining purely to Philology, -entitles the writer to the diploma, not of a Doctor in Philology, but of -a Doctor in Literature! - -Meanwhile, to make confusion worse confounded, the Universities, or, to -speak more correctly, a party in the Universities, are undertaking to -provide the country with teachers for the dissemination of literary -culture,--for the interpretation of Literature in the proper sense of -the term. Whether this is done competently or incompetently depends, of -course, and must depend purely on accident, on the willingness and -ability, that is to say, of individual teachers to educate themselves. -Common standards and common aims they have none. Each does what is right -in his own eyes. As some have graduated in the classical schools, some -in the Mediæval and Modern Languages Tripos, some in Modern History, -some in Moral Science or Theology, and some in nothing, there is -naturally much variety in their methods and aims. - -But it is when we turn to the works in modern Belles Lettres, and more -particularly to those dealing with English Literature, which the -University Presses publish, that we realize the full significance of -this anarchy. It would not be going too far to say, that all which is -worst in current literature, when at its worst finds in some of these -works comprehensive illustration. It is indeed almost an even chance -whether a work issuing from those Presses is excellent, whether it is -indifferent, or whether it is executed with shameful incompetence.[1] - -All, therefore, so far as Belles Lettres are concerned is chaos at the -Universities, and all consequently is chaos everywhere else. - -The next appeal--for all appeals to the Universities have been -vain--must be made to those who regulate the curriculums where -Literature is made a subject of teaching. Let them rigorously exclude -all but the best books. Let them discourage the study of such Epitomes, -Manuals, and Histories as are the work of mere irresponsible book -makers, and prescribe in its place the study of literary masterpieces. -Without excluding the best modern poetry and prose, let most -attention--for obvious reasons--be paid to the writings of the older -masters. Let them lay special stress on the study of criticism,--of -works treating of its principles, of works illustrating the application -of its principles to particular writers; and let no work be recognised -which is not of classical authority. Translations should, of course, as -a rule, be avoided; but in such a subject as the principles of -criticism, there is not the smallest reason why those works which are -most excellent in other languages, such as the _Treatise on the -Sublime_, and some portions of Aristotle’s _Poetic_, such as Lessing’s -_Laocoon_, Schiller’s _Letters on Æsthetics_, the best Essays of -Sainte-Beuve should not be included.[2] Nor can it be emphasized too -strongly that the theory on which all literary teaching should proceed -is that its object is not so much to plant as to cultivate, not so much -to convey information, which, after all, is but its medium, as to -inspire, to refine, to elevate. I cannot but think, too, that the -foundations of all this might be laid much earlier than they are, -especially in our classical schools, by encouraging, as, according to -Coleridge, Dr. Boyer used to do, the study of some of our greater -writers, such as Shakespeare and Milton, side by side with that of Homer -and Sophocles. - -But it is in criticism, in criticism competently, honestly, and -fearlessly applied, that the chief salvation lies. There is probably no -review or newspaper in London which does not number among its -contributors men of the first order of ability and intelligence, men who -are real scholars and real critics, men who see through all that I have -been describing and are sick of it. Let them not remain an impotent -minority, but combine, and become influential. If popular Literature -aspires to be ambitious, and trespasses on the domains of scholarship -and criticism, let them submit it to the tests which it invites, let -them try it by the standards which it exacts. There is no more reason -for the co-existence of two standards, as is now practically the case, -in the production of writings treating of our own Literature than there -is in the production of writings dealing with Classical Literature. The -work of any one who meddles with the last, even in the way of -popularizing it, is instantly called by scholars to a strict account, -and sciolism and charlatanry are exploded at once. But in the case of -our own Literature there is no such solidarity. It seems to be assumed -that a scholar is one thing and a man of letters another, that the -difference between work which appeals to connoisseurs and work which -appeals to the public is not simply a difference in degree, but a -difference in kind, and that the criteria of the multitude need be the -only criteria of what is addressed to the multitude. The manuscript of a -History of Greek or Roman Literature, or a monograph on an ancient -classic, if it were not at least solid and trustworthy, would have no -chance of ever getting beyond a publisher’s reader. But a History of -English Literature, or a monograph on an English classic, teeming with -errors in fact and with absurdities in theory and opinion, will not -improbably be regarded as an authority, and pass, unrevised, into more -than one edition. - -The progressive degradation of Literature and of what is involved in its -influence is, and must be, inevitable, unless criticism is prepared -watchfully and faithfully to do its duty. Let it guard jealously the -standards and touchstones of excellence as distinguished from -mediocrity, even though it may be prudent to make great allowances in -applying them; let it institute a rigorous censorship over books -designed for the use of students at the Universities and in other -educational establishments; let it permit no writer to pose in a false -position, and deliberately trade on the ignorance and inexperience of -his readers; let it discourage in every way the production of worthless -and superfluous books, whether in poetry or in prose; and lastly, while -fully recognising how much must be conceded to professional authors -writing against time, having to court popularity or being fettered by -conditions imposed on them by their employers, let it take care that -their productions shall at least not be mischievous, either by -disseminating error or by corrupting taste. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 1: One illustration of the indifference of the authorities of -our University Presses to the interest of Literature is so scandalous -that it must be specified. Fourteen years ago a series of lectures was -delivered by the then Clarke Lecturer in the Hall of Trinity College, -Cambridge. They were afterwards published under the title of _From -Shakespeare to Pope_, and reviewed in the _Quarterly Review_ for -October, 1886. The lectures, as the Review showed, absolutely swarmed -with blunders, many of them so gross as to be almost incredible. Ever -since then the volume has been circulated by the Press, absolutely -unrevised, indeed without a single correction, and is now in -circulation.] - -[Footnote 2: Cf. what Milton says in prescribing the study of -masterpieces in criticism: “This would make them (students) soon -perceive what despicable creatures our common rimers and play-writers -be, and show them what religious, what glorious and magnificent use -might be made of poetry, both in Divine and human things. From hence, -and not till now, will be the right season of forming them to be able -writers and composers in every excellent matter, when they shall be thus -fraught with an universal insight into things.”--_Tractate on -Education._] - - - - -ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES - -I. LANGUAGE _VERSUS_ LITERATURE AT OXFORD - - -To say that the anarchy which has resulted from confusing the -distinction between the study and interpretation of Literature as the -expression of art and genius, and its study and interpretation as a mere -monument of language, has had a most disastrous effect on education -generally, would be to state very imperfectly the truth of the case. It -has led to inadequate and even false conceptions of what constitutes -Literature. It has led to all that is of essential importance in -literary study being ignored, and all that is of secondary or accidental -interest being preposterously magnified; to the substitution of -grammatical and verbal commentary for the relation of a literary -masterpiece to history, to philosophy, to æsthetics; to the mechanical -inculcation of all that can be imparted, as it has been acquired, by -cramming, for the intelligent application of principles to expression. -It has led to the severance of our Literature from all that constitutes -its vitality and virtue as an active power, and from all that renders -its development and peculiarities intelligible as a subject of -historical study. In a word, it has led to a total misconception of the -ends at which literary instruction should aim, as well as of its most -appropriate instruments and methods. All this is illustrated nowhere -more strikingly than in the publications of the two great University -Presses. It would be easy to point to editions of English classics, and -to works on English Literature, bearing the _imprimatur_ of Oxford and -Cambridge, in which all that is worst in the opposite extremes of -pedantry and dilettantism finds ludicrous expression. - -And in thus speaking we are saying nothing more than is notorious, -nothing more than is admitted, and admitted unreservedly, in the -Universities themselves, or at least at Oxford. But different sections -of Academic society regard the matter in different lights. The majority -of the classical professors and teachers, deprecating any attempt on the -part of the University to meddle with “Literature,” treat the whole -thing as a joke, and, so far from supposing that the reputation of the -University is concerned, find infinite amusement in the constant -exposures which are being made in the reviews and newspapers of the -absurdities of the “English Literature party.” They regard the “study -of Literature” precisely as they regard the University Extension -Movement--the one as a contemptible excrescence on our Academic system, -the other as a contemptible excrescence on Academic curricula. Another -section takes a very different view. Recognising the reasonableness of -the appeals which have, during the last twelve years, been made to -Oxford to place the study of Literature on the same sound footing as she -has placed that of other subjects included in her courses, and -discerning clearly that what is required cannot be obtained as long as -the interests of Philology and those of Literature continue to collide, -this party, unhappily a small minority, has pleaded for the -establishment of a School of Literature. They have very properly laid -stress on four points: First, that, as the chief justification for the -establishment of such a School is the fact that the University is -undertaking by innumerable agencies, its Press, its oral teachers both -at home and abroad, to disseminate liberal instruction through the -medium of English Literature, the principal object of the School should -be the education of these agencies. Secondly, they have insisted that, -if the interpretation of Literature is to effect what it is of power to -effect, if, as an instrument of political instruction, it is to warn, to -admonish, to guide, if, as an instrument of moral and æsthetic -instruction, it is to exercise that influence on taste, on tone, on -sentiment, on opinion, on character--on all, in short, which is -susceptible of educational impression--it must both be properly defined -and liberally studied; and they contend that, if it is to be so defined -and so studied outside the Universities, it must first be so defined and -so studied within. Thirdly, they insist that the study of our own -Literature should be associated with that of ancient classical -literature, for two indisputable reasons: first, because the basis of -all liberal literary culture, of a high standard, must necessarily rest -on competent classical attainments, and because, historically speaking, -the development and characteristics of the greater part of what is most -valuable in our Literature would be as unintelligible, without reference -to the Greek and Roman classics, as the Literature of Rome would be -without reference to that of Greece. Fourthly, they point out that, as -our Literature is, in various intimate ways, associated with the -Literatures of Italy, France, and Germany, and that, as an acquaintance -with the classics of those countries must form an essential element in a -literary education, the comparative study of those Literatures and our -own ought, by all means, to be encouraged and provided for. And, -fifthly, they show that what is demanded is perfectly feasible. There -already exists in the University, they contend, every facility for -organizing such a course of Literature as is required. All that is -needed is co-ordination. In the Classical Moderations and in the -_Literæ Humaniores_ Honour Schools a liberal literary education on the -classical side is already provided; two-thirds in fact of the -discipline, culture, and attainments desiderated in a literary teacher -it is the aim of those Schools to impart. The Taylorian Institute -provides instruction in the languages and literatures of the Continent; -and, if its professors could be roused into a little more activity, a -youth might, in two years, if he pleased,--and that side by side with -his severer studies--acquire something more than a superficial -acquaintance with the language and writings of Dante and Machiavelli, of -Montaigne and Molière, of Lessing and Goethe. What he could not obtain -would be instruction and guidance in the study of our own Literature. In -a word, all that is required to secure what this party plead for is -simply the establishment of a School of English Literature, in the -proper acceptation of the term, and the co-ordination of studies which -are at present pursued independently. It was proposed that it should -take the form of a Post-graduate Honour School, standing in the same -relation to the other schools in the University as the old Law and -History School used to stand to the old _Literæ Humaniores_ School, and -as the examination for the Bachelorship in Civil Law now stands to the -ordinary Law School. Thus a youth who had graduated in honours in -Moderations and in the Final Classical School, who had studied modern -literatures at the Taylorian and our own Literature under its -professor, or even by himself, would have an opportunity of displaying -his qualifications for an honour diploma in Literature. But the appeals -and arguments of this party have been of no avail. - -Next come the philologists. They are in possession of the field. All the -revenues supporting the Chairs of Language and Literature are their -monopoly. They have steadily resisted all attempts on the part of what -may be denominated the Liberal party to encroach on their dominions. In -their eyes the Universities are simply nurseries for esoteric -specialists, and to talk of bringing them into touch with national life -is, in their estimation, mere cant. Their attitude towards Literature, -generally, is precisely that of the classical party towards our own -Literature; they regard it simply as the concern of men of letters, -journalists, dilettants, and Extension lecturers. They defeated sixteen -years ago an attempt to establish a Chair of English Literature by -transforming it into a Chair of Language and securing it for themselves. -They attempted, subsequently, to supplement what they had done by the -establishment of a School of Language on the model of the Mediæval and -Modern Languages Tripos at Cambridge. They were defeated by a coalition -of the classical party, the Liberals, of whom we have just spoken, and a -third party which insisted on a compromise between Philology and -Literature. Reviving the scheme, they have, by accepting the -modifications of the compromisers, just succeeded in getting it -accepted. The new School of English Language and Literature is the -result of that compromise. - -Now it will not be disputed that if the Universities ought, in the -interests of liberal culture, to provide adequately for instruction in -Literature, they ought also, in the interests of science, to provide -adequately for instruction in Philology. It is a branch of learning of -immense importance. It is, and ought to be, the peculiar care of -Universities, and nothing could be more derogatory to a University than -deficiency in such a study. But it is a study in itself. As a science it -has no connection with Literature. Indeed the instincts and faculties -which separate the temperament of the mathematician from the temperament -of the poet are not more radical and essential than the instincts and -faculties which separate the sympathetic student of Philology from the -sympathetic student of Literature. But no science resolves itself more -easily into a pseudo-science, and it is in this degenerate form that it -has become linked with Literature and been, in all ages, the butt of -wits and men of letters. Nothing but anarchy can result till this -mutually degrading alliance be dissolved. It has been forced on the -philologists by the compromise to which reference has been made. Let -them be free to rescind it. Let the “pia vota” of Professor Max Müller -be fulfilled and Oxford have her School of Philology. That such a School -should be established is desirable for three reasons. In the first -place, it would define what is at present vague and indeterminate, the -scope and functions of Philology. Secondly, it would place that study on -its proper footing, and, by placing it on its proper footing, it would -not only demonstrate its relation to other studies, but it would enable -it to effect fully what it is competent to effect. Thirdly, it might, -and probably would, do something to relieve Oxford of the opprobrium of -being behind the rest of the learned world in this branch of science. -The School would probably not attract many students, for Philology, -unlike Literature, can never appeal to more than a small minority. If, -therefore, the choice lay between the institution of a School of -Philology and that of a School of Literature, there can be no doubt -which should have precedence. But no such choice is offered. If the -philologists were not strong enough to refuse to compromise, they are -strong enough to crush any attempt to forestall them. - -Let us now turn to the constitution of the School which has been the -result of this arrangement, and which will authorize the University to -confer, not, be it remembered, an ordinary, but an honour, degree in -English Language and Literature. The following are the Regulations. The -subjects for examination are four. 1. Portions of English authors. 2. -The History of the English Language. 3. The History of English -Literature. 4. In the case of those candidates who aim at a place in the -first or second class, a Special Subject of language or literature. The -portions of the authors specified are these. _Beowulf_, the texts -printed in Sweet’s _Anglo-Saxon Reader_, _King Horn_, _Havelok_; -Laurence Minot, _Sir Gawain and the Green Knight_. Of Chaucer’s -_Canterbury Tales_, the _Prologue_, _The Knight’s Tale_, _The Man of -Law’s_, _The Prioress’s_, _Sir Thopas_, _The Monk’s_, _The Nun -Priest’s_, _The Pardoner’s_, _The Clerk’s_, _The Squire’s_, _The Second -Nun’s_, _The Canon Yeoman’s_. Next come the _Prologue_ and the first -seven _passus_ (text B) of _Piers Ploughman_. Then come select plays of -Shakespeare, chosen apparently at haphazard, _Love’s Labour’s Lost_, -_Romeo and Juliet_, _Richard the Second_, _Twelfth Night_, _Julius -Cæsar_, _Winter’s Tale_, _King Lear_. Then we have the following -extraordinary farrago:-- - -Bacon’s _Essays_. - -Milton, with a special study of _Paradise Lost_ and the _Areopagitica_. - -Dryden’s _Essay on Epic_ (sic). - -Pope’s _Satires and Epistles_. - -Johnson’s _Lives of the Poets_--the Lives of Eighteenth-Century Poets. - -Goldsmith’s _Citizen of the World_. - -Burke’s _Thoughts on the Present Discontents_. - -Lyrical Ballads (Wordsworth and Coleridge), Shelley’s _Adonais_.[3] - -The second part of the examination will be on the History of the English -Language. “Candidates will be examined in Gothic (the Gospel of St. -Mark), and in translation from Old English and Middle English authors -not specially offered.” - -This is to be followed by the History of English Literature, to which -portion of the Regulations the following odd clause is appended: “the -examination will include the History of Criticism and of style in prose -and verse.” Last come the special subjects designed for “those who aim -at a place in the First or Second Class.” Six of these consist of -certain prescribed periods of English Literature. The other subjects are -as follows:-- - -(1) Old English Language and Literature down to 1150 A.D. - -(2) Middle English Language and Literature, 1150-1400 A.D. - -(3) Old French Philology with special reference to Anglo-Norman French, -together with a special study of the following texts:--_Computus of -Phillippe de Thaun_, _Voyage of St. Brandan_, _The Song of Dermot and -the Earl_, _Les Contes moralisés de Nicole Bozon_. - -(4) Scandinavian Philology, with special reference to Icelandic, -together with a special study of the following texts:--_Gylfaginning_, -_Laxdæla Saga_, _Gunnlaugssaga Ormstungu_. - -(5) French Literature down to 1400 A.D. in its bearing on English -Literature. - -(6) Italian Literature as influencing English down to the death of -Milton. - -(7) German Literature from 1500 A.D. to the death of Goethe in its -bearing on English Literature. - -(8) History of Scottish Poetry. - -Such is the scheme which will, in conjunction with the similar scheme at -Cambridge, supply England and the colonies with their literary -professors. Let us examine it in detail. The first thing which strikes -us is the contrast between the competence and judgment displayed in the -organization of the philological part of the course and the confusion, -inadequacy, and flimsiness so conspicuous in the literary part. Nothing -could be more satisfactory than the provisions made for the study of -Language. They are obviously the work of legislators who knew what they -were about, and who, but for the thwarting requirements of the -provisions for Literature, would have proceeded to a superstructure -worthy of the foundation. A student who, in addition to having mastered -the prescribed works in Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, and Middle English, is -competent to translate and comment on unprepared passages from those -dialects, has certainly laid the foundation of sound scholarship in an -important department of Philology. In the fact that what properly -belongs to his study has been relegated to the subjects out of which he -has only the option of choosing one, we have a lamentable illustration -of the effects of the compromise forced on the philologists. If, for the -literary portion of the curriculum, a candidate could substitute the -first four of the special subjects, he would have completed a thoroughly -satisfactory course of Philology, so far at least as relates to the -Teutonic and Romance languages. - -But to pass from what concerns Philology to what concerns Literature. -Now in considering this point it is necessary to remember that we are -not dealing with the regulations of any subordinate institution or -curriculum, with provincial Universities and seminaries, or with schemes -of study in which Literature is only one out of many subjects. We are -dealing with a Final Honour School at Oxford, with regulations which -will inevitably form a precedent and model wherever the study of English -literature shall be organized in Great Britain. We are dealing with a -school which is to educate those who are to educate the country. -Nothing, therefore, could be more disastrous than unsoundness and -deficiency in the provisions of such an institution, nothing more -deplorable than its giving countenance and authority to error and -inadequacy. It is not too much to say that, if this scheme had been -designed with the express object of degrading the standard of literary -teaching, and of perpetuating all that is worst in present systems, it -could hardly have been better adapted for its purpose. Not to dwell upon -subordinate defects, it completely severs the study of our own -literature from that of the ancient classical literatures. It -necessitates no knowledge of any of the Continental literatures. It -ignores absolutely the higher criticism. Contracting Literature within -the narrowest bounds, its selection of books for special study is worthy -of an Army Examination. In the wretched jumble in which Goldsmith’s -_Citizen of the World_ jostles Shelley’s _Adonais_ and Burke’s _Thoughts -on the Present Discontents_ Wordsworth’s and Coleridge’s _Lyrical -Ballads_, no attempt is made to discriminate between compositions which -are representative, either critically of the work of particular authors, -or historically of particular epochs, and works which have no such -significance, while many of the most important departments of our prose -Literature are unrepresented. Nor is this all. It affords every facility -for cramming. It is adapted to test nothing but what may be -mechanically acquired and mechanically imparted, what may be poured out -from lectures into notebooks, and from notebooks into examination -papers. Proceeding on the assumption that a literary education is merely -the acquisition of positive knowledge, it neither requires nor -encourages, as the prescription of an essay or thesis, or even -“taste-paper,” might have done, any of the finer qualities of literary -culture, such, for example, as a sense of style, sound judgment, good -taste, the touch of the scholar. We can assure these legislators, and we -speak from knowledge, that, setting aside the philological portion of -this curriculum, which is, so far as it goes, solid enough, an -experienced crammer, would, in about three months furnish an astute -youth with all that is requisite for graduating in this school. - -But to proceed to details. Conceive the qualifications of an interpreter -and critic of English Literature, a graduate in Honours in his subject, -whose education has proceeded on the hypothesis that he need have no -acquaintance with the classics of Greece and Rome. Would any competent -scholar deny that the history of English Literature, in its mature -expression, is little less than the history of the modifications of -native genius and characteristics by classical influence, that the -development and peculiarities of our epic, dramatic, elegiac, didactic, -pastoral, much of our lyric, of our satire and of other species of our -poetry is, historically speaking, unintelligible without reference to -ancient classical literature? That what is true of our poetry is true of -our criticism, of our oratory, sacred and secular, of our dialectic and -epistolary Literature, of our historical composition, of the greater -part, in short, of our national masterpieces in prose? What, indeed, the -Literature of Greece was to that of Rome, the Literatures of Greece and -Rome have been to ours.[4] - -It was the influence of Æschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Menander, -Diphilus, which transformed the _Ludi Scenici_ and the Atellan farces -into the tragedies of Ennius and Pacuvius and the comedies of Plautus -and Terence. It was the influence of the Roman drama and of a drama -modelled on the Roman which transformed, so far at least as structure -and style are concerned, our similarly rude native experiments into the -tragedies and comedies of Shakespeare. On the epics of Greece were -modelled the epics of Rome, and on the epics of Greece and Rome are -modelled our own great epics. Of our elegiac poetry, to employ the term -in its conventional sense, one portion is largely indebted to -Theocritus, Moschus, and Virgil, and another to Catullus and Ovid. -Almost all our didactic poetry is modelled on the didactic poetry of -Rome. Theocritus and Virgil have furnished the archetypes for our -eclogues and pastorals. One important branch of our lyric poetry springs -directly from Pindar, another important branch directly from Horace, -another directly from the choral odes of the Attic dramatists and of -Seneca. Our heroic satire, from Hall to Lord Lytton, is simply the -counterpart--often, indeed, a mere imitation--of Roman satire. And if -this is true of our satire, it is equally true of our best ethical -poetry. The Epistles, which fill so large a space in the poetical -literature of the seventeenth and eighteenth century, derive their -origin from those of Horace. To the _Heroides_ of Ovid we owe a whole -series of important poems from Drayton to Cawthorn. The Greek anthology -and Martial have furnished the archetypes of our epigrams and of our -epitaphs. It is the same with our prose. The history of English -eloquence begins from the moment when the Roman classics moulded and -coloured our style, when periodic prose was modelled on Cicero and Livy, -when analytic prose was modelled on Sallust, Seneca, and Tacitus. With -the exception of fiction, there is no important branch of our prose -composition, the development and characteristics of which are -historically intelligible without reference to the ancients. How -radically inadequate must any study of the principles of criticism be, -which has no reference to the critical works of the Greek and Roman -writers, is obvious. But it is not merely in tracing the development and -explaining the peculiarities generally of our prose and of our poetry -that competent classical scholarship is indispensable. Is it not -notorious that in each generation, from Spenser to Tennyson, from More -to Froude, our leading poets and prose writers have been, with very few -exceptions, men nourished on classical literature and saturated with its -influence? Many entire masterpieces, much, and in some cases the greater -portion, of other masterpieces, particularly in our poetry, are simply -unintelligible--we are speaking, of course, of serious critical -students--except to classical scholars. Take, for example, the _Faerie -Queen_, and the _Hymns_ of Spenser, Milton’s _Paradise Lost_, _Comus_, -_Lycidas_, and _Samson Agonistes_, Pope’s satires, the two great odes -of Gray, Collins’s odes to _Fear_ and the _Passions_, Wordsworth’s great -_Ode_ and his _Laodamia_, Shelley’s _Adonais_ and _Prometheus Unbound_, -Landor’s _Hellenics_, much of the poetry of Tennyson, Browning, and -Matthew Arnold. Indeed it would be as preposterous to attempt any -critical study of our Literature, without reference to the ancients, as -it would be for a man to set up as an interpreter in Roman Literature -without reference to the Greek. - -And the effect of this severance of the study of the ancient classics -from the study of our own is written large throughout the whole domain -of education, in the instruction given in schools and institutes, in the -monographs, manuals, and “editions” which pour from scholastic presses. -In one of the most popular manuals now in circulation, the writer -gravely tells us that “the pastoral name of _Lycidas_ was chosen by -Milton to signify purity of character,” adding “in Theocritus a goat was -so called λευκιτας for its whiteness,” that Comus “the drinker -of human blood” revelled in the palace of Agamemnon.[5] Another writer -confounds the “choruses” in Shakespeare with the choruses of the Greek -plays. Another, commenting on the symbolism of ivy in the wreath of a -poet, tells us that it indicates “constancy.”[6] Nothing is more common -than to find elaborate critical comments on the _Faerie Queen_ without -the smallest reference to its connection with Aristotle’s _Ethics_, and -on Wordsworth’s great _Ode_ without any reference to Plato. But such is -the confidence reposed in Professor Earle and his theory, and so -determined are the legislators for the new School to exclude all -connection with classical literature, that it is not admitted even as a -special subject. A candidate has, as we have seen, the option of -studying the influence exercised on old English literature by French, -and on later literature by Italian and German; but the one thing which -he has not the option of studying is the influence exercised on it by -the literatures of Greece and Rome. Some of our readers may remember -that a few years ago a public appeal was made for an expression of -opinion on the question of associating the study of our own classics and -that of the ancients. Opinions were elicited from many of the most -distinguished men in England. They were all but unanimous, not merely in -supporting the association, but in deprecating the severance. So wrote -Mr. Gladstone, Cardinal Manning, Professor Jowett, Matthew Arnold, Lord -Lytton, Mr. John Morley, Walter Pater, Addington Symonds; so wrote the -Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London, the Rector of -Lincoln, the President of Magdalen, the Warden of All Souls, and many -others. We may add, also--for we are now at liberty to state it -publicly--that this was emphatically the opinion of Robert Browning. We -cannot, of course, quote these opinions _in extenso_,[7] and that of the -late Professor Jowett and a portion of that of Mr. John Morley must -suffice. - - I am as strongly of opinion that in an Honour School of English - Literature or Modern Literature the subject should not be - separated from classical literature, as I am of opinion that - English literature should have a place in our curriculum. - -So writes Professor Jowett. - - It seems to me to be as impossible effectively to study English - literature, except in close association with the classics, as - it would be to grasp the significance of mediæval or modern - institutions without reference to the political creations of - Greece and Rome. I should be very sorry to see the study of - Greek and Latin writers displaced, or cut off from the study of - our own. - -So writes Mr. John Morley. - -But the Professor of Anglo-Saxon and his friends, as we have seen, think -otherwise, and have, unhappily for the interests of letters and -education, persuaded Oxford to think otherwise too. We say advisedly the -interests of letters and education. For the precedent of excluding from -a School of “Literature,” and that at the chief centre and nursery of -liberal culture, the Literatures of Greece and Rome cannot but be -detrimental to the vitality and influence of the ancient classics; and, -as Froude truly observed, both the national taste and the tone of the -national intellect would suffer serious decline, if they lost their -authority. The reaction against philological study which has set in -during the last ten years has given them a new lease of life. But the -spirit of the age is against them; they have rivals in languages far -easier to acquire; they are not, and never can be, in touch with the -many. Let them become disassociated from our curriculums of Literature, -and they will cease to be influential, They will cease to be studied -seriously, to be studied even in the original, except by mere scholars. - -Another absurdity, not less monstrous, in these regulations, is the -absence of all provision for instruction in the principles of criticism. -There is indeed an unmeaning clause about the history of criticism, and -of style in verse and prose, being included in the examination; but as -nothing is specified, and as no work on criticism, with the exception of -Dryden’s _Discourse on Epic Poetry_, and Johnson’s _Lives_ (of -eighteenth-century poets),[8] is included in the books prescribed for -special study, it is plain that this important subject has no place. Why -it should not have occurred to these legislators to substitute, say, for -Goldsmith’s _Citizen of the World_ and Burke’s _Thoughts on the Present -Discontents_, some work which would at least have opened the eyes of the -literary professors of the future to the existence of philosophical -criticism, is certainly odd. Had they prescribed select essays from -Hume; and Shaftesbury’s _Advice to an Author_, or Campbell’s _Philosophy -of Rhetoric_, or Burke’s _Treatise on the Sublime and Beautiful_, or -even the critical portions of Coleridge’s _Biographia Literaria_, with -the two essays of Wordsworth, it would have been something. But the -truth is that, as they have excluded, except from the optional subjects, -all literatures but the English, one absurdity has involved them in -another. The course for the literary education of our future professors, -proceeding on the principle that they need know no language but Gothic -and Anglo-Saxon, has necessitated the elimination of all the great -masterpieces of critical literature. As they are assumed to know no -Greek, they can have no serious instruction in such works as Aristotle’s -_Poetic_ and _Rhetoric_, and in the _Treatise on the Sublime_. As they -are assumed to know no Latin, they can have no instruction in Roman -criticism. On the same principle such works as Lessing’s _Laocoon_ and -_Hamburgische Dramaturgie_, Schiller’s Æsthetical Letters and Essays, -Villemain’s Lectures, and Sainte-Beuve’s Essays, can find no place in -their curriculum of study. And so it comes to pass that Dryden’s -_Discourse on Epic Poetry_ and Johnson’s _Lives_ of the -eighteenth-century poets, represent--_proh pudor!_--the course in -Criticism. - -Now it is not too much to say that, for a University like Oxford to -confer an honour degree in English Literature on a student who need -never have read a line of the works to which we have referred, is to -authorize not simply superficiality, but sheer imposture. How can a -teacher deal adequately even with the subject which these regulations -profess to include--the history of criticism--who need have no -acquaintance with the _Poetic_ and _Rhetoric_, the _Treatise on the -Sublime_, and the _Institutes of Oratory_? How could a teacher possibly -be a competent exponent and critic of the masterpieces of our -literature, who had not received a proper critical training, and how -could he have any pretension to such a training when all that is best -in criticism had been expressly excluded from his education? - -It may be urged that he would himself supply these deficiencies, that -the study of our own Literature would naturally lead him to the study of -other Literatures, that intelligent curiosity, ambition, or a sense of -shame would induce him to supplement voluntarily, and by his own -efforts, what he needed in his profession. In some instances this would -undoubtedly be the case. In the great majority of instances such a -supposition would be against all analogy. As a general rule, a high -honour degree in any subject represented at the Universities is final. -It winds a man up for life. It determines, fixes, and colours his -methods, his views, his tone, in all that relates to the subject in -which he has graduated. If he chooses teaching as a profession, he has -no inducement to correct, to modify, or even materially add to what has -been imparted to him, for his scholastic reputation has been made, and a -comfortable independence is assured. To very many men, indeed, who go up -to the Universities with the intention of following teaching as a -profession, a high degree is a mere investment, the one instinct in them -which is not quite banausic being the conscientious thoroughness with -which they impart what they have been taught. Nothing, therefore, is of -more importance to education than the sound constitution of the Honour -Schools of Oxford and Cambridge, and nothing could be more disastrous -than the toleration in those Schools of inadequate standards, and of -palpably erroneous theories of study. - -But to return to the Regulations. The ridiculous disproportion between -the ground covered and the work involved in the different “special -subjects” open to the option of candidates, would seem to indicate, -either that the regulators are very inadequately informed on those -subjects, or that divided counsels have resulted in the settlement of -very different standards of requirement. Compare, for instance, what is -involved respectively in such subjects as “English Literature between -1700 and 1745,” and “The History of Scottish Poetry.” Why, a competent -knowledge of the history of Scotch poetry in the fifteenth century alone -would be more than an equivalent to the first subject. Not less absurd -is the prescription of “English Literature between 1745 and 1797” as an -alternative for “English Literature between 1558 and 1637.” The -prescription of such “special subjects” as the influence exercised on -our Literature by the Literatures of Italy, Germany, and France, is one -of the few steps in a wise direction discernible in these regulations; -but, as no student is free to take more than one of them, or required to -take any of them at all, their inclusion in no way affects the -constitution of the School. A competent literary education is not very -much furthered by a student being invited to study how our Literature -has been affected by one out of the five Literatures which have -influenced it. As, moreover, the integrity of a chain depends on its -weakest link, so the efficiency of examinational tests, in their -application to purely optional subjects, depends on that subject in the -list which involves least labour. A candidate who can “get a first” out -of “English Literature between 1700 and 1745,” or between 1745 and 1797, -will be much too wise to attempt to “get a first” out of subjects which -will require treble the time and labour to master. Is it likely that -candidates, anxious, naturally, from less lofty motives than the love of -Literature for its own sake, to obtain an honour degree, will, after -laboriously acquiring Anglo-Saxon and Middle English, which are -compulsory, voluntarily specialize in a subject requiring a knowledge of -Italian and German, when it is open to them to choose, as their special -subject, “Old English Language and Literature down to 1150”? - -The statute authorizing the foundation of this School recites that in -its curriculum and examinations “equal weight” is, “as far as possible, -to be given to Language and Literature, provided always that candidates -who offer special subjects shall be at liberty to choose subjects -connected either with Language or Literature, or with both.” It would -be interesting to know what this means. If by “equal weight” be meant -equality in the proportions of what is prescribed for the study of -Literature, and what is prescribed for the study of Language, the -provision is stultified by the very constitution of the course. To -suppose that the history of English Literature, and the special study of -a few particular works like Shelley’s _Adonais_, Burke’s _Present -Discontents_, and the _Lyrical Ballads_, is equivalent to the History of -the English language, the Gospel of St. Mark in Gothic, the _Beowulf_, -and a volume of extracts in Anglo-Saxon, _King Horn_, _Havelok_, _Sir -Gawain_, and the prologue and seven _passus_ of _Piers Ploughman_ in -Middle English, is palpably absurd. If by “equal weight” be meant that -an examiner is to assign equal marks to candidates who distinguish -themselves in Literature, and to candidates who distinguish themselves -in Language, it involves gross injustice. For while the latter have -every opportunity for displaying knowledge and competence, the former -have not. If a student has literary tastes and sympathies, if he is -conversant with the Classics, if, attracted by what is best not merely -in our own but in other modern Literatures, he has indulged himself in -their study, if he has made himself a good critic and acquired a good -style, what chance has he of doing his attainments and accomplishments -justice? But if it be meant that “equal weight” will be given, not to -literary merit regarded as Sainte-Beuve and Matthew Arnold would regard -it, but regarded in relation to the standard indicated by the -regulations of the School, then the philologists would have just reason -to complain. - -As the constitution of this School is still open to amendment, it is -devoutly to be hoped that Oxford will see its way to reconsidering a -matter so seriously affecting the interests of education and culture. It -is neither too late to remedy what has been done, nor to devise a -remedy. Let it be remembered that there is an essential distinction -between what should constitute an Honour School and what should -constitute a Pass School, between what is to educate those who are to -educate others, and what guarantees nothing more than a smattering. The -present institution could be reformed in two ways. By reducing the -philological part of its provisions to the level of the literary part, -it could, with a little further simplification, be made into an -excellent Pass School, which would supply a real want. By eliminating -the literary part, and adding proportionately to the philological, it -could be transformed into a perfectly satisfactory Honour School of -Modern Languages. But no modification could make it into an Honour -School of English Literature correspondingly adequate, for the simple -reason that the study of English Literature cannot be isolated from the -study of those literatures with which it is inseparably linked. The -absurdity of assuming that the student of Philology could separate a -single language or dialect from the group to which it belongs, that he -could isolate Anglo-Saxon from Gothic, or Middle English from -Anglo-Saxon, the Celtic of the Cymbry from the Celtic of the Gaels, is -not greater than to assume that the study of our Literature can be -severed from the study of those literatures which stand in precisely the -same relation to it as one of those dialects stands to the others in the -same group. - -If the legislators of this School decline to reform it, then it is the -duty of Oxford--a duty which she owes alike to education and to her own -honour--to counteract the mischief which this institution must, by -degrading throughout England and the colonies the whole level of liberal -instruction and study on its most important side, inevitably do. To the -herd of imperfectly and erroneously disciplined teachers which this -institution will turn loose on education, let her oppose, at least, a -minority which shall worthily represent her. Let her establish a proper -degree or diploma in Literature. There exist, as we have already said, -scattered throughout the various institutions of the University, nearly -all the facilities for a complete course in this subject, and nothing -more is needed than to encourage and render possible their -co-ordination. Let it be open to a man who has obtained a high class in -Moderations and in the Final Classical Schools, who has availed himself -of the opportunities offered for the study of Modern Languages and -Literatures in the Taylorian Institute, and who has studied what he -would at present have to study for himself, our own Literature--let it -be open to him to present himself for examination in these subjects, and -to obtain, as the result of such an examination, a degree analogous to -the Bachelorship of Civil Law. It would no doubt not be possible for -these studies to be pursued, systematically, side by side with the work -required for a high class in Moderations and _Literæ Humaniores_. Nor is -it necessary. There need be no limit assigned to the time at which a -candidate would be free to qualify himself for obtaining this diploma. -As a general rule it would probably be about six months, possibly a -year, after the attainment of the present degree in Arts. And, -considering the high prizes open to teachers in Literature, it would be -well worth a student’s while to spend this additional time in preparing -himself for the examination. If a post-graduate scholarship, analogous -to the Craven or the Derby scholarships, could be founded for the -encouragement of a comparative study of Classical and Modern Literature, -an important step would, at any rate, be taken in a right direction; -something would be done for the competent equipment of future Professors -of Literature. - -Thus would a precedent, disastrous beyond expression to the interests of -liberal instruction and culture, as well as to the reputation of the -University--we mean the severance of the study of Classical Literature -from that of our own--be at least deprived of its authority. Thus would -the mass at any rate be leavened, and such institutions in the provinces -and elsewhere as have, unlike Oxford and Cambridge, had the wisdom to -separate their Chairs of Language and Literature, know where to go for -those who should fill them; and thus, finally, would there be some -chance of the literary curriculum in Oxford ceasing to be a by-word in -the Universities of the Continent and America. - - Since the first edition of these essays appeared the liberality - of Mr. John Passmore Edwards has supplied the scholarship here - desiderated, and Oxford has instituted a University - scholarship, bearing the donor’s name, “for the encouragement - and promotion of the study of English Literature in connection - with the Classical Literatures of Greece and Rome.” - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 3: For the sort of textbook from which the student who is a -candidate for “honours in English” will be required to get his knowledge -of this poem, see _infra_, the review of the Clarendon Press Edition of -Shelley’s _Adonais_.] - -[Footnote 4: The Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford, one of the chief -legislators for the new School, thinks otherwise, and we should like to -place the following passage on record. In his extraordinary _History of -English Prose_ (p. 485) he writes thus: “The idea that English -literature rests upon a classical basis has been formulated and -industriously circulated as the watchword of a pedantic faction, and -hardly any organ of current literature has proved itself strong enough, -or vigilant enough, to secure itself against the insidious entrance of -the above indoctrination.” And so it comes to pass that we read in the -account of the debate in Congregation, on the occasion of the former -attempt to establish this School:-- - -“The proposal to add the Professors of Greek and Latin to the Board of -Studies was rejected by thirty-eight votes to twenty-four, Professor -Earle maintaining that the fallacious notion that English literature was -derived from the classics was so strong that it was unwise to place even -the Professor of Latin on the Board.”--_Times_, May 26, 1887.] - -[Footnote 5: - - και μην πεπωκως γ’, ὡς θρασυνεσθαι πλεον, - βροτειον αιμα, κωμος εν δομοις μενει - δυσπεμπτος εξω ξυγγονων Ερινυων. - - --_Agamem._, 1159-61. -] - -[Footnote 6: For ample illustration of this, see _infra_ the review of -the Clarendon Press edition of Shelley’s _Adonais_.] - -[Footnote 7: They may all be found in full in a _Pall Mall “Extra”_ -(January, 1887), and in the present writer’s _Study of English -Literature_.] - -[Footnote 8: It is amusing to notice how carefully the greater part of -what is most precious and instructive in Johnson’s work, the lives -namely of Cowley and Dryden, and the noble critique of _Paradise Lost_, -is expressly excluded, and the greater part of what is most trivial, and -regarded by himself as trivial, the lives of the minor poets of the -eighteenth century, selected instead. Macaulay ranks the lives of Cowley -and Dryden, with that of Pope, as the masterpieces of the work; and -Johnson himself considered the life of Cowley to be the best.] - - - - -ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES[9] - -II. TEXT BOOKS - -[Footnote 9: Shelley’s _Adonais_, edited with introduction and notes by -William Michael Rossetti. (Oxford: at the Clarendon Press.)] - - -If any proof were needed of what has been insisted on over and over -again, that, until the Universities provide adequately for the proper -study of English Literature--for the study of it side by side with -Classical Literature--there will be small hope of its finding competent -critics and interpreters, it would be afforded by the volume before us. -For this volume the delegates of the Oxford University Press are -responsible; and in allowing it their _imprimatur_ they have been guilty -of a very grave error. No such standard of editing would have been -tolerated in any other subject in which they undertake to provide books. -A work pertaining to Classics, to History, to Philosophy, to Science, -marked by corresponding deficiencies, would have been suppressed at -once, until those deficiencies had been supplied. To Mr. Rossetti -himself we attach no blame. What he was competent to do he has, for the -most part, done well and conscientiously,--conscientiously, as may be -judged from the fact that, while the poem itself occupies twenty pages -in large type, Mr. Rossetti’s dissertations and notes occupy one hundred -and twenty-eight in small type. It was, indeed, his misfortune, rather -than his fault, to be entrusted with a work which required a peculiar -qualification, an intimate acquaintance, that is to say, with Classical -Literature. That he has no pretension to this is abundantly plain from -his Introduction and from every page of his notes. - -When one of the Universities undertakes to provide our colleges and -schools with comments and notes on a poem so saturated with classicism -as _Adonais_, the least that could be expected from bodies who are, as -it were, the guardians of classical literature, is the provision that -the classical part of the work should be done at least competently; it -would be hardly too much, perhaps, to expect that it should be done -excellently. Of this part of Mr. Rossetti’s work we scarcely know which -are the worse--his sins of commission or his sins of omission. His -classical qualifications for commenting on a poem as unintelligible, -critically speaking, without constant reference to the Platonic -dialogues, particularly to the _Symposium_ and the _Timæus_, and to the -Greek poets, as the _Æneid_ would be without reference to the Homeric -poems and the _Argonautica_ of Apollonius, appear to begin and end with -some acquaintance with Mr. Lang’s version of Bion and Moschus. We will -give a few specimens. Mr. Rossetti is greatly puzzled with Shelley’s -allusion to Urania in stanzas 2 to 4. - - “Where was lone Urania - When Adonais died?” - - “Most musical of mourners, weep again. - Lament, anew, Urania!” - -“Why out of the nine sisters,” he asks, “should the Muse of Astronomy be -selected? Keats never wrote about astronomy.” Perhaps, he suggests, -Shelley was not thinking of the Muse Urania, “but of Aphrodite Urania.” -Yet, if so, why should she be called “musical”?--a question to be asked, -no doubt, as our old friend Falstaff would say. However, after balancing -the respective claims of both, he finally comes to the conclusion that -the Urania of _Adonais_ is Aphrodite. If Mr. Rossetti had been -acquainted with a work to which he never even refers, but which -exercised immense influence over Shelley’s poem--the _Symposium_ of -Plato--it would have saved him two pages of speculation. His ignorance -of this is the more surprising as Shelley has himself translated the -dialogue. But Mr. Rossetti need not, in this case, have gone so far -afield. Has he never read the prologue to the seventh book of Milton’s -_Paradise Lost_? In his note on the lines-- - - “The one remains, the many change and pass,” - -it is really pitiable to find him supposing that this is an allusion to -“the universal mind,” and “the individuated minds which we call human -beings,” when any schoolboy could have told him that the allusion is, of -course, a technical one to the Platonic “forms” or archetypes; while -“the power” in stanza 42, the “sustaining love” in stanza 54, and the -“one spirit” in stanza 43, are allusions respectively to the Aphrodite -Urania in the discourse of Eryximachus in the _Symposium_, and to the -Divine Artificer in the _Timæus_. And these dialogues form the proper -commentary on Shelley’s metaphysics in this poem. - -Still more extraordinary is Mr. Rossetti’s note on “wisdom the mirrored -shield”-- - - “What was then - Wisdom, the mirrored shield?” - -(st. 27), which is as follows: “Shelley was, I apprehend, thinking of -the _Orlando Furioso_ of Ariosto (!). In that poem we read of a magic -shield which casts a supernatural and intolerable splendour ... a sea -monster, not a dragon, so far as I recollect, becomes one of the victims -of the mirrored shield.” This slovenly and perfunctory mode of reference -is, we may remark in passing, hardly the sort of thing to be expected -in works issued from University Presses. We wonder what the Universities -would say to an editor of Virgil who, in commenting on some Homeric -allusion in his author, contented himself with observing that Virgil “is -here thinking of the _Iliad_,” and, “so far as I can recollect,” etc. -The reference is, we need hardly remark, not to any magic shield in the -_Orlando_, but to the _scutum crystallinum_ of Pallas Athene, as any -well-informed fourth-form schoolboy would know. If Mr. Rossetti will -turn to Bacon’s _Wisdom of the Ancients_, chap. vii., he will find some -information on this subject, which may be of use to him, should this -work run into a second edition. Take, again, the note on the symbolism -of the flowers and cypress cone in stanza 33:-- - - “His head was bound with pansies overblown, - And faded violets, white and pied and blue; - And a light spear topped with a cypress cone, - Round whose rude shaft dark ivy tresses grew.” - -Here the editor’s ignorance of ancient Classical Literature has led him -into a whole labyrinth of blunders and misconceptions. “The ivy,” he -says, “indicates constancy in friendship”! Is it credible that a -Clarendon Press editor should be ignorant that ivy--_doctarum hederæ -præmia frontium_--is the emblem of the poet? The violet, he remarks, -indicates modesty. It neither indicates, nor can possibly indicate, -anything of the kind. Its traditional signification, deduced perhaps -from Pliny’s remark (_Nat. Hist._, xxi. c. 38), that it is one of the -longest-lived of flowers, is fidelity. But the passage of which Shelley -was thinking when he wrote this stanza--a passage to which Mr. Rossetti -makes no reference at all, was _Hamlet_, act iv. sc. 1: “There is -pansies that’s for thoughts.... I would give you some violets, but they -withered all when my father died.” So that it is quite possible that the -“faded violets,” associated as these flowers are with the Muses and the -Graces, merely symbolize the fading and drooping towards what may be -further symbolized in the cypress cone,--death. We are by no means sure, -however, that the cypress cone does, as Mr. Rossetti remarks, “explain -itself.” Shelley, assuming he gave the image another application, was -doubtless thinking of Silvanus--“teneram ab radice ferens, Silvane, -cupressum,” _Georg._ i. 20 (see, too, Spenser’s _Faerie Queene_, I. vi. -st. 14), and may possibly have been symbolizing his sympathy with the -genius of the woods--have been referring to that “gazing on Nature’s -naked loveliness,” which he describes in stanza 31. In any case, Mr. -Rossetti has entirely misinterpreted the meaning of the whole passage. - -Wherever classical knowledge is required--as it is in almost every -stanza--he either gives no note at all, or he blunders. Thus in stanza -24 he gives no note on the use of the word “secret.” In stanza 28 he has -evidently not the smallest notion of the meaning of the word “obscene” -as applied to ravens. The fine adaptations from _Lucretius_ (II. -578-580) in stanza 21, and again from II. 990-1010 in stanzas 20 and 42; -the adaptation from the _Agamemnon_ (49-51) in stanza 17; from the -fragments of the _Polyidus_ of Euripides in stanza 39; from the _Iliad_ -(vi. 484) in stanza 34; from Theocritus, _Idyll._, i. 66, and Virg., -_Ecl._, x. 9-10 in stanza 2; and again from Theocritus, _Idyll._, i. 77 -seqq., from which the procession of the mourners is adapted, and on -which the whole architecture of the poem is modelled--all these are -alike unnoticed. Nor is Mr. Rossetti more fortunate in explaining -allusions to passages in other literatures. The adaptation of the -sublime passage in Isaiah (xiv. 9, 10), by which one of the finest parts -of the poem was suggested, stanzas 45 and 46; the singular reminiscence -in stanza 28:-- - - “The vultures - ... Whose wings rain contagion;” - -of Marlowe’s _Jew of Malta_, act ii. sc. 1, where he speaks of the raven -which - - “Doth shake contagion from her sable wings;” - -the obvious reminiscence of Dante, _Inf._, 44 seqq. in stanza 44; of -Shakespeare’s _Romeo and Juliet_, v. 3, which forms the proper -commentary on lines 7 and 8 of stanza 3; of none of these is any notice -taken. On many important points of interpretation we differ _toto -cœlo_ from Mr. Rossetti. The “fading splendour,” for example, in -stanza 22, cannot possibly mean “fading as being overcast by sorrow and -dismay” (cf. stanza 25), it simply means vanishing, receding from -sight--a magnificently graphic epithet. Is Mr. Rossetti acquainted with -the proleptic use of adjectives and participles? We may add that Mr. -Rossetti has not even taken the trouble to ascertain who was the writer -of the famous article, of which so much is said both in the preface of -the poem and in the poem itself, but “presumes,” etc. _Et sic omnia._ -And _sic omnia_ it will inevitably continue to be, until the -Universities are prepared to do their duty to education by placing the -study of our national Literature on a proper footing. - -It is, we repeat, no reproach to Mr. Rossetti, who has distinguished -himself in more important studies than the production of scholastic -text-books, that he should have failed in an undertaking which happened -to require peculiar qualifications. Indeed, our respect for Mr. Rossetti -and our sense of his useful services to Belles Lettres would have -induced us to spare him the annoyance of an exposure of the deficiencies -of this work, had it not illustrated, so comprehensively and so -strikingly, the disastrous effects of the severance of the study of -English Literature from that of Ancient Classical Literature at our -Universities. - - - - -ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES[10] - -III. TEXT BOOKS - -[Footnote 10: _Shakespeare--Select Plays. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark_ -(Oxford: at the Clarendon Press. MDCCCXC.)] - - -More than a century and a half has passed since Pope thus expressed -himself about philologists,-- - - “‘Tis true on words is still our whole debate, - Dispute of _Me_ or _Te_, of _aut_ or _at_, - To sound or sink in _Cano_ O or A, - To give up Cicero or C or K; - The critic eye, that microscope of wit, - Sees hairs and pores, examines bit by bit; - How parts relate to parts or they to whole, - The body’s harmony, the beaming soul, - Are things which Kuster, Burmann, Wasse shall see, - When man’s whole frame is obvious to a _Flea_.” - -We need scarcely say that we have far too much respect for Dr. Aldis -Wright and for his distinguished coadjutor to apply such a description -as this to them as individuals, for no one can appreciate more heartily -than we do their monumental contribution to the textual criticism of -Shakespeare, but we can make no such reserve in speaking of this edition -of _Hamlet_. A more deplorable illustration, we do not say of the -subjection of Literature to Philology, for that would very imperfectly -represent the fact, but of the absolute substitution of Philology, and -of Philology in the lowest sense of the term, for Literature it would be -impossible to imagine. Had it been expressly designed to prove that its -editors were wholly unconscious of the artistic, literary, and -philosophical significance of Shakespeare’s masterpiece, it could -scarcely have taken a more appropriate form. - -The volume contains 117 pages of Shakespeare’s text, printed in large -type; the text is preceded by a preface of twelve pages, and followed by -notes occupying no less than 121 pages in very small type; so that the -work of the poet stands in pretty much the same relation to that of his -commentators as Falstaff’s bread stood to his sack. In the case of a -play like _Hamlet_, so subtle, so suggestive, so pregnant with critical -and philosophical problems of all kinds, commentary on a scale like this -might have been quite appropriate. But in this stupendous mass of -exegesis and illustration there is, with the exception of one short -passage, literally not a line about the play as a work of art, not a -line about its structure and architecture, about its style, about its -relations to æsthetic, about its metaphysic, its ethic, about the -character of Hamlet, or about the character of any other person who -figures in the drama. The only indication that it is regarded in any -other light than as affording material for philological and antiquarian -discussion is a short quotation, huddled in at the conclusion of the -preface, from Goethe’s _Wilhelm Meister_, and an intimation that -“Hamlet’s madness has formed the subject of special investigation by -several writers, among others by Dr. Conolly and Sir Edward Strachey.” - -A more comprehensive illustration of the truth of the indictment brought -against philologists by Voltaire, Pope, Lessing, and Sainte-Beuve than -is supplied by the notes in this volume it would be difficult to find. -Dulness, of course, may be assumed, and of mere dulness we do not -complain; but a combination of prolixity, irrelevance, and absolute -incapacity to distinguish between what to ninety-nine persons in every -hundred must be purely useless and what to ninety-nine persons in every -hundred is the information which they expect from a commentator, is -intolerable. We will give a few illustrations. A plain man or a student -for examination comes to these lines:-- - - “‘Tis the sport to have the enginer - Hoist with his own petar;” - -and, though he knows what the general sense is wishes to know exactly -what Shakespeare means. He turns to the note for enlightenment, and the -enlightenment he gets is this:-- - - “_Enginer._ Changed in the quarto of 1676 to the more modern - form of engineer. Compare _Troilus and Cressida_ ii. 3. 8, - “Then there’s Achilles a rare enginer.” For a cognate form - mutiner see note on iii. 4. 83. So we have pioner for pioneer - _Othello_ iii. 3. 346. _Hoist_ may be the participle either of - the verb ‘hoise’ or ‘hoist.’ In the latter case it would be the - common abbreviated form for the participles of verbs ending in - a dental. _Petar._ So spelt in the quartos, and by all editors - to Johnson, who writes ‘petards.’ In Cotgrave we have ‘Petart: - a Petard or Petarre; an Engine (made like a bell or morter) - wherewith strong gates,’ etc.”-- - -And so the hungry sheep looks up and is not fed. Again, he finds-- - - “He smote the sledded Polacks on the ice,” - -turns to the note, and reads:-- - - “_Polacks._ The quartos have ‘pollax,’ the two earliest folios - read ‘Pollax,’ the third ‘Polax,’ the fourth ‘Poleaxe.’ Pope - read ‘Polack’ and Malone ‘Polacks.’ The word occurs four times - in _Hamlet_. For ‘the sledded Polacks’ Molke reads ‘his leaded - pole-axe.’ But this would be an anticlimax, and the poet, - having mentioned ‘Norway’ in the first clause, would certainly - have told us with whom the ‘parle’ was held.” - -The poet Young noted how - - “Commentators each dark passage shun, - And hold their farthing candles to the sun.” - -The Clarendon Press editors are certainly adepts in these -accomplishments. Take one out of a myriad illustrations. The line in Act -i. sc. 2, “The dead vast and middle of the night,” is the signal for a -note extending to twelve closely printed lines. “’Tis bitter cold, and I -am sick at heart,” says Francisco. If any note were needed here, it -might have been devoted to pointing out to tiros the fine subjective -touch. The note is this:-- - - “_Bitter cold._ Here bitter is used adverbially to qualify the - adjective ‘cold.’ So we have ‘daring hardy’ in _Richard II._ i. - 3. 43. When the combination is likely to be misunderstood, - modern editors generally put a hyphen between the two words. - _Sick at heart._ So _Macbeth_ v. 3. 19, ‘I am sick at heart.’ - We have also in _Love’s Labour’s Lost_ ii. 1. 185, ‘sick at the - heart,’ and _Romeo and Juliet_ iii. 3. 72, ‘heart-sick - groans.’” - -Now let us see how the poor student fares when real difficulties occur. -Every reader of Shakespeare is familiar with the corrupt passage, Act -iv. sc. 1:-- - - “The dram of eale - Doth all the noble substance of worth out - To his own scandal-- - -a passage which, as all Shakespearian scholars know, has been -satisfactorily emended and explained. We turn to the notes for guidance, -and find ourselves treated as poor Mrs. Quickly was treated by Falstaff, -“fubbed off”--thus:-- - - “We leave this hopelessly corrupt passage as it stands in the - two earliest quartos. The others read ‘ease’ for ‘eale,’ and - modern writers have conjectured for the same word base, ill, - bale, ale, evil, ail, vile, lead. For ‘of a doubt’ it has been - proposed to substitute ‘of worth out,’ ‘soul with doubt,’ ‘oft - adopt,’ ‘oft work out,’ ‘of good out,’ ‘of worth dout,’ ‘often - dout,’ ‘often doubt,’ ‘oft adoubt,’ ‘oft delase,’ ‘over-cloud,’ - ‘of a pound,’ and others.” - -This, it may be added, is the sort of stuff--_incredibile dictu_--that -our children have to get by heart; for this Press, be it remembered, -practically controls half the English Literature examinations in -England. As students know quite well that nine examiners out of ten will -set their questions from “the Clarendon Press notes,” it is with “the -Clarendon Press notes” that they are obliged to cram themselves. But to -continue. Even a well-read man might be excused for not knowing the -exact meaning of the following expression:-- - - “They clepe us drunkards, and with _swinish phrase - Soil our addition_.” - -He turns to the notes, and having been briefly informed that _clepe_ -means “call,” and _addition_ “title,” is left to flounder with what he -can get out of--“Could Shakespeare have had in his mind any pun upon -‘Sweyn,’ which was a common name of the kings of Denmark?” - -Another leading characteristic of the _genus_ philologist, we mean the -preposterous importance attached by them to the smallest trifles, finds -ludicrous illustration in the following note:-- - - “My father, in his habit, as he lived!” - -exclaims Hamlet to his mother. This is the signal for:-- - - “There is supposed to be a difficulty in these words, because - in the earlier scenes the Ghost is in his armour, to which the - word ‘habit’ is regarded as inappropriate. In the earlier form - of the play, as it appears in the quarto of 1603, the Ghost - enters ‘in his nightgowne,’ and as the words ‘in the habit as - he lived’ occur in the corresponding passage of that edition, - it is probable that on this occasion the Ghost appeared in the - ordinary dress of the king, although this is not indicated in - the stage directions of the other quartos or of the folios.” - -As a possible solution of this grave difficulty, we would suggest that, -as the Ghost was undoubtedly in a very hot place, he might have found -his nightgown less oppressive than his armour, and though it would -certainly have been more decorous to have exchanged his nightgown for -his uniform on revisiting the earth, yet, as the visit was to his wife, -he thought perhaps less seriously about his apparel than our editors -have done. We have nothing to warrant us in assuming that he was in his -“ordinary dress.” The choice must lie between the nightgown and the -armour. But a truce to jesting. - -If any one would understand the opacity and callousness which -philological study induces, we would refer them to the note on Hamlet’s -last sublime words, “The rest is silence”:-- - - “The quartos have ‘Which have solicited, the rest is silence.’ - The folios, ‘Which have solicited. The rest is silence.’ ‘O, O, - O, O. _Dyes._’ If Hamlet’s speech is interrupted by his death - it would be more natural that the words ‘The rest is silence’ - should be spoken by Horatio.” - -We said at the beginning of this article that there was not a word of -commentary on the poetical merits of the play. We beg the editors’ -pardon. They have in one note, and in one note only, ventured on an -expression of critical opinion. We all know the lines-- - - “There is a willow grows aslant a brook - That shows his hoar leaves in the glassy stream,” - -etc., etc. We transcribe the note on this passage that it may be a sign -to all men of what Philology is able to effect, an omen and testimony of -what must inevitably be the fate of Literature if the direction and -regulation of its study be entrusted to philologists:-- - - “This speech of the Queen is certainly unworthy of its author - and of the occasion. The enumeration of plants is quite as - unsuitable to so tragical a scene as the description of Dover - cliff in _King Lear_ iv. 6. 11-24. Besides there was no one by - to witness the death of Ophelia, else she would have been - rescued.” - -As this beggars commentary, transcription shall suffice. - -Now we would ask any sensible person who has followed us, we do not say -in our own remarks--for they may be supposed to be the expression of -biassed opinion--but in the specimens we have given of such an edition -as this of _Hamlet_, and of such an edition as we have just reviewed of -_Adonais_, what is likely to be the fate of English Literature, as a -subject of teaching, so long as our Universities ignore their -responsibilities as the centres of culture by not only countenancing, -but assisting in the production and dissemination of such publications -as these? How can we expect anything but anarchy wherever the subject -is treated?--there an extreme of flaccid dilettantism, here an extreme -of philological pedantry. Conceive the tone and temper which, especially -at the impressionable age of the students for whom the book is intended, -the study of Shakespeare, under such guides as the editors of this -_Hamlet_, would be likely to induce. Is it not monstrous that young -students between the ages of about fifteen and eighteen should have such -text books as these inflicted on them? - -The radical fault of those who regulate education in our Universities -and elsewhere, and prescribe our schoolbooks, is their deplorable want -of judgment. They seem to be utterly incapable of distinguishing between -what is proper for pure specialists and what is proper for ordinary -students. There is not a page in this edition which does not proclaim -aloud, that it could never have been intended for the purposes to which -it has been applied, that it is the work of technical scholars, -concerned only in textual and philological criticism and exegesis, and -appealing only to those who approach the study of Shakespeare in the -same spirit and from the same point of view. Anything more sickening and -depressing, anything more calculated to make the name of Shakespeare an -abomination to the youth of England it would be impossible for man to -devise. It is shameful to prescribe such books for study in our Schools -and Educational Institutes. - - - - -OUR LITERARY GUIDES - -I. A SHORT HISTORY OF ENGLISH LITERATURE[11] - -[Footnote 11: _A Short History of English Literature._ By George -Saintsbury, Professor of Rhetoric and English Literature in the -University of Edinburgh.] - - -This Short History is evidently designed for the use of serious readers, -for the ordinary reader who will naturally look to it for general -instruction and guidance in the study of English Literature, and to whom -it will serve as a book of reference; for students in schools and -colleges, to many of whom it will, in all likelihood, be prescribed as a -textbook; for teachers engaged in lecturing and in preparing pupils for -examination. Of all these readers there will not be one in a hundred who -will not be obliged to take its statements on trust, to assume that its -facts are correct, that its generalizations are sound, that its -criticisms and critical theories are at any rate not absurd. It need -hardly be said that, under these circumstances, a writer who had any -pretension to conscientiousness would do his utmost to avoid all such -errors as ordinary diligence could easily prevent, that he would guard -scrupulously against random assertions and reckless misstatements, that -he would, in other words, spare no pains to deserve the confidence -placed in him by those who are not qualified to check his statements or -question his dogmas, and who naturally suppose that the post which he -occupies is a sufficient guarantee of the soundness and accuracy of his -work. But so far from Professor Saintsbury having any sense of what is -due to his position and to his readers, he has imported into his work -the worst characteristics of irresponsible journalism: generalizations, -the sole supports of which are audacious assertions, and an indifference -to exactness and accuracy, as well with respect to important matters as -in trifles, so scandalous as to be almost incredible. - -Sir Thomas More said of Tyndale’s version of the New Testament that to -seek for errors in it was to look for drops of water in the sea. What -was said very unfairly of Tyndale’s work may be said with literal truth -of Professor Saintsbury’s. The utmost extent of the space at our -disposal will only suffice for a few illustrations. We will select those -which appear to us most typical. In the chapter on Anglo-Saxon -literature the Professor favours us with the astounding statement, that -in Anglo-Saxon poetry “there is practically no lyric.”[12] It is -scarcely necessary to say that not only does Anglo-Saxon poetry abound -in lyrics, but that it is in its lyrical note that its chief power and -charm consists. In the threnody of the _Ruin_, and the _Grave_, in the -sentimental pathos of the _Seafarer_, of _Deor’s Complaint_, and of the -remarkable fragment describing the husband’s pining for his wife, in the -fiery passion of the three great war-songs, in the glowing subjective -intensity of the _Judith_, in the religious ecstasy of the _Holy Rood_ -and of innumerable passages in the other poems attributed to Cynewulf, -and of the poem attributed to Cædmon, deeper and more piercing lyric -notes have never been struck. Take such a passage as the following from -the _Satan_, typical, it may be added, of scores of others:-- - - “O thou glory of the Lord! Guardian of Heaven’s hosts, - O thou might of the Creator! O thou mid-circle! - O thou bright day of splendour! O thou jubilee of God! - O ye hosts of angels! O thou highest heaven! - O that I am shut from the everlasting jubilee, - That I cannot reach my hands again to Heaven, - ... Nor hear with my ears ever again - The clear-ringing harmony of the heavenly trumpets.”[13] - -And this is a poetry which has “practically no lyric”! On page 2 the -Professor tells us that there is no rhyme in Anglo-Saxon poetry; on page -18 we find him giving an account of the rhyming poem in the _Exeter -Book_. Of Mr. Saintsbury’s method of dealing with particular works and -particular authors, one or two examples must suffice. He tells us on -page 125 that the heroines in Chaucer’s _Legend of Good Women_ are “the -most hapless and blameless of Ovid’s Heroides.” It would be interesting -to know what connexion Cleopatra, whose story comes first, has with -Ovid’s Heroides, or if the term “Heroides” be, as it appears to be, (for -it is printed in italics) the title of Ovid’s Heroic Epistles, what -connexion four out of the ten have with Ovid’s work. In any case the -statement is partly erroneous and wholly misleading. In the account -given of the Scotch poets, the Professor, speaking of Douglas’ -translation of the _Æneid_, says, he “does not embroider on his text.” -This is an excellent illustration of the confidence which may be placed -in Mr. Saintsbury’s assertions about works on which most of his readers -must take what he says on trust. Douglas is continually “embroidering on -his text,” indeed, he habitually does so. We open his translation purely -at random; we find him turning _Æneid_ II. 496-499:-- - - “Non sic, aggeribus ruptis cum spumeus amnis - Exiit, oppositasque evicit gurgite moles, - Fertur in arva furens cumulo, camposque per omnes - Cum stabulis armenta trahit.” - - “Not sa fersly the fomy river or flude - Brekkis over the bankis on spait quhen it is wode. - And with his brusch and fard of water brown - The dykys and the schorys betis down, - Ourspreddand croftis and flattis wyth hys spate - Our all the feyldis that they may row ane bate - Quhill houssis and the flokkis flittis away, - The corne grangis and standard stakkys of hay.” - -We open _Æneid_ IX. 2:-- - - “Irim de cœlo misit Saturnia Juno - Audacem ad Turnum. Luco tum forte parentis - Pilumni Turnus sacratâ valle sedebat. - Ad quem sic roseo Thaumantias ore locuta est.” - -We find it turned:-- - - “Juno that lyst not blyn - Of hir auld malyce and iniquyte, - Hir madyn Iris from hevin sendys sche - To the bald Turnus malapart and stout; - Quhilk for the tyme was wyth al his rout - Amyd ane vale wonnder lovn and law, - Syttand at eys within the hallowit schaw - Of God Pilumnus his progenitor. - Thamantis dochter knelys him before, - I meyn Iris thys ilk fornamyt maide, - And with hir rosy lippis thus him said.” - -We turn to the end of the tenth _Æneid_ and we find him introducing six -lines which have nothing to correspond with them in the original. And -this is a translator who “does not embroider on his text”! It is -perfectly plain that Professor Saintsbury has criticised and commented -on a work which he could never have inspected. The same ignorance is -displayed in the account of Lydgate. He is pronounced to be a versifier -rather than a poet, his verse is described as “sprawling and -staggering.” The truth is that Lydgate’s style and verse are often of -exquisite beauty, that he was a poet of fine genius, that his -descriptions of nature almost rival Chaucer’s, that his powers of pathos -are of a high order, that, at his best, he is one of the most musical of -poets. We have not space to illustrate what must be obvious to any one -who has not gone to encyclopædias and handbooks for his knowledge of -this poet’s writings, but who is acquainted with the original. It will -not be disputed that Gray and Warton were competent judges of these -matters, and their verdict must be substituted for what we have not -space to prove and illustrate. “I do not pretend,” Gray says, “to set -Lydgate on a level with his master Chaucer, but he certainly comes the -nearest to him of any contemporary writer that I am acquainted with. His -choice of expression and the smoothness of his verse far surpass both -Gower and Occleve.” Of one passage in Lydgate, Gray has observed that -“it has touched the very heart strings of compassion with so masterly a -hand as to merit a place among the greatest poets.”[14] Warton also -notices his “perspicuous and musical numbers,” and “the harmony, -strength, and dignity” of his verses.[15] - -Turn where we will we are confronted with blunders. Take the account -given of Shakespeare. He began his metre, we are told, with the -lumbering “fourteeners.” He did, so far as is known, nothing of the -kind. Again: “It is only by guesses that anything is dated before the -_Comedy of Errors_ at the extreme end of 1594.” In answer to this it may -be sufficient to say that _Venus and Adonis_ was published in 1593, that -the first part of _Henry VI._ was acted on 3rd March, 1592, that _Titus -Andronicus_ was acted on 25th January, 1594, and that _Lucrece_ was -entered on the Stationers’ books 9th May, 1594. This is on a par with -the assertion, on page 315, that Shakespeare was traditionally born on -24th April! On page 320 we are told that _Measure for Measure_ belongs -to the first group of Shakespeare’s plays, to the series beginning with -_Love’s Labour’s Lost_ and culminating with the _Midsummer Night’s -Dream_. It is only fair to say that the Professor places a note of -interrogation after it in a bracket, but that it should have been placed -there, even tentatively, shows an ignorance of the very rudiments of -Shakespearian criticism which is nothing short of astounding. Take, -again, the account given of Burke. Our readers will probably think us -jesting when we tell them that Professor Saintsbury gravely informs us -that Burke supported the American Revolution. Is the Professor -unacquainted with the two finest speeches which have ever been delivered -in any language since Cicero? Can he possibly be ignorant that Burke, so -far from supporting that revolution, did all in his power to prevent it? -The whole account of Burke, it may be added, teems with inaccuracies. -The American Revolution was not brought about under a Tory -administration. What brought that revolution about was Charles -Townshend’s tax, and that tax was imposed under a Whig administration, -as every well-informed Board-school lad would know. Burke did not lose -his seat at Bristol owing to his support of Roman Catholic claims. If -Professor Saintsbury had turned to one of the finest of Burke’s minor -speeches--the speech addressed to the electors of Bristol--he would have -seen that Burke’s support of the Roman Catholic claims was only one, and -that not the most important, of the causes which cost him his seat. -Similar ignorance is displayed in the remark (p. 629) that “Burke -joined, and indeed headed, the crusade against Warren Hastings, in -1788.” The prosecution of Warren Hastings was undertaken on Burke’s sole -initiative, not in 1788, but in 1785. A few lines onwards we are told -that the series of Burke’s writings on the French Revolution “began with -the _Reflections_ in 1790, and was continued in the _Letter to a Noble -Lord_, 1790.” _A Letter to a Noble Lord_ had nothing to do with the -French Revolution, except collaterally as it affected Burke’s public -conduct, and appeared, not in 1790, but in 1795. - -It seems impossible to open this book anywhere without alighting on some -blunder, or on some inaccuracy. Speaking (p. 277) of Willoughby’s -well-known _Avisa_, the Professor observes that nothing is known of -Willoughby or of _Avisa_. If the Professor had known anything about the -work, he would have known that _Avisa_ is simply an anagram made up of -the initial letters of _Amans_, _vxor_, _inviolata semper amanda_, and -that nothing is known of Avisa for the simple reason that nothing is -known of the site of More’s Utopia. On page 360 we are told that Phineas -Fletcher’s _Piscatory Eclogues_, which are, of course, confounded with -his _Sicelides_, are a masque; on page 624, but this is perhaps a -printer’s error, that Robertson wrote a history of Charles I. On page -482, John Pomfret, the author of one of the most popular poems of the -eighteenth century, is called Thomas. On page 550, Pope’s _Moral -Essays_ are described as _An Epistle to Lord Burlington_, presumably -because the last of them, the fourth, is addressed to that nobleman. On -page 587 we are told that Mickle died in London: he died at Forest Hill, -near Oxford. On page 556 we are informed that Prior was part author of a -parody of the “Hind and Panther,” and that he was “imprisoned for some -years.” The work referred to is wrongly described, as it only contained -parodies of certain passages in Dryden’s poem, and he was in confinement -less than two years. On page 358, Brutus, the legendary founder of -Britain, is actually described as the son of Æneas. If Professor -Saintsbury were as familiar as he affects to be with Geoffrey of -Monmouth, with Layamon and with the early metrical romances, he would -have known that Brutus is fabled to have been the son of Sylvius, the -son of Ascanius, and, consequently, the great-grandson of Æneas. Many of -the Professor’s critical remarks can only be explained on the -supposition that he assumes that his readers will not take the trouble -to verify his references or question his dogmas. We will give one or two -instances. On page 468, speaking of seventeenth-century prose, he says, -with reference to Milton: “The close of the _Apology_ itself is a very -little, though only a very little, inferior to the _Hydriotaphia_.” By -the _Apology_ he can only mean the _Apology for Smectymnuus_, for the -defence of the English people is in Latin. Now, will our readers credit -that one of the flattest, clumsiest and most commonplace passages in -Milton’s prose writings, as any one may see who turns to it, is -pronounced “only a little inferior” to one of the most majestically -eloquent passages in our prose literature. That our readers may know -what Professor Saintsbury’s notions of eloquence are, we will transcribe -the passage: - - “Thus ye have heard, readers, how many shifts and wiles the - prelates have invented to save their ill-got booty. And if it - be true, as in Scripture it is foretold, that pride and - covetousness are the sure marks of those false prophets which - are to come, then boldly conclude these to be as great seducers - as any of the latter times. For between this and the judgment - day do not look for any arch deceivers who, in spite of - reformation, will use more craft or less shame to defend their - love of the world and their ambition than these prelates have - done. And if ye think that soundness of reason or what force of - argument so ever shall bring them to an ingenuous silence, ye - think that which shall never be. But if ye take that course - which Erasmus was wont to say Luther took against the pope and - monks: if ye denounce war against their riches and their - bellies, ye shall soon discern that turban of pride which they - wear upon their heads to be no helmet of salvation, but the - mere metal and hornwork of papal jurisdiction; and that they - have also this gift, like a certain kind of some that are - possessed, to have their voice in their bellies, which, being - well drained and taken down, their great oracle, which is only - there, will soon be dumb, and the divine right of episcopacy - forthwith expiring will put us no more to trouble with tedious - antiquities and disputes.” - -And this is “a very little, only a very little, inferior,” to the -“Hydriotaphia”! - -On page 652, Swift’s style, that perfection of simple, unadorned _sermo -pedestris_--is described as marked by “volcanic magnificence.” On page -300 Hooker is described as “having an unnecessary fear of vivid and -vernacular expression.” Vivid and vernacular expression is, next to its -stateliness, the distinguishing characteristic of Hooker’s style. It -would be interesting to know what is meant by the remark on page 445 -that Barrow’s style is “less severe than South’s.” Another example of -the same thing is the assertion on page 517 that Joseph Glanville is one -of “the chief exponents of the gorgeous style in the seventeenth -century.” Very ‘gorgeous’ the style of the _Vanity of Dogmatizing_, of -its later edition the _Scepsis Scientifica_, of the _Sadducismus -Triumphatus_, of the _Lux Orientalis_, and of the Essays! - -Indeed, the Professor’s critical dicta are as amazing as his facts. We -have only space for one or two samples. Cowley’s _Anacreontics_ are “not -very far below Milton”(!) Dr. Donne was “the most gifted man of letters -next to Shakespeare.” Where Bacon, where Ben Jonson, where Milton are to -stand is not indicated. Akenside’s stilted and frigid _Odes_ “fall not -so far short of Collins.” We wonder what Mr. Saintsbury’s criterion of -poetry can be. But we forget, with that criterion he has furnished us. -On page 732, speaking of “a story about a hearer who knew no English, -but knew Tennyson to be a poet by the hearing,” he adds that “the story -is probable and valuable, or rather invaluable, for it points to the -best if not the only criterion of poetry.” And this is a critic! We -would exhort the Professor to ponder well Pope’s lines: - - “But most by numbers judge a poet’s song, - - * * * * * - - In the bright muse, tho’ thousand charms conspire, - Her voice is all these tuneful fools admire, - Who haunt Parnassus but to please their ear.” - -On page 734 we are told Browning’s _James Lee_--the Professor probably -means _James Lee’s Wife_--is amongst “the greatest poems of the -century.” On Wordsworth’s line, judged not in relation to its context, -but as a single verse--“Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting”--we -have the following as commentary: “Even Shakespeare, even Shelley have -little more of the echoing detonation, the auroral light of true -poetry”; very “echoing,” very “detonating”--the rhythm of “Our birth is -but a sleep and a forgetting.” Mr. Saintsbury’s notions of what -constitutes detonation and auroral light in poetry appear to resemble -his notions of what constitutes eloquence in prose. Nothing, we may add -in passing, is more amusing in this volume than Mr. Saintsbury’s cool -assumption of equality as a critical authority with such a critic as -Matthew Arnold, whom he sometimes patronises, sometimes corrects, and -sometimes assails. The Professor does not show to advantage on these -occasions, and he leaves us with the impression that if “Mr. Arnold’s -criticism is piecemeal, arbitrary, fantastic, and insane,” the criticism -which appears, where it is not mere nonsense, to take its touchstones, -its standards, and its canons from those of the average Philistine is, -after all, a very poor substitute. But enough of Mr. Saintsbury’s -“criticism,” which is, almost uniformly, as absurd in what it praises as -in what it censures. - -The style, or, to borrow an expression from Swift, what the poverty of -our language compels us to call the style, in which this book is -written, is on a par with its criticism. We will give a few examples. -“It is a proof of the greatness of Dryden that he knew Milton for a -poet; it is a proof of the smallness (and mighty as he was on some -sides, on others he was very small) of Milton that (if he really did so) -he denied poetry to Dryden.”[16] “What the _Voyage and Travaile_ really -is, is this--it is, so far as we know, and even beyond our knowledge in -all probability and likelihood, the first considerable example of prose -in English dealing neither with the beaten track of theology and -philosophy, nor with the, even in the Middle Ages, restricted field of -history and home topography, but expatiating freely on unguarded plains -and on untrodden hills, sometimes dropping into actual prose romance and -always treating its subject as the poets had treated theirs in _Brut_ -and _Mort d’Arthur_, in _Troy-book_ and _Alexandreid_, as a mere canvas -on which to embroider flowers of fancy.”[17] Again, “With Anglo-Saxon -history he deals slightly, and despite his ardent English -patriotism--his book opens with a vigorous panegyric of England, the -first of a series extending to the present day (from which an anthology -_De Laudibus Angliæ_ might be made)--he deals very harshly with Harold -Godwinson.”[18] “He had a fit of stiff Odes in the Gray and Collins -manner.” “_The Hind and Panther_ (the greatest poem ever written in the -teeth of its subject)”. “His voluminous Latin works have been _tackled_ -by a special Wyclif Society.” These are a few of the gems in which every -chapter abounds. - -Of Professor Saintsbury’s indifference to exactness and accuracy in -details and facts we need go no further for illustrations than to his -dates. Such things cannot be regarded as trifles in a book designed to -be a book of reference. We will give a few instances. We are informed on -page 238 that Ascham’s _Schoolmaster_ was published in 1568; it was -published, as its title-page shows, in 1570. Hume’s _Dissertations_ -were first published, not in 1762, but in 1757. Bale’s flight to -Germany was not in 1547, when such a step would have been unnecessary, -but in 1540. Pecock was, we are told, translated to Chichester in 1550, -exactly ninety years after his death! As if to perplex the readers of -this book, two series of dates are given; we have the dates in the -narrative and the dates in the index, and no attempt is made to -reconcile the discrepancies. Accordingly we find in the narrative that -Caxton was probably born in 1415--in the index that he was born in 1422; -in the narrative that Latimer, Fisher, Gascoign and Atterbury were born -respectively in 1489, in 1465, about 1537 and in 1672--in the index that -they were born respectively in 1485, 1459, 1525 and 1662; in the -narrative Gay was born in 1688--in the index he was born in 1685. In the -narrative Collins dies in 1756, and Mrs. Browning is born in 1806--in -the index Collins dies in 1759, and Mrs. Browning is born in 1809. The -narrative tells us that Aubrey was born in 1626, and John Dyer _circa_ -1688--in the index that Aubrey was born in 1624 and Dyer _circa_ 1700. -In the index Mark Pattison dies in 1884--in the narrative he dies in -1889. In Professor Saintsbury’s eyes such indifference to accuracy may -be venial: in our opinion it is nothing less than scandalous. It is -assuredly most unfair to those who will naturally expect to find in a -book of reference trustworthy information. - -We must now conclude, though we have very far from exhausted the list of -errors and misstatements, of absurdities in criticism and absurdities in -theory, which we have noted. Bacon has observed that the best part of -beauty is that which a picture cannot express. It may be said, with -equal truth, of a bad book, that what is worst in it is precisely that -which it is most difficult to submit to tangible tests. In other words, -it lies not so much in its errors and inaccuracies, which, after all, -may be mere trifles and excrescences, but it lies in its tone and -colour, its flavour, its accent. Professor Saintsbury appears to be -constitutionally incapable of distinguishing vulgarity and coarseness -from liveliness and vigour. So far from having any pretension to the -finer qualities of the critic, he seems to take a boisterous pride in -exhibiting his grossness. - -If our review of this book shall seem unduly harsh, we are sorry, but a -more exasperating writer than Professor Saintsbury, with his -indifference to all that should be dear to a scholar, the mingled -coarseness, triviality and dogmatism of his tone, the audacious nonsense -of his generalisations, and the offensive vulgarity of his diction and -style--a very well of English defiled--we have never had the misfortune -to meet with. Turn where we will in this work, to the opinions expressed -in it, to the sentiments, to the verdicts, to the style, the note is the -same,--the note of the _Das Gemeine_. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 12: Page 37.] - -[Footnote 13: - - Eá lâ drihtenes þrym! eá lâ duguða helm! - eá lâ meotodes miht! eá lâ middaneard! - eá lâ däg leóhta! eá lâ dreám godes! - eá lâ engla þreát! eá lâ upheofon! - eá lâ þät ic eam ealles leás êcan dreámes, - þät ic mid handum ne mäg heofon geræcan - ne mid eágum ne môt up lôcian - ne hûru mid eárum ne sceal æfre gehêran - þære byrhtestan bêman stefne. - - --_Satan._ edit. Grein, 164-172. -] - -[Footnote 14: _Some Remarks on Lydgate._ Gray, Aldine Ed. v. 292-321.] - -[Footnote 15: That Lydgate’s verse should occasionally be rough and -halting is partly to be attributed to the wretched state in which his -text has come down to us from the copyists, and partly to the arbitrary -way in which he varies the accent. His heroic couplets in the _Storie of -Thebes_ are certainly very unmusical. For the whole question of his -versification see Dr. Schick, Introduction to his edition of _The Temple -of Glas_, pp. liv.-lxiii., and Schipper, _Altenglische Metrik_, 492-500. -But neither of these scholars does justice to the exquisite music of his -verse at its best.] - -[Footnote 16: Page 474.] - -[Footnote 17: Page 150.] - -[Footnote 18: Page 63.] - - - - -OUR LITERARY GUIDES - -II. A SHORT HISTORY OF MODERN ENGLISH LITERATURE[19] - -[Footnote 19: _A Short History of Modern English Literature._ By Edmund -Gosse. London, 1898.] - - -The author of this work has plainly not pondered the advice of Horace, -“Sumite materiam vestris, qui scribitis, æquam viribus.” His ambitious -purpose is “to give the reader, whether familiar with books or not, a -feeling of the evolution of English Literature in the primary sense of -the term,” and he adds that “to do this without relation to particular -authors and particular works seems to me impossible.” This may be -conceded; for, a feeling of the evolution of English or of any other -literature, without reference to particular authors and particular -books, would be analogous to the capacity for feeling without anything -to feel. But, unfortunately, those of Mr. Gosse’s readers who wish to -have the feeling to which he refers will merely find the conditions -without which, as he so justly observes, the said feeling is -impossible. In other words, references, in the form of loose and -desultory gossip, to particular authors and particular works -chronologically arranged, are all that represent the “evolution” of -which he is so anxious “to give a feeling.” - -Described simply, the work is an ordinary manual of English Literature -in which, with Mr. Humphry Ward’s _English Poets_, Sir Henry Craik’s -_English Prose Writers_, Chambers’ _Cyclopædia of English Literature_, -the _Dictionary of National Biography_, and the like before him, the -writer tells again the not unfamiliar story of the course of our -Literature from Chaucer to the present time. But Mr. Gosse is no mere -compiler, and brings to his task certain qualifications of his own, a -vague and inaccurate but extensive knowledge of our seventeenth, -eighteenth and nineteenth century Belles Lettres; and here, as a rule, -he can acquit himself creditably. Though far from a sound, he is a -sympathetic critic; he has an agreeable but somewhat affected style, and -can gossip pleasantly and plausibly about subjects which are within the -range indicated. But at this point, as is painfully apparent, his -qualifications for being an historian and critic of English Literature -end. The moment he steps out of this area he is at the mercy of his -handbooks; so completely at their mercy that he does not even know how -to use them. And it is here that Mr. Gosse becomes so irritating, partly -because of the sheer audacity with which mere inferences are -substituted for facts and simple assumptions for deduced -generalizations, and partly because of the habitual employment of -phraseology so vague and indeterminate that it is difficult to submit -what it conveys to positive test. These are serious charges to bring -against any writer; and if they cannot be abundantly substantiated, a -still more serious charge may justly be urged against the accuser. - -To turn to the work. On page 85 Mr. Gosse favours us with the following -account of the _Faerie Queene_: “A certain grandeur which sustains the -three great Cantos of Truth, Temperance, and Chastity fades away as we -proceed.... The structure of it is loose and incoherent when we compare -it with the epic grandeur of the masterpieces of Ariosto and Tasso.” It -would be difficult to match this; every word which is not a blunder is -an absurdity. Where are “the three great Cantos”? Can Mr. Gosse possibly -be ignorant that the poem is divided into books, each book containing -twelve Cantos? Assuming, however, that he has confounded books with -Cantos, where is the great book dealing with ‘Truth’? As he places it -before ‘Temperance,’ we presume that he means the first book and that he -has confounded ‘Truth’ with ‘Holiness.’ This is pretty well, to begin -with. Where, we next ask in amazement, is the ‘grandeur’ which sustains -the prolix farrago of the third book, and which ‘fades away’ as we -proceed to the only book which almost rivals the first and second, the -fifth, and the sublimest portion of the whole work, the superb Cantos -which represent all that remains of the seventh? What, we gasp, is the -meaning of the ‘epic grandeur’ of Ariosto? and “the loose and incoherent -structure” of the _Faerie Queene_ when compared with that of the -_Orlando Furioso_? Could any poem be more loose and incoherent in -structure than the _Orlando_, or any term be less appropriate to its -tone and style than ‘grandeur’? On page 80 he actually tells us that -Fox’s well-known _Book of Martyrs_ was written in Latin and translated -by John Day, and that it is John Day’s translation of the Latin original -which represents that work, confounding Fox’s _Commentarii Rerum in -Ecclesiâ gestarum_, etc., printed at Basil with the _Acts and Monuments -of the Church_, and making John Day, the publisher of it, the translator -of it into English! And this is his account of one of the most -celebrated works in our language. Of Swift’s _Sentiments of a Church of -England Man_, we have the following account: “That such a tract as the -_Sentiments of a Church of England Man_, with its gusts of irony, its -white heat of preposterous moderation, led on towards Junius is -obvious.” This is an excellent example of the confidence which may be -placed in Mr. Gosse’s assertions. Of this pamphlet, it may be sufficient -to say that there is not a single touch of irony or satire in it; that -it stands almost alone among Swift’s tracts for its perfectly temperate -and logical tone; it is a calm appeal to pure reason. There is the same -audacity of assertion in classing Feltham’s _Resolves_ with Hall’s and -Overbury’s Character Sketches, and Earle’s _Microcosmogonie_ as “a -typical example” of “a curious school of comic or ironic portraiture, -partly ethical and partly dramatic.” In 1625, we are told that Bacon -completed the _Sylva Sylvarum_. If Mr. Gosse knew anything of Bacon’s -philosophical writings, he would have known that the _Sylva Sylvarum_ -never was and never could have been completed, for it was in itself a -fragment--a mere collection of materials to be incorporated in the -_Phœnomena Universi_, a work which was to have been six times larger -than Pliny’s _Natural History_. In giving an account of Tillotson, he -speaks of “the serene and insinuating periods” of the elegant -latitudinarian who “was assiduous in saying what he had to say in the -most graceful and intelligible manner possible.” A more perfect -description of the very opposite of Tillotson’s style could hardly be -given. Those who are acquainted with Fuller’s writings will be equally -surprised to find him classed with Jeremy Taylor and Henry More, and to -learn that his style is ‘florid and involved,’ distinguished by its -‘long-windedness’ and ‘exuberance.’ Has Mr. Gosse no apprehension of his -readers turning to the originals and testing his statements? We have -another of these bold assertions in the account of Lydgate, derived, we -suspect, from a hasty generalization from a remark made about him in Mr. -Ward’s _British Poets_. “Lydgate,” says Mr. Gosse, “had a most defective -ear; his verses are not to be scanned. His ear was bad and tuneless.” -Any one who has read Lydgate knows that, if we except his heroic -couplets, a more musical poet is not to be found in the fifteenth -century, or, indeed, in our language; the softness and smoothness of his -verse, wherever he writes in stanzas, as he generally does, is indeed -his chief characteristic. These remarks are minor illustrations of an -accomplishment in which Mr. Gosse has no rival. - -The Euphuists of the sixteenth century drew, for purposes of simile and -illustration, on a fabulous natural history which assumed the existence -of certain animals, herbs, and minerals, and of certain properties and -qualities possessed by them. This gave great point and picturesqueness -to their style, and though it was certainly misleading and occasionally -perplexing to those who went to them for natural history, it had a most -charming and imposing effect. Mr. Gosse seems to have imported a similar -fiction into criticism. Of this we have a most amusing illustration on -page 155. Speaking of Herrick Mr. Gosse remarks, “In the midst of these -extravagances, like Meleager winding his _pure white violets_”--the -Italics are ours--“into the _gaudy garland of late Greek Euphuism_, we -find Robert Herrick.” Meleager’s Anthology is not extant, but the -dedication is, and from that dedication we know exactly from what poets -it was compiled. It ranged from about B.C. 700 till towards the close of -the Alexandrian Age, for, with the exception of Antipater of Sidon, it -is very doubtful whether he inserted any epigrams by his contemporaries, -but he admitted a hundred and thirty-one of his own. In other words his -collection comprised epigrams composed by the masters preceding the -Alexandrian Age from Archilochus downwards, and by those who, during -that age and afterwards, cultivated with scrupulous care the simplicity -and purity of the early models. Indeed, the poets represented in his -Anthology are, with one exception, the artists of Greek epigram in its -purest, simplest, and chastest form. That one exception is himself. In -him are first apparent the _dulcia vitia_ of the Decadence; he is full -of dainty subtleties, he is almost more Oriental than Greek, his style -is luscious, elaborate and florid. Such, then, was the composition of -“the gaudy garland of late Greek Euphuism,” and such the nature of the -“pure white violets” wound into it by Meleager. It is amusing to trace -Mr. Gosse’s rodomontade to its source. In the well-known dedication to -which we have referred, Meleager prettily compares the various poets, -from whose works he selects, to flowers, speaking modestly of his own -contributions as “early white violets.” To critics like Mr. Gosse the -rest is easy. Meleager, he no doubt argued, was an excellent poet; he -belonged to a late age: ‘Euphuism’--a delightfully vague term, is likely -to characterise a late age; a poet who compares his verses to white -violets had evidently a taste for simplicity, and presumably, therefore, -was no Euphuist; a gaudy garland is an excellent set off for pure white -violets. And so, to the great perplexity of scholars, but to the great -satisfaction of those who enjoy a pretty sentence, Meleager will -continue “to wind his pure white violets into the gaudy garland of late -Greek Euphuism.” - -We have a similar illustration of the same thing in Mr. Gosse’s account -of Shaftesbury. We are told that he “was perhaps the greatest literary -force between Dryden and Swift”; that “he deserves remembrance as the -first who really broke down the barrier which excluded England from -taking her proper place in the civilization of literary Europe”; that -“he set an example for the kind of prose which was to mark the central -years of the century”; that “his style glitters and rings, and ... yet -so curious that one marvels that it should have fallen completely into -neglect”; that “he was the first Englishman who developed theories of -formal virtue, who attempted to harmonize the beautiful with the true -and the good”; that the modern attitude of mind seems to meet us first -in the graceful cosmopolitan writings of Shaftesbury; that “without a -Shaftesbury there would hardly have been a Ruskin or a Pater.” Such -amazing nonsense almost confounds refutation by its sheer absurdity. - -With regard to the first statement, it may be sufficient to say that -between the period of Dryden’s literary activity and the publication of -Swift’s _Battle of the Books_ and _Tale of a Tub_ were flourishing -Hobbes, Izaak Walton, Bunyan, Temple, and Locke; that between the -publication of the _Tale of a Tub_ and of Shaftesbury’s collected -writings were flourishing Addison, Steele, De Foe, Arbuthnot, Berkeley. -With regard to the second statement, it would be interesting to know how -a writer who had been preceded by Bacon, Hobbes and Locke, could be -described as a writer who had been the first “to break down the barrier -which excluded England from taking her proper place in the civilization -of literary Europe.” The truth is, that Shaftesbury exercised no -influence at all on Continental Literature until long after our -Literature had generally become influential in France. Equally absurd -and baseless is the remark that he “set an example of the kind of prose -that was to mark the central years of the century.” Whose prose was -affected by him? Bolingbroke’s? or Fielding’s? or Richardson’s? or -Middleton’s? or Johnson’s? or Goldsmith’s? or Hume’s? or Hawkesworth’s? -or Sterne’s? or Smollett’s? or Chesterfield’s? that of the writers in -the _Monthly Review_? or in the _Adventurer_? or in the _World_? or in -the _Connoisseur_? To say of Shaftesbury’s style that “it glitters and -rings,” is to say what betrays utter ignorance of its characteristics. -As a rule, it is diffuse, involved, and cumbrous, affected, but with an -affectation which sedulously aims at the very opposite effects of -“glittering and ringing.” When he is eloquent, as in the _Moralists_, he -imitates the style of Plato; his vice is florid verbosity; it may be -doubted whether a single sentence could be found to which Mr. Gosse’s -description would be applicable. If, it may be added, his style had -“fallen completely into neglect,” it is somewhat surprising that “he -should set an example for the kind of prose which was to mark the -central years of the century.” When we are told that he was “the first -Englishman who attempted to harmonize the beautiful with the true and -the good,” we ask in amazement whether Mr. Gosse has ever inspected the -_Hymns_ of Spenser and the writings of the Cambridge Platonists; and -when he tells us that without a Shaftesbury there would hardly have been -a Ruskin or a Pater, we would suggest to him that both Ruskin and Pater -were perhaps not ignorant of the Platonic Dialogues. In the account -given of Spenser, a poem is attributed to him which he never wrote. “In -one of his early pieces, _The Oak and The Briar_, went far,” etc., the -oak and the briar is simply an episode in the second eclogue of the -_Shepherd’s Calendar_. Mr. Gosse, probably finding it quoted in some -book of selections, has jumped to the conclusion that it is a separate -poem. Of Mr. Gosse’s qualifications for dealing with Spenser, we have, -by the way, an excellent example in the following remark: “Spenser, -although he boasted of his classical acquirements, was singularly little -affected by Greek or even Latin ideas.” Spenser’s _Hymns_ in honour of -Love and in Honour of Beauty are simply saturated with Platonism, being -indeed directly derived from the _Phædrus_ and the _Symposium_, -numberless passages from which are interwoven with the poems. The whole -scheme of the _Faerie Queene_ was suggested by, and based on, -Aristotle’s _Ethics_ with elaborate particularity, Arthur, in his -relation to the several knights, corresponding to the virtue -μεγαλοψυχια in its relation to the other virtues. The conclusion of -the tenth canto of the first book is simply an allegorical presentation -of the relation of the βιος θεωρητικος to practical life. The -“Castle of Medina” in the second book is a minutely technical exposition -of the Aristotelian doctrine of the mean, modified by the Platonic -theory of morals: the three mothers being the λογιστικη, the -επιθυμητικη, and θυμητικη, the three daughters, -Elissa, Perissa, and Medina, being respectively the Aristotelian -ελλειψις, the ὑπερβολη and the μεσοτης. In fact, -the whole passage is simply an allegory of the Aristotelian doctrine of -the mean. The whole of the ninth canto of the second book is founded on -the famous passage in the _Timæus_ describing the anatomy of man. In -truth the poem teems with references to Plato and Aristotle, and with -passages imitated from the Greek poets, as every scholar knows. And this -is a poet “singularly little affected by Greek ideas!” - -The same astonishing ignorance is displayed in a remark about Milton. We -are told that in his youth he was “slightly subjected to influence from -Spenser.” If Mr. Gosse had any adequate acquaintance with Milton and -Spenser, he would have known that Spenser was to Milton almost what -Homer was to Virgil, that Spenser’s influence simply pervades his poems, -not his youthful poems only, but _Paradise Lost_ and even _Paradise -Regained_. On page 194 we find this sentence: “From 1660 onwards ... -what France originally, and then England, chose was the _imitatio -veterum_, the Literature in prose and verse which seemed most closely -to copy the models of Latin style. Aristotle and Horace were taken, not -merely as patterns, but as arbiters.” It would be very interesting to -know what English author took Aristotle as a pattern for style. Is Mr. -Gosse acquainted with the characteristics of Aristotle’s style? Should -he ever become so, he will probably have some sense of the immeasurable -absurdity of asserting that our prose writers from 1660 onwards took -that style for their model. On a par with this is the assertion that up -to 1605 Bacon had mainly issued his works in “Ciceronian Latin.” Is Mr. -Gosse aware of the meaning of “Ciceronian Latin”? Very “Ciceronian” -indeed is Bacon’s Latinity, and particularly that of the _Meditationes -Sacræ_, the only work published in Latin by Bacon up to 1605! It is -scarcely necessary to say, in passing, that such works as Bacon had -published up to 1605 were, with the one exception referred to, all in -English. Nothing, it may be added, is so annoying in this book as its -slushy dilettantism. Mr. Gosse appears to be incapable of accuracy and -precision. Thus he tells us that Chaucer’s expedition to Italy in 1372 -was “the first of several Italian expeditions.” Chaucer, so far as is -known, visited Italy, after this, exactly once. Again, he tells us that -the _Complaint of Mars_ and the _Parliament of Fowls_ are interesting as -showing that Chaucer had completely abandoned his imitation of French -models. Chaucer wrote several poems in the pure French style, and based -on French models, after the date of these poems. Such would be the -Rondel _Merciless Beauty_ suggested by Williamme d’Amiens, the -_Compleynt of Venus_, partly adapted and partly translated from three -Ballades by Sir Otes de Graunson, and the _Compleynt to his Empty -Purse_, modelled on a Ballade by Eustache Deschamps, while French -influence continued to modify his work throughout. On page 238 we are -told that Thomson revived the Spenserian stanza; it had been revived by -Pope, Prior, Shenstone, and Akenside. On page 151 we are informed that -the first instalment of Clarendon’s History remained unprinted till -1752, and the rest of it till 1759. If Mr. Gosse knew anything about one -of the most remarkable controversies of the eighteenth century, he would -have known that the greater part of it was printed and published between -1702 and 1704, and frequently reprinted between 1704 and 1731. - -There is not a chapter in the book which does not teem with errors. -Trissino’s _Sofonisba_ was not the only work in which blank verse had -attained any prominence in Italy about 1515; it had been employed in -works equally prominent, by Rucellai in his _Rosmunda_, and in his -_Oreste_, as well as in his didactic poem _L’Api_, and by Alamanni in -his _Antigone_, all of which were composed within a few years of that -date. On page 120 we are told that Davies was the first to employ, on a -long flight, the heroic quatrain; it had been employed by Spenser in a -poem extending to nearly a thousand lines. Nor was Surrey’s essay in -_terza rima_ “the earliest in the language.” Chaucer made the same -experiment, though a little irregularly, in the _Compleynt to his Lady_. -We are told on page 79 that Gascoigne was “the first translator of Greek -tragedy.” Gascoigne never translated a line from the Greek. His -_Jocasta_, to which presumably the reference is made, is simply an -adaptation of Ludovico Dolce’s _Giocasta_. On page 25 we are informed -that “Gower’s French verse has mainly disappeared.” Gower is not known -to have written anything in French except the _Ballades_ and the -_Speculum Meditantis_, both of which are extant, as it is inexcusable in -any historian of English Literature not to know. The account given on -page 25 of the _Confessio Amantis_ shows that Mr. Gosse is very -imperfectly acquainted with what he so fluently criticises, or he would -have been aware that the seventh book is purely episodical and has -nothing whatever to do with “The lover’s symptoms and experience.” In -the account of Pope we are informed that “Boileau discouraged love -poetry and Pope did not seriously attempt it.” Pope is the author of -the most famous love poem in the eighteenth century, _Eloisa to -Abelard_, to say nothing of the _Elegy to an Unfortunate Lady_, of the -beautiful hymn to Love in the second chorus in the tragedy of _Brutus_, -and the exquisite fragment supposed to have been addressed to Lady Mary -Wortley Montagu. “The satires of Pope,” he continues, “would not have -been written but for those of his French predecessor.” Can Mr. Gosse -possibly be ignorant that the satires of Pope are modelled on the -Satires and Epistles of Horace, that they owe absolutely nothing to -Boileau, not even the hint for applying Roman satire to modern times, as -he had precedents in his own countrymen Dryden and Rochester? - -Mr. Gosse’s criticism is often very amusing, as here, speaking of -Gibbon: “Perhaps he leaned on the strength of his style too much, and -_sacrificed the abstract to the concrete_.” Of all historians who have -ever lived, Gibbon is the most “abstract” and has most sacrificed the -“concrete” to the “abstract,” as every student of history knows. On a -par with this is the prodigious statement (p. 291) that there is “an -absence of emotional imagination” in Burke! That excellent man, Mr. -Pecksniff, was, we are told, in the habit of using any word that -occurred to him as having a fine sound and rounding a sentence well, -without much care for its meaning; “and this,” says his biographer “he -did so boldly and in such an imposing manner that he would sometimes -stagger the wisest people and make them gasp again.” This is precisely -Mr. Gosse’s method. About the propriety of his epithets and statements, -so long as they sound well, he never troubles himself; sometimes they -are so vague as to mean anything, as often they have no meaning at all, -as here: “His [that is Shelley’s] style, carefully considered, is seen -to rest on a basis built about 1760, from which it is every moment -springing and sparkling, like a fountain, in columns of ebullient -lyricism.” Could pure nonsense go further? We have another illustration -of the same audacity of absurd assertion on page 260. We are there -informed--Mr. Gosse is speaking of our prose literature about the centre -of the eighteenth century--that “Philosophy by this time had become -detached from _belles lettres_; it was now quite indifferent to those -who practised it, whether their sentences were harmonious or no.... -Philosophy in fact quitted literature.” If there was any period in our -prose literature when philosophy was in the closest alliance with belles -lettres, and was most studious of the graces of style, it was between -about 1750 and 1771. In those years appeared Hutcheson’s _System of -Moral Philosophy_, Adam Smith’s _Theory of Moral Sentiments_, one of the -most eloquent philosophical treatises ever written, Burke’s _Treatise on -the Sublime and Beautiful_, Reid’s _Inquiry into the Human Mind_, -Tucker’s _Light of Nature Pursued_, Beattie’s _Essay on Truth_, to say -nothing of Hume’s _Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals_, his -_Political Discourses_, and his _Natural History of Religion_, all of -them works pre-eminently distinguished by the graces of style, while so -far from philosophy quitting belles lettres, it was during these years -that the foundations of philosophical criticism were laid by Burke, -Harris, Hurd, Kames, and others. Mr. Gosse appears to have forgotten -that he had himself told us (p. 205) that Shaftesbury’s style set the -example of the prose which was to mark the central years of the century! -Thus again Burton’s _Anatomy of Melancholy_ is “an entertaining neurotic -compendium”; Bacon’s _Essays_ are “often mere notations ... enlarged in -many cases merely to receive the impressions of a Machiavellian -ingenuity.” Shelley’s _Triumph of Life_ is “a noble but vague gnomic -poem, in which Petrarch’s Trionfi are summed up and sometimes excelled.” -Keats’ “great odes are Titanic and Titianic.” On page 284 we are -informed that for fifteen years after the close of 1800 “poetry may be -said to have been stationary in England.” When we remember that within -these years appeared the best of Wordsworth’s poems, the best of -Coleridge’s, the best of Scott’s, the best of Crabbe’s, the first two -cantos of _Childe Harold_, the best of Campbell’s, the best of Moore’s, -and of Southey’s--we wonder what can be meant, till we read on to find -that it was “on the contrary extremely active.” But “its activity took -the form of the gradual acceptance of the new romantic ideas, the slow -expulsion of the old classic taste, and the multiplication of examples -of what had once for all been supremely accomplished in the hollows of -the Quantocks.” In other words, its activity took the form of its -activity, and its activity led to its becoming stationary. Mr. Gosse is -sometimes solemnly oracular, as here: “It is a sentimental error to -suppose that the winds of God blow only through the green tree; it is -sometimes the dry tree which is peculiarly favourable to their passage.” -It is not sometimes, we submit, but always that the dry tree will be -most propitious to their passage. But we like Mr. Gosse best when he is -eloquent, as here: “In the chapel of Milton’s brain, entirely devoted -though it was to a Biblical form of worship, there were flutes and -trumpets to accompany one vast commanding organ.” No wonder poor Milton -suffered, as we know he did suffer, from insomnia! - -The statement that “so miserable is the poverty of the first half of the -seventeenth century, when we have mentioned Pecock and Capgrave, there -is no other prose writer to be named,” is bad enough. But to sum up -Pecock’s work with the remark, “the matter is paradoxical and -casuistical reasoning on controversial points, in which he secures the -sympathy neither of the new thought nor the old,” is to demonstrate that -Mr. Gosse knows nothing whatever about it. The _Repressor_ is in many -important respects one of the most remarkable works in our early prose -Literature. It would be interesting to know what is the meaning of the -following: “The masterpiece of Chillingworth stands almost alone in a -sort of underwood of Theophrastian character sketches.” Does Mr. Gosse -suppose that English prose Literature in and about 1637 is represented -by Hall’s _Characters of Vices and Virtues_, by Sir Thomas Overbury’s -_Characters_, and by Earle’s _Microcosmographie_, which appeared -respectively, not in and about 1637, but in 1608, in 1614, and in 1628? -If this was the underwood in which Chillingworth’s work stood, it stood -also in a dense forest represented by some of the most celebrated prose -writings of the seventeenth century, such as the greater part of the -writings of Bacon and of Raleigh, the _Anatomy of Melancholy_, Selden’s -_Titles of Honour_ and _Mare Clausum_, Lord Herbert of Cherbury’s _De -Veritate_, Feltham’s _Resolves_, the best of Hall’s writings, Purchas’ -_Pilgrims_, Barclay’s _Argenis_, the Histories of Speed, Stowe, Hayward, -and Raleigh, Heylin’s _Microcosmus_, Prynne’s _Histrio-Mastix_, and the -famous sermons of Lancelot Andrewes, all of which appeared between 1608 -and 1637. These are the sort of remarks in which Mr. Gosse habitually -indulges. We have another example in the following: “Shelley’s attitude -to style is in the main retrograde,” a generalization based on the fact -that he was no admirer of “the arabesque of the cockney school.” But -were Shelley’s chief contemporaries admirers of the arabesque of the -cockney school, or were they affected by it? Was Wordsworth, was -Coleridge, or Southey, or Byron, or Crabbe, or Campbell, or Landor?--a -question which Mr. Gosse probably never stopped to ask himself. On a par -with this is the absurd assertion that “English poetry was born again -during the autumn months of 1797.” The appearance of the _Lyrical -Ballads_ did not make, but mark, an era in our poetry. The revolution of -which they were the expression had been maturing, as surely but -distinctly as the social and political revolution marked by the assembly -of the States-General ten years before. There was hardly a note struck -in the _Lyrical Ballads_ which had not been struck in our poetry between -1740 and the date of their appearance. - -To call this compilation a _History of Modern English Literature_ is -ludicrous. Mr. Gosse has no conception even of the eras into which our -Literature naturally falls, or of the movements which in each of those -eras defined themselves. Nothing could be more misleading and inadequate -than the accounts given of the historians, theologians, philosophers, -and critics, many of whom--nay, whole schools of whom--are not noticed -at all. Sidney’s epoch-marking little treatise is dismissed in four -unmeaning lines as “an urbane and eloquent essay, which labours under -but one disadvantage, namely, that when it was composed in 1581 there -was scarcely any poesy in England to be defended. This was posthumously -printed in 1595.” Ben Jonson’s not less remarkable _Discoveries_ are not -even mentioned. How writers like Bacon, Hooker, Hobbes, Locke, and -Berkeley fare we have not space to illustrate. Mr. Gosse, indeed, -judging by his excursions into the realms of theology and philosophy, -has certainly been wise to assign more space to _The Flower and the -Leaf_ than is assigned to Hobbes, Barrow, Butler, and Paley put -together. We have by no means exhausted the list of blunders and -absurdities to be found in this book; but we have, we fear, exhausted -the patience of our readers, and we must bring our examination of it to -a close. - -The melancholy thing about all this is the perfect impunity with which -such works as these can be given to the public. We have not the smallest -doubt that this book has been extolled to the skies in reviews which -have not detected a single error in it, and which have accepted its -generalizations and its criticisms with unquestioning credulity; and we -have as little doubt that those scholars who have discerned its defects -and absurdities have chosen, from motives possibly of kindness, possibly -of prudence, and possibly in mere contempt, to maintain silence about -them. Had it appeared twenty years ago, it would instantly have been -exposed and exploded, indeed no writer would have dared to insult -serious readers by such a publication. What every reader has a right to -demand from those who take upon themselves to instruct him are -sincerity, industry, and competence; and what no critic has a right to -condone is ostentatious indifference on the part of an author to the -responsibilities incurred by him in undertaking to teach the public. - -The sooner Mr. Gosse, and writers like Mr. Gosse, come to understand -that, however ingeniously expressed, reckless generalizations, random -assertions and the specious semblance of knowledge, erudition, and -authority may pass current for a time, but are certain at last to be -detected and exposed, the better for themselves and the better for their -readers. If, too, they wish justice to be done to the accomplishments -which they really possess, they will do well to remember what is implied -in the proverb _Ne sutor ultra crepidam_, and what the Germans mean by -VERMESSENHEIT. - - - - -LOG-ROLLING AND EDUCATION - - -We see no objection to Mutual Admiration Societies; they are -institutions which afford much pleasure, and can, as a rule, do little -harm. If vanity be a foible, it is a foible well worth cherishing, and -will be treated tenderly even by a philosopher. For, of all the -illusions which give a zest to life, the illusions created by this -flattering passion are the most delightful and inspiring. They are so -easily evoked; they respond with such impartial obsequiousness to the -call of the humblest magician. He has but to speak the word--and they -are made; to command--and they are created. A becomes what B and C -pronounce him to be, and what A and C have done for B, that will B and A -do in turn for C. It is a delicious occupation, no doubt, a feast for -each, in which no crude surfeit reigns, where, in Bacon’s phrase, -satisfaction and appetite are perpetually interchangeable; it is like -the herbage in the Paradise of the Spanish poet, “quanto mas se goza -mas renace,”--the more we enjoy it the more it grows. It is an old -game--“Vetus fabula per novos histriones”:-- - - “’Twas, ‘Sir, your law,’ and ‘Sir, your eloquence,’ - ‘Yours Cowper’s manner and yours Talbot’s sense’; - Thus we dispose of all poetic merit: - Yours Milton’s genius and mine Homer’s spirit. - Walk with respect behind, while we at ease - Weave laurel crowns and take what name we please. - ‘My dear Tibullus!’ if that will not do, - Let me be Horace, and be Ovid you.” - -And there is this advantage. If a sufficient number of magicians can, or -will, combine, these illusions may not only serve each magician for -life, but become, for a time, simply indistinguishable from realities. -Now, as we said before, we see no great harm in this. It is, to say the -least, a very amiable and brotherly employment; and were it quite -disinterested and honest, it would be closely allied with that virtue -which St. Paul exalts above all virtues. But everything has or ought to -have its limits. When Boswell attempted to defend certain Methodists who -had been expelled from the University of Oxford, Johnson retorted that -the University was perfectly right--“They were examined, and found to be -mighty ignorant fellows.” “But,” said Boswell, “was it not hard to expel -them? for I am told they were good beings.” “I believe,” replied the -sage, “that they might be good beings, but they were not fit to be in -the University of Oxford. A cow is a very good animal in the field, but -we turn her out of a garden.” - -To our certain knowledge many of those who owe their reputation to the -art to which we are referring are good beings, and we have little doubt -that most of those who are least scrupulous in practising it are good -beings also. Indeed it may be conceded at once that there is always a -strong presumption that members of Mutual Admiration Societies belong to -this class. On the reciprocity of essentially Christian virtues their -very existence depends. Whatever may be thought of their heads, their -hearts are pretty sure to be in the right place. They may, it is true, -act more in the spirit of the precept that we should do unto others as -we would they should do unto us than in that of the precept which -pronounces that it is more blessed to give than to receive. This, -however, is a trifle--one of those distinctions without differences -which are so common in Christian ethics. But for ourselves we must, as -we have said before, discriminate. To the cow in the field we have no -objection; it is of the cow in the garden that we complain. - -To drop metaphor: there are certain spheres of literary activity in -which the circulation of mutual puffery by this clique or by that -clique can do comparatively little harm to any one or to anything. -There are some subjects on which every reader is not only perfectly -competent to form his own judgment, but is pretty certain to do so. He -may amuse himself by seeing what the critics have to say, and he may be -induced by them in the first instance to turn to the book which is in -question, but he is practically unaffected by any opinions unless they -happen to coincide with his own. Such is the case with books of travel, -with novels, and, as a rule, with poetry. Here the arts of the -log-roller are as harmless as the frolics of whales with tubs. No one -takes what he sees seriously except those who are engaged in the -pastime. If Mr. A cannot give the general public what it appreciates, -nothing that Mr. B can say will cajole that public into believing that -it has what it has not. Mr. C and Mr. D may vociferate, till they are -hoarse, that “Mr. E is the subtlest and most discriminating critic that -the English-speaking world has ever known”; but if Mr. E’s eulogies of -Mr. C’s verses and of Mr. D’s novels are not corroborated by the general -reader’s independent judgment, the fame of Messrs. C and D will not -extend beyond their clique. If in poetry or prose fiction trash -succeeds, as it undoubtedly does, it succeeds not because of the skill -with which it has been puffed, though this may be a factor in its -success, but because it hits the popular taste. The public is seldom -deceived except when it wishes to be deceived. Log-rolling has much to -answer for: it loads our bookstalls with nonsense and rubbish, it -impedes the production of sound literature, it degrades the standard of -taste, it degrades the standard of aim and attainment, and indirectly it -is in every way mischievous to literature. But we very much question -whether in the case of publications which appeal directly to general -readers, and are within the scope of their judgments, the fortune of a -book is in any way affected by the arts of the log-roller. Amusement -mingled with impatience is probably the prevailing sentiment when Mr. C -and Mr. D are loud in each other’s praises. We remember the amœbæan -strains of Hayley and Miss Seward in Porson’s epigram:-- - - _Miss Seward_: Tuneful poet, Britain’s glory; - Mr. Hayley, that is you. - - _Mr. Hayley_: Ma’am, you carry all before you; - Trust me, Lichfield Swan, you do. - - * * * * * - - _Miss Seward_: Ode, didactic, epic, sonnet; - Mr. Hayley, you’re divine. - - _Mr. Hayley_: Ma’am, I’ll take my oath upon it, - You yourself are all the nine. - -Or, in a less good-natured mood, we may perhaps recall with a certain -satisfaction Pope’s cruel but pathetic picture of the minor log-rollers -of his day:-- - - Next plunged a feeble but a desperate pack, - With each a sickly brother at his back. - Sons of a day! just buoyant on the flood, - Then numbered with the puppies in the mud. - -But there are certain subjects and certain spheres in which the arts of -the log-roller, if equally contemptible, are not quite so harmless. - -During the last fifteen years the Press has been teeming with books -designed to circulate among readers who are seriously interested in -_belles lettres_ and criticism. Some of them have appeared as volumes in -a series, some as independent monographs and manuals, and some in the -humbler forms of editorial introductions and notes. Among them may be -found works of really distinguished scholars, and works in every way -worthy of such scholars; and it is no doubt works like these which have -given credit and authority generally to publications of this kind. The -popularity of these productions has been extraordinary, and their -manufacture has become one of the most lucrative of hackney employments. -Nor is this all. Their professed purpose is the dissemination of serious -instruction, is to become text-books in literary history and in literary -criticism; and, as text-books on those subjects, they have made their -way, or are making their way, not merely into our public libraries, but -also into the libraries of nearly every educational institute in -England. Indeed it would not be too much to say that if, among general -readers, about eighty in every hundred derive almost all they know about -English literature, both historically and critically, from these -volumes, in our schools and colleges, the average number of those whose -studies are and ought to be independent of them is yearly diminishing. -It is of these text-books and of the responsibilities incurred by those -who produce and circulate them that we wish to speak. - -We have already commented on the distinction which must be drawn between -what is best and what is inferior in the publications to which we have -been referring; and, in truth, the difference is one not of degree but -in kind. As our desire is, in Swift’s phrase, to lash the vice but spare -the name, we shall not specify the works which we have selected as -typical of log-rolling in relation to education. Till we saw them we had -no conception of the lengths to which this sort of thing has run. -Ostensibly the works before us are critical and biographical monographs -designed to become text-books for students of English literature; they -may be more correctly described as complete epitomes of the art of -puffery. The writers begin by assuming that the objects of their -ludicrous adulation--who are, like themselves, contributors of the -average order to current periodicals, and the authors of monographs -similar to their own--are by general consent critics of classical -authority. The most deferential references are made to them in almost -every page. Now it is “Goethe and Mr. So-and-so have observed,” or -“Coleridge has remarked, but Mr. So-and-so is inclined to think,” etc. -Sometimes it assumes the form of a sort of awful reverence, as “Mr. -So-and-so is a little uncertain, but surely he more than hints,” or “Mr. -So-and-so, as we all know, was once of opinion, though he has recently -found reason to alter,” etc. We saw not long ago in the notes to a -certain edition of a classical author: “Socrates and Mr. X---- _of -Trinity_ have observed,” etc. Occasionally this homage expresses -itself--and this is more serious--in the form of long extracts from Mr. -So-and-so’s writings. Nothing is more common in works like these than to -find critics and writers of classical authority either completely -ignored, or, if cited at all, cited only in the connection which we have -indicated. That the gentlemen who are the subjects of this grotesque -flattery either have paid or will pay their friends in kind may, of -course, be taken for granted. Thus one factitious reputation builds up -another, and one bad book ushers in twenty which are worse. - -Macaulay has an amusing passage in which he has collected the names of -those who, according to Horace Walpole, were “the first writers” in -England in 1753. It might have been expected that Hume, Fielding, Dr. -Johnson, Richardson, Smollett, Collins, and Gray would at least have had -a place among them. Not at all. They were Lord Bath, Mr. W. Whithed, Sir -Charles Williams, Mr. Soame Jenyngs, Mr. Cambridge, and Mr. Coventry; in -other words, a clique of politicians and men of fashion of the very -titles of whose writings even a reader tolerably well read in the -literature of those times might excusably be ignorant. We are not -exaggerating when we say that this system of strenuous and well-directed -mutual puffery is, in our own time, leading to similarly perverted -conceptions about the relative position of those who owe their celebrity -to these ignoble arts and those on whose fame Time’s test has set its -seal, not merely on the part of the general public, but on the part of -those who are responsible for the books introduced into schools and -educational institutes. We will give an illustration. - -At a meeting held not long ago, for the purpose of prescribing books for -a Reading Society, the choice lay between some of Johnson’s Lives, -Select Essays by Sainte Beuve, and Select Essays by Matthew Arnold on -the one hand, and on the other certain books typical of the literature -of which we have been speaking. The debate which ensued was very -amusing. A member of the committee, a gentleman of conservative temper, -strongly urged the claims of Johnson, Sainte Beuve, and Arnold, on the -ground that it was the duty of the Society to encourage the study of -what was excellent and of classical quality, especially in criticism; -that it was not merely the information contained in a book which had to -be considered, but the style, the tone, the touch; that the monographs -proposed as an alternative could scarcely be regarded as of the first -order, either in expression or in matter, for he had observed, though he -had only glanced at them, several solecisms in grammar and several -inaccuracies of statement; and he concluded by adding that other -writings of these particular authors with which he happened to be more -familiar had not prejudiced him in their favour. Upon that, another -member of the council, who had been busily conning the Press notices -inserted in the monographs in question, pleaded their claim to -preference. “Dr. Johnson,” he remarked, “was no doubt a great man in his -day, but his day had long been over; no one read him now. Sainte Beuve -and Matthew Arnold might be classical and all that, but they were not up -to date.” He could not talk as an expert on literary matters, and -therefore he would not contradict what the former speaker had said, -“but there could be no doubt that Messrs. So-and-so,” the authors of the -monographs in question, “were very big men--bigger men, I should think -(glancing at the Press notices in his hand), than Sainte Beuve and -Matthew Arnold. At any rate, everybody has heard of them; and,” he -continued, “listen to this.” He then proceeded to read out some of the -notices, adding that it was difficult, if he might say so without -offence, to reconcile what his friend, the preceding speaker, had said -with what was said in these notices. He was a little staggered--for, -though a simple, he was a shrewd man--when the very remarkable -similarity between Mr. A’s eulogies of Mr. B and Mr. B’s eulogies of Mr. -A was pointed out to him, and when, in reference to anonymous testimony, -he was reminded that one voice may have many echoes. It was generally -felt, more especially as Mr. A or Mr. B had, we believe, more than one -acquaintance among the committee, that the debate was taking rather an -embarrassing turn. The question was then put to the vote, and the -monographs were carried by a majority of three to one. - -What occurred at this meeting is occurring every day, variously -modified, wherever the choice of books is in question, whether in public -libraries or in educational institutions. A literature, the sole -credentials of which are derived from those who produce and circulate -it, is gradually superseding that of our classics. We seem in truth to -be losing all sense of the essential distinction between the writings of -the average man of letters and those of the masters. - - - - -OUR LITERARY GUIDES - -III. BOOKS WORTH READING[20] - -[Footnote 20: _Books Worth Reading._ A Plea for the Best and an Essay -towards Selection, with Short Introductions. By Frank W. Raffety, -London.] - - -Were it not for its melancholy significance, this would be one of the -most amusing books which it has ever been our fortune to meet with. Of -Mr. Frank W. Raffety we have not the honour to know anything, except -what we have gathered from this little volume and from its title-page. -But he must be a singularly interesting gentleman. His enthusiasm for -books, his portentous ignorance of them; his strenuous desire to improve -the popular taste by pleading for the best, his instinctive tendency to -make in all cases for the worst; his sublime intolerance of everything -in literature which falls short of excellence, his more than sublime -indifference to the commonest rules of grammar and syntax in expressing -that intolerance; the _naïveté_, the frankness, the recklessness with -which he displays his incompetence for the task which he has -undertaken--in these qualifications and accomplishments Mr. Raffety is -not perhaps alone, but he has certainly no superior. - -Mr. Raffety aspires to guide his readers through the chief literatures -of the world. Now the task of a reviewer, who has a conscience, is not -always a cheerful one, and we confess that, when we had generally -surveyed Mr. Raffety’s work, we resolved to amuse ourselves by trying to -discover of which of the literatures, to which Mr. Raffety constitutes -himself a guide, Mr. Raffety is probably most ignorant. It is a nice -point. Let our readers judge. We will begin with Mr. Raffety and the -Classics. Of Theognis, the most voluminous of the Greek Gnomic poets, it -is said that “only a few sentences”--Mr. Raffety is presumably under the -impression that Theognis wrote in prose--“quoted in the works of Plato -and others survive.” “The Greek Anthology,” we are astounded to learn, -“is by Lord Neaves” and “is one of the best volumes in the A.C.E.R. -series.” What Mr. Raffety no doubt means is, that Lord Neaves is the -author of a monograph on the Greek anthology, as he certainly was. With -regard to Herodotus, Mr. Raffety has evidently got some information not -generally accessible. His _History_, we are told, “is a great prose -epic.... The second book is of the most interest. In other works are the -histories of Crœsus, Cyrus,” etc. It would be interesting to know -what other works besides his _History_ Herodotus has left. Of the -_Prometheus Bound_ of Æschylus Mr. Raffety gives the following -interesting account. It contains, he says, “the story of Prometheus and -his defiance of Jupiter, who condemned him to be bound to a rock, where -he died rather than yield.” We exhort Mr. Raffety, before his work -passes into a second edition, to consult his Classical Dictionary. - -Of the translations recommended by Mr. Raffety we should very much like -to get a sight of the translation of Pindar by Calverley, of the joint -translation of the same classic by Messrs. E. Myers and A. Lang, and of -the joint translation of Thucydides “by Jowett and Rev. H. Dale, 2 -vols.” Of Herodotus, of Æschylus, of Sophocles, of Pindar, of Polybius, -of Demosthenes, what are, by general consent, esteemed the best -translations are not so much as mentioned. Latin literature fares even -worse in the hands of our guide. Mr. Raffety appears to know no more -about Catullus than that he was a writer of epigrams. Such trifles as -the _Attis_, the _Peleus and Thetis_, the Julia and Manlius marriage -song, the _Coma Berenices_, the love lyrics and threnodies he does not -condescend to notice. In “guiding” his readers to translations of -Lucretius and Juvenal, Munro’s version of the first in prose and -Gifford’s version of the second in verse--which Conington pronounced to -be the best version of any Roman classic in our language--are not so -much as referred to. Nor, again, in the case of Plautus and Terence, -are the excellent versions of Thornton and Coleman noticed. Tacitus, who -is oddly described as “the foremost man of the day,” an estimate which -might have pleased but which would certainly have surprised him, -chronicled, we are told, “the foundation of the Christian religion.” Mr. -Raffety’s assurance on this point will probably disappoint inquisitive -readers. Equally surprising are the portions of the work dealing with -the modern literatures. In the course of these we learn that “the -_Nibelungen Lied_ is the oldest drama in Europe”; that the -_Areopagitica_ and the _Defence of the People of England_ are Milton’s -best prose writings--Mr. Raffety apparently not being aware that the -second work is in Latin, and that if he means the first _Defence_, it is -anything but one of the best of Milton’s writings. We are also informed -that Dryden was most valuable as a translator from the Greek and Latin; -Dryden’s versions from the Greek begin and end with paraphrases of four -Idylls of Theocritus, the first book of the _Iliad_ and the parting of -Hector and Andromache from the sixth, and are notoriously the very worst -things he ever did. - -Sometimes Mr. Raffety fairly takes our breath away, as when he informs -us that Gray’s tomb can be seen in the little churchyard of Stoke Pogis -“with the _Elegy_ written upon it.” Can Mr. Raffety be acquainted with -the length of the _Elegy_ and with the proportions of a tombstone? -Chaucer, we are informed, wrote some poems in Italian. We should very -much like to see them, and so probably would Professor Skeat, for they -appear to have escaped the notice of all Chaucer’s editors. Swift’s -_Tale of a Tub_ was written, we are told, “against the teaching of -Hobbes!” - -It is indeed impossible to open this book anywhere without alighting on -some most discreditable blunder or absurdity. Thus we are informed that -Macaulay’s essay on Burleigh treats of the time of James I.--Burleigh, -as we need hardly say, dying nearly five years before James came to the -throne, and Macaulay’s essay having no reference at all to James I.’s -time. “There is,” says Mr. Raffety, “no more stirring lyric than _The -Cotter’s Saturday Night_,” a remark which shows that Mr. Raffety does -not know what a lyric poem is. But to look for blunders in Mr. Raffety’s -pages would be to look for leaves in a summer forest. His critical -remarks and biographical notes are truly delightful. We wish we had -space to quote some of them. Of their general quality the following -profound remark is a fair specimen:--“Dante requires study, and an -endeavour after appreciation.” Mr. Raffety is always anxious to conduct -his readers by short cuts and to save them trouble. Macaulay’s _Essays_, -for example, should be read before his _History_; “they will be more -easily tackled,” he says, “than the _History_ in the first instance.” -But on the subject of Gibbon Mr. Raffety is adamant, being fully of the -late Professor Freeman’s opinion--“Whatever else is read, Gibbon must be -read.” How Gibbon is to be read, or why Gibbon is to be read, or in what -edition he should be read, Mr. Raffety does not explain. - -Now, what possible end can be served by books like these, except to -misguide and misinform? Here is a writer, who certainly leaves us with -the impression that he cannot read the Greek and Latin classics in the -original, setting up as a director of classical study, and pronouncing -_ex cathedrâ_ on the merits of translations of these classics. His -knowledge of the modern literature is, as is abundantly manifest, though -we have neither space nor patience to illustrate, equally insufficient -and unsubstantial, and yet he undertakes to initiate and guide the -inexperienced in these studies. This book is presented to the public in -a most attractive form, being excellently printed on excellent paper, -and will naturally be taken seriously by those to whom it appeals. It is -for this reason that we also have felt it our duty to take it seriously. -And, as we believe that every bad book stands in the way of a good one, -we can promise Mr. Raffety, and writers like Mr. Raffety, that we shall -continue to take them seriously. - - - - -THE NEW CRITICISM[21] - -[Footnote 21: _Retrospective Reviews._ A Literary Log. By Richard Le -Gallienne. 2 vols.] - - -Nearly two thousand years ago Horace observed that, though every calling -presupposed some qualification in those who followed it, and a man who -knew nothing of marine affairs would not undertake to manage a ship, or -a man who knew nothing of drugs to compound prescriptions, yet everybody -fancied himself competent to commence poet. Qualified or unqualified, at -it we all go, he complains, and scribble verses. But times have changed, -and those who in Horace’s day were the pests of poetry, with which they -could amuse themselves without mischief, have now become the pests of -another kind of literature in which their diversions are not quite so -harmless. Where the poetaster once stood the criticaster now stands. The -transformation of the one pest into the other, where they do not, as -they often do, become both, is easily accounted for, and as Dr. Johnson -has so excellently explained it, we cannot do better than transcribe -his words. “Criticism,” says the Doctor, “is a study by which men grow -important and formidable at a very small expense. The power of invention -has been conferred by nature upon few, and the labour of learning those -sciences which may by mere labour be attained is too great to be -willingly endured; but every man can exert such judgment as he has upon -the works of others, and he whom nature has made weak and idleness keeps -ignorant may yet support his vanity by the name of critic.” But -criticasters and their patrons have improved on this--for “he whom -nature has made weak and idleness keeps ignorant” may, in our time, not -merely support his vanity, but support himself. - -Till we inspected the volumes before us, we had really no conception of -the pass to which things have now come in so-called criticism. The -writer sits in judgment on most of the authors who have, during recent -years, been before the public. He passes sentence not merely on current -novelists, poets, and essayists, but on some of our classics, and on -books like the late Mr. Pater’s _Lectures on Plato and Platonism_ and -Dr. Wharton’s edition of _Sappho_. To any acquaintance with the -principles of criticism, to any conception of criticism in relation to -principles, to any learning, to any scholarship, to any knowledge of the -history of literature and of the masterpieces of literature, either in -our own language or in other languages, he has not the smallest -pretension. Nor does he allow this to be gathered simply from the work -itself, where it is, needless to say, abundantly apparent, but with a -_naïveté_ and impudence which are at once ludicrous and exasperating he -glories in his ignorance. Literature and its interpretation are to him -what the Bible and its interpretation were to the ranting sectaries of -Dryden’s satire. In its explanation knowledge and learning were folly, -nothing was needed but “grace.” - - “No measure ta’en from knowledge, all from grace, - Study and pains were now no more their care, - Texts were explained by fasting and by prayer.” - -So to our critic knowledge and learning are of equal unimportance--nay, -equally contemptible--and all that is needed to take the measure of -Plato and Wordsworth is, in his own words, “the capacity for -appreciation.” With this very slender outfit he sits down to the work of -criticism, to enlighten the world _de omni scibili_ in literature, from -the lyrics of _Sappho_, “the singer, a single petal of whose rose is -more than the whole rose-garden of later women singers,” to “the -statesmanlike reach and grasp” of Mr. E. Gosse’s essays. - -To discuss seriously the opinions or impressions of a writer of this -kind would be as absurd as to attempt to fight gnats with a sword, and -we shall merely content ourselves with transcribing, without comment, a -few of the aphorisms with which these volumes are studded. “Criticism is -the art of praise.” “Shakespeare is the greatest English poet, not -because he created Hamlet and Lear, but because he could write that -speech about Perdita’s flowers and Claudio’s speech on death in _Measure -for Measure_.” “The perfection of prose is the essay, of poetry the -lyric, and the most beautiful book is that which contains the most -beautiful words.” These specimens will probably suffice. Mr. Le -Gallienne is also of opinion that “culture is mainly a matter of -temperament”--that “a man is born cultured,” that mere education and -study are to such a one not simply superfluities, but impertinences. -“What matters it,” he eloquently asks, “that one does not remember or -even has never read great writers? Our one concern is to possess an -organization open to great and refined impressions.” A paltry scholar, -for example, may be able to construe Sappho, but it is only “an -organization open to great and refined impressions” which can discern -(in a crib) “the pathos of eternity in some twenty words” of “this -passionate singer of Lesbos.” Plato may be studied by poor pedants, but -to an organization of this kind the binding of a volume is sufficient -enlightenment; “to merely hold in the hand and turn over its pages is a -counsel in style,” for do not “the temperate beauty, the dry beauty -beloved of Plato, find expression in the sweet and stately volume -itself” [he is “reviewing” the late Mr. Pater’s lectures on Plato], -“with its smooth night-blue binding, its rose-leaf yellow pages, its -soft and yet grave type”? The value of Mr. Le Gallienne’s judgments, of -his praise, and of his censure, which, ludicrous to relate, are quoted -by some publishers as recommendations, or “opinions of the press,” may -be estimated by these dicta, and by this theory of a critical education. - -Macaulay somewhere speaks of a certain nondescript broth which, in some -Continental inns, was kept constantly boiling, and copiously poured, -without distinction, on every dish as it came up to table. The writer of -these essays appears, metaphorically speaking, to be provided with a -similar abomination. Whatever be his theme, poem, essay, novel, picture, -he contrives to serve it up with the same condiment, a sickly and -nauseous compound of preciosity and sentimentalism. - -The melancholy thing about all this is the profound unconsciousness on -the part of the author of these volumes that he is exciting ridicule; -that he is, in Shakespeare’s phrase, making himself a motley to the -view. But there are considerations more melancholy still. We should not -have noticed these volumes had they not been representative and typical -of a school of so-called critics which is becoming more and more -prominent. Incredible as it may seem, there are certain sections of -literary society and of the general public which take Mr. Le Gallienne -and his dicta quite seriously, and to which the prodigious nonsense in -these volumes does not present itself as absurdity, but as the articles -of a creed. These essays have, moreover, appeared in publications the -names of some of which carry authority. It is, therefore, high time that -some stand should be made, some protest entered against writings which -cannot fail to corrupt popular taste and to degrade the standard of -popular literature. Of one thing we are very certain, that no -self-respecting literary journal which undertook to review these volumes -could allow them to pass without denunciation. - -Of Mr. Le Gallienne we know nothing personally. He is, if we are rightly -informed, still a young man, and we would in all kindness exhort him to -turn the abilities which he undoubtedly possesses to better account. -There is much in these essays which shows that he was intended for -something better than to further the decadence. If, instead of sneering -at scholars, affecting to despise learning and study, indulging in silly -paradoxes, tinsel epigrams, and absurd generalisations, he would read -and think, and endeavour to do justice to himself and to his -opportunities, he might, we make no doubt, obtain an honourable -reputation. There is much which is attractive in his work, and in the -personality reflected in it. He is not a charlatan, for though he is -ignorant, he is honest. Genial and sympathetic, he has much real -critical insight, and, in going through his volumes, we have noted many -remarks which were both sound and fine. At its best his style is -excellent,--clear, lively, and engaging. Let him cease to play the -buffoon, which can only end in his gaining the applause of mere fools -and the contempt of every one else. - - - - -THE GENTLE ART OF SELF-ADVERTISEMENT - - -The illustrious Barnum once observed that, if a man’s capital consisted -of a shilling, one penny of that shilling should be spent in purchasing -something, and the remaining eleven-pence should be invested in -advertising what was purchased. There was, perhaps, a touch of -exaggeration in that great man’s remark, but it was founded on a -profound knowledge both of human nature and of the world. Intrinsically -nothing is valuable; things are what we make or imagine them. Even the -diamond, as a costly commodity, exists on suffrage. If a man cannot -persuade his fellow-creatures that he has genius, talent, learning, -“’twere all alike as if he had them not.” What Persius asks with a -sneer, “Scire tuum nihil est, nisi te scire hoc sciat alter?”--is your -knowledge nothing, unless some one else know that you are knowing?--a -wiser man would ask in all seriousness. Shakespeare was never nearer the -truth than when he wrote-- - - “No man is the lord of anything, - Though in and of him there be much consisting, - Till he communicates his parts to others; - Nor doth he of himself know them for aught, - Till he behold them formed in the applause - Where they are extended.” - -And never was a man more mistaken than the old preacher who said to his -congregation, “If you have a talent in your napkin, you should take care -not to hide it; but if you have no talent, but only a napkin, you should -not so flourish your napkin as to create the impression that it is full -of talents.” Why, this is just what nine men in ten who court fame have -to do. Nature is kind, but seldom profuse. If she really endows a man -with what, if trumpeted, would make him famous, the odds are she couples -with her gifts pride, modesty, or self-respect, which, to say the least, -heavily handicap him in the race for reputation. When she does not endow -with the reality, she compensates by bestowing the power of acquiring -the credit for it. She is, as a rule, much too thrifty to heap on the -same man the keen pleasures of genuine enthusiasm and the sweets of -popular applause. An impartial mother, she loves all her children, and -divides her favours equally between shams and true men. This Churchill -marks in his brutal way; speaking of a certain contemporary, he -describes him as endowed with - - “That low cunning which in fools supplies, - And amply too, the place of being wise, - Which Nature, kind, indulgent parent, gave - To qualify the blockhead for a knave.” - -But our business is not with knaves and blockheads, but with “gentler -cattle,” and the quotation demands an apology. - -The importance of the art of self-advertisement, as must be abundantly -clear from the preceding remarks, can scarcely be overestimated. Though -it is perhaps still in its infancy, its progress during the last few -years has been most encouraging. The old coarse methods so familiar to -us in the past, and still successfully practised in the present--we mean -mutual admiration cliques, log-rolling, and what is vulgarly known as -“pulling the strings”--have been greatly improved upon and refined. -Bentley’s famous remark when, explaining how it was that he took to -commentating, he said, that as he despaired of standing on his own legs -in the Temple of Fame, he got on to the shoulders of the Ancients, -appears to have suggested one of the most ingenious of modern -expedients. This consists of “getting up” a memorial to some -distinguished man--a statue, it may be, or modest bust. Some labour, -some ability, and some learning are involved in the more cumbrous device -of Bentley. But here all is simple and very easy. You are on the -shoulders of your great man at a bound, and stand side by side with him -in a trice. There is nothing which redounds to his credit which does -not redound to your own. As the Red Indian is under the impression that -in possessing himself of a scalp he possesses himself of the virtues -belonging to the former owner of the scalp, so this tribute of -enthusiastic admiration quietly assumes, without trouble, all that -enthusiastic admiration naturally implies. Is the object of your homage -a poet, a critic, a scholar, the very fact that you pay him homage is, -in itself, testimony of your own right to one or other of these -honourable titles. If, moreover it should happen that you know very -little about the writings of the author whom you have elected to honour, -this is of no consequence; for of all the disguises which ignorance can -assume, “enthusiasm” is the most effective. Nor are these the only -advantages of this particular method of getting reputation. The -collection of subscriptions and the formation of a committee bring you -into contact, or may, if judiciously managed, bring you into contact -with all your distinguished contemporaries; and we know what the proverb -says--“Noscitur a sociis”--a man is what his companions are. - -But nothing is more effectual, for purposes of self-advertisement, than -a device which has lately been practised with signal success. This -consists of scraping up an acquaintance with some person, whose name is -not unknown to the public,--even a second-rate novelist will do--and -waiting till he dies. As there is a tide in the affairs of men, so, as -we all know, there is a moment at the demise of literary men when the -voracity of public curiosity knows neither distinction nor satiety. This -is the moment for the self-advertiser to nick; this is the time for him -to float, with his defunct friend, on the lips of men. He will find -readers for anything he may choose to print--that letter with its -exquisite compliments, that conversation in which his poor attainments -were so generously over-estimated, or the importance of his slight -literary services so much exaggerated. Of course, the value of such -advertisements will be in proportion to the eminence of the subject of -the reminiscences--and happy, thrice happy, those who were able to turn -men like Darwin, Tennyson, and Browning to this account; their -reputation may be regarded as made. But it is not always necessary to -wait till great men die, though it is an experiment too bold and -perilous for most aspirants to make this sort of capital out of them -while they are still alive. Still _audentes fortuna juvat_, and it has -been done. A certain minor poet published in an American magazine, not -many years ago, an article entitled “A Day with Lord Tennyson,” in which -he represented the Laureate as turning the conversation on his (the -minor bard’s) poetry. We are told how the great man, after fervently -reiterating a stanza of that minor bard which pleased him, requested his -son to take it down in writing; how that son, though the day was cold -and blowy, took it down; how Tennyson grasped, at parting, his brother -poet’s hand, and begged in transport that he would “come again and come -often.” He came, we believe, no more. But what of that? He had -accomplished a feat so simple and yet so original that it may fairly be -questioned whether what Mr. Burnum used to call his masterpiece was in -any way comparable to it. To interview a great man, even on an -assumption of equality, is, as we all know, a comparatively easy matter, -but to turn the conversation of the great man into a seasonable puff of -yourself requires a combination of qualities not often united in a -single person. The worst of feats like these is that they must have a -tendency to make great men a little shy of encouraging the acquaintance -of those to whom they can be so useful. But simplicity, as Thucydides -remarks, is one of the chief ingredients of greatness, and it is a -quality very difficult to wear out. - -If Tennyson’s interviewer has ever had a rival in the important art -which has been discussed--for the benefit of youthful ambition--in this -article, we are inclined to think that that rival was the Rev. Aris -Willmott. This now almost forgotten writer was a very voluminous author -both in verse and prose; but his merits were not appreciated by an -ungrateful public so much as they ought to have been. He resorted, -therefore, to the following exquisitely ingenious device. He published -a handsome volume, which is now before us, entitled _Gems from English -Literature_, thus arranged: Bacon, Rev. Aris Willmott, Jeremy Taylor, -Rev. Aris Willmott, Barrow, Rev. Aris Willmott, sandwiching himself -regularly through the prose classics, and in the same way through the -poets--Shakespeare, Rev. Aris Willmott, Milton, Rev. Aris, etc. As -birthday books, press notices, interviews at home, portraits of -distinguished authors in their studies, and the like are getting a -little stale, we cordially recommend this rev. gentleman’s expedient--it -may be judiciously modified--to the notice of all who are unable to -distinguish fame from notoriety. - - - - -R. L. STEVENSON’S LETTERS[22] - -[Footnote 22: _The Letters of Robert Louis Stevenson to his Family and -Friends._ Selected and Edited with Notes and Introduction by Sidney -Colvin. 2 vols.] - - -The late Robert Louis Stevenson is a writer who has every title to -commiseration, and the appearance of the volumes before us may be said -to mark the climax of his misfortunes. Diseased and sickly from his -birth, with his life frequently hanging on a thread, he probably never -knew the sensation of perfect health. During the impressionable years of -early youth his surroundings appear to have been most uncongenial; he -was forced into a profession for which he had no taste and no aptitude. -In constant straits for money, at times he was miserably poor; his -apprenticeship to letters was long and arduous, for he was not one of -Nature’s favourites, and attained what he did attain by unsparing and -severe labour. His wandering and restless life, bringing him as it did -into contact with all phases of humanity and with all parts of the -world, was of course in many respects favourable to his work, but it -had at the same time serious disadvantages. It gave him little time for -reflection; it imported a certain feverishness into his energy, and -rendered that concentration and steadiness, without which no really -great work can be accomplished, impossible. That in these circumstances -Stevenson should have produced so much, and so much which is of a high -order of merit, is most creditable to him, and not a little surprising. -“He stands,” says his friend Professor Colvin, “as the writer who in the -last quarter of the nineteenth century has handled with the most of -freshness and inspiriting power the widest range of established literary -forms--the moral, critical and personal essay, travels sentimental and -other, parables and tales of mystery, boys’ stories of adventure, -memoirs; nor let lyrical and meditative verse both English and Scottish, -and especially nursery verse, a new vein for genius to work in, be -forgotten.” With some reservation this may be conceded, and this is as -far as eulogy can legitimately be stretched. - -But, unhappily, some of Stevenson’s admirers have made themselves and -their idol ridiculous, by raising him to a position his claims to which -are preposterous. If he be measured with his contemporaries the -comparison will generally be in his favour--he certainly did best what -hundreds can do well. His essays have distinction and excellence; his -novels, travels, and short tales, though scarcely entitled to the praise -of originality, as they strike no new notes and are mere variants of the -work of Scott, Kingston, Ballantyne, De Quincey and Poe, bear the -impress of genius as distinguished from mere talent, and reflect a very -charming personality; his verse, too, is pleasing and skilful. But when -we are told that he will stand the third in a trio with Burns and Scott, -and when we have to listen to serious appeals to Edinburgh to raise a -statue to him beside the author of _Marmion_ and the Waverley Novels, -all who truly appreciate his work may well tremble for the reaction -which is certain to succeed such extravagant overestimation. The truth -is that poor Stevenson, himself one of the simplest, sincerest and most -modest of men, got involved with a clique who may be described as -manufacturers of factitious reputations,--the circulators of a false -currency in criticism. In these days of appeals to the masses it is as -easy to write up the sort of works which are addressed to them--popular -essays, tales and novels--as it is to write up the commodities of quack -doctors and the shares of bogus companies. The production of popular -literature is now a trade, and in some cases this kind of puffery is the -work of deliberate fraud, originating from various motives. In many -cases it simply springs from ignorance and critical incompetence, -current criticism being, to a considerable extent, in the hands of very -young men who, having neither the requisite knowledge nor the proper -training, are unable to judge a writer comparatively. In other cases it -is to be attributed to good nature and the tendency in the genial -appreciation of real merit to indulge in extravagant expression. But the -result is the same. A reputation, so grotesquely out of proportion to -what is really merited that sober people are inclined to suspect that -all is imposture, is gradually inflated. Eulogy kindles eulogy; -hyperbole is heaped on hyperbole; a ludicrous importance is attached to -every trifle which falls, or which ever has fallen, from this -Press-created Fetish. While he is alive he is encouraged, or rather -importuned, to force his power of production to keep pace with the -demand for everything bearing his signature; when he is dead the very -refuse of his study finds eager publishers. - -This kind of thing has obviously many advantages, which are by no means -confined to the object of the idolatry itself. In the first place it -means business; it is the creation of a goose which can lay golden eggs, -and it is, in the second place, a creation which reflects no little -glory on the creators. Is it nothing to be the satellites of so radiant -a luminary? When the familiar correspondence of the great man is -printed, will not what he was pleased to say, with all the friendly -license of private intercourse, in the way of compliment and eulogy, be -proclaimed from the house-tops? - -All this is exactly what has happened in the case of poor Stevenson. No -man ever took more justly his own measure, or would have been more -annoyed at the preposterous eulogies of which he has been made the -subject, on the part of interested or ill-judging friends. We wonder -what he would himself have said, could he have seen the letters before -us described, as they were described in one of the current Reviews, as -“the most exhaustive and distinguished literary correspondence which -England has ever seen.” We entirely absolve Professor Colvin from any -suspicion of being actuated by unworthy motives in publishing them. It -is abundantly clear that he has not published them to puff himself, that -his labour has been a labour of love, and that he believed himself to be -piously fulfilling a duty to his friend. But they ought never to have -been given to the world. More than two-thirds have nothing whatever to -justify their appearance in print, and merely show, what will surprise -those who knew Stevenson by his literary writings, how vapid, vulgar and -commonplace he could be. In their slangy familiarity and careless -spontaneity they remind us of Byron’s, but what a contrast do these -trivial and too often insipid tattlings present to Byron’s brilliance -and point, his wit, his piquancy, his insight into life and men! Only -here and there, in a touch of description, or in a casual reflection, do -we find anything to distinguish them from the myriads of letters which -are interchanged between young men every day in the year. Their one -attraction lies in the glimpses they reveal of Stevenson’s own charming -personality, his kindliness, his sympathy, his great modesty, his -manliness, his transparent truthfulness and honesty. It is amusing to -watch him with one of his correspondents who was evidently endeavouring -to establish a mutual exchange of flattery. The urbane skill with which -this gentleman’s persistently fulsome compliments are either fenced or -waived aside, the ironical delicacy with which, when a return is -extorted, they are repaid, in a measure strictly adjusted to desert and -yet certain not to disappoint expectant vanity, are quite exquisite. -“The suns go swiftly out,” he writes to him, referring to the death of -Tennyson and Browning and others, “and I see no suns to follow, nothing -but a universal twilight of the demi-divinities, with parties like you -and me beating on toy drums, and playing on penny whistles about -glow-worms.” The indignant letter to the _New York Tribune_, in defence -of James Payn, who had been accused of plagiarising from one of -Stevenson’s fictions, well deserves placing on permanent record, as an -illustration of his chivalrous loyalty to his friends. - -We are sorry, we repeat, that these letters have been given to the -world. So far as Stevenson’s reputation is concerned they can only -detract from it. When they illustrate him on his best side they merely -emphasise what his works illustrate so abundantly that further -illustration is a mere work of supererogation. When they present him, as -for the most part they do, in dishabille, they exhibit him very greatly -to his disadvantage. If Professor Colvin had printed about one-third of -them, and retained his excellent elucidatory introductions, which form -practically a biography of Stevenson, he would have produced a work for -which all admirers of that most pleasing writer would have thanked him. -As it is, he has been guilty, in our opinion, of a grave error of -judgment. - - - - -LITERARY ICONOCLASM[23] - -[Footnote 23: _The Authorship of the Kingis Quair._ A New Criticism by -J. T. T. Brown.] - - -Among the worthies of the fifteenth century there is no more interesting -and picturesque figure than the Poet-King of Scotland, James I. Long -before the poem on which his fame rests was given to the world, -tradition had assigned him a high place among native makers, and his -countrymen had been proud to add to the names of Dunbar and Douglas, of -Henryson and Lyndsay, the name of the best of their kings. Great was -their joy, therefore, when, in 1783, William Tytler gave public proof -that the good King’s title to the laurel was no mere title by courtesy, -but that he had been the author of a poem which could fairly be regarded -as one of the gems of Scottish literature. There cannot, in truth, be -two opinions about the _Kingis Quair_. It is a poem of singular charm -and beauty, and, though it is modelled closely on certain of Chaucer’s -minor poems, and is in other respects largely indebted to them, it is -no servile imitation; it bears the impress of original genius, not so -much in details and incident as in tone, colour, and touch; it is a -brilliant and most memorable achievement, and Rossetti hardly -exaggerates when he describes it as - - “More sweet than ever a poet’s heart - Gave yet to the English tongue.” - -For more than a hundred years it has been the delight of all who care -for the poetry of the past, and the story it tells, and tells so -pathetically, is now among the “consecrated legends” which every one -cherishes. “The best poet among kings, and the best king among poets,” -the name of the author of the _Kingis Quair_ heads the list of royal -authors. The stanza which he employed, though invented or adopted by -Chaucer, takes its title from the King, and “the rime royal” will be in -perpetual evidence of his services to poetry, as the University of St. -Andrews will be of his services to learning and education. No generation -has passed, from Sir Walter Scott to Mrs. Browning, and from Mrs. -Browning to Gabriel Rossetti, which has not been lavish of honour and -homage to him. - -But, it seems, we have all been under a delusion. Our simple ancestors -believed that James was the author of _Peebles to the Play_ and -_Christ’s Kirk on the Green_; but _Peebles to the Play_ and _Christ’s -Kirk on the Green_ “are now”--Mr. J. T. T. Brown is -speaking--“relegated to the anonymous poetry of the sixteenth century, -inexorably deposed by the internal evidence”; and Mr. Brown aspires to -send the _Kingis Quair_ the same way. His fell purpose is “to deprive -James of his singing garment, and reduce him to the humbler rank of a -King of Scots.” There is something almost terrible in the exultation -with which Mr. Brown assumes that--the King’s claim to every other poem -attributed to him having been completely demolished--it only remains to -deprive him of the _Kingis Quair_, to make his poetical bankruptcy -complete. And to the demolition of the King’s claim to the “Quair” Mr. -Brown ruthlessly proceeds. Now we have no intention of entering into the -question of the authenticity of the minor poems to which Mr. Brown -refers; but we shall certainly break a lance with this destructive -critic in defence of James’s claim to the _Kingis Quair_. - -Mr. Brown contends, first, that there is no satisfactory external -evidence in favour of the King’s authorship of the poem; and, secondly, -that the internal evidence is almost conclusive against him. What are -the facts? In the Bodleian Library is a MS. the date of which is -uncertain, but it cannot be assigned to an earlier period than 1488. -This MS. contains certain poems of Chaucer, Hoccleve, Lydgate, and -others, together with the _Kingis Quair_. Of the _Kingis Quair_ it is, -so far as is known, the only MS., and to it alone we owe the -preservation of the poem. Both title and colophon assign the work to -James I., the words being: “Heireefter followis the quair Maid be King -James of Scotland ye first, callit ye Kingis quair, and Maid quhen his -Ma. wes in Ingland,” the colophon running, “Explicit, &c., &c., quod -Jacobus primus scotorum rex Illustrissimus.” This is surely precise -enough; but Mr. Brown insists that the statement carries very little -weight, being no more than the _ipse dixit_ of not merely an -irresponsible, but of an unusually reckless copyist. The recklessness of -this copyist Mr. Brown deduces from the fact that, of ten poems -attributed to Chaucer in the same MS., five undoubtedly do not belong to -him. On this we shall only remark that it would be interesting to know -whether these poems have been attributed to Chaucer in other MSS. In any -case, Mr. Brown must surely know that it is a very different thing for a -copyist to miss-assign a few short poems and to make a statement so -explicit as the statement here made with regard to the _Kingis Quair_. -He must either have been guilty of deliberate fraud--and what right have -we to assume this?--or he must have been misled, an hypothesis which is -equally unwarrantable, unless it be adequately supported. And how does -Mr. Brown proceed to support it? He contends that we have no -satisfactory evidence from other sources that James was the author of -the poem. Walter Bower, the one contemporary historian, though he gives -in his _Scotichronicon_ an elaborate account of the King’s -accomplishments, is silent, Mr. Brown triumphantly observes, about his -poetry. This may be conceded. But Weldon is equally silent about the -poetry of James VI., and Buchanan about the poetry of Mary. And what -says the next historian, John Major? “In the vernacular”--we give the -passage in Mr. Brown’s own version--“he was a most skilful composer.... -He wrote a clever little book about the Queen before he took her to wife -and while he was a prisoner,” a plain reference to the _Kingis Quair_. -Testimony to his poetical ability is also given by Hector Boyes in his -_History of Scotland_, “In linguâ vernaculâ tam ornata faciebat carmina, -ut poetam natum credidisses.” So say John Bellenden, John Leslie, and -George Buchanan. Of these witnesses Mr. Brown coolly observes that they -carry little or no weight, because they only echo each other and Major. -Major, Mr. Brown insists, is “the sole authority for the ascription to -James of the vernacular poems.” Certainly fame in the face of such -critics as Mr. Brown is held on a very precarious tenure. Dunbar, in his -_Lament of the Makaris_, enumerates, continues our critic, twenty-one -Scottish poets, but passes James over in silence, therefore James’s -title to being a poet was unknown to him. Possibly; but that Dunbar’s -list was not meant to be exhaustive is proved by the fact that he makes -no mention of a poet, and of a considerable poet, who must have been -well known to him, Thomas of Ercildoune. Nothing can be more misleading -than deductions like these. Ovid has given us an elaborate catalogue of -the poets of his time, but makes no mention of Manilius. Heywood and -Taylor have given elaborate catalogues of the contemporary Elizabethan -dramatists and make no mention of Cyril Tourneur. Addison has given us -an account of the principal English poets, and makes no mention of -Shakespeare. If Dante’s and Chaucer’s acquaintance with their -distinguished brethren is to be estimated by those whom they noticed, it -must have been far more limited than we know it, by other evidence, to -have been. Lyndsay, again, is cited as testimony of ignorance of James’s -title to rank among poets; but in the list, in which he is silent about -James, he is silent about poets so famous as Barbour, Blind Harry, -Wyntown, Kennedy, and Douglas. - -Mr. Brown next proceeds to the question of internal evidence. He cannot -understand how it could come to pass, that a Scotchman, who left his -native country when he was under twelve years of age, and who was -educated by English tutors in England, should, after eighteen years of -exile, employ “the Lowland Scottish dialect.” This is surely not very -difficult to explain. Nothing so much endears his country to a man as -exile, and nothing is more cherished by a patriot than his native -language. Ten years’ exile among the Getæ did not corrupt the Latinity -of Ovid, and more than twenty years’ exile did not impair the purity of -Thucydides’ Attic. The King may have had English tutors, but Wyntown -distinctly tells us that he was allowed to retain, as his companions, -four of his countrymen. When he served in France he had a Scottish -bodyguard. The document in the King’s own handwriting, printed by -Chalmers, proves that in 1412 he was conversant with the Lowland -dialect. In all probability, therefore, he carefully cherished his -native language. The consensus of tradition places it beyond all doubt -that he composed poetry in the vernacular, and as he wrote the _Kingis -Quair_ when he knew that he was about to return to Scotland as its king, -it was surely the most natural thing in the world that he should compose -a poem which told the story of himself and his young bride, whom he was -introducing to his subjects as their queen, in the language of the -country. But, says Mr. Brown, it is the Lowland dialect, with inflexions -peculiar to Midland English, with many Chaucerian inflections engrafted -on it. And what more natural? The Midland dialect was the dialect of his -English teachers. The poems of Chaucer he probably had by heart. - -Mr. Brown’s object in all this is to relegate the _Kingis Quair_ to -that group of poems which are represented by the _Romaunt of the Rose_, -_The Court of Love_, and _Lancelot of the Lak_, which appeared late in -the fifteenth century, and in which all these peculiarities are very -pronounced. Into philological details we have not space to enter, but -this we will say. We will admit that _ane_ before a consonant, the past -participle in _yt_ or _it_, the pronouns _thaire_ and _thame_, the -plural form _quhilkis_, the employment of the verb _to do_ in the -emphatic conjugation and the like, are peculiarities which belong to a -period not earlier than about 1440, and that all these peculiarities are -to be found in the poem. But, we contend that these are just as likely -to be due to the transcriber as they are to the author. Nothing was so -common with copyists as to import into their texts the peculiarities of -their own dialects, indeed it was habitual with them. Thus Hampole’s -_Pricke of Conscience_ was greatly altered by southern scribes. Thus, in -the Bannatyne MS., Chaucer’s minor poems were similarly altered by -northern scribes. It is, in truth, the very height of rashness to -dispute the genuineness of an original, in consequence of the presence -of peculiarities which might quite well have been imported into it by a -copyist. The resemblances between this poem and the _Court of Love_ are, -we admit, not likely to have been mere coincidences, and we are quite -ready to admit that the _Court of Love_ in the form in which we have it -now, must be assigned to a much later date, more than a century later, -than the date (1423) assigned to the _Kingis Quair_. But this is -certain--that many, and very many, of the resemblances between the two -poems are to be attributed to the fact that the writers were saturated -with the influence of Chaucer, and delighted in imitating and recalling -his poetry. If, again, it be assumed that one poem was the exemplar of -the other, this is indisputable, that the _Court of Love_ was modelled -on the _Kingis Quair_, and not the _Kingis Quair_ on the _Court of -Love_. For, setting aside peculiarities which may be assigned to -transcribers, there can be little doubt that the _Court of Love_ belongs -to the sixteenth century at the very earliest, while Mr. Brown himself -admits that the MS. of the _Kingis Quair_ may be approximately fixed at -1488. - -Nothing can be more unsatisfactory than Mr. Brown’s attempt to show that -the poem breaks down in autobiographical details, and that it derives -these details from Wyntown’s _Chronicle_. James does not mention the -exact year in which he was taken prisoner. He tells us that he commenced -his voyage when the sun had begun to drive his course upward in the sign -of Aries, that is, on or about the 12th of March--and that he had not -far passed the state of innocence, “bot nere about the nowmer of zeris -thre”--in other words, that he was about ten years of age. Hereupon Mr. -Brown, assuming that Wyntown gives the date of the King’s birth -correctly, proceeds to point out that the King was not at this time -“about ten,” but that he was about eleven and a half; and then asks -triumphantly whether James would have been likely to forget his own age. -Again, he contends that the King’s capture could not have taken place in -March, because it is highly probable that at the end of February, or at -the beginning of March, the King was in the Tower. For the fact that he -was in the Tower at that date there is not an iota of proof, or even of -tolerably satisfactory presumptive evidence. How the author of the -_Kingis Quair_ could have been indebted to Wyntown’s _Chronicle_ for the -autobiographical details it is, indeed, difficult to see. The poem gives -March as the date of the capture; the _Chronicle_ gives April. According -to the poem, the King’s age at the time of his capture was about ten; -according to the _Chronicle_, about eleven and a half. The _Chronicle_ -gives the year of the capture; the poem does not. The _Chronicle_ gives -details not to be found in the poem; the poem details not to be found in -the _Chronicle_. Mr. Brown has no authority whatever for asserting that -Book IX. chap. xxv. of the _Chronicle_ was certainly written years -before James returned to Scotland. All we know about the _Chronicle_ is -that it was finished between the 3rd of September, 1420, and the return -of James in April, 1424. - -Mr. Brown must forgive us for expressing regret that he should have -wasted so much time and learning, in attempting to support a paradox -which can only serve to perplex and mislead. Scholars, especially in -these days, would do well to remember, that nothing can justify -destructive criticism but a conscientious desire, on the part of those -who apply it, to correct error and to discover truth. And they would -also do well to ponder over Bacon’s weighty words: “Like as many -substances in Nature which are solid do putrify and corrupt into worms, -so it is the property of good and sound knowledge to putrify and -dissolve into a number of subtle, idle, unwholesome, and, as I may term -them, vermiculate questions, which have indeed a kind of quickness and -life of spirit, but no soundness of matter nor goodness of substance.” - - - - -WILLIAM DUNBAR[24] - -[Footnote 24: _William Dunbar._ By Oliphant Smeaton. Edinburgh: -Oliphant.] - - -Boswell tells us that he once offered to teach Dr. Johnson the Scotch -dialect, that the sage might enjoy the beauties of a certain Scotch -pastoral poem, and received for his reply, “No, sir; I will not learn -it. You shall retain your superiority by my not knowing it.” It would -not be true to say that Dr. Johnson’s indifference to the Scotch -language and to Scotch poetry has been shared by all cultivated -Englishmen, but it has certainly been shared by a very large majority in -every generation. The superb merit of many of the Scotch ballads, the -lyrics of Burns and the novels of Scott have practically done little to -diminish this majority and to induce English readers to acquire the -knowledge which Dr. Johnson disdained. Nine Englishmen out of ten read -Burns, either with an eye uneasily fishing the glossary at the bottom of -the page, or _ad sensum_, that is, in contented ignorance of about three -words in every nine. And this is, perhaps, all that can reasonably be -expected of the Southerner. Life is short; the world of Scotch drink, -Scotch religion and Scotch manners is not, as Matthew Arnold observed, a -lovely one, and the time which such an accomplishment would require -would be far more profitably spent in acquiring, say, the language of -Dante and Ariosto, or even the language of the _Romancero General_ and -of Cervantes. A modern reader may stumble, with more or less -intelligence, through a poem of Burns, catching the general sense, -enjoying the lilt, and even appreciating the niceties of rhythm. But -this is not the case with the Scotch of the fifteenth century--the -golden age of the vernacular poetry, the age when poets were writing -thus:-- - - “Catyvis, wrechis, and ockeraris, - Hud-pykis, hurdaris, and gadderaris, - All with that warlo went; - Out of thair throttis thay schot on udder - Hett moltin gold, me thocht, a fudder - As fyre-flawcht, maist fervent, - Ay as thay tumit them of schot, - Feyndis fild thame new up to the thrott - With gold of allkin prent.” - -The usual consequences have been the result of this ignorance. The -Scotch have had it all their own way in estimating the merits of their -vernacular classics, and the few outsiders, whether English or German, -who have made the Scotch language and literature a special subject of -study, have very naturally not been willing to underestimate the value -of what it has cost them labour to acquire, and so have supported the -exaggerated estimates of the Scotch themselves. What Voltaire so -absurdly said of Dante, that his reputation was safe because no -intelligent people read him, is literally true of such poets as -Henryson, Douglas, and Dunbar. We simply take them on trust, and, as -with most other things which are taken on trust, we seldom trouble -ourselves about the titles and guarantees. It may be accepted as an -uncontrolled truth that the world is always right, and very exactly -right, in the long run. That mysterious tribunal which, resolved into -the individuals which compose it, seems resolved into every conceivable -source of ignorance, error, and folly, is ultimately infallible. There -are no mismeasurements in the reputation of authors with whom readers of -every class have been familiar for a hundred years. But, in the case of -minor writers who appeal only to a minority, critical literature is the -record of the most preposterous estimates. The history of the building -up of these pseudo-reputations is generally the same in all cases. First -we have the _obiter dictum_ of some famous man whose opinion naturally -carries authority, uttered, it may be, carelessly in conversation, or -committed, without deliberation, to paper, in a letter or occasional -trifle. Then comes some little man, who takes up in deadly seriousness -what the great man has said, and out comes, it may be, an essay or -article. This wakes up some dreary pedant, who follows with an “edition” -or “Study,” which naturally elicits from some kindred spirit a -sympathetic review. Thus the ball is set rolling, or, to change the -figure, bray swells bray, echo answers to echo, and the thing is done. -Meanwhile, all that is of real interest and importance in the author -thus resuscitated is lost sight of; in advocating his factitious claims -to attention his real claims are ignored. For the true point of view is -substituted a false, and the whole focus of criticism, so to speak, is -deranged. The first requisite in estimating the work and relative -position of a particular author is the last thing which these -enthusiasts seem to consider, that is, the application of standards and -touchstones derived not simply from the study of the author himself, but -from acquaintance with the principles of criticism, and with what is -excellent in universal literature. - -All this has been illustrated in the case of the poet who is the subject -of the volume before us. As Mr. Ruskin has pronounced _Aurora Leigh_ to -be the greatest poem of this century, so Sir Walter Scott, who has, by -the way, been singularly unjust to Lydgate and Hawes, pronounced Dunbar -to be “a poet unrivalled by any that Scotland has ever produced.” a -reckless judgment which he could never have expressed deliberately. -Ellis followed suit, and in Ellis’ notice Dunbar is “the greatest poet -Scotland has produced.” These judgments have, in effect, been -reverberated by successive writers and editors. In due time, some -fourteen years ago, appeared the inevitable German monograph, “William -Dunbar: sein Leben und seine Gedichte,” by Dr. J. Schipper, to whom Mr. -Oliphant Smeaton appropriately and reverently inscribes the present -monograph. - -In Mr. Oliphant Smeaton’s work Dunbar assumes the proportions which -might be expected--he is a “mighty genius.” “The peer, if not in a few -qualities, the superior of Chaucer and Spenser. By the indefeasible -passport of the supreme genius he has an indisputable title to the -apostolic succession of British poetry to that place between Chaucer and -Spenser, that place which can only be claimed by one whose genius was -co-ordinate with theirs.” As probably eight out of every ten of Mr. -Smeaton’s readers will know nothing more of Dunbar than what Mr. Smeaton -chooses to tell them, and as we, considering the space at our disposal, -cannot refute him by a detailed examination of Dunbar’s works, it is -fortunate that he has given us a succinct illustration of the value of -his critical judgment. The following are four typical stanzas of a poem -which Mr. Smeaton ranks with Milton’s _Lycidas_ and Shelley’s -_Adonais_; we give them as Mr. Smeaton gives them, modernised:-- - - “I that in health was and gladness - Am troubled now with great sickness. - Enfeebled with infirmity, - _Timor mortis conturbat me._ - - “Our pleasure here is all vain glory, - This false world is but transitory, - The flesh is brittle, the fiend is slee, - _Timor mortis conturbat me._ - - “The state of man doth change and vary, - Now sound, now sick, now blyth, now sary - Now dancing merry, now like to dee, - _Timor mortis conturbat me._ - - “No state on earth here stands sicker, - As with the wind waves the wicker, - So waves this world’s vanity, - _Timor mortis conturbat me._” - -As the following is pronounced to be one of the finest stanzas Dunbar -ever penned, it is interesting as illustrating what is, in Mr. Smeaton’s -opinion, the best work of this rival of Chaucer and Spenser:-- - - “Have mercy, love, have mercy, lady bright; - What have I wrought against your womankeid, - That you should murder me a sackless wight, - Trespassing on you nor in word nor deed? - That ye consent thereto, O God forbid; - Leave cruelty and save your man for shame, - Or through the world quite losëd is your name.” - -It may be added that what are by far the finest passages in Dunbar’s -poems are passed unnoticed and unquoted by Mr. Smeaton. Indeed, his -acquaintance with Dunbar, or, at all events, his taste in selection, is -exactly on a par with that of Ned Softley’s with Waller. “As that -admirable writer has the best and worst verses among our English poets, -Ned,” says Addison, “has got all the bad ones by heart, which he repeats -upon occasion to show his reading.” Should Mr. Smeaton ever meet his -idol in Hades, we would in all kindness advise him to avoid an -encounter; let him remember that the fulsome eulogy is his own, but that -the verses quoted are the poet’s. Attempted murder--so the irate shade -might argue--is less serious than compulsory suicide. - -Dunbar was undoubtedly a man of genius, but a reference to the poets who -immediately preceded him will make large deductions from the praises -lavished on him by his eulogists. He struck no new notes. _The Thistle -and the Rose_ and _The Golden Terge_ are mere echoes of Chaucer and -Lydgate, and, in some degree, of the author of _The King’s Quair_, and -are indeed full of plagiarisms from them. _The Dance of the Seven Deadly -Sins_ is probably little more than a faithful description of a popular -mummery. His moral and religious poems had their prototypes, even in -Scotland, in such poets as Johnston and Henryson. His most remarkable -characteristic is his versatility, which ranges from the composition of -such poems as _The Merle and the Nightingale_ to the _Twa Maryit Wemen -and the Wedo_, from such lyrics as the _Meditation in Winter_ to such -lyrics as the _Plea for Pity_. Mr. Smeaton calls him “a giant in an age -of pigmies.” The author or authoress of _The Flower and the Leaf_ was -infinitely superior to him in point of style, Henryson was infinitely -superior to him in originality, and Gavin Douglas at least his equal in -power of expression and in description. - -Let us do Dunbar the justice which Mr. Smeaton has not done him, and -take him at his very best. Here is part of a picture of a May morning,-- - - “For mirth of May, wyth skippis and wyth hoppis - The birdis sang upon the tender croppis, - With curiouse notis, as Venus Chapell clerkis. - The rosis yong, new spreding of their knoppis, - War powderit brycht with hevinly beriall droppis; - Throu bemes rede, birnyng as ruby sperkis, - The skyes rang for schoutyng of the larkis.” - -This is brilliant and picturesque rhetoric touched into poetry by the -“Venus Chapell clerkis,” and the magical note in the last line; so too -the touch in _The Golden Terge_, likening the faery ship to “blossom -upon the spray.” But in his allegorical poem he is too fond of the -“quainte enamalit termes,” and his verse has a certain metallic ring. It -will be admitted, we suppose, that the best of his moral poems would be -_The Merle and the Nightingale_ and “Be Merrie Man”; but the utmost -which can be said for them is, that the philosophy is excellent and its -expression adequate; that is, that they have little to distinguish them -from hundreds of other poems of the same class. - -In speaking of Dunbar’s satires, Mr. Smeaton indulges himself in the -following nonsense, “From the genial, jesting, and ironical -incongruities of Horace and Persius we are introduced at once into the -bitter, vitriolic scourgings of Juvenal,” and in the following -rhodomontade, telling us that they unite “the natural directness of -Hall, the subtle depth of Donne, the delicate humour of Breton, the -sturdy vigour of Dryden, the scalding, vitriolic bitterness of Swift, -the pungency of Churchill, the rural smack of Gay, united to an approach -at least to the artistic perfection of Pope.” Stuff like this and -indiscriminate eulogy are, no doubt, much easier to produce than an -estimate of a writer’s historical position and importance. Of the -relation of Dunbar to his predecessors and contemporaries in England and -Scotland, of his prototypes and models in French and Provençal -literature, of the influence which he undoubtedly exercised on -subsequent poetry, and especially on Spenser, Mr. Smeaton has nothing to -say. It never seems to occur to him that his hero, like every one else, -must have had his limitations, that “the many-sidedness of that genius -which has a ring”--the metaphors are not ours, but Mr. -Smeaton’s--“almost Shakespearian, about it,” could hardly have been -distinguished by uniformity of excellence; that “that painter of -contemporary manners, who had all the vividness of a Callot, united to -the broad humour of a Teniers and the minute touch of a Meissonier,” who -“reflected in his verse the most delicate _nuances_, as well as the most -startling colours of the age wherein he lived,” must have had degrees in -success. - -We have singled out this volume for special notice, not because of any -intrinsic title it possesses to serious attention, but because it is -typical of a species of literature which is rapidly becoming one of the -pests of our time. While every encouragement should be given to sober, -judicious, and competent reviews of our older writers, every -discouragement should be given, out of respect to the dead, as well as -in the interests of the living, to such books as the present. For they -are as mischievous as they are ridiculous. They misinform; they mislead; -they corrupt, or tend to corrupt, taste. After laying down a volume like -this we feel, and we expect Dunbar would have felt, that there is -something much more formidable than the old horror, “the candid friend,” -even that indicated by Tacitus--_pessimum inimicorum genus--laudantes_. - - - - -A GALLOP THROUGH ENGLISH LITERATURE[25] - -[Footnote 25: _A Literary History of the English People from the Origins -to the Renaissance._ By J. J. Jusserand.] - - -There is a breeziness and hilarity, a gay irresponsibility and abandon, -about M. Jusserand which is perfectly delightful. He is the very -Autolycus of History and Criticism. What more sober students, who have -some conscience to trouble them, are “toiling all their lives to find” -appears to be his as a sort of natural right. The fertility of his -genius is such, that it seems to blossom spontaneously into erudition. -Like the lilies he toils not, but unlike the lilies he spins, and very -pretty gossamer too. It is impossible to take him seriously. - -The truth is that M. Jusserand belongs to a class of writers which, -thanks to indulgent publishers, a more indulgent public, and most -indulgent reviewers, is just now greatly in the ascendant. -“Encyclopædical heads,” who took all knowledge for their province, -probably died with Bacon, but encyclopædical heads who take all -Literature or all History for their province appear to be as common as -the “excellence” which, in opposition to Matthew Arnold’s opinion, the -American lady maintained was so abundant on both sides of the Atlantic. -These are the gentlemen who complacently sit down “to edit the -Literatures of the world,” or “to trace the development of the human -race, from its picturesque cradle in the valleys of Central Asia, to its -infinite ramifications in our own day”--within “the moderate compass of -an octavo volume.” - -M. Jusserand’s first feat is to dispose of some six centuries in -ninety-three pages, in a narrative which simply tells over again, though -certainly after a more jaunty fashion, what Ten Brink, Henry Morley, and -others have told much more seriously, and, we may add, much more -effectively. The Norman Conquest and an account of the Anglo-Norman -literature occupy about a hundred and ten pages, while some eighty pages -more, dealing with the fusion of the races and the gradual evolution of -the English people and language, bring us to Chaucer. It might have been -expected that M. Jusserand would have justified his survey of a period -so often reviewed before, either by tracing, with more fulness and -precision than his predecessors, the successive stages in the -development of our nationality and its expression in literature, or by -adding to our knowledge of the characteristics and peculiarities of the -literature itself. He has done neither. He has, on the contrary, -obscured the first by the constant introduction of irrelevant matter, -and he has apparently no notion of the relative importance of the -authors on whose works he dilates or touches. Thus Richard Rolle of -Hampole fills more space than Layamon, whose work is despatched in a -page! Thus two lines in a note suffice for the _Ormulum_, two lines for -Mannyng’s _Handlyng of Synne_, a singularly interesting and significant -work, ten lines for Robert of Gloucester, who is rather perplexingly -described as “a distant ancestor of Gibbon and Macaulay,” while four -pages are accorded to _Tristan_ and five to the _Roman du Renart_. How -the Latin Chroniclers fare may be judged from the fact that a little -more than a page serves for Geoffrey of Monmouth, a line for Ordericus -Vitalis, and two for Giraldus Cambrensis. In the chapter on Chaucer M. -Jusserand does more justice to his subject, and it is to be regretted -for his own sake that he has not confined himself to such essays. He is -never safe except when he is on the beaten path. Nothing could be more -inadequate than the section on Gower. It certainly indicates that M. -Jusserand is not very familiar with the _Confessio Amantis_. Not one -word is said about the remarkable prologue, and to dismiss such a work -in less than three pages, observing that “it contains a hundred and -twelve short stories, two or three of which are very well told, one, the -adventure of Florent, being, perhaps, related even better than in -Chaucer,” is not quite what we should expect in a work purporting to -narrate the “literary history of the English people.” M. Jusserand has -not even taken the trouble to keep pace with modern investigation in his -subject, but actually tells us that Gower’s _Speculum Meditantis_ is -lost! If Gower’s writings are not of much intrinsic value, they are of -immense importance from an historical point of view. John de Trevisa, a -most important name in the history of English prose, is despatched in -eight lines of mere bibliographical information, without a word being -said about his great services to our literature, and without any -reference being made either to the remarkable preface to his great work, -or to his version of the Dialogue attributed to Occam. - -The only satisfactory chapter in the book is the chapter dealing with -Langland and his works; but it is certainly surprising that no account -should be given of the very remarkable anonymous poem entitled _Piers -Ploughman’s Crede_. Again, whole departments of literature, such as the -Metrical Romances, the Laies, Fabliaux, early lyrics and ballads, are -most inadequately treated, some of the most memorable and typical being -not even specified. Surely Minot was not a man to be dismissed, with a -flippant joke, in half a page, or _King Horn_ and _Havelok_ poems to be -relegated to passing reference in a note. - -But it is in dealing with the literature of the fifteenth century that -M. Jusserand’s superficiality and, to put it plainly, incompetence for -his ambitious task become most deplorably apparent. In treating the -earlier periods he had trustworthy guides even in common manuals, and he -could not go far wrong in accepting their generalizations and -statements. Books easily attainable, and indeed in everybody’s hands, -could enable him to dance airily through the Anglo-Saxon literature and -through the period between Layamon and Chaucer. No one can now very well -go wrong in Chaucer and his contemporaries, who has at his side some -half-dozen works which any library can supply. But it is otherwise with -the literature of the fifteenth century. Here, as every one who happens -to have paid particular attention to it knows, popular manuals and -histories are most misleading guides. Deterred, no doubt, by the -prolixity of the poetry and by the comparatively uninteresting nature of -the prose literature, modern historians and critics have contented -themselves with accepting the verdicts of Warton and his followers, who -probably had as little patience as themselves; and so a kind of -conventional estimate has been formed, which appears and reappears in -every manual and handbook. We turned, therefore, with much curiosity to -this portion of M. Jusserand’s work. We had, we own, our suspicions -about his first-hand knowledge of the literature through which he glided -so easily in the earlier portions of his book, and here, we thought, -would be the crucial test of his pretension to original scholarship. -Would he do voluminous Lydgate the justice which, as the specialist -knows, has so long been withheld from him? Would he point out the strong -human interest of Hoccleve; the great historical interest of Hardyng; -the power and beauty of the ballads; or, if he included Hawes within the -century, would he show what a singularly interesting poem, intrinsically -and historically, the _Pastime of Pleasure_ really is? If, again, he -included the Scotch poets, how would he deal with the problems presented -by Huchown? Would he accord the proper tribute to the genius of Dunbar; -would he estimate what poetry owes respectively to James I., Henry the -Minstrel, Robert Henryson, and Gavin Douglas? In our prose literature, -would he comment on the great importance of Pecock’s memorable work, of -Fortescue’s two treatises, of the _Paston Letters_, of Caxton’s various -publications? How would he deal with the one “classical” work of the -century, Malory’s _Morte d’Arthur_? - -Now, of Lydgate, “to enumerate whose pieces,” says Warton, “would be to -write the catalogue of a little library,” it is not too much to say -that he was one of the most richly gifted of our old poets, that as a -descriptive poet he stands almost on the level of Chaucer, that his -pictures of Nature are among the gems of their kind, that his pathos is -often exquisite, “touching,” as Gray said of him, “the very heartstrings -of compassion with so masterly a hand as to merit a place among the -greatest of poets.” His humour is often delightful, and his pictures of -contemporary life, such as his _London Lickpenny_ and his _Prologue to -the Storie of Thebes_, are as vivid as Chaucer’s. In versatility he has -no rival among his predecessors and contemporaries. Gray notices that, -at times, he approaches sublimity. His style often is -beautiful,--fluent, copious, and at its best eminently musical. The -influence which he exercised on subsequent English and Scotch literature -would alone entitle him to a prominent position in any history of -English poetry. But the handbooks think otherwise, and he occupies just -three pages in M. Jusserand’s work, the only estimate of his work being -confined to the assertion that “he was a worthy man if ever there was -one, industrious and prolific,” etc., and the only criticism is the -remark that his “prosody was rather lax.” And this is how poor Lydgate -fares at our historian’s hands. To Hoccleve are assigned just one page -and a few lines. Hardyng figures only in the bibliography at the bottom -of a page. The ballads are despatched in fifteen lines. Hawes’ _Pastime -of Pleasure_, memorable alike both for the preciseness with which it -marks the transition from the poetry of mediævalism to that of the -Renaissance, for its probable influence on Spenser, and for its -intrinsic charm, its pathos, its picturesqueness, and its sweet and -plaintive music, is curtly dismissed, as the handbooks dismiss it, as -“an allegory of unendurable dulness.” If M. Jusserand would throw aside -the manuals and turn to the original, he would probably see reason to -modify his verdict. Our author’s breathless gallop through the Scotch -poets, to whom he allots nine pages, can only be regarded with silent -astonishment by readers who happen to known anything about those most -remarkable men. Huchown is not so much as mentioned. The amazing -nonsense which he writes in summing up Dunbar, we will transcribe, _ut -ex uno discas omnia_: - - “Dunbar, with never-flagging spirit, attempts every style.... - His flowers are too flowery, his odours too fragrant; by - moments it is no longer a delight, but almost a pain. It is not - sufficient that his birds should sing; they must sing among - perfumes, and these perfumes are coloured.” - -Has M. Jusserand ever read _The Dance of the Seven Deadly Sins_, _The -Twa Maryit Wemen and the Wedo_, and the minor poems of Dunbar? If he -has, would he pronounce that these “flowers” are “too flowery”--these -“odours” “too fragrant,” or would he feel the absurdity of generalizing -on ludicrously insufficient knowledge? His verdicts on the other Scotch -poets are marked by the same superficiality, and we regret to add -flippancy. To class Henryson among poets whose style is “florid” and -whose roses are “splendid but too full-blown” is to show that M. -Jusserand knows as little about him as he seems to know about Dunbar. In -all Henryson’s poems there are only three short passages which could by -any possibility be described as florid. The prose of the fifteenth -century fares even worse at his hands. Capgrave is mentioned only in the -bibliography! Of the interest and importance of Pecock, historically and -intrinsically, he appears to have no conception; on the real -significance of the _Repressor_ he never even touches, and how indeed -could he in the less than one page which is assigned to one of the most -remarkable writers in the fifteenth century? A page suffices for the -_Paston Letters_, and four lines for Malory’s _Morte d’Arthur_! - -Now we would ask M. Jusserand, in all seriousness, what possible end can -be served by a book of this kind, except the encouragement of everything -that is detestable to the real scholar: superficiality, want of -thoroughness, and false assumption, and what is more, the public -dissemination of error, and of crude and misleading judgments. Such a -work as the present, the soundness and trustworthiness of which -ninety-nine readers in every hundred must necessarily take for granted, -can only be justified when it proceeds from one who is a master of his -immense subject, from one whose generalizations are based on amply -sufficient knowledge, whose suppressions and omissions spring neither -from carelessness nor from ignorance, but from discrimination, and in -whose statements and judgments implicit reliance can be placed. To none -of these qualifications has M. Jusserand the smallest pretension. - -We have no wish to seem discourteous to M. Jusserand or to say anything -which can cause him annoyance, but it is no more than simple duty in any -critic with a becoming sense of responsibility to discountenance in -every way the production of such books as these. They are not only -mischievous in themselves, but they form precedents for books which are -more mischievous still. We like M. Jusserand’s enthusiasm, but we would -exhort him to reduce the flatulent dimensions, which his ambition has -here so unhappily assumed, to that more tempered ambition which gave us -the monographs on Piers Ploughman and on the Tudor novelists. - - - - -DE QUINCEY AND HIS FRIENDS[26] - -[Footnote 26: _Personal Recollections, Souvenirs, and Anecdotes of -Thomas De Quincey and his Friends and Associates._ Written and collected -by James Hogg.] - - -To a thoughtful reader there is, perhaps, no sadder spectacle than those -sixteen volumes which represent all that remains to us of Thomas De -Quincey. What superb powers, what noble and manifold gifts, what -capacity for invaluable and imperishable achievements had Nature -lavished on this extraordinary man! Metaphysics might for all time have -been a debtor to that vigorous, acute, and subtle intellect, at once so -speculative and logical, so inquisitive and discriminating. Æsthetic -criticism might have found in him a second Lessing, and literary -criticism a superior Sainte-Beuve. For, in addition to all that would -have enabled him to excel in abstract thought, he had--and in ample -measure--the qualities which make men consummate critics: rare power of -analysis, the nicest perception, sensibility, sympathy, good taste, -good sense, immense erudition. He might have contributed masterpieces to -Theology, to History, to Economic Science. But they know not his name. -He has set his seal on nothing but on English style. About a hundred and -fifty articles contributed to magazines and encyclopædias, some of them -of a high order of literary merit, many of them simply worthless, the -majority of them containing what is inferior so disproportionately in -excess of what is valuable that they may be likened to dustbins, with -jewels here and there glittering among the rubbish;--this is what -represents him. It is as a master of style, by virtue of what he -accomplished as a rhetorician and prose poet only, that he will live. -But this, comparatively scanty as it is, is of pre-eminent, of unique -value, and will suffice to secure him a place for ever among the -classics of English prose. He has also another claim, if not to our -reverence, at least to our curious attention and interest,--and that -attention and interest he can scarcely fail to excite in every -generation,--his autobiographical writings give us a picture, and that -with fascinating power, of one of the most extraordinary personalities -on record. - -Indiscriminating admiration is among the most pleasing traits of youth, -but in men of mature years it loses its attractiveness. When it is no -longer the effervescence of juvenile enthusiasm for which all make -allowance, it becomes, like the levities of boyhood affected in middle -life, merely vapid folly. In relation to its object it not only defeats -its own ends, but is apt to make recipient and donor alike ridiculous. -Nor is this all. By some curious law of association which we cannot -pretend to explain, its almost inevitable ally is dulness, and dulness -of a peculiarly wearisome and exasperating kind. During the last few -years these peculiarities have become so alarmingly epidemic that it -really seems high time to form, on the principle of Mr. Morris’s Society -for the Preservation of Ancient Monuments, a Society for the -Preservation of Literary Reputations. When those “of whom to be -dispraised were no small praise” take to eulogy and editing, an unhappy -Classic may well look to his true friends. It is nothing less than -appalling to behold the mountains of rubbish now gradually accumulating -over the work--the real work--of such poets as Wordsworth, Shelley, and -Keats; rubbish of their own, rescued with cruel industry from the -oblivion to which they would themselves have consigned it, rubbish of -their commentators and editors, dulness and inanity unutterable. “What, -sir,” asked an Eton boy of Foote, “was the best thing you ever said?” -“Well,” was the reply, “I once saw a chimney-sweep on a high prancing, -high-mettled horse. ‘There,’ said I, ‘goes Warburton on Shakespeare.’” -But it is not in the Warburtons, not in the chimney-sweepers, that the -mischief lies; it is in those who may be called the scavengers and -sextons of literature, in those who, utterly unable to discern between -what is precious and what is worthless in a man’s work, thrust all, -without distinction, into prominence, and thus not only enable an author -to “write himself down,” but, by their indiscriminating eulogies, assist -him in his suicide. The subtlest form, indeed, which detraction can -assume is over-praise, for a man is thus forced to give the lie to his -own reputation. - -No one, perhaps, has suffered so much from ill-judging admirers as De -Quincey. If ever an author needed a judicious adviser, when preparing -his works for publication in a permanent form, and a judicious editor, -when the time had come for that final edition on which his title to -future fame should rest, it was the English opium-eater. But, unhappily, -he had no such adviser in his lifetime, and he has had no such editor -since. He consequently reprinted much which ought never to have been -reprinted at all, and he omitted to reprint some things which would have -done honour to him. His besetting faults, even in his vigour, were -loquacity and silliness, a habit of “drawing out the thread of his -verbosity finer than the staple of his argument”--a tendency to peddle -and dawdle, as well as to indulge in a sort of pleasantry, so attenuated -as to border closely on inanity. As he grew older these habits became -more confirmed. His puerility and garrulousness in his later writings -are often intolerable. But this was not the worst. In revising some of -his earlier papers, and particularly the _Confessions_, he not only -imported into them tiresome irrelevancies and superfluities, but, in -emending, ruined the glorious passages on which his fame as a -rhetorician and prose poet rests; such has been the fate, among others, -of the exquisite description of the powers of opium,--the superb passage -beginning, “The town of L.. represented the earth with its sorrows and -its graves,”[27] and of the dreams in the second part of the -_Confessions_, particularly of the sublime one beginning, “The dream -commenced with a music.”[28] - -Mr. James Hogg tells us that his design in publishing the present volume -was that he might “place a stone upon the cairn of the man” who had -treated him “with an almost paternal tenderness.” We sincerely -sympathize with Mr. Hogg’s pious intention, but we submit that the -truest kindness which he, or any other admirer of De Quincey could do -him, would be not to augment but to lighten the cairn which indiscreet -admirers are so industriously piling over him. To change the figure, the -best service which could be rendered to De Quincey would be to relieve -him of his superfluous baggage, not to add to it. His fame would stand -much higher, if his sixteen volumes were vigorously weeded; if the -sweepings and refuse of his study, so injudiciously given to the world -by Dr. Japp and Mr. Hogg, were given instead to the flames; and if -reminiscents and biographers would only leave him to tell, in his own -fashion, his own story, especially as it is one of those stories the -interest of which depends purely on the telling. We have already -expressed our sympathy with Mr. Hogg’s pious intention. It only remains -for us to express our regret that Mr. Hogg’s piety should have taken the -form of the most barefaced piece of book-making which we ever remember -to have met with. Addison, if we are not mistaken, somewhere describes a -man to whom a single volume afforded all the amusement and variety of a -whole library, for, by the time he had arrived at the middle, he had -completely forgotten the beginning, and when he arrived at the end, he -had completely forgotten the whole. Mr. Hogg appears to proceed on the -assumption that it is pretty much the same with the public and its -memory, that its capacity for amusement is permanent, but that its -recollection of what has amused it is so treacherous, that repetition -will be sure to have all the attraction of novelty. This is, no doubt, -unhappily true. But it is a truth which no critic has a right to -concede. - -All that is of interest in this volume is little more than the literal -reproduction, in another shape, of material embodied in a Life of De -Quincey, published by Dr. Alexander Japp, under the pseudonym of H. A. -Page, in 1877. Its exact composition is as follows. Eliminating the -preface and the index, the book consists of 359 pages. Of these, seventy -consist of a dreary _réchauffé_ by Dr. Japp himself of his own Life of -De Quincey, and of the additional information contained in his edition -of the Posthumous Works. Next comes a series of reminiscences, extracted -from Dr. Japp’s Life, from Dr. Garnett’s edition of the _Confessions_, -from the _Quarterly Review_, and from other sources all equally -accessible. Then Mr. Hogg himself opens fire with _Days and Nights with -De Quincey_. An essay--“On the supposed Scriptural Expression for -Eternity”--excellently illustrating De Quincey in his senility, is -reprinted, with awe-struck admiration, from the American edition of his -works. - -For the purpose, presumably, of adding to the bulk of the book, Moir’s -ballad, _De Quincey’s Revenge_, is included, though its sole connection -with De Quincey is, that it deals with a legend concerning the possible -ancestors of a possible branch of his possible family. Then we have one -of Mr. Shadworth Hodgson LL.D.’s _Outcast Essays_, “On the genius of De -Quincey,” the reason for the hospitable entertainment of the outcast -being by no means apparent. Among other dreary trifles is a reprint of -a Latin theme, one of De Quincey’s college exercises. As Mr. Hogg has -chosen to reprint and translate this, it would have been as well to -print and translate it correctly. “Quæ ansibus obstant” should, of -course, have been “ausibus,” and “oculi perstringuntur” cannot possibly -mean “are spellbound,” but “are dazzled.” - -The republication of these pieces was, we repeat, a great mistake, -another lamentable illustration of the cruel wrong which officious and -ill-judging admirers may inflict on a writer’s reputation. Talleyrand -once observed that, a wise man would be safer with a foolish than with a -clever wife, for a foolish wife could only compromise herself, but a -clever wife might compromise her husband. Substituting ‘unambitious’ for -‘foolish’ and ‘ambitious’ for ‘clever,’ we are very much inclined to -apply the same remark to a great writer and his friends. It requires a -Johnson to support a Boswell, and a Goethe to support an Eckermann. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 27: See Works. Black’s Edit., Vol. I. p. 212, compared with -original Edit., pp. 113-114.] - -[Footnote 28: _Id._, p. 272 and original Edit., pp. 177-178.] - - - - -LEE’S _LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE_[29] - -[Footnote 29: _A Life of Shakespeare._ By Sidney Lee.] - - -It is a pleasure to turn from the slovenly and perfunctory work, from -the plausible charlatanry and pretentious incompetence which it has so -often been our unwelcome duty to expose in these columns, to such a -volume as the volume before us. It is books like these which retrieve -the honour of English scholarship. A wide range of general knowledge, -immense special knowledge, scrupulous accuracy, both in the -investigation and presentation of facts, the sound judgment, the tact, -the insight which in labyrinths of chaotic traditions and conflicting -testimony can discern the clue to probability and truth--these are the -qualifications indispensable to a successful biographer of Shakespeare. -And these are the qualifications which Mr. Lee possesses, in larger -measure than have been possessed by any one who has essayed the task -which he has here undertaken. A ranker and more tangled jungle than that -presented by the traditions, the apocrypha, the theories, the -conjectures which have gradually accumulated round the memory of -Shakespeare since the time of Rowe, could scarcely be conceived. In this -jungle some, like Charles Knight, have altogether lost themselves; -others, like Joseph Hunter, have struck out vigorously into wrong -tracks, and floundered into quagmires. Halliwell Phillipps, sure-footed -and wary though he was, certainly had not the clue to it. But Mr. Lee, -who can plainly say with Comus,-- - - “I know each lane, and every alley green, - Dingle or bushy dell of this wild wood, - And every bosky bourne from side to side, - My daily walks and ancient neighbourhood,” - -has thridded it, and taught others to thrid it, as no one else has done. -And he will have his reward. He has produced what deserves to be, and -what will probably become, the standard life of our great national poet. - -Mr. Lee’s book is substantially a reproduction of his article on -Shakespeare, contributed to the _Dictionary of National Biography_, the -high merits of which have long been recognised by scholars; and he has -certainly done well to make that article popularly accessible by -reprinting it in a separate form. But the present volume is not a mere -reproduction of his contribution to the Dictionary; it is much more. He -has here filled out what he could there sketch only in outline; what he -could there state only as results and conclusions, he here illustrates -and justifies by corroboration and proof. He has, moreover, both in the -text and in the appendices, brought together a great mass of interesting -and pertinent collateral matter which the scope of the Dictionary -necessarily precluded. - -More than a century ago George Steevens wrote: “All that can be known -with any degree of certainty about Shakespeare is that he was born at -Stratford-on-Avon, married and had children there, went to London, where -he commenced actor, wrote poems and plays, returned to Stratford, made -his will, died, and was buried there.” And, if we set aside probable -inferences, this is all we do know of any importance about his life. His -pedigree cannot certainly be traced beyond his father. Nothing is known -of the place of his education--that he was educated at the Stratford -Grammar School is pure assumption. His life between his birth and the -publication of _Venus and Adonis_ in 1593, is an absolute blank. It is -at least doubtful whether the supposed allusion to him in Greene’s -_Groat’s Worth of Wit_, and in Chettle’s _Kind Heart’s Dream_ have any -reference to him at all; it is still more doubtful whether the William -Shakespeare of Adrian Quiney’s letter, or of the Rogers and Addenbroke -summonses, or the William Shakespeare who was assessed for property in -St. Helens, Bishopsgate, was the poet. We know practically nothing of -his life in London, or of the date of his arrival in London; we are -ignorant of the date of his return to Stratford, of his happiness or -unhappiness in married life, of his habits, of his last days, of the -cause of his death. Not a sentence that fell from his lips has been -authentically recorded. At least one-half of the alleged facts of his -biography is as purely apocryphal as the life of Homer attributed to -Herodotus. - -But probability, as Bishop Butler says, is the guide of life, and on the -basis of probability may be raised, it must be owned, a fairly -satisfactory biography. Mr. Lee has not been able to contribute any new -facts to Shakespeare’s life, which is certainly not his fault; but he -has given us a recapitulation, as lucid as it is exhaustive, of all that -the industry of successive generations of memorialists from Ben Jonson -to Halliwell Phillipps has succeeded in accumulating, and he has been as -judicious in what he has rejected as in what he has adopted. From the -curse of the typical Shakespearian biographer--we mean the statement of -mere inference and hypothesis as fact--he is absolutely free. He has -done excellent service in giving, if not finishing, at least swashing -blows to the monstrous fictions of the theorists on the sonnets, -particularly to the Fitton-Pembroke mare’s nest, fictions which have -been gradually generating a Shakespeare, as purely apocryphal as the -Roland of the song or the Apollonius of Philostratus. - -Mr. Lee’s most remarkable contribution to speculative Shakespearian -criticism, in which, we are glad to say, he does not often indulge, is -his contention that the W. H. of the dedication to the sonnets was -William Hall, a small piratical stationer. It is never wise to speak -positively on what must necessarily be, till certain evidence is -obtainable, a matter of speculation. But we are very much inclined to -think that Mr. Lee’s contention has at least something in its favour. -Our readers will remember that one of the chief points in the enigma of -the sonnets is the dedication, and it runs thus: “To the onlie begetter -of these ensuing Sonnets, Mr. W. H., all happiness and that eternitie -promised by our ever-living poet wisheth the well-wishing adventurer in -setting forth. T. T.” It has generally been assumed that the “W. H.” is -the youth who is the hero of the first group of sonnets, and the poet’s -friend, and he has commonly been identified either with William Herbert, -third Earl of Pembroke, or with Henry Wriothesley, third Earl of -Southampton. The difficulties in the way of either hypothesis--and on -each hypothesis not Babels merely, but cities of Babels have been -raised--are to an unprejudiced mind insurmountable. Mr. Lee maintains -with plausible ingenuity, but not, we think, conclusively, that there is -no proof that the youth of the sonnets was named “Will” at all. His -analysis of the “Will” sonnets is a masterpiece of subtle ingenuity, and -well deserves careful attention. He then proceeds to adopt the theory -that the word “begetter” is not to be taken in the sense of “inspirer,” -but simply as “procurer” or “obtainer” of the sonnets for T. T., _i.e._, -the publisher, Thomas Thorpe. In other words, that Thorpe dedicated the -sonnets to W. H., in return for W. H. having piratically obtained them -for him. This is at least doubtful. In the first place it may reasonably -be questioned whether “begetter” could have the meaning which is here -assigned to it; the passages quoted from _Hamlet_ (“acquire and beget a -temperance”) and from Dekker’s _Satiro-mastix_, “I have some cousins -german at Court shall beget you the reversion of the Master of the -King’s Revels,” are anything but conclusive. Still, Thorpe, who is by no -means remarkable for the purity of his English, may have used it in the -sense which Mr. Lee’s theory requires. - -Shakespeare’s sonnets, as is well known, were circulating among his -friends in manuscript, and Mr. Lee has discovered that one William Hall -was well known as an Autolycus among publishers, and had already edited, -under the initials W. H., a collection of poems left by the Jesuit poet, -Southwell--in other words had already done for the publisher, George -Eld, what it is assumed that he now did for Thomas Thorpe. Mr. Lee’s -theory is, it must be admitted, plausible, and few would hesitate to -pronounce it far more probable than the theory which would identify the -enigmatical initials with the names of Pembroke or Southampton. - -The chapters dealing with the sonnets are, in our opinion the most -valuable contribution which has ever been made to this important -province of Shakespearian study, and it may be said of Mr. Lee, as -Porson said of Bentley, that we may learn more from him when he is wrong -than from many others when they are right. His contention is, and it is -supported with exhaustive erudition, that these poems are, in the main, -a concession to the fashion, then so much in vogue, of sonnet writing; -that their themes are the conventional themes treated in those -compositions; that some of them were dedicated to Southampton, that some -may be autobiographical, but that they are wholly miscellaneous, and -tell no consecutive story, as so many critics have erroneously assumed. -We cannot accept all Mr. Lee’s theories and conclusions, but one thing -is certain, that they are supported with infinitely more skill and -learning than any other theories which have been broached on this -hopelessly baffling problem. - -We will conclude by noticing what seem to us slight blemishes in this -admirable work. There is nothing to warrant the assertion on p. 158 that -most of Shakespeare’s sonnets were produced in 1594, which is to cut the -knot of a most difficult question. Indeed, with respect to the whole -question of the sonnets, Mr. Lee is, we venture to submit, a little too -dogmatic. It is a question which no one can settle as positively as Mr. -Lee seems to settle it. There is surely no good, or even plausible -reason for doubting the authenticity of _Titus Andronicus_, whatever -innumerable Shakespearian critics may say, external and internal -evidence alike being almost conclusive for its genuineness. There is -nothing to warrant the supposition that Shakespeare was on bad terms -with his wife. The famous bequest in his Will was probably a delicate -compliment, and we are surprised that Mr. Lee should not have noticed -this. Among the testimonies to Shakespeare in the seventeenth century, -Mr. Lee should have recorded that of Archbishop Sharp, who, according to -Speaker Onslow, used to say “that the Bible and Shakespeare had made him -Archbishop of York.” - -Mr. Lee must also forgive us for adding that, in this work at least, -æsthetic criticism is not his strong point, and he would have done well -to keep it within even narrower bounds than he has done. Many of those -who would be the first to admire his erudition and the other scholarly -qualities which are so conspicuous in every chapter of his book, will, -we fear, take exception to much of his criticism, especially in relation -to the sonnets. It is too positive; it is unsympathetic; it is too -mechanical. But our debt to Mr. Lee is so great, that we feel almost -ashamed to make any deductions in our tribute of gratitude. - - - - -SHAKESPEARE’S SONNETS[30] - -[Footnote 30: _The Mystery of Shakespeare’s Sonnets: an attempted -Elucidation._ By Cuming Walters. _Testimony of the Sonnets as to the -Authorship of the Shakespearian Plays and Poems._ By Jesse Johnson. -_Shakespeare’s Sonnets Reconsidered and in part Re-arranged, with -Introductory Chapters, Notes and a Reprint of the Original 1609 -Edition._ By Samuel Butler.] - - -There goes a story that an ingenuous youth, who had the privilege of an -introduction to Lord Beaconsfield, resolved to make the best of the -occasion, by extracting, if possible, from that astute political sage -the secret of success in life. It might take the form, he thought, of a -little practical advice. For that advice, explaining the object with -which it was asked, he accordingly applied. “Yes,” said Lord -Beaconsfield, “I think I can give you some advice which may possibly be -of use to you. Never trouble yourself about The Man in the Iron Mask, -and never get into a discussion about the authorship of the Letters of -Junius.” In all seriousness we think it is high time that the “closure” -should be applied to a debate on another “mystery” of which every one -must be tired to death, except perhaps those who contribute to it. If -some progress could be made towards the solution of the Mystery of -Shakespeare’s Sonnets, if there was the faintest indication of any dawn -on the darkness, even the wearied reviewer would be patient. But the -thing remains exactly where it was, before this appalling literary -epidemic set in. During the last three or four years scarcely a month -has passed without its “monograph,” many of these treatises, mere -replicas of their predecessors, differing only in degrees of stupidity -and uselessness. Mr. Cuming Walters’ volume, sensible enough and -intelligent, we quite concede, simply thrashes the straw. It professes -to be an original contribution to the question. There is not a view or -theory in it, which is not now a platitude to every one who has had the -patience to follow this controversy. It analyses the Sonnets; they have -been analysed hundreds of times. It asks who was W. H.; it answers the -question as it has been answered _usque ad nauseam_. It discusses the -dark lady, and lands us in the same shifting quagmire of opinion in -which Mr. Tyler and his coadjutors and opponents have been floundering -for the last four years. It assumes, it rejects, it questions, it -suggests, what has been assumed, rejected, questioned, and suggested -over and over again. Indeed, it may now be said with literal truth that, -unless some fresh discovery is made, nothing new, whether in the way of -absurdity or sense, can be advanced on this subject. But books are -multiplied with such rapidity and in such prodigious numbers in these -days, that they thrive, like cannibals, on one another. The last comer -is simply its forgotten predecessor in disguise. - -But platitude is the very last charge that can be brought against Mr. -Jesse Johnson’s contribution to the curiosities of Shakespearian -criticism. The theory advanced here is, that Shakespeare never wrote the -Sonnets at all, that he was quite unequal to their composition, that the -author of them “was probably fifty, perhaps sixty, and that he was -besides a man of genius, which Shakespeare certainly was not. I would -not,” says Mr. Jesse Johnson, “deny to Shakespeare great talent. His -success in and with theatres certainly forbids us to do so. That he had -a bent or a talent for rhyming or for poetry, an early and persistent -tradition and the inscription over his grave indicate. And otherwise -there could hardly have been attributed to him so many plays, besides -those written by the author of the Sonnets.” Shakespeare may have been -equal to trifles like _Hamlet_ or _Lear_--for Mr. Jesse Johnson would be -the last to dispute the claim made for Shakespeare as a hard-working -playwright clearing his twenty-five thousand dollars a year (Mr. Jesse -Johnson is calculating his income according to the present time)--but -“to Shakespeare working as an actor, adapter or perhaps author came a -very great poet, one who outclassed all the writers of that day, and it -is the poetry of that great unknown which, flowing into Shakespeare’s -work, comprises all or nearly all of it which the world treasures or -cares to remember.” If we told Mr. Jesse Johnson, and all who resemble -Mr. Jesse Johnson, the truth about their productions, we are quite -certain of one thing--but the one thing of which we are certain it -would, perhaps, be good taste in us to leave unsaid. - -Of a very different order is Mr. Samuel Butler’s _Shakespeare’s Sonnets -Reconsidered_. This is the work of a scholar, but of a scholar mounted -on a hobby-horse of unusually vigorous mettle. Mr. Butler begins with a -tremendous onslaught on the theories of the Southamptonites, the -Herbertists and the anti-autobiographical party; and in this part of his -work he has certainly much to say which is both pertinent and plausible, -nay, in our opinion, convincing. But he is less successful in -construction than in demolition. His own contention is, that the Sonnets -are undoubtedly autobiographical, and very derogatory to Shakespeare’s -moral character. He is satisfied that “Mr. W. H.” was the youth who -inspired them, not the youth who simply collected, or procured them, and -gave them to Thorpe, but that this youth was neither the Earl of -Southampton nor the Earl of Pembroke, nor, indeed, any one of superior -social rank to the poet, though this has always been assumed. Adopting -the theory of Tyrwhitt and Malone that the key to the youth’s name is to -be found in the seventh line of the twentieth sonnet,-- - - “A man in hew all _Hewes_ in his controlling.” - -and deducing, with them, from Sonnets cxxxv., cxxxvi. and cxliii. that -the youth’s Christian name was William, Mr. Butler believes, as they -did, that the youth’s name was William Hughes, or Hewes; and Mr. Butler -is inclined to identify him, though he speaks, of course, by no means -confidently, with a William Hughes, who served as steward in the -_Vanguard_, _Swiftsure_ and _Dreadnought_, and who died in March, -1636-7. Mr. Butler supports his theories with hypotheses which an -impartial judge of evidence will find it difficult to concede. In the -face of Sonnets xxxvi., xxxvii. and cxxiv. the contention that the youth -was not in a superior social station to the poet cannot be maintained -with any confidence. There are still graver difficulties in the way of -supposing that the Sonnets were written between January, 1585-6 and -December, 1588. That they could be the work of a young man between his -twenty-first and his twenty-fourth year, and have preceded by some four -years the composition of _Venus and Adonis_ and the _Rape of Lucrece_, -is simply incredible; but it is a question which cannot be argued, for -we have nothing but mere hypothesis to go upon. Mr. Butler’s -arrangement and interpretation of the Sonnets are, moreover, purely -fanciful. When Mr. Butler would have us believe that some of the Sonnets -in the second group, from cxxvii. to clii., are addressed to and concern -not the woman, but the youth, he asks us to accept a theory which is not -only revolting, but which sets all probability at defiance. Similarly -absurd, he must forgive us for saying, is his grotesquely repulsive -interpretation of Sonnet xxxiv. Nor is there anything to justify the -interpretation placed on Sonnets xxxiii. and xxxiv. or the collocation -of cxxi. All that can be said for Mr. Butler’s exceedingly ingenious and -admirably argued theory is, that it supports a view of the question -which, if it admits of no positive confutation, produces no conviction. -No theory, based on an arbitrary arrangement of these poems and on -positive deductions drawn, or rather strained, from most ambiguous -evidence and from pure hypotheses, can possibly be satisfactory. - -The problem presented in these Sonnets is undoubtedly the most -fascinating problem in all literature, and it is as exasperating as it -is fascinating. It appears to be so simple, it seems constantly to be on -the verge of its solution, and yet the moment we get beyond a certain -point in inquiry, the more complex its apparent simplicity is discovered -to be, the more hopeless all prospect of explaining the enigma. Take -the difficulty of assuming, what seems to be obvious, that they are -autobiographical. Here we have the poet, and that poet Shakespeare, -admitting the world into the innermost secrets of his life, taking his -contemporaries, without the least reserve, into his confidence, inviting -and assisting them to the study of his own morbid anatomy, and, in a -word, stripping himself bare with all the shameless abandon of Jean -Jacques and of Casanova. Everything that we know of Shakespeare seems to -discountenance the probability of his having any such intention. No -anecdote, with the smallest pretence to authenticity, couples his name -with scandal. The theory which identifies him with the W. S. of -Willobie’s _Avisa_ has no real basis to rest on, and without -corroboration is absolutely inadmissible as evidence. Whatever -Shakespeare’s private life may have been, it is quite clear that he -carefully regarded the decencies, and would have been the last man in -the world to pose publicly in the character presented to us in the -Sonnets. If the poems are autobiographical, we can only conclude that -they were published without his consent, and even to his great -annoyance. This may certainly have been the case, and is indeed often -assumed to have been so. But even then it is, to say the least, curious, -that there should have been no tradition about the extraordinary story -which they tell, especially considering the distinction of the _dramatis -personæ_. Assuming that the youth, who is their hero, was a real person, -he must, judging from Sonnets xxxvi., xxxvii. and cxxiv., have been -conspicuous in the society of that time; assuming the rival poet to be a -real person, he must have been equally conspicuous in another sphere, -while Shakespeare himself, at the time the Sonnets were published, was -the most distinguished poet and playwright in London. It is, therefore, -extraordinary that all traces of an affair in which persons of so much -eminence were involved, and which would have furnished scandal-mongers -with the topics in which such gossips most delight, should have entirely -disappeared. We must either conclude that posterity has been very -unfortunate in the loss of records which would have thrown light on the -matter, or that Shakespeare’s contemporaries knew nothing of the facts, -and contented themselves with the poetry; or, lastly, that what we may -call the fable of the Sonnets, the drama in which W. H., “the dark -lady,” and the rival poet play their parts, is as fictitious as the plot -of _The Midsummer Night’s Dream_ or _The Tempest_. - -It is not our intention to support any of the numerous theories which -pretend to give us the key to these Sonnets, still less to propose any -new one, but simply to show that the enigma presented by them is as -insoluble as ever, and that all attempts to throw light on it have -served to effect nothing more than to make darkness visible and -confusion worse confounded. Let us briefly review the facts. In 1609, -Thomas Thorpe, a well-known Elizabethan bookseller, published a small -quarto volume, entitled _Shakespeare’s Sonnets_, having apparently not -obtained them from the poet himself, and to this volume was prefixed the -following dedication:--“To the onlie begetter of these ensuing Sonnets, -Mr. W. H., all happiness and that eternitie promised by our ever-living -poet wisheth the well-wishing adventurer in setting forth. T. T.” Here -begins and ends all that is certainly known about W. H. and his relation -to these poems. No one knows who he was; no one knows what is exactly -meant by the word “begetter,” whether it is to be taken in the sense of -inspirer, whether that is to say W. H. is the youth celebrated in the -Sonnets--“the master-mistress” of the poet’s passion, or whether it -simply means the person who got or procured the poems for Thorpe,--in -which case the identification of the initials is of no consequence, -unless we are to suppose that the youth who inspired them presented them -to Thorpe. Mr. Sidney Lee, in his very able paper in the _Fortnightly -Review_ for February, 1898, and in his Life of Shakespeare, argues that -there is no proof that the youth of the Sonnets was named “Will,” though -this has always been assumed to be the case. The evidence on which the -point must be argued will be found in the puns on “Will” in Sonnets -cxxxiv.-vi. and cxliii. It seems to us, we must own, that the balance of -probability, though not certainly in favour of the affirmative, -decidedly inclines towards it. Granting then,--for it is, after all, -only an hypothesis,--that the initials W. H. are those of the youth -celebrated in the Sonnets, to whom are they to be assigned? The youth, -whoever he was, is represented as being in a social position superior to -that of the poet; he has apparently rank and title; he has wealth; he is -young and eminently handsome, his beauty being of a delicate, effeminate -cast; he is highly cultivated and accomplished; he is on terms of the -closest intimacy with the poet, by whom he is passionately beloved; he -lives a free, loose life, and he intrigues with his friend’s mistress. - -Passing by all preposterous theories about William Harte, William -Hughes, William Himself and the like, we come to the two names which -seem worth serious consideration, William Herbert, third Earl of -Pembroke, and Henry Wriothesly, third Earl of Southampton. The Pembroke -theory, with Mr. Thomas Tyler’s corollary identifying the “dark lady” -with Mary Fitton, has been adopted by Dr. Brandes in his work on -Shakespeare just published. But the difficulties in the way of accepting -it are insuperable. They have been admirably discussed by Mr. Sidney -Lee in the article to which we have referred. In the first place, while -Shakespeare must have been on terms of more than brotherly intimacy with -the youth of the Sonnets, there is no evidence at all that he had ever -been in any other relation with the Earl than in the ordinary one of -servant and patron. The words of Heminge and Condell, in the dedication -of the first folio to Pembroke and his brother, merely state that they -had both of them “prosequted” him with favour; in other words, been to -him what they had been to many other dramatists and men of letters; and -that is the only evidence of any connection between Shakespeare and -Pembroke. Tradition was certainly silent about any relations between -them, for Aubrey, as Mr. Lee has pointed out, though he has collected -much information about both, says nothing about their acquaintanceship, -though he mentions Pembroke’s connection with Massinger, and -Southampton’s with Shakespeare. But Thorpe’s dedication is conclusive -against Pembroke. In 1609, Pembroke, who had succeeded to the title on -the death of his father in January, 1601, was Lord Chamberlain, a Knight -of the Garter, and one of the most distinguished noblemen in England. Is -it credible that Thorpe would address him as Mr. W. H., more especially -as in the other works which he inscribed to him,--and he inscribed -several,--he is careful to give him all his titles, and to address him -with the most fulsome servility? Again, Pembroke, as Mr. Lee points out, -was never a “Mister” at all. As the eldest son of an earl, he was -designated by courtesy Lord Herbert, and as Lord Herbert he is always -spoken of in contemporary records. The appellation “Mr.” was not, as Mr. -Lee observes, used loosely, as it is now, and could never have been -applied to any nobleman, whether holding his title by right or by -courtesy. Whatever allowance may be made for a poet’s passion and fancy, -some weight must be attached to the insistence made in the Sonnets on -the youth’s delicate and effeminate beauty. It is true that we have no -portraits of Pembroke before he arrived at middle age, but those -portraits justify us in concluding that he could never, at any time, -have been distinguished by beauty of the type indicated in the poems. - -Against all this the advocates of the Pembroke theory have nothing to -place but conjectures, a series of insignificant coincidences and the -assumption that the woman in the Sonnets is to be identified with the -woman who bore Herbert a child, Mary Fitton. The publication of Sonnet -xliv. by Jaggard, in 1599, shows that the intrigue between the youth and -the dark lady, which is the central event of the Sonnets, was already, -and had probably been for some time, in full career, while there is no -evidence that Pembroke was involved with Mary Fitton before the summer -of 1600. But what finally disposes of this theory is the testimony -afforded by Lady Newdigate-Newdegate’s recently published _Gossip from a -Muniment Room_. Indispensable requisites in the lady of the Sonnets are, -that she should be dark, a “black beauty” with “eyes raven black,” with -hair which resembles “black wires,” and that she should be a married -woman; but the portraits--and there are two of them--of Mary Fitton, -show that she had a fair complexion, with brown hair and grey eyes; and -she remained unmarried, until long after her connection with Pembroke -had ceased. - -The theory which identifies W. H. with the Earl of Southampton is -slightly more plausible, but the difficulties in the way of accepting it -are, in truth, equally insuperable. This theory has at least one great -point in its favour. Shakespeare was acquainted, and it may be inferred -intimately acquainted, with Southampton, as the dedications of _Venus -and Adonis_ and the _Rape of Lucrece_ indicate. Of his affection and -respect for this nobleman he has left an expression almost as remarkable -as the language of the sonnets. “The love I dedicate to your lordship is -without end.... What I have done is yours; what I have to do is yours: -being part in all I have devoted yours. Were my worth greater, my duty -would show greater.” This bears a singularly close resemblance to Sonnet -xxvi.,-- - - “Lord of my love, to whom in vassalage - Thy merit hath my duty strongly knit, - To thee I send this written embassage - To witness duty, not to show my wit, - Duty so great, which wit so poor as mine - May make seem bare, in wanting words to show it.” - -And there is much in the Sonnets which can be made to coincide with what -we know of Southampton. But, as we push inquiry, difficulties of all -kinds begin to swarm in on us. The first is, as in the case of Pembroke, -with the dedication. To say nothing of the fact that “W. H.” is not “H. -W.”--the possibility of the appellation of “Mr.” being applied to one -who had been an Earl since 1581, and who had twice been addressed in -dedications by his full titles, and that by Shakespeare himself, is a -wholly inadmissible hypothesis. To argue that this was merely “a blind,” -is simply to beg the question. If the Sonnets were addressed to -Southampton, they must have been written between 1593 and 1598. In 1593 -Southampton was in his twenty-first year, in 1598 in his twenty-sixth; -Shakespeare, respectively, in his thirty-first and thirty-fifth year. -Now, what is especially emphasized in the sonnets is the youthfulness of -the young man to whom they are dedicated, and the advanced age of the -poet. In Sonnet cviii. the youth is addressed as “a sweet boy,” in -cxxvi. as “a lovely boy,” in liv. as “a beauteous and lovely youth”; in -xcv. his “budding name” is referred to, while the poet speaks of -himself as “old,” as “beaten and chopped with tanned antiquity,” as -being “with Time’s injurious hand crushed and o’erworn.” And so, as has -been more than once pointed out, we have this anomaly--a man of -thirty-four describing himself as a thing of “tanned antiquity” in -writing to “a sweet and lovely boy” of twenty-five. No one could have -been less like the effeminate youth of the Sonnets than Southampton. All -we know about him, including his portraits, indicates that he was -eminently masculine and manly. Again, it is matter of history that he -greatly distinguished himself on the Azores expedition in 1597, -acquitting himself with so much gallantry that, during the voyage, he -was knighted by Essex. To this expedition, which must have involved one -of those absences of which we hear so much in the Sonnets, to this -exploit and this honour, which afforded so much opportunity for -peculiarly acceptable compliment, Shakespeare makes no reference at all. -There is nothing to indicate that the youth of the Sonnets had gained -any military or political distinction, had taken any part in public -life, or had ever been absent from England. To assume with Mr. Lee that -the Sonnets were written in or before 1594, and therefore before -Southampton had become distinguished, is to involve ourselves in -inextricable difficulties. Even Mr. Lee admits that Sonnet cvii. must -have reference to the death of Elizabeth in 1603. With regard to the -supposed references to Southampton’s relations with Elizabeth Vernon, no -certain, or, to speak more accurately, no even plausible inferences can -be drawn in any particular: all that they can be reduced to are degrees -of improbability. - -If, again, we accept the theory of Tyrwhitt and Malone, supported by Mr. -Butler, and suppose that W. H. was some obscure person, we are -proceeding on mere hypothesis, and a hypothesis seriously shaken by the -plain meaning expressed in Sonnets xxxvi., xxxvii., and cxxiv. - -The enigma of these Sonnets is, we repeat, as insoluble now as it was -when inquiry was first directed to them. Whether they are to be regarded -as autobiographical, as dramatic studies, as a mixture of both, as a -collection of miscellaneous poems, as written to order for others, as -mere exercises in the sonnet-cycle, or as all of these things, is alike -uncertain. Our knowledge of the time of their composition begins and -ends with the facts, that some of them were, presumably, in circulation -in or before 1598, that two of them had certainly been composed in or -before 1599, and that all of them had been written by 1609. The rest is -mere conjecture; and on mere conjecture and mere hypothesis is based -every attempt to solve their mystery. If certainty about them can ever -be arrived at, it can only be attained by evidence of which, as yet, we -have not even an inkling. The probability is, that it was Shakespeare’s -intention, or rather Thorpe’s intention, to baffle curiosity, and, -except in the judgment of fanatics, he has certainly succeeded in doing -so. - -For our own part we are very much inclined to suspect, that they owed -their origin to the fashion of composing sonnet-cycles, that those -cycles suggested their themes and gave them the ply; that the beautiful -youth, the rival poet, and the dark lady are pure fictions of the -imagination; and that these poems are autobiographical only in the sense -in which _Venus and Adonis_, the _Rape of Lucrece_, _Romeo and Juliet_ -and _Othello_ are autobiographical. - - - - -LANDSCAPE IN POETRY[31] - -[Footnote 31: _Landscape in Poetry from Homer to Tennyson._ By Francis -T. Palgrave.] - - -It would be scarcely possible for a critic of Mr. Palgrave’s taste and -learning to produce a treatise on any aspect of poetry, which would not -be full of interest and instruction, and the present volume is a -contribution, and in some respects a memorable contribution, to a -particularly attractive subject of critical inquiry. Its purpose is to -trace the history of descriptive poetry in its relation, that is to say, -to natural objects and more particularly to landscape, by illustrating -its characteristics at different periods, and among different nations. -Beginning with the Homeric poems, Mr. Palgrave reviews successively the -“landscape” of the Greeks, the Romans, the Hebrews, the mediæval -Italians, the Celts, the Anglo-Saxons, and of our own poets, from the -predecessors of Chaucer to Lord Tennyson. That a work, covering an area -so immense, should be far less satisfactory in some portions than in -others is no more than what might be expected, and Mr. Palgrave would -probably be himself the first to admit that, except when he is dealing -with the classical poetry of Hellas, of ancient and mediæval Italy, and -of our own country, his treatise has no pretension to adequacy. Even -within these bounds there is much which is irrelevant, and much which is -surprisingly defective. Where, as in a subject like this, the material -at the author’s disposal is necessarily so superabundant, surely the -utmost care should have been taken both to keep within the limits of the -theme proposed, and to select the most pertinent and typical -illustrations. But when Mr. Palgrave illustrates “Homeric landscape” by -the simile describing the heifers frisking about the drove of cows in -the fold-yard, and the “Sophoclean landscape” by the simile of the -blast-impelled wave rolling up the shingle, he lays himself open to the -imputation of drawing at random on his commonplace book. Indeed, the -pleasure with which lovers of classical poetry will read this book -cannot fail to be mingled with the liveliest surprise and -disappointment. Take the Homeric poems. If a reader, tolerably well -versed in the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_, were asked for illustrations of the -power with which natural phenomena are described, to what would he turn? -Certainly not to Mr. Palgrave’s meagre and trivial examples, three of -which alone have any title to pertinence. He would turn to the winter -landscape in _Iliad_, xii. 278-286, to the lifting of the cloud from -the landscape in _Iliad_, xvi. 296:-- - - ὡς δ’ ὁτ’ αφ’ ὑψηλης κορυφης ορεος μεγαλοιο - κινηση πυκινην νεφελην στεροπηγερετα Ζευς, - εκ τ’ εφανεν πασαι σκοπιαι και πρωονες ακροι - και ναπαι, ουρανοθεν δ’ αρ’ ὑπερῥαγη ασπετος αιθηρ. - - “As when Zeus, the gatherer of the lightning, moves a thick - cloud from the high head of some mighty mountain, and all the - cliffs and the jutting crags and the dells start into light, - and the immeasurable heaven breaks open to its highest”; - -to the descent of the wind on the sea, _Ib._ xi. 305-308:-- - - ὡς ὁποτε Ζεφυρος νεφεα στυφελιξη - αργεσταο Νοτοιο, βαθειη λαιλαπι τυπτων; - πολλον δε τροφι κυμα κυλινδεται, ὑψοσε δ’ αχνη - σκιδναται εξ ανεμοιο πολυπλαγκτοιο ιωης. - - “As when the west wind buffets the cloudlets of the brightening - south wind, lashing them with furious squall, and the big wave - swells up and rolls along, and the spray is scattered on high - by the blast of the careering gale”; - -or to the pictures of the billow-buffeted headland, and the wave -bursting on the ship in _Iliad_, xv. 618-628; or to the storm-cloud -coming over the sea in _Iliad_, iv. 277; or to the descent of the wind -on the standing corn, _Iliad_, ii. 147. He would point, above all, to -the description of Calypso’s grotto, in _Odyssey_, v. 63-74; to that of -the harbour of Phorcys, in _Odyssey_, xiii. 97-112; to the fountain in -the grove, xvii. 205-211. Mr. Palgrave comments justly on Homer’s minute -observation of nature; but he only gives one illustration, where it is -noticed in _Odyssey_, vi. 94, that the sea, in beating on the coast, -“washed the pebbles clean.” He might have added with propriety many -others: as the “earth blackening behind the plough,” in _Iliad_, xviii. -548; the bats in the cave, _Odyssey_, xxiv. 5-8; the birds escaping from -the vultures, _Iliad_, xxii. 304, 305; the wasps “wriggling as far as -the middle,” σφηκες μεσον αιολοι, _Iliad_, xii. 167; the dogs -and the lions, _Iliad_, xviii. 585, 586. - -Mr. Palgrave observes that Homer “was not only familiar with the sea, -but loved it with a love somewhat unusual in poets.” We venture to -submit that there is not a line in Homer indicating that he “loved” the -sea, except for poetical purposes; like most of the Greeks he probably -dreaded it; his real feeling towards it is no doubt indicated in his own -words:-- - - ου γαρ εγω γε τι φημι κακωτερον αλλο θαλασσης ανδρα - γε συγχευαι. - ---nothing crushes a man’s spirit more than the sea. Mr. Palgrave justly -points out that Hesiod’s rude prosaic style and matter are not congenial -to the poetic landscape, yet it is only fair to Hesiod to say, that his -poetry is not without vivid touches of natural description, as the -winter scene in _Works and Days_, 504 sqq., and his description of the -beginning of spring, 565-569, show. Professor Palgrave next glances at -the treatment of nature in the lyric poets, and very properly cites the -lovely fragment of Alcman: - - βαλε δη βαλε κηρυλος ειην - ὁς τ’ επι κυματος ανθος ἁμ’ αλκυονεσσι ποτηται, - νηλεγες ητορ εχων, ἁλιπορφυρος ειαρος ορνις,-- - -but in translating it makes a truly extraordinary blunder. - - “Would I were the kingfisher, as he flies, with his mates _in - his feeble age_, between wind and water.” - -νηλεγες ητορ meaning, as we need hardly say, “reckless heart”; -it is exactly Byron’s, “With all her _reckless_ birds upon the wing.” In -the quotations from Sappho, Ibycus, and Pindar, Mr. Palgrave has been -judicious and happy, but surely he ought to have found place for the -lovely flower cradle of Iamus in the sixth Olympic Ode, and for the -moonlight evening in the third Olympian,--only seven words, but what a -picture!--while, in the popular poetry, the omission of the Swallow Song -is inexplicable.[32] Nor can we forgive him the omission of the -magnificent simile of the spring wind clearing away the clouds, in the -thirteenth of the fragments attributed to Solon. - -But it is in dealing with the Greek dramatists that Mr. Palgrave is most -defective in illustration. It is not to the opening of the _Prometheus_, -or to the conclusion, or, indeed, to any of the passages from this poet -which Mr. Palgrave cites, that we must turn for Æschylean landscape, or -for illustration of this poet’s power of natural description. It is to -his brief picture--his pictures of scenery, though singularly vivid, are -always brief--of the airy seat “against which the watery clouds drift -into snow,” - - λισσας αιγιλιψ απροσδεικτος οιοφρων κρεμας - γυπιας πετρα (_Supplices_, 772-3), - -where almost every word is a perfect picture, literally beggaring mere -translation; it is to his description, so magical in its rhythm, of the -mid-day sea slumbering in summer calm (_Agamemnon_, 548-50), - - η θαλπος, ευτε ποντος εν μεσημβριναις - κοιταις ακυμων νηνεμοις ευδοι πεσων, - -to his picture of the keen brisk wind, clearing the clouds away, to -bring into relief against the sky the dark masses of waves tossing on -the horizon (_Agamemnon_, 1152-54), to his world-famous - - ποντιων κυματων - ανηριθμον γελασμα. - - “The multitudinous laughter of the ocean waves.” - - --_Prometheus_, 89-90. - -Mr. Palgrave has, of course, cited with reference to Sophocles the great -chorus in the _Œdipus Coloneus_, but he has omitted to notice that, -if Sophocles has not elsewhere given us so elaborate a piece of natural -description, innumerable touches in the dramas, and more particularly -in the fragments, show that he observed nature almost as minutely as -Shakespeare. Nothing could be more vivid than the touches of description -in the _Philoctetes_. From Euripides Mr. Palgrave cites nothing, -observing that he rarely goes beyond somewhat conventional phrases. -Surely Mr. Palgrave must have forgotten the magnificent description of -Parnassus, as seen from the plain, in the _Phœnissæ_, the glorious -description of a moonlight night, as represented on the tapestry, in the -_Ion_, the vivid touches of natural description in the _Bacchæ_, that of -the meadow in the _Hippolytus_, and the chorus about Athens in the -_Medea_, to say nothing of the charming rural picture in the fragments -of the _Phaeton_.[33] To say of Aristophanes that, in his treatment of -nature, he rarely goes beyond somewhat common phrases, is to say what is -refuted, not merely in the chorus referred to by Mr. Palgrave, but in -the _Frogs_ and in the _Birds_. He stands next to Homer in his keen -sensibility to the charm of nature. Shelley himself might have written -the choruses referred to. In dealing with the Alexandrian poets Mr. -Palgrave passes over Apollonius Rhodius and Callimachus entirely, and -yet the fine picture of Delos given by Callimachus in the Hymn to Delos -is one of the gems of ancient description, and Apollonius Rhodius -abounds with the most graphic and charming delineations of scenery and -natural objects. What a beautiful description of early morning is -this!-- - - ημος δ’ ουρανοθεν χαροπη ὑπολαμπεται ηως - εκ περατης ανιουσα, διαγλαυσσουσι δ’ αταρποι, - και πεδια δροσοεντα φαεινη λαμπεται αιγλη. - - _Argon._ i. 1280-1283. - - “What time from heaven the bright glad morn coming up from the - East begins to shine, and path and road are all agleam, and the - dew-bespangled plains are flashing with the radiant light.” - -How vivid too, and with the vividness of modern poetry, are his -descriptions of the cave of Hades and its neighbourhood (ii. 729-750), -and the Great Syrtis (iv. 1230-1245)! In his selections from the Greek -Anthology Mr. Palgrave is much happier; but here again he has many -omissions, and among them the most remarkable illustration of Greek -nature-painting to be found in that collection--namely, Meleager’s idyll -giving an elaborate description of a spring day, which might have been -written by Thomson (_Pal. Anthology_, ix. 363). It may be observed in -passing that ουρεσιφοιτα κρινα (_Pal. Anth._, v. 144) can -hardly mean “lilies that wander over the hills,” but lilies “that haunt -the hills,” and that ξουθαι μελισσαι in Theocritus, vii. 142, -probably means “buzzing” bees, not “tawny.” - -In dealing with the Roman poets Mr. Palgrave is, with one exception, -most unsatisfactory. From the poets preceding Lucretius, amply as the -fragments would serve his purpose, he gives only one illustration. We -should have expected the vivid picture given by Accius in his -_Œnomaus_ of the early morning: - - “Forte ante Auroram, radiorum ardentum indicem, - Cum e somno in segetem agrestis cornutos cient, - Ut rorulentas terras ferro rufidas - Proscindant, glebasque arvo ex molli exsuscitent.” - - “Perchance before the dawn that heralds the burning rays, what - time rustics bring forth the oxen from their sleep into the - cornfields, to break up the red dew-spangled soil with the - ploughshare, and turn up the clods from the soft soil”; - -or the wonderfully graphic description of a sudden storm at sea, in the -fragments of the _Dulorestes_ of Pacuvius: - - “Profectione læti piscium lasciviam - Intuentur, nec tuendi capere satietas potest. - Interea prope jam occidente sole inhorrescit mare, - Tenebræ conduplicantur, noctisque et nimbum occæcat nigror, - Flamma inter nubes coruscat, cælum tonitru contremit, - Grando mixta imbri largifico subita præcipitans cadit, - Undique omnes venti erumpunt, sævi existunt turbines, - Fervit æstu pelagus.” - - “Glad at heart when they set out they gaze at the sporting - fish, and are never weary of looking at them. Meanwhile, hard - upon sunset, the sea ruffles, darkness gathers thick, the - blackness of the storm-clouded night hides everything, flame - flashes between the clouds, heaven shakes with thunder, hail, - mingled with streaming rain, dashes suddenly down, from every - quarter all the winds tear forth, wild whirlwinds rise, the sea - boils with the seething waters.” - -With Lucretius, indeed, he deals fully, and this portion of his work -leaves little to be desired. But a reference to the lines to Sirmio and -one illustration from the _Peleus and Thetis_ exhaust his examples from -Catullus. We should have expected the picture of the stream leaping from -the mossy rock into the valley beneath, in the Epistle to Manlius, of -the morning chasing away the shadows in the _Attis_, and the lovely -flower pictures in the Epithalamia. In dealing with Virgil most of Mr. -Palgrave’s citations are practically irrelevant; scarcely any of the -passages which best illustrate Virgil’s power of landscape painting -being even referred to. “The _Æneid_,” says Mr. Palgrave, “may be -briefly dismissed. Natural description can have but little place in an -epic.” And yet what are the passages to which any one, who wishes to -illustrate the charm and power of Virgil’s pictures of scenery, would -naturally turn? Surely to these: the description of the rocky recess -which sheltered Æneas’s ships (_Æneid_, i. 159-168), a picture worthy of -Salvator; the picture of Ætna (iii. 570-582), which rivals the picture -of it given by Pindar, a picture praised so justly by Mr. Palgrave -himself; the description of a calm night (iv. 522-527); the -wave-buffeted, gull-haunted rock (v. 124-128); and, above all, the -scenery at the mouth of the Tiber, bathed in the rays of the morning -sun, a picture unexcelled even by Tennyson. Nor even in the _Georgics_ -is any reference made to the superb description of a storm in harvest -time (i. 216-334), or to the magnificent winter piece (iii. 349-370). - -The remarks about the indifference of Propertius to natural scenery are -most unjust. What a charming picture is this!-- - - “Grata domus Nymphis humida Thyniasin, - Quam supra nullæ pendebant debita curæ - Roscida desertis poma sub arboribus; - Et circum irriguo surgebant lilia prato - Candida purpureis mixta papaveribus.” - - _El._, I. xx. 35-39. - -It may be conceded that Ovid is conventional and commonplace in his -treatment of nature; but why is Valerius Flaccus, with his bold, vivid -touches, left unnoticed? Why does one citation suffice for the many -exquisite cameos which ought to have been given from Statius? Another -inexplicable omission in Mr. Palgrave’s work is the poem entitled -_Rosæ_, attributed to Ausonius--a lovely poem, infinitely more beautiful -than the epigram quoted by Mr. Palgrave from the Latin Anthology, and -rivalling the fragment given by him from Tiberianus. Most readers would -agree with him in his estimate of Claudian, but he might have added the -fine description of Olympus in the _De Consulatu Theodori_, 200-210: - - “Ut altus Olympi - Vertex, qui spatio ventos hiemesque relinquit, - Perpetuum nullâ temeratus nube serenum - Celsior exsurgit pluviis, auditque ruentes - Sub pedibus nimbos, et rauca tonitrua calcat;” - -which Goldsmith, by the way, has borrowed and paraphrased in the -_Deserted Village_, together with its sublime application: - - As some tall cliff that lifts its awful form - Swells from the vale and midway leaves the storm, - Though round its breast the rolling clouds are spread, - Eternal sunshine settles round its head. - -Space does not serve to follow Mr. Palgrave through his chapters on -Italian, Celtic, and Anglo-Saxon poetry, in all of which his omissions -are as remarkable as his citations; so we must content ourselves with -making a few remarks on his treatment of the English poets. It is -pleasing to see that, guided by Gray, he has done justice to Lydgate, -but he has not noticed the distinguishing peculiarity of this poet in -his description, his extraordinary sensitive appreciation of colour. - -Among the Scotch poets of the fifteenth century a prominent place should -have been given to Henryson who is not even mentioned. Mr. Palgrave -hurries over the Elizabethan poets with too much expedition, and the -poets of the eighteenth century fare even worse. Great injustice is done -to Thomson. Why did not Mr. Palgrave, instead of citing what he calls -Thomson’s “cold” tropical landscape, for the purpose of contrasting it -unfavourably with Tennyson’s picture in _Enoch Arden_, give us instead -the Summer morning-- - - “At first faint gleaming in the dappled East - ... Young day pours in apace, - And opens all the lawny prospect wide, - The dripping rock, the mountain’s misty tops - Swell on the sight, and brighten with the dawn, - Blue through the dusk the smoking currents shine,” - -or - - “The clouds that pass, - For ever flushing round a summer sky”; - -or the rainbow in the _Lines to the Memory of Sir Isaac Newton_? Dyer -may be somewhat prosaic, but he is not a poet to be despatched in a -treatise on descriptive poetry, without citation, in a few contemptuous -lines: how vivid is his picture of a calm in the tropics!-- - - “The dewy feather, on the cordage hung, - Moves not; the flat sea shines, like yellow gold - Fused in the fire”; - -or his - - “Rocks in ever-wild - Posture of falling”; - -or the charming landscape in _Grongar Hill_ with such touches as these: - - “The windy summit wild and high - Roughly rushing on the sky”; - -or - - “Rushing from the woods the spires - Seem from hence ascending fires.” - -As Wordsworth said, “Dyer’s beauties are innumerable and of a high -order.” It is very surprising that nothing should have been said about -Shenstone and the Wartons, about Scott of Amwell, Jago, Crowe and -Bowles, all of whom are, in various ways, remarkable as descriptive -poets. And certainly Mr. Palgrave does scant justice to Cowper; his -touch may be prosaic, but he always had his eye on the object, and his -landscape lives. Surely, by the way, Mr. Palgrave is mistaken in -supposing that Shelley apparently understood Alastor to mean a -“wanderer”; he understood it, as the preface shows, to mean, what it -means so often in Greek, “one under the spell of an avenging deity.” - -Here we must break off. Mr. Palgrave’s is an important work, and it is -the duty, therefore, of a critic to review it seriously, in the hope -that, should it reach a second edition, which may be confidently -anticipated, Mr. Palgrave may be disposed to do a little more justice to -his most interesting subject. - - Since this article was written Mr. Palgrave’s lamented death - has unhappily rendered all hope of what was anticipated in the - last paragraph, vain. But the review has been reprinted, and - with some additions, in the hope that it may not be - unacceptable as a contribution, however slight and imperfect, - to a subject of great interest to lovers of poetry. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 32: See Bergk, Poet. Lyr. _Carm._ Pop. xxix.] - -[Footnote 33: Nauck, _Trag. Græc. Frag._, p. 473.] - - - - -AN APPRECIATION OF PROFESSOR PALGRAVE - - -A familiar figure in literary circles, a fine critic, a graceful and -scholarly minor poet, and one whose name will long be held in -affectionate remembrance by lovers of English poetry, has passed away in -the person of Francis Turner Palgrave. It would be absurd to place him -beside Matthew Arnold--to whose genius, to whose characteristic -accomplishments, to whose authority and influence, he had no pretension. -And yet it may be questioned whether, after Arnold, any other critic of -our time contributed so much to educate public taste where, in this -country, it most needs such education. If, as a nurse of poets and in -poetic achievement, England stands second to no nation in Europe, in no -nation in the world has the standard of popular taste been so low, has -the insensibility to what is excellent, and the perverse preference of -what is mediocre to what is of the first order, been so signally, so -deplorably, conspicuous. The generation which produced Wordsworth -preferred Moore, and no less a person than the author of _Vanity Fair_ -wrote:--“Old daddy Wordsworth may bless his stars if he ever gets high -enough in Heaven to black Tommy Moore’s boots.” While the readers of -Keats might have been numbered on his fingers, Robert Montgomery’s -_Satan_ and _Omnipresence of the Deity_ were going through their twelfth -editions. During many years, for ten readers of Browning’s poems there -were a hundred thousand for Martin Tupper’s _Proverbial Philosophy_, -while the popularity of Mrs. Browning was as a wan shadow to the -meridian splendour of Eliza Cook. Whoever will turn to the criticism of -current reviews and magazines forty years ago will have no difficulty in -understanding the diathesis described by Matthew Arnold as “on the side -of beauty and taste, vulgarity; on the side of morality and feeling, -coarseness; on the side of mind and spirit, unintelligence.” Whoever -will turn to nine out of the ten Anthologies, most in vogue before 1861, -will understand, that the same instinct which in the Dark Ages led man -to prefer Sedulius and Avitus to Catullus and Horace, Statius to Virgil, -and Hroswitha to Terence, led these editors to analogous selections. - -Making every allowance for the co-operation of other causes, it would -hardly be an exaggeration to say that the appearance of the _Golden -Treasury of Songs and Lyrics_ in 1861 initiated an era in popular taste. -It remains now incomparably the best selection of its kind in -existence. Its distinctive feature is the characteristic which -differentiates it from all the anthologies which preceded or have -followed it. It was to include nothing which was not first-rate; there -was to be no compromise with the second-rate; if its gems varied, as -gems do in value, each was to be of the first water. With patient and -scrupulous diligence, the whole body of English poetry, from Surrey to -Wordsworth, was explored and sifted. After due rejections, each piece in -the residue was considered, weighed, tested. And here Mr. Palgrave had -assistance, more invaluable than any other anthologist in the world has -had--that of the illustrious poet to whom the volume was dedicated. It -may be safely said of Tennyson that nature and culture had qualified him -for being as great a critic as he was a poet. His taste was probably -infallible; his touchstones and standards were derived not merely from -the masters who had taught him his own art, but from a wonderfully -catholic and sympathetic communion with all that was best in every -sphere of influential artistic activity. The consequence is, that a book -like the _Golden Treasury_, especially when taken in conjunction with -the notes, which form an admirable commentary on the text, may be said -to lay something more than the foundation of a sound critical education. -What the _Golden Treasury_ is to readers of a maturer age the -_Children’s Treasury_ is to younger readers. It is a great pity that -such inferior works as many which we could name are allowed, in our -schools, to supplant such a work as Palgrave’s. The same exquisite taste -and nice discernment mark his other anthologies, his selections from -Herrick, and Tennyson, and, though perhaps in a less degree, his -_Treasury of English Sacred Poetry_, and his recently published -supplement to the _Golden Treasury_. It is probably impossible to -over-estimate the salutary influence which these works have exercised. - -There is no arguing on matters of taste, and exception might easily be -taken, sometimes, to his dicta as a critic. But this at least must be -conceded by everybody, that in the best and most comprehensive sense of -the term he was a man of classical temper, taste, and culture, and that -he had all the insight and discernment, all the instincts and -sympathies, which are the result of such qualifications. He had no taint -of vulgarity, of charlatanism, of insincerity. He never talked or wrote -the cant of the cliques or of the multitude. He understood and clung to -what was excellent; he had no toleration for what was common and second -rate; he was not of the crowd. He belonged to the same type of men as -Matthew Arnold and William Cory, a type peculiar to our old Universities -before things took the turn which they are taking now. It will be long -before we shall have such critics again, and their loss is -incalculable. - -As a scholar Palgrave was rather elegant than profound or exact, and, to -judge from a series of lectures delivered by him as Professor of Poetry -at Oxford, on _Landscape in Classical Poetry_, and afterwards published -in a work which is here reviewed, his acquaintance with the Greek and -Roman poets was, if scholarly and sympathetic, somewhat superficial. But -he was getting old, and perhaps he had lost his memory or his notes. As -a poet he was the author of four volumes, the earliest, published in -1864, entitled _Idylls and Songs_, and the latest, published in 1892, -_Amenophis; and other Poems_. But his most ambitious effort appeared in -1882, _Visions of England_, written with the laudable purpose of -stirring up in the young the spirit of patriotism. His poetry may be -described, not inaptly, in the sentence in which Dr. Johnson sums up the -characteristics of Addison’s verses:--“Polished and pure, the production -of a mind too judicious to commit faults, but not sufficiently vigorous -to attain excellence.” Perhaps they served their end in procuring for -him the honourable appointment which he filled competently for ten -years--that of the Professorship of Poetry at Oxford. It may be said of -him as was said of Southey, he was a good man and not a bad poet, or of -Agricola, _decentior quam sublimior fuit_. But as a critic of Belles -Lettres he was excellent. - - - - -ANCIENT GREEK AND MODERN LIFE[34] - -[Footnote 34: _Some Aspects of the Greek Genius._ By S. H. Butcher, -Litt. D., LL.D. London.] - - -That a second edition of Professor Butcher’s essays on _Some Aspects of -the Greek Genius_ should have been called for so soon is assuredly a -very significant fact. And it is significant in more ways than one. It -not only goes far to refute Lord Coleridge’s theory that Greek has lost -its hold on modern life, but it furnishes one of the many proofs, which -we have recently had, that people are beginning to understand what is -now to be expected from classical scholars, if classical scholars are to -hold their own in the world of to-day, and that scholars are, in their -turn, aware that they no longer constitute an esoteric guild for -esoteric studies. The task of the purely philological labourer has been -accomplished. During more than four centuries, succeeding schools of -literal critics have been toiling to furnish mankind with the means of -unlocking the treasures of classical Greece. Till within comparatively -recent times, the power of reading the Greek classics with accuracy and -ease was an accomplishment beyond the reach of any but specialists. -Unless a student was prepared to grapple with the difficulties of -unsettled and often unintelligible texts, to make his own grammar--nay, -his own dictionary--to choose between conflicting and contradictory -interpretations, and, in a word, to possess all that now would be -required in a classical editor, it would be impossible for him to read, -with any comfort, a chorus of Æschylus or Sophocles, an ode of Pindar, -or a speech in Thucydides. But now all these difficulties have vanished. -Excellent lexicons, grammars, commentaries, and translations, with -settled texts, and editions of the principal Greek classics so -satisfactory that practically they leave nothing to be desired, have -rendered what was once the monopoly of mere scholars common property. -The power of reading Greek with accuracy and comfort is now, indeed, -within the reach of any person of average intelligence and industry. - -But prescription and tradition are tenacious of their privileges. Greek -has so long been regarded as the inheritance of philologists, that they -are not prepared to resign what was once their exclusive possession, -without a struggle. It is useless to point out to them that, if Greek is -to maintain its place in modern education, it can only maintain it by -virtue of its connection with the humanities, by virtue of its -intrinsic value as the expression of genius and art, and of its -historical value as the key to the development and characteristics of -the classics of the modern world; by virtue, in fine, of its relation to -life, and its relation to History and Criticism. The revival, indeed, of -the _trivium_ and _quadrivium_ of the Middle Ages would not be an -absurder anachronism than it is to draw no distinction between the -functions and aims of classical scholarship, when it was, necessarily, -confined to philologists and specialists, and its functions and aims at -the present day. It has been the obstinate determination on the part of -academic bodies not to recognise this distinction, but to preserve Greek -as the monopoly of those who approach it only on the side of -philological specialism, which has led to its complete dissociation in -our scholastic system from what constitutes its chief, almost its sole -title to preservation. At Cambridge, for example, it has been expressly -excluded from the only School in which the study of Literature has been -organized, and an attempt to substitute Modern Languages in its -place--for a degree in arts--was only defeated by the intervention of -non-resident members of the University. At Oxford a scheme for a “School -of Literature,” in which Greek was to have no place, might, not long ago -have been carried, and the casting vote of the proctor alone saved the -University from this disgrace, and Greek from a crushing blow.[35] But, -fortunately for the cause of Greek, there is every indication that a -reaction, too strong for academic bodies to resist, is setting in. -Scholars are beginning to see that what Socrates did for Philosophy must -now be done for Greek, if Greek is to hold its own. Thus, it has -preserved, and no doubt may preserve, its esoteric side; but that which -constitutes its chief, its real importance--which justifies its -retention in modern education--is not what appeals, and can only appeal, -in each generation, to a small circle of “specialists”--its philological -interest, but what appeals to liberal intelligence, to men as men, to -the poet, to the philosopher, to the orator, to the critic. To this end, -to what may be described as the vitalization of Greek, all the labours -of the late Professor Jowett were directed; and by his means Plato, -Thucydides, and Aristotle are brought into influential relation with -modern life. What he effected for them Professor Jebb has effected for -Sophocles, and not only has this unrivalled Greek scholar placed within -the reach of any person of average intelligence all that is necessary -for the elucidation of the language, art, and philosophy of the -Shakespeare of the Athenian stage, but he has not disdained to furnish a -popular manual of Homeric study, and a popular elementary guide-book to -Greek literature. Professor Lewis Campbell has laboured in the same -field and in the same cause. Great also have been the services rendered -to the popularization of Greek by Mr. Andrew Lang, Mr. Ernest Myers, Mr. -Walter Leaf, and many other distinguished scholars, all of whom have -shown, both by their published works and as lecturers, that the -masterpieces of ancient Greece may become as intelligible and -influential in the world of to-day as they were more than two thousand -years ago. - -We welcome with joy the advent of Professor Butcher among these -prophets. Few names stand higher than his in the roll of modern -scholars, and assuredly few modern scholars possess, in so large a -measure, the power of applying scholarship to the purposes of liberal -criticism and exegesis. He has written a delightful book, in a pleasant -style, full of learning, suggestive, stimulating, a book which no -student of Greek literature can lay down without a hearty feeling of -gratitude to the author. Porson said of Bentley that more might be -learned from his work when he was in error than from the work of a rival -scholar when he was in the right. We shall not presume to accuse -Professor Butcher of error, but we are bound to say that there is much -in his book which appears to us very questionable, and much also from -which we entirely dissent. - -Professor Butcher discusses, for example, at great length, the leading -characteristics of the Greek temper, but, in drawing his conclusions, he -has not sufficiently distinguished between what was more or less -accidental and what was essentially peculiar. The fact is that nothing -is so easy as generalisations of this kind, if the deduction of half -truth be our aim; and nothing so difficult if whole truth, or truth -which may be accepted without reserve, is to be the result. The most -mobile, plastic, Protean people who have ever lived, their activity, -within the strict limits of classical literature, extended over about -six centuries, and, if we protract it to the point included in Professor -Butcher’s illustrations, to more than nine centuries. Of their -literature, though we appear to have the best of it, not a third part -has survived. By an adroit use of illustration, it is, therefore, easy -to predicate anything of them. Go to serious epic, to serious as -distinguished from passionate lyric, to tragedy, to threnody, and they -were, if you please, the gravest people on earth’s face; go to -Aristophanes and to the poets of the Old Comedy, and they were the -merriest; go to the Ionic Elegists and to the fragments of the New -Comedy, and they were the saddest and most cynical; go to Thucydides, -Plato, and Aristotle, and they were, like Dante’s sages, _ni tristi ni -lieti_. We do not quarrel with Professor Butcher’s general position in -his Essay on the melancholy of the Greeks, or question that there -existed in certain moods a profound melancholy and dissatisfaction with -life in the Greek temper. But of what intelligent and reflective people -or individual who have ever existed is this not equally true? Where we -do quarrel with Professor Butcher is on the following point, the point -on which he chiefly rests in proving that the Greeks were pre-eminently -distinguished by pessimistic melancholy--an assertion that we deny _in -toto_. He tells us that, with one notable exception, to which he -subsequently adds three others, the Greeks regarded hope not as a solace -and support in life, but as a snare and a delusion, not as a power to -cling to, but as an influence fraught with mischief. Nothing surely can -be more erroneous. The wisest people who have ever lived are not likely -to have confounded baseless and flighty desires or aspirations with what -is implied in hope, though Professor Butcher has done so in the -illustrations advanced by him in support of his theory. All through -Greek literature, from Hesiod to Theocritus--not to go further--the -importance and wisdom of cherishing hope, as one of the chief supports -of life, are emphatically dwelt on. Professor Butcher has surely -misrepresented--certainly Æschylus and the Greeks generally did not -interpret it in the sense in which he has done--the fable of Pandora’s -chest. It was not “as part of the deadly gift of the goddess” that hope -was there; it was as the one blessing amid the crowd of ills. “As long -as a man lives,” says Theognis, “let him wait on hope.... Let him pray -to the gods; and to Hope let him sacrifice first and last” (1143-1146). -Pindar, if he warns man against baseless, wild, or extravagant -expectation, is emphatic on the wisdom of cherishing hope. It is “the -sweet nurse of the heart in old age,” “the chief helmsman of man’s -versatile will.” (_Fragment_, 233.) “A man should cherish good hope.” -(_Isth._, vii. 15.) “It is the wing on which soaring manhood is -supported.” (Pythian, viii. 93.) “The wise,” says Euripides, “must -cherish hope.” (_Frag. of Ino._) Again: “Prudent hope must be your stay -in misfortune.” (_Id._) Life, he says in the _Troades_ (628), is -preferable to death, in that it has hopes. A sentiment repeated by -Euripides again in the _Hercules Furens_ (105-6): “That man is the -bravest who trusts to hope under all circumstances; to be without hope -is the part of a coward.” So Menander: “Hold before yourself the shield -of good hope.” (_Incert. Frag._ xlvii.) The passages quoted by Professor -Butcher from Thucydides are not to the point. It would have been much -more to the point had he quoted the passage in which Pericles eulogizes -those who “committed to hope the uncertainty of success” (II. 42), or -the passage (I. 70) in which the superiority of the Athenians to the -Lacedæmonians in civil and military efficiency is largely attributed to -their reliance on hope. Again, what, according to Cephalus, in the -_Republic_, is the chief solace of old age?--“The abiding presence of -sweet hope.” But it would be easy to multiply indefinitely from the -Greek classics what Professor Butcher calls “rare examples of hope in -the happier aspect.” - -The most important chapters in Professor Butcher’s work--indeed they -occupy nearly one half of it--are those dealing with Aristotle’s theory -of fine art and poetry. On no subject in criticism have there been so -many misconceptions current and influential even among scholars, -originating for the most part from mistranslations and misunderstandings -of the treatise in which they find their chief embodiment--the -_Poetics_. This has unfortunately come down to us in a very imperfect -and corrupt state, and, what is more unfortunate still, it became a -classic in criticism long before it was properly understood. Thus, in -the clause in the famous definition of tragedy, where Aristotle -describes it as δι’ ελεου και φοβου περαινουσα την των τοιουτων -παθηματων καθαρσιν, “through pity and fear effecting the purgation of -these emotions,” the French and English critics of the seventeenth and -eighteenth centuries, ignoring the words των τοιουτων, have -totally misinterpreted the passage, and given it a meaning which was not -only not intended by Aristotle, but which has falsified his whole theory -of the scope and functions of tragedy. An unsound text, the insertion -of αλλα before the clause, sent Lessing on a wrong track. From -the misinterpretation of another passage in the treatise (V. 4) has been -deduced the famous doctrine of the Unities. The mistranslation of -σπουδαιος in the definition of Tragedy, and of the same word in -the comparison between Poetry and History, has led to misconceptions on -other points. The scholars who did most in England to place the study of -this treatise on a sound footing were Twining and Tyrwhitt. In the -present century it has received exhaustive illustration from -Saint-Hilaire, Stahr, Susemihl, Vahlen, Teichmüller, Ueberweg, Reinkens, -Jacob Bernays, and others; while such works as E. Müller’s _Geschichte -der Theorie der Kunst bei den Alten_ have thrown general light on the -question of Greek æsthetics. That Professor Butcher has not been able to -advance anything new in these essays is very creditable to him, for the -simple reason that, as all that is worth saying has been said, his sole -resource, had he attempted to be original, would have been paradox and -sophistry. With regard to the question of the _Katharsis_, it will -probably be, for all time, a case of “quot homines tot sententiæ”; and -we have certainly no intention of accompanying Professor Butcher into -this labyrinth. We entirely agree with him and Bernays that the passage -in the _Politics_ (V. viii. 7) settles conclusively at least one part of -the meaning, but we differ from Bernays, in contending that the -“lustratio” is included, and from Professor Butcher, in contending that -the “lustratio” is not effected merely by the relief. Professor Butcher -seems here indeed to be a little confused, or at all events confusing. -He first explains “katharsis” as “a purging away of the emotions of pity -and fear,” and then explains it as “a purifying of them”; but it is -neither easy to understand how “purging away” is “purifying,” nor why we -should “purify” what we “purge away.” Surely it is better--but we speak -with all submission--to take the word in two different meanings, the one -signifying the immediate effect of tragedy in its direct appeal to the -passions referred to, the other not to its immediate, but to its -ulterior and total effect in educating the passions thus excited. - -Professor Butcher, who appears to belong to the Pater School, dwells -with great complacency on the fact that Aristotle “attempted to separate -the function of æsthetics from that of morals,” that “he made the end of -art reside in a pleasurable emotion,” that he says “nothing of any moral -aim in poetry,” and that though he often takes exception to Euripides as -an artist, “he attaches no blame to him for the immoral tendency in some -of his dramas,” so severely censured by Aristophanes. If Professor -Butcher implies, as he seems to imply by this, that Aristotle would lend -any countenance to the modern art-for-art’s-sake doctrine, and -proceeded on the assumption that there was no necessary connection -between æsthetics and morals, he does Aristotle very great injustice, -and is refuted by the _Poetics_ themselves. In the fifth chapter -Aristotle lays stress on the fact that tragedy is, like epic, a -representation of “superior or morally good characters” (μιμησις -σπουδαιων)--that the characters are to be good (χρηστα). In -the twenty-fifth chapter he says that nothing can excuse the exhibition -of moral depravity (μοχθηρια), unless it be one of the things -implicit in the plot; and that among the most serious objections which -can be brought against a drama is that it is likely to do moral harm -(βλαβερα). In the thirteenth chapter he shows,--and on moral -grounds,--why the protagonist in a tragedy should not be a perfectly -good man or a perfectly bad man. Indeed, the very definition of tragedy -refutes Professor Butcher’s statement. It may be said, no doubt, that -Aristotle maintains that the end of poetry is pleasure, but it must be -“the proper pleasure,” and in the proper pleasure moral satisfaction is -implied.[36] It is only by a quibble that Professor Butcher’s theory can -be supported, and it is a pity to quibble on subjects which may be so -mischievously misunderstood. Aristotle was, we suspect, very much nearer -to Ben Jonson and Milton than to Mr. Pater in his conception of the -functions and scope of poetry. - -In the interesting essay on Sophocles there are two statements which -appear to us very questionable. It is surely not true to say that -Sophocles was “the first of the Greeks who has clearly realized that -suffering is not always penal.” Who could have expressed this truth more -forcibly than Æschylus? To say nothing of the well-known passage in the -_Agamemnon_, 167-171:-- - - Ζηνα ... - τον φρονειν βροτους ὁδωσαντα, τον παθει μαθος - θεντα κυριως εχειν. - σταζει δ’ εν θ’ ὑπνω προ καρδιας - μνησιπημων πονος, και παρ’ ακοντας ηλθε σωφρονειν,-- - -the doctrine of which is repeated in 241-2 of the same play, and in -other passages in his dramas, notably in _Choephoroe_, 950-955, and in -_Eumenides_, 495, συμφερει σωφρονειν ὑπο στενει. The fact -that suffering and calamity have resulted in blessing is emphasized as -strongly in the concluding drama of the Orestean Trilogy, the -_Eumenides_, as it is in the _Œdipus Coloneus_. Again, when Professor -Butcher says that “in Sophocles the divine righteousness asserts itself -not in the award of happiness or misery to the individual, but in the -providential wisdom which assigns to each individual his place and -function in a universal moral order,” he says what it is very difficult -to understand. Surely in the case of each one of the protagonists in -Sophocles, to employ the word in its non-technical sense, their deserts -are very exactly meted out. Antigone deliberately courts her fate by -setting the law at defiance, though she knew what the penalty was, and -falls, but has her compensation in the applause of her own conscience -and “in the faith that looks through death.” Ajax paid the penalty, as -the poet emphasizes, for brutality and impious insolence; Œdipus -suffers for his impetuosity and intemperance, but, his punishment -exceeding the offence, the balance is adjusted for him in final triumph -over the sons who had wronged him, in procuring blessings for his -protector, in the peace of the soul, and in a glorious death. -Clytemnestra and Ægisthus well deserve their fate, as, in addition to -committing their crime, they continue ostentatiously to glory in it. In -the _Trachiniæ_ Hercules is punished for a base and cowardly murder, -followed by an act of cruel and indiscriminate vengeance, retribution -coming on him through the sister of the man thus murdered, and the -daughter of the prince on whom this iniquitous vengeance had been -wreaked, as Deianeira, but for Iole, would not have sent the poisoned -tunic. Sophocles has even altered the legend to emphasize the guilt of -Hercules. The _Philoctetes_, indeed, is the only play which lends any -support to Professor Butcher’s statement. Here the gods undoubtedly -condemn a man to a life of torture that their designs, irrespective of -the individual, may be fulfilled, and that Troy may not fall before the -appointed time; but how fully, how nobly is he compensated! It seems to -us that the award of happiness and misery to the individual, in -accordance with desert, is as conspicuous in the ethics of Sophocles as -it is in the ethics of Shakespeare. And it is the more conspicuous, when -we remember the hampering conditions under which Sophocles had to work, -the limitations conventionally imposed on the treatment of the legends. - -We wish we had space to comment on Professor Butcher’s admirable, though -somewhat defective, chapter on the dawn of Romanticism in Greek poetry, -but we must forbear, and repeat our thanks to him for a book full of -interest and instruction, not the least of its charms being the lively -and graceful style in which it is written. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 35: This blow has, since these words were written, been -inflicted. See _supra_ pp. 45-75.] - -[Footnote 36: So he says, _Poet._, xxvi., of epic and tragedy, that each -ought not to produce any chance pleasure, but the pleasure proper to it -(δει γαρ ου την τυχουσαν ἡδονην ποιειν αυτας αλλα την -ειρημενην, _i.e._ οικειαν).] - - - - -THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICISM[37] - -[Footnote 37: _The Principles of Criticism. An Introduction to the Study -of Literature._ By W. Basil Worsfold. London: Allen.] - - -Bishop Warburton said that there were two things which every man thought -himself competent to do, to manage a small farm and to drive a whisky. -Had Warburton lived in our time, he would probably have added a -third--to set up for a critic. What the author of the best critical -treatise in the Greek language pronounced to be the final fruit of long -experience, culture, and study, directed and illumined by certain -natural qualifications, has now come to be represented by the idle and -irresponsible gossip of any one who can gossip agreeably. Agreeable -gossip and good criticism are, as Sainte-Beuve and others have shown, -far from being incompatible, the misfortune is that they should be -confounded; but confounded they are, and the confusion is the curse of -current literature. We have recently observed, with concern, that the -rubbish which used formerly to be shot into novels and poems is now -being shot into criticism, and that there appears to be a growing -impression that the accomplishments which qualify young men for spinning -cobwebs in fiction and manufacturing versicles can, with a little -management, serve to set them up as critics. There is not much more -difficulty in forming an opinion about a book than there is in reading -it, and as criticism in the hands of these fribbles becomes little more -than the dithyrambic expression of that opinion, the profession of -criticism is one in which it is delightfully easy to graduate. It -requires neither learning nor knowledge, neither culture nor discipline. -It is neither science nor art; it is the gift of nature, a sort of -“lyric inspiration.” With principles, with touchstones, with standards, -it has nothing whatever to do. Its business is to declaim, to coin -phrases, to juggle with fancies and to say “good things.” - -A writer, therefore, who tries to recall criticism to a sense of its -responsibilities and true functions deserves all sympathy and -encouragement. It is refreshing to turn from the sort of thing to which -we have referred to such a work as Mr. Worsfold has given us. His design -is “to present an account of the main principles of literary criticism,” -which he professes to trace from Plato to Matthew Arnold. Mr. Worsfold’s -thesis simply stated is that criticism--and he deals with criticism -chiefly in its application to poetry--has passed successively through -five stages. With the Greeks it concerned itself principally with form. -“The first question it asked with them was not, as with us, What is the -thought? but What is the form?” By Addison--for here Mr. Worsfold makes -a prodigious leap over some twenty centuries--it was furnished with a -new test, and it asked, How does a given poem affect the imagination? By -Lessing a return was made to the formal criticism of the ancients, but -he adopted also Addison’s criterion, and added definiteness to it. -Victor Cousin followed in 1818 with his lectures, entitled, _Du Vrai, du -Beau, et du Bien_, and enlarged the boundaries of the science by a -complete theory of beauty and art, developed mainly out of Plato. Lastly -came Matthew Arnold, who extended the realm still further, by the -addition of certain other important touchstones of poetic excellence. At -the present time a gradual limitation of the scope of its rules, and a -gradual extension of the scope of its principles, are the tendencies -most discernible in criticism. “An enlightened criticism no longer aims -at directing the artist by formulating rules which, if they were valid, -would only tend to obliterate the distinction between the fine and the -technical arts. It allows him to work by whatever methods he may choose, -and it is content to estimate his merit not by reference to his method -but by reference to his achievement, as measured by principles of -universal validity.” - -All this is exceedingly ingenious, and has in it a measure of truth, -but, like most generalisations on vast and complicated subjects, it is -more plausible than sound. The stages in the progress of criticism are -not so sharply defined as Mr. Worsfold would have us believe. If Greek -criticism were represented only by Plato and the extant works of -Aristotle, English by Addison and Matthew Arnold, German by Lessing, and -French by Victor Cousin, what Mr. Worsfold postulates might, after a -manner, pass muster. But by far the greater portion of Greek criticism -has perished; it exists only in fragments, and to the most important and -remarkable work on this subject which has come down to us from -antiquity, the _Treatise on the Sublime_, Mr. Worsfold does not even -refer. If he had done so, and had he considered what is scattered -fragmentarily through the Greek writers, or may be gathered from the -titles of treatises which are lost, he would have seen that much which -he supposes to mark development in criticism has long been old. -Innumerable passages in the minor Greek critics, in Plutarch and in the -Scholia, especially if we add what is to be found in Roman writers, -derived no doubt from Greek sources, amply warrant doubt whether, after -all, it is not with criticism as it is, to use Goethe’s expression, with -wit, “Alles Gescheidte ist schon gedacht worden, man muss nur -versuchen, es noch einmal zu denken.” At all events, it is a great -mistake to suppose that Greek criticism, in its application to poetry, -is represented by Plato and Aristotle. It would be almost as absurd to -go to Plato for typical Greek criticism on poetry as it would be to go -to Henry More or the Puritan Divines for typical English criticism. He -approached it only as such a philosopher would be likely to approach it. -He regarded art and letters generally simply as means of educational -discipline and culture, or as mere playthings, of which the best to be -expected was harmless pleasure. He despised poetry not only as an -appeal, and a perturbing appeal, to the senses and the passions, but as -representing the shadows of shadows. It may be pronounced with -confidence that, had he seriously applied himself to literary and -artistic criticism, he would have been one of the subtlest and -profoundest critics who ever lived, and would probably have anticipated, -so far as principles are concerned, all that Mr. Worsfold attributes to -Addison, to Lessing, and to Victor Cousin; but, like our own Ruskin, he -was wilful and fanatical. - -Still less is Greek criticism represented by Aristotle. It is in the -highest degree misleading to generalize from such a work as the -_Poetics_. It is not merely a fragment, but a fragment deformed by -desperate corruption, hopeless interstices and contemptible -interpolations. If it confines itself, or in the main confines itself, -to formal criticism, it is simply because it was designed to deal with -that particular department of criticism, not because its author supposed -that the chief question which concerned criticism was form. Again, if by -form Mr. Worsfold understands, as he appears to do, expression and -structure, he very much misrepresents the Treatise. Aristotle’s -criterion of poetry is not its formal expression, for he distinctly -declares that it is not metre which makes a poem, and even seems to -maintain that a poem may be composed without metre. In Aristotle’s -definition and conception of poetry as the concrete expression of the -universal, in his definition of the scope and functions of tragedy, and -in innumerable occasional remarks we have the germs of much, and of very -much, which Mr. Worsfold would attribute to the later developments of -criticism. - -Aristotle, it is true, derived his canons from an analysis of the -masterpieces of Greek poetry, but it is doing him great injustice to -say, that he would make all epics Homeric, and all plays Sophoclean, and -most erroneous to assume that modern criticism commenced at this point. -Aristotle distinctly questions whether tragedy had as yet perfected its -proper types or not (_Poet._, IV. 11), and in discussing the proper -length of tragedy he makes a remark which shows that such a plot as the -plot of _Hamlet_ or the plot of _Lear_ would have been quite compatible -with his canons.[38] The truth is that Mr. Worsfold has gone too far; he -has confounded the various aspects of criticism with stages in its -development. Aristotle dealt mainly with form, because it was his -business to deal with form. Plato approached poetry from a particular -point of view, because it was from that particular point of view that it -concerned him. - -Had Mr. Worsfold taken his stand in his review of ancient criticism on -the treatise attributed to Longinus, he would have seen that what he so -strangely attributes to Addison and later writers had long been -anticipated. This remarkable work which, since its translation into -French by Boileau in 1674, has had more influence on criticism both in -England and on the Continent than any other work that could be named, -would alone show how much we owe to the Greeks. It has analyzed and -defined, for all time, the essential virtues and the essential vices of -diction and style, and has traced them to their sources. It has -furnished us with infallible criteria in judging rhetoric and poetry. -Take its analysis of the “grand style,” which is described -comprehensively as μεγαλοφροσυνης απηχημα, “the echo of a -great soul”; it has, the Treatise tells us, five -characteristics--richness and grandeur of conception (το περι -τας νοησεις ἁδρεπηβολον); vehement and inspired passion (το -σφοδρον και ενθουσιαστικον παθος), the due formation of figures, -which are twofold--first those of thought, and secondly those of -expression (ἡ ποια των σχηματων πλασις δισσα δε που ταυτα, τα -μεν νοησεως, θατερα δε λεξεως); noble diction (ἡ γενναια, -φρασις); dignified and elevated composition (ἡ εν αξιωματι -και διαρσει συνθεσις). Nothing could be more masterly than its -detailed analysis of each of these qualities, and of the pseudo forms -which they assume, as the result of stimulated enthusiasm. How -admirable, too, is its test of the sublime in the seventh chapter; its -criticism of Sappho, generalizing what constitutes the charm and power -of lyric, in the tenth chapter; its analysis of the eloquence of -Demosthenes, again generalizing the characteristics of oratory in -perfection (chap. xvii.); its demonstration of the inferiority of -correct mediocrity to the faulty irregularities of inspired genius; its -admirable remarks about the relation of Art to Nature. Like the -_Poetics_, it has come down to us in a very mutilated form, and has -evidently been interpolated by some inferior hand, which no doubt -accounts for the exasperating triviality of some of the sections. Here, -as elsewhere, we have references to the many losses which Greek -criticism has sustained, the author referring to treatises written by -him on Xenophon, on Composition, and on the Passions. - -It is impossible to give an adequate account of the evolution of -criticism without a very careful survey of the chief contributors to -criticism in each generation, and such a survey Mr. Worsfold has not -attempted. To Latin criticism he never even refers. And yet it has had -great influence on critical literature. The Romans, it is true, -contributed scarcely anything new to criticism, except that which -pertains to oratory. We know enough of Varro, with whom Roman criticism -may be said to begin, to feel confident that he could have had no -pretension to the finer qualities of the critic. Of the five treatises -composed by him, only one, the περι χαρακτηρων, appears to -have been purely critical, and it almost certainly drew largely on Greek -sources. Horace derived the material of the _Ars Poetica_ from a Greek -writer, Neoptolemus of Parium. Much of Quinctilian’s criticism is -demonstrably a compilation from Greek writers. The best critic of poetry -among the Romans is undoubtedly to be found in Petronius, occasional and -scanty though his remarks are. But of prose literature Rome produced two -really great critics--the one was Cicero, the other was Tacitus. The -_Brutus_ and the _Dialogus de Oratoribus_ are masterpieces, equal to -anything which has come down to us from the Greeks. One of the most -important critical principles ever enunciated we owe to Cicero. He was -the first to demonstrate that the test of excellence in oratory lay, in -its appealing equally to the multitude and to the most fastidious of -connoisseurs. The most consummate rhetorician which the world has ever -seen, he was at the same time a consummate critic of his art. This -department of criticism has, indeed, for nearly two thousand years, been -practically his monopoly; it may be questioned whether anything can be -added, so far as the technique of rhetoric is concerned, to what may be -traced to his writings. The interest of the _Dialogus de Oratoribus_ is -largely historical, but never have the causes which inspire and nourish, -or depress and starve, eloquence been more eloquently and brilliantly -explained. Nor must it be forgotten that it was through the medium of -the Latin critics that Greek criticism became influential on modern -literature. - -Mr. Worsfold has very properly drawn attention to the fine passage about -poetry in the second book of Bacon’s _Advancement of Learning_, but he -says not a word about Sidney’s remarkable treatise, one of the most -charming contributions to the criticism of poetry which has ever been -made, or about the admirable remarks in Ben Jonson’s _Discoveries_. The -interest of Elizabethan criticism, as represented by these works--and -they are the only works on this subject of any value produced during the -Elizabethan period--lies partly in its return to Aristotelian canons, -and partly in the importance which, in accordance with the ancients, it -attaches to the didactic element in poetry. This is expressed very -eloquently in Ben Jonson’s dedication of the _Fox_:-- - - “If men will impartially and not asquint look toward the - offices and function of a poet, they will easily conclude to - themselves the impossibility of a man’s being the good poet - without being first the good man,--he that is able to inform - young men to all good discipline, inflame young men to all good - virtues, keep old men in their best and supreme state, or, as - they decline to childhood, recover them to their first state, - that comes forth the interpreter and arbiter of nature, a - teacher of things divine no less than human.” - -This was precisely Spenser’s conception of one of the chief functions of -poetry. Thus the Elizabethan critics, who were followed afterwards by -Milton, if they did not formally discuss the relation of æsthetic to -ethic, insisted on their essential connection in the higher forms of -poetry. Even in the succeeding age, when poetry lost all its high -seriousness and much of its moral dignity, criticism, if it did not -always insist on the application of this test, still retained it. Dryden -could write, “I am satisfied if verse cause delight, for delight is the -chief, if not the only end, of poesy”; but in adding “instruction can be -admitted but in the second place, for poesy only instructs as it -delights,” he half corrected his former statement, and, indeed, simply -reverted to what Aristophanes, Ben Jonson, and Milton would have been -the first to admit. - -But to return to Mr. Worsfold. A very serious defect in his work is his -omission of all notice of Boileau and Dryden, and of the critics -contemporary with them in France and England. The consequence is, that -much is attributed to Addison which belongs to them, and Addison’s -importance as a critic is much overrated. Again, of the many memorable -contributions to this branch of literature in England, in France, in -Italy, and in Germany, which were made between the appearance of the -Abbé Dubos’s _Réflexions critiques sur la poésie et la peinture_ in -1719, and the lectures of Coleridge and Schlegel about 1812, all that is -said is represented by what is said of Lessing. Though a long chapter is -given to Matthew Arnold, Matthew Arnold’s master, Sainte-Beuve, is, if -we remember rightly, not so much as named. - -Dr. Johnson divided critics into three classes--those who know the rules -and judge by them, those who know no rules but judge entirely by natural -taste, those who know the rules but are above them. This has been true -in all ages, and sufficiently disposes of Mr. Worsfold’s hypothesis -about the stages through which criticism has passed. All that can be -said is, that at certain times there has been a tendency, determined of -course by the character of the particular age, towards the predominance -of a particular critical method and of particular points of view. -Further than this it would be perilous to go. It has been the task of -the present age to develop each of these methods to the full, and the -most authoritative critics of the last twenty years might easily be -ranged under one of those classes. - -The soundest and most valuable part of Mr. Worsfold’s book is the part -dealing with the criticism of the last few years. His chapter on Matthew -Arnold, in particular, is admirable, and his remarks on the functions of -criticism at the present time, deduced as they have been from -Wordsworth, Arnold and Ruskin, are in a high degree instructive and -interesting. In pointing out that criticism should not confine itself -merely to the investigation of technical excellence, and to all that is -implied in the doctrine of Art for Art’s sake, but should recognise that -there are limits beyond which the artist should not exercise his -technical skill, he recalls us to principles which it is well that -criticism should not forget. We quite agree with him that there is now -an increasing tendency to recognise these limits, and to lay most stress -on the interpretation of the ideal element in literature and art. That -is certainly the modern note. We have expressed our reasons for -dissenting from Mr. Worsfold’s historical view of the evolution of -criticism, but his book is full of interest, and will amply repay the -attention of serious readers. It is a book which does not deserve to be -lost in the crowd. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 38: ὁ δε κατ’ αυτην την φυσιν του πραγματος ὁρος, -αει μεν ὁ μειζων μεχρι του συνδηλος ειναι καλλιων εστι κατα το -μεγεθος. ὡς δε ἁπλως διορισαντας ειπειν, εν ὁσω μεγεθει κατα το -εικος η το αναγκαιον εφεξης γιγνομενων συμβαινει εις ευτυχιαν εκ -δυστυχιας, η εξ ευτυχιας εις δυστυχιαν μεταβαλλειν, ἱκανος ὁρος -εστιν του μεγεθους. (_Poet._, vii. 7.)] - - - - -WOMEN IN GREEK POETRY[39] - -[Footnote 39: _Antimachus of Colophon and the Position of Women in Greek -Poetry._ By E. F. M. Benecke.] - - -The editor of this book cannot be congratulated either on his competence -or on his discretion. To hurry into the world a work which is not merely -a fragment, but which cries for revision, suppression, and correction in -almost every page, is a literary crime of the first magnitude, and -deserves the severest castigation. Of the author of the work, who -appears to have been a young man of some attainments and of much -promise, we desire to speak with all gentleness; we wholly absolve him -from blame, for we have no right to assume that he would himself have -given to the world what his editor admits was _intra penetralia Vestæ_, -and what we hope and believe he would himself have committed -_emendaturis ignibus_, had he arrived at years of discretion. But the -dissemination of error is no light thing, especially in relation to -subjects which are of great interest, and, from an historical and -literary point of view, of great importance. When we think of the many -amiable and industrious tutors at Oxford and Cambridge who, unless they -are put on their guard, will unsuspiciously fill their note-books with -the nonsense of this volume, and impart it, by degrees, to the listening -credulity of youth, we feel we have no alternative but to perform a -plain, if painful, duty. We repeat, we absolve the author from all -blame; the sole culprit is the editor. - -That Solomon was the author of the _Iliad_, Poggio the author of the -_Annals_ of Tacitus, and Bacon the author of Shakespeare’s plays, are -hypotheses scarcely less monstrously absurd than the thesis propounded -in this volume. Mr. Benecke’s main contentions are “that a pure love -between man and woman seemed to the early Greeks” (that is, to those who -lived before the latter end of the Peloponnesian War) a sheer -impossibility; that “in extant Greek poetry there is no trace of -romantic love poetry addressed to women prior to the time of Asclepiades -and Philetas”; that “in the works of these writers this element suddenly -appears not in the nature of an experiment but as a leading motive”; -that the appearance of this element was due to the influence of -Antimachus, “who was the first man who had the courage to say that a -woman was worth loving, and who may thus be regarded as the originator -of the romantic element in literature.” As we have not space to refute -this nonsense in detail, we will give some examples of the way in which -it is supported. First come misrepresentations and blunders. To -emphasize the degradation of women, passages in translation are twisted -and perverted almost beyond recognition. - -Thus the couplet of Catullus-- - - “Tunc te dilexi, non tantum ut vulgus amicam, - Sed pater ut natos diligit et generos”-- - -is actually paraphrased “I loved you, not as a man loves a woman, but as -a man loves a youth.” The couplet in which Antigone says, “If my husband -died, I could get another, and were I deprived of him too, I could be a -mother by another man”-- - - ποσις μεν αν μοι, κατθανοντος, αλλος ην - και παις απ’ αλλου φωτος, ει τουδ’ ημπλακον-- - -is translated “If my husband had died, I could have married another, if -he had failed to get me children, I could have committed adultery.” The -“main motive of the Iliad,” we are informed, (p. 76), “is the love of -Achilles for Patroclus.” The interest of the _Ajax_ “is meant to centre -on Teucer, the _amasius_ of the dead Ajax.” That the _Alcestis_ may not -be pressed into the service of those who would maintain that the Greeks -knew how to respect women, the key to it is to be found “in the relation -existing between Admetus and Apollo”(!) The revolting coarseness and -flippant vulgarity which mark the book, and, which do very little credit -to Oxford training, are illustrated by the remarks employed to disparage -these types of womanhood which the writer well knows would refute his -theory. Thus of Nausicaa, “she is always regarded as a charming type of -woman; but, after all, how one naturally thinks of her is (_sic_) as a -charming type of washerwoman”; of Penelope, “she longs for the return of -her husband, no doubt; but what really grieves her about the suitors is -not their suggestions as to his death, but the quantity of pork they -eat.” On a par with this sort of thing is the remark about a play of -Sophocles, which, by the way, is not extant, that “it merely drew the -usual picture of the gods playing shove-halfpenny with human souls” (p. -47); or flippant vulgarity like the following--Admetus expresses “his -deep regret that he cannot accompany Alcestis, as Charon does not issue -return tickets.” If this is the humour of young Oxford, the progress of -which we hear so much has been purchased at a heavy price. - -But to continue. On page 27 we are confronted with the astounding -statement that “it is in Anacreon that we find for the first time -love-poetry addressed to a woman.” Why, Hermesianax (15, 16) distinctly -states that Musæus wrote love-poetry to his wife or mistress, Antiope, -and that Hesiod wrote many poems in honour of his love, Eoia (_Id._ -22-24). Alcæus notoriously wrote love-poems to Sappho, as we need go no -further than the first book of Aristotle’s _Rhetoric_ to know; both -Alcman, the lover of Egido and Megalostrate, and, probably Ibycus also -wrote love-poetry to women. It is mere special pleading to contend that -Mimnermus did not write poetry to the mistress of his affections, to -whom, according to Strabo, his erotic poetry was addressed. Hermesianax -distinctly states that Mimnermus was passionately in love with Nanno, -and certainly implies that his love-poetry was addressed to her (35-38). -It is true that two of the fragments of Archilochus are ambiguous, but -one is not; and, if we may judge by a single line (Fr. 71), his love for -Neobule expressed itself in a manner indistinguishable from Petrarch’s -vein--“Would that I might touch Neobule’s hand”: ει γαρ ὡς εμοι -γενοιτο χειρα Νεοβουλης θιγειν. It is clear that women had a -prominent place in the poetry of Stesichorus, and in his poem entitled -_Calyce_ we seem to have had an anticipation of the modern love romance. -And yet, in spite of all this, we are informed that the Greeks had no -love-poetry addressed to, or concerning women, before Anacreon. - -The methods adopted for minimizing or disguising the importance of women -in the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_ are very amusing. “The Trojan war was the -work of a woman; but how very little that woman appears in the _Iliad_.” -She appears quite as frequently and imposingly as the action admits, -and she and Andromache are painted as elaborately as any of the -_dramatis personæ_ in the poem. Indeed, it would not be too much to say -that, with the exception of Achilles and Agamemnon, they leave the -deepest impression on us. “A woman has been managing the affairs of -Odysseus for twenty years in an exemplary fashion; but the hero of the -_Odyssey_ on his return prefers to associate with the swineherd.” -Comment is superfluous. Nothing could be more striking than the -prominence which is given to women both in the _Iliad_ and in the -_Odyssey_. To cite such writers as Simonides of Amorgus, Phocylides and -Theognis, as authorities on the position of women, is as absurd, in -Sancho Panza’s phrase, as to look for pears on an elm. - -The Greek Tragedies are treated after the same fashion as the _Iliad_ -and the _Odyssey_. We are told that the remarkable prominence given in -Sophocles’s plays to the affection between brother and sister affords -conclusive proof that the nature of modern love between man and woman -was unknown to him; and we are also informed, that the relations between -Electra and Orestes, and Antigone and Polynices “are absolutely those of -modern lovers.” It would be difficult to say which is more absurd, the -deduction or the statement. What love could be more loyal and more -passionate than Hæmon’s love for Antigone? The prominence given by -Sophocles to the love between brother and sister has its origin from the -same cause as the very small part played by lovers in the Greek -tragedies generally. In the first place, a poet who took his plot from -the fortunes of the houses of Pelops or Laius could only work within the -limits of tradition; in the second place, love romances, unless -involving deep tragical issues as in the _Trachiniæ_, the _Medea_, and -the _Hippolytus_, were totally incompatible with the Greek idea of -tragedy. But we must hurry to the grand discovery made by the author of -this volume. - -Somewhere about 405 B.C. flourished Antimachus, of Colophon, the author -of a voluminous epic, and of several other poems. He had the misfortune -to lose his wife Lyde, and, to beguile his sorrow, he composed a long -elegy in her honour. Of the far-reaching consequences of this act let -our author speak. “When Antimachus first sat down in his empty house at -Colophon to write an elegy to his dead wife, consciously or -unconsciously he was initiating the greatest artistic revolution that -the world has ever seen.” Asclepiades and Philetas followed him as -imitators, and the thing was done. Woman was at last “connected with -‘romance.’” Our author admits the difficulty of supposing that “any one -man could invent and popularize an entirely new emotion”; but suggests -that if we regard it as “simply due to the readjustment of an already -existing emotion,” that is παιδεραστια, such a supposition is -“no longer absurd.” It is not only absurd but monstrous. - -The truth almost certainly is, that the love between man and woman in -ancient Greece differed very little from the love between man and woman -as it exists now. Marriage was, it is true, purely a matter of business; -most wives aspired to nothing more than the management of the nursery -and the household, and most women being without education, and living in -seclusion, could scarcely associate, intellectually at least, on equal -terms with their husbands or lovers. But this proves nothing more than -_mariages de convenance_, and love based on the fascination exercised by -sensuous attraction prove now. Then, as in our own time, there were -marriages and marriages, liaisons and liaisons. The story which Plutarch -tells of Callias (_Cimon._ iv.) shows that marriage was often based on -love. The pictures given of Hector and Andromache in the _Iliad_, of -Alcinous and Arete, of Ulysses and Penelope, of Menelaus and Helen in -the _Odyssey_, the charming account of Ischomachus and his young wife in -the _Œconomics_ of Xenophon, the noble and pathetic story of Pantheia -and Abradatas in the _Cyropædeia_, the story which, in his life of -Agis,[40] Plutarch tells of Chilonis, and, in the _Morals_, of -Camma,[41] and innumerable other legends, traditions, and anecdotes, -prove that women could inspire and return as pure and as chivalrous a -love as any of the heroines of chivalry. The poet who could write about -marriage as Homer does in the Sixth Odyssey would have had little to -learn from modern refinement.[42] The love which Critobulus describes -himself as having for Amandra, in the _Symposium_ of Xenophon, and the -remarks made by Socrates in that dialogue embody the most exalted -conceptions of the passion of love between the sexes. The sentiments of -Plutarch on this subject are indistinguishable from the most refined -notions of the modern world, as is abundantly illustrated in the -_Amatorius_, the _Conjugalia Præcepta_, and in the remarks on marriage -in the eighth chapter of the Essay on Moral Virtue. If Ajax and Hercules -became brutes, Tecmessa and Deianeira were not the only women who have -discovered that men are, too often, May when they woo, and December when -they wed. It is ridiculous to suppose that a people whose popular poetry -could present such types of womanhood as Arete, Antigone, Alcestis, -Deianeira, Electra, Macaria, Iphigenia, Evadne, and Polyxena, who could -boast such poetesses as Sappho, Erinna, Corinna, Myrtis, and Damophila, -and whose society was graced by such women as Aspasia, Diotima, -Gnathæna, Herpyllis, Metaneira, and Leontium, should have given -expression to passion, sentiment, and romance only in παιδικοι -ὑμνοι. - -What the author of this book, and what others who are fond of -generalizing about the Greeks, forget, is, that of a once vast and -voluminous literature we have only fragments. That portion of their -poetry which would have thrown light on the subject here discussed has -perished. It is certain, for example, that of their lyric poetry a very -large portion was erotic, of that portion exactly one poem has survived -in its entirety, while a few hundred scattered lines, torn from their -context, represent the rest that has come down to us. We know, again, -that in some hundreds of their dramas, in the Middle and New Comedy that -is to say, the plots turned on love--of these dramas not a single one is -preserved. But the reflection of some twenty of them in Terence and -Plautus, and several scattered fragments, clearly indicate, that the -passion between the sexes involved as much sentiment and romance as it -does in our Elizabethan dramatists. In what respect do Charinus and -Pamphilus in the _Andria_ and Antipho in the _Phormio_--mere replicas, -of course, of Greek originals--differ from modern lovers? What could be -more romantic than the love story which formed the plot of the _Phasma_ -of Menander? It is fair to our author to say that he fully admits this, -in the only tolerably satisfactory part of his book, the chapter on -Women in Greek Comedy. The great blot on Greek life, to which Mr. -Benecke gives so much prominence, has probably had far too much -importance attached to it, partly, perhaps, owing to its accentuation in -the writings of Plato, and partly owing to that rage for scandalous -tittle-tattle, so unhappily characteristic of ancient anecdote-mongers -from Ion to Athenæus. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 40: Agis, xvii., xviii.] - -[Footnote 41: De Mulierum Virtutibus.] - -[Footnote 42: See particularly lines 180-185.] - - - - -MR. STEPHEN PHILLIPS’ POEMS[43] - -[Footnote 43: _Poems._ By Stephen Phillips. London and New York John -Lane.] - - -The accent here is unmistakable, it is the accent of a new and a true -poet. Mr. Phillips gives us no mere variations on familiar melodies, no -clever copies of classical archetypes, and what is more, he has not -employed any illegitimate means of attracting attention and giving -distinction to his work. An audacious choice of subjects, the adoption -of the stones which the builders have rejected, and, it may be added, -disdained, has, when coupled with elaborate affectations and -eccentricities of treatment and style, often enabled mediocrity to pass, -temporarily at least, for genius, and the specious counterfeit of -originality for the thing itself. But these poems are marked by -simplicity, sincerity, spontaneity. If a discordant note is sometimes -struck, here in an over-strained conceit, and there in an incongruous -touch of preciosity or false sentiment, this is but an accident; in -essentials all is genuine. Nature and passion affect to be speaking, and -nature and passion really speak. A poet, of whom this may be said with -truth, has passed the line which divides talent from genius, the true -singer from the accomplished artist or imitator. He has taken his place, -wherever that place may be, among authentic poets. To that high honour -the present volume undoubtedly entitles Mr. Phillips. It would now, -perhaps, be premature to say more than “Ingens omen habet magni clarique -triumphi,” but we may predict with confidence that, if fate is kind and -his muse is true to him, he has a distinguished future before him. It -may be safely said that no poet has made his _début_ with a volume which -is at once of such extraordinary merit and so rich in promise. - -Mr. Phillips is not a poet who has “one plain passage of few notes.” He -strikes many chords, and strikes them often with thrilling power. The -awful story narrated in _The Wife_ is conceived and embodied with really -Dantesque intensity and vividness; it has the master’s suggestive -reservation, smiting phrase, and clairvoyant picture wording, as “in the -red shawl _sacredly_ she burned,” “smiled at him with her lips, not with -her eyes”; while “Mother and child that food together ate” is, in -pregnancy of tragic suggestiveness, almost worthy to stand with the -“poscia, più che il dolor, poté il digiuno.” Equally distinguished, -though on another plane of interest, is _The woman with the dead Soul_, -the soul which could once “wonder, laugh, and weep,” but over which the -days began to fall “dismally, as rain on ocean blear,” till-- - - “Existence lean, in sky dead grey - Withholding steadily, starved it away.” - -If the pathos in these poems is almost “too deep for tears,” it is -gentler in the second and third of the lyrics, which are as exquisite as -they are affecting. The idea in the lines _To Milton Blind_, is worthy -of Milton’s own sublime conceit, that the darkness which had fallen on -his eyes was but the shadow of God’s protecting wings. The whole poem, -indeed, is a beautiful paraphrase of the noble passage in the _Second -Defence of the People of England_: “For the Divine law”--we give it in -the English translation--“not only shields me from injury, but almost -renders me too sacred to attack, not indeed so much from the privation -of my sight as from the overshadowing of those heavenly wings which seem -to have occasioned this obscurity; and which, when occasioned, he is -wont to illuminate with an interior light more precious and more pure.” - -In _The Lily_, which is a little obscure--a fault against which Mr. -Phillips would do well to guard, for he frequently offends in this -respect--we have the note of Petrarch, but Petrarch would not have ended -the poem so flatly. Tennyson is recalled, too nearly perhaps, in “By the -Sea,” but it is a poem of great charm and beauty. _The New De Profundis_ -is, unhappily, the key to Mr. Phillips’ characteristic mood; it reminds -us of the curse imposed on the worldling in Browning’s _Easter Day_, -before he has learned the use of life and doubt. - -Mr. Phillips’ two most ambitious poems are _Christ in Hades_ and -_Marpessa_. In _Christ in Hades_ he fails, as Mrs. Browning failed in -_The Drama of Exile_. He attempts a theme--a stupendous theme--to which -his genius is not equal, and which could only have been adequately -treated by such poets as Dante and Milton, in the maturity of their -powers. It has neither basis nor superstructure. It is what the Greeks -would call “meteoric” as distinguished from “sublime.” It is a weird, -wild, and chaotic dream; and yet for all this its appeal to the heart -and the imagination is piercing and direct. Like Tennyson, Mr. Phillips -has the art of unfolding the full significance of a few suggestive words -in a great classic; and nothing could be more effective than the use to -which he has applied the famous lines which Homer places in the mouth of -Achilles. Poetry has few things more pathetic than Homer’s picture of -Hades and the dead, and that pathos Mr. Phillips has given us in -quintessence, as few would question after reading the lines which -describe Persephone yearning for her return to the spring-illumined -world, the speech of the Athenian ghost, and the woman’s address to -Christ. If the world depicted has something of Horace’s artistic -monster, or, to change the image, something of the anarchy of dreams in -its composition, the vividness and picturesqueness with which particular -figures and scenes are flashed into light and definition is -extraordinarily impressive. It is so with the central figure, Christ; -it is so with Prometheus; and the contrast between these martyrs for man -has both pathos and grandeur. - -There is more originality, more power in _Christ in Hades_ than in -_Marpessa_, but _Marpessa_ has more balance, more sanity, more of the -stuff out of which good and abiding poetry is made, than its -predecessor. The one savours of the spasmodic school, the productions of -which have rarely been found to have the principle of life, however rich -they may have been in promise; the other is a return to a school in -which most of those who have gained permanent fame have studied. And we -are glad to find a young poet there. - -But it would be doing Mr. Phillips great injustice not to note that, -though he has had many predecessors in the semi-classical, semi-romantic -re-treatment of the Greek myths, notably Keats in _Hyperion_, Wordsworth -in _Dion_ and _Laodamia_, Landor in his _Hellenics_, and Tennyson in -_Ænone_ and _Tithonus_, he has treated his theme with a distinction -which is all his own, and has impressed on it an intense individuality. -In comparison with these masters he may be _pauper_, but he is _pauper -in suo ære_. - -It would be easy to point to faults in Mr. Phillips’ work. His sense of -rhythm, even allowing for what are plainly deliberate experiments in -discord, seems often curiously defective. How stiff and limping, for -example, is the following:-- - - “O pity us, - For I would ask of thee only to look - Upon the wonderful sunlight and to smell - Earth in the rain. Is not the labourer - Returning heavy through the August sheaves - Against the setting sun, who gladly smells - His supper from the opening door--is he - Not happier than these melancholy kings? - How good it is to live, even at the worst! - God was so lavish to us once, but here - He hath repented, jealous of His beams.” - -Lines, again, like “Pierced her, and odour full of arrows was,” -“Realizes all the uncoloured dawn,” “Yet followed a riddled memorable -flag,” are, no doubt, extreme instances, but they are typical of many -bad lines. Occasionally he falls flat on some harsh prosaic phrase, like -“beautiful indolence _was on our brains_.” Nor is he always happy in his -attempts at novelty in phraseology, as in his employment of the words -“liable,” “inaccurate,” “pungent”; and these faults in rhythm and -diction are the more remarkable, as the really subtle mastery over -rhythmic expression which he exhibits at times, and his singularly -felicitous epithets, turns, and phrases are among his most striking -gifts. Take a few out of very many: “A bleak magnificence of endless -hope,” “That common trivial face, of endless needs,” “The mystic river, -floating wan,” “And the moist evening fallow, richly dark,” “That palest -rose sweet on the night of life.” How noble is the rhythm and imagery of -the following:-- - - “All the dead - The melancholy attraction of Jesus felt: - And millions, like a sea, wave upon wave, - Heaved dreaming to that moonlight face, or ran - In wonderful long ripples, sorrow-charmed. - Toward him, in faded purple, pacing came - Dead emperors, and sad, unflattered kings; - Unlucky captains, listless armies led: - Poets with music frozen on their lips - Toward the pale brilliance sighed.” - -And it would be easy to multiply illustrations from _Marpessa_ and _By -the Sea_. Occasionally there is a certain incongruity between the form -and the matter. A poem so essentially, so intensely realistic as _The -Wife_ should not have such quaintnesses as “palèd in her thought.” Nor -should we have - - “The constable, with lifted hand, - Conducting the orchestral Strand”; - -nor should a railway station be described as a “moonèd terminus.” -Nothing is so disenchanting as affectation. - -One cannot but add that these poems, welcome as they are, would have -been more welcome still, had they been less profoundly melancholy. Their -monotonous sadness, the persistency with which they dwell on all those -grim and melancholy realities which poetry should help us to forget, or -cheer us in enduring, is not merely their leading, but their pervading -characteristic. This note will, we hope, change. Leopardi is immortal, -and could not be spared; but one Leopardi is enough for a single -century. - - - - -THE ILLUSTRIOUS OBSCURE[44] - -[Footnote 44: _West Country Poets: Their Lives and Works, etc._ -Illustrated with Portraits. By W. H. Kearley Wright, F.R.H.S. London: -Elliot Stock. 1896.] - - -Some nineteen hundred years ago Horace observed that there was one thing -which neither gods, nor men, nor bookstalls would tolerate in a -poet--and that was mediocrity. The verdict of gods, men, and the -bookstalls is probably still what it was then; but to such tribunals the -rhymesters of our time can afford to be quite indifferent. Paper and -printing are cheap; small poets and small critics are now so numerous -that they form a world, and a populous world, in themselves; and, well -understanding the truth of the old proverb, “Concordiâ, parvæ res -crescunt,” they mutually manufacture the wreaths with which they crown -each other’s modest vanity. There are hundreds of “poets” and “critics” -of whom the great world knows nothing, who are thus enabled, in their -little day, to taste all the sweets of fame, and “walk with inward glory -crown’d.” To wage serious war against such a tribe as this would be as -absurd as to break butterflies upon a wheel; but we really think it high -time that some protest should be made against the indefinite -multiplication of the rubbish for which these people and their patrons -are responsible, and still more against its importation into what -purports to be a contribution to serious literature. As long as these -geniuses confine themselves to their proper sphere, the poets’ corners -of provincial newspapers, we have nothing to say. But it becomes quite -another matter when the skill of an ingenious projector enables--we are -really sorry to have to speak so harshly--a rabble of poetasters to -figure side by side with poets of classical fame, and to appear in all -the dignity of contributors to a national anthology. Yet such is the -design of this volume, which was, it seems, published by subscription, -the subscribers being for the most part the various candidates for -poetical fame, who have obligingly sent their portraits and their -biographies for insertion in Mr. Kearley Wright’s “monumental work.” As -Mr. Kearley Wright’s collection begins with the fifteenth century, and -includes the really eminent poets who happen to have been born in the -West of England, many of his worthies are naturally _apud plures_, but -the majority, in whose honour the anthology appears to have been -compiled, adorn the living. And very gratifying it must be for these -gentlemen, and for Mr. Kearley Wright himself--for he also has a -niche--to find themselves side by side with Sir Walter Raleigh, Herrick, -Gay, and Coleridge. - -Mr. Kearley Wright’s “company of makers” is certainly a motley one. -First comes among his living bards an inspired porter at the Teignmouth -railway station, who asks in rapture,-- - - “Along the glitt’ring streets of gold, - Amid the brilliant glare, - Shall we God’s banner there unfold, - His righteous helmet wear?” - -At no great distance follows, with a portrait looking intensely -intellectual, “the manager of the Bristol and South Wales Railway Waggon -Company, Limited,” whose poems are described as “lacking here and there -logical sequence and literary method,” but “evincing undoubtedly a great -poetical disposition and philosophical drift.” The two poems which -illustrate this poet’s genius afford very little proof either of “a -great poetical disposition” or of “a philosophical drift,” but painfully -conclusive proof that much more is lacking than “logical sequence and -literary method,” the lack of which may certainly be conceded as well. -Next comes Mr. Jonas Coaker, “the landlord of the Warren House Inn,” -whose verses “disclose a poetic spirit, and, had he possessed the -advantages of education, would doubtless have attracted some attention.” -Mr. Coaker is in the main autobiographical. - - “I drew my breath first on the moor, - There my forefathers dwelled; - Its hills and dales I’ve traversed o’er, - Its desert parts beheld. - - * * * * * - - It’s oft envelop’d in a fog, - Because it’s up so high.” - -And Mr. Coaker continues in the same strain further than we care to -transcribe. Then we have Mr. John Goodwin, “formerly a coach-guard, who -sung of the days when there was such a thing, if we may so phrase it, as -the poetry of locomotion.” In his poetry, we are told, “there is a -genuine ring,” as here, for example:-- - - “I mind the time, when I was guard, - The lord, the duke, or squire - Would travel by the old stage-coach, - Or post-chaise they would hire.” - -Mr. Charles Chorley, who is, we are informed, submanager of the Truro -Savings Bank, in verses which are presumably a parody of Sir William -Jones’ _Imitation of Alcæus_, inquires, not without a certain propriety, -“What constitutes a mine?” On a par with all these are the verses of the -bard who “in summer hawked gooseberries and in winter shoelaces,” and -those of the “uneducated journeyman woolcomber.” - -Now, we need hardly say that the humble vocations of these poets are -neither derogatory to them nor in any way detrimental to merit where -merit exists; but there is no merit whatever in the poems assigned to -them in this volume; they are simply such poems as hawkers, woolcombers, -railway porters, and submanagers of provincial banks--“who pen a stanza -when they should engross”--might be expected to write. The same may be -said of almost every copy of verses, produced by amateurs, to be found -in this collection. We have scarcely noticed a single poem which rises -above mediocrity; a very large proportion are below even a mediocre -standard--they are simply rubbish. In one poet only, among those whose -names were not before known to us, do we discern genius, and that is in -Mr. John Dryden Hosken, whose poem, entitled _My Masters_, is really -excellent. - -The editor of this anthology is plainly incompetent, both in point of -taste and critical discernment, and in point of knowledge, for the task -which he has undertaken. The first is proved by the extracts which he -has selected from the works of well-known poets. Coleridge, for example, -is represented by two comparatively inferior poems, _The Devil’s -Thoughts_ and _Fancy in Nubibus_; Thomas Carew, by two short poems, one -of which is probably the worst he ever wrote; Herrick, by two of his -very worst; Praed, by two of the feeblest and least characteristic of -his poems; Walcot, by mere trash. It is quite possible that their less -illustrious brethren may have suffered from the deplorable inability of -this editor to discern between what is good and what is bad. Certainly -Capern, who was a poet with a touch of genius, suffers, for the lyric -given is very far indeed from representing or illustrating his best or -even his characteristic work. In giving an account of Alexander Barclay, -who, by the way, is called Andrew in the Preface, Mr. Wright says -nothing about his most important poems--his Eclogues. If Eustace Budgell -is included among the poets, why are not his poems specified and -represented? Of Aaron Hill it is observed that “neither his reputation -as a poet nor his connexion with the county of Devon is sufficient to -warrant more than a mere notice of his name.” Aaron Hill was the author -of more than one poem of conspicuous merit. The verses attributed on -page 488 to Sir William Yonge were written by Lady Mary Wortley Montagu. -But these are trifles. What we wish to protest against is the foisting -of such volumes as these on our libraries; and it is appalling to learn -that it is the intention of Mr. Kearley Wright, if he is sufficiently -encouraged by subscribers, to follow this with another similar -collection. If poets like these wish to gratify their vanity, let them -not gratify it to the detriment of serious literature; for, if the few -can discriminate, the many cannot, and the multiplication of works like -these must infallibly tend to lower the standard of current literature, -by furthering the disastrous “cult of the average man.” In our opinion -criticism can have no more imperative duty than to discountenance and -discourage in every way such projectors as Mr. Kearley Wright and such -poets as those for whose merits he and critics like him stand sponsors. - - - - -VIRGIL IN ENGLISH HEXAMETERS[45] - -[Footnote 45: _The Eclogues of Virgil._ Translated into English -Hexameter Verse by the Right Hon. Sir George Osborne Morgan, Bart., -Q.C., M.P. London.] - - -Sir George Osborne Morgan has served his generation in much more -important capacities than those of a scholar and a translator of Virgil, -and had this little work, therefore, been less meritorious than it is, -no critic with a sense of the becoming would deal harshly with it. But -it challenges and deserves serious consideration, not only as an attempt -to solve a problem of singular interest to students of classical poetry, -but as a somewhat ambitious contribution to the literature of -translation. Sir Osborne Morgan is, however, mistaken in supposing that -in translating Virgil into his own metre he “has undertaken a task which -has never been attempted before.” In 1583 Richard Stanihurst published a -translation of the first four books of the _Æneid_ in English -hexameters; and, if Sir Osborne will turn to Webbe’s _Discourse of -English Poetrie_, published as early as 1586, he will find versions in -English hexameters of the First and Second Eclogues, while Abraham -Fraunce, in a curious volume, entitled _The Countess of Pembroke’s Ivy -Church_, which appeared in 1591, has, among the other hexameters in the -collection, given a version of the Second Eclogue in this measure. But -Sir Osborne Morgan has been more immediately anticipated in his -experiment. In 1838 Dr. James Blundell published anonymously, under the -title of _Hexametrical Experiments_, versions in hexameters of the -First, Fourth, Sixth, and Tenth Eclogues, and to this translation he -prefixed an elaborate preface, vindicating the employment of the -hexameter in English, and explaining its mechanism to the unlearned. -Indeed, Blundell arrived at the same conclusion as Sir Osborne Morgan, -that the proper medium for an English translation of hexametrical poems -in Greek and Latin is the English hexameter. We may, however, hasten to -add that Sir Osborne has little to fear from a comparison with his -predecessors, who have, indeed, done their best to refute by example -their own theory. It may be observed, in passing, that the translations -of Virgil into rhymed decasyllabic verse are far more numerous than Sir -Osborne Morgan seems to suppose. He is, he says, acquainted only with -two--the version by Dryden and Joseph Warton--not seeming to be aware -that Warton translated only the _Georgics_ and _Eclogues_, printing -Pitt’s version of the _Æneid_. The whole of Virgil was translated into -this measure by John Ogilvie between 1649-50, and by the Earl of -Lauderdale about 1716, while versions of the _Æneid_, the _Georgics_, -and the _Eclogues_, in the same metre, have abounded in every era of our -literature, from Gawain Douglas’s translation of the _Æneid_ printed in -1553, to Archdeacon Wrangham’s version of the _Eclogues_ in 1830. - -It is no reproach to Sir Osborne Morgan that, in the occupations of a -busy political life, his scholarship should have become a little rusty, -but it is a pity that he should so often have allowed himself to be -caught tripping, when a little timely counsel in the correction of his -proof sheets might have prevented this. In the First Eclogue the line - - “Non insueta graves temptabunt pabula fetas” - -is translated - - “Here no unwonted herb shall tempt the travailing cattle.” - -What it really means is, no change of fodder, no fodder which is strange -to them, shall “infect” or “try” the pregnant cattle, “insueta” being -used in exactly the same sense as in Eclogue V. 56, “_insuetum_ miratur -limen Olympi,” and “temptare” as it is used in Georg. III. 441, and -commonly in classical Latin. It is, to say the least, questionable -whether in the couplet-- - - “Pauperis et tuguri congestum cæspite culmen, - Post aliquot, mea regna videns, mirabor aristas?”-- - -the last line can mean - - “Gaze on the straggling corn, the remains of what once was my kingdom.” - -“Aristas” is much more likely to be a metonymy for “messes,” _i.e._ -“annos,” like αροτου in Sophocles’ _Trachiniæ_, 69, τον -μεν παρελθοντ’ αροτον, a confirmative illustration which seems to have -escaped the commentators; but it is difficult to say, and Sir Osborne -has, it must be owned, excellent authority for his interpretation. In -Eclogue III. the somewhat difficult passage - - “pocula ponam - Fagina.... - Lenta quibus torno facili superaddita vitis - Diffusos hedera vestit pallente corymbos”-- - -_i.e._ “where the limber vine wreathed round them by the deft graving -tool is twined with pale ivy’s spreading clusters,”--is translated: - - “Over whose side the vine by a touch of the graving tool added - Mantles its clustering grapes in the paler leaves of the ivy.” - -This is quite wrong. “Corymbos” cannot possibly mean clusters of grapes, -but clusters of ivy berries, “hederâ pallente” being substituted, after -Virgil’s manner, for “hederæ pallentis.” In Eclogue IV. 24 there is no -reason for supposing that the “fallax herba veneni” is hemlock; it is -much more likely to be aconite. In line 45 “sandyx” should be translated -not “purple” but “crimson,” vague as the colour indicated by “purple” -is. In Eclogue V. - - “Si quos aut Phyllidis ignes, - Aut Alconis habes laudes, aut jurgia Codri” - -is not - - “Phyllis’s fiery loves you would sing or the quarrels of Codrus,” - -but “your passion for Phyllis, your invectives against Codrus,” “ignes” -being used far more becomingly for a man’s love than for a woman’s. So, -again, “pro purpureo narcisso” cannot mean what nature never saw, -“purple daffodil,” but the white narcissus. In Eclogue VIII. “Sophocleo -tua carmina digna cothurno” is turned by what is obviously a _lapsus -calami_, “worthy of Sophocles’ sock.” A scholar like Sir Osborne Morgan -does not need reminding that the “sock” is a metonymy for Comedy, as -Milton anglicizes it in _L’Allegro_, “if Jonson’s learned sock be on.” -In the exquisite passage in Eclogue VIII. 41-- - - “Jam fragiles poteram ab terrâ contingere ramos”-- - -to translate “fragiles” as “frail” is to miss the whole point of the -epithet. What Virgil means is, “I could just reach the branches from the -ground and _break them off_”; if it is to be translated by one epithet, -it must be “brittle.” Again in the Ninth Eclogue the words - - “quâ se subducere colles - _Incipiunt_, mollique jugum demittere clivo,” - -do not mean “where the hills with gentle depression steal away into the -plain,” but the very opposite: _i.e._ “Where the hills begin to draw -themselves up from the plain,” the ascent being contemplated from below. -In Eclogue IX., in turning the couplet - - “Nam neque adhuc Vario videor, nec dicere Cinnâ - Digna, sed argutos inter strepere anser olores,” - -the translator has no authority for turning the last verse into “a -cackling goose in a chorus of cygnets,” for there is no tradition that -cygnets sang, and goose should have been printed with a capital letter -to preserve the pun, the allusion being to a poetaster named Anser. -Unfortunately for the English translator, our literature can boast no -counterpart to “Anser” _totidem literis_, but Goose printed with a -capital is near enough to preserve, or suggest the sarcasm. There is -another slip in Eclogue X.: “Ferulas” is not “wands of willow” but -“fennel.” - -Occasionally a touch is introduced which is neither authorized by the -original, nor true to nature. There is nothing, for instance to warrant, -in Eclogue I. 56, the epithet “odorous” as applied to the willow, nor -does “salictum” mean a “willow” but a “willow-bed or plantation.” To -translate “ubi tempus erit” by “when the hour shall have struck” reminds -us of Shakespeare’s famous anachronism in _Julius Cæsar_ and is as -surprising in the work of a scholar as the lengthening of the -penultimate in arbutus, “Sweet is the shower to the blade, To the newly -weaned kid the arbutus.” As a rule, the translator turns difficult -passages very skilfully, but this is not the case with the couplet which -concludes the “Pollio”:-- - - “Incipe, parve puer: cui non risere parentes - Nec deus hunc mensâ, dea nec dignata cubili est”; - -that is, the “babe on whom the parent never smiled, no god ever deemed -worthy of his board, no goddess of her bed”--in other words, he can -never enjoy the rewards of a hero like Hercules; but there is neither -sense nor skill, and something very like a serious grammatical error, in - - “Who knows not the smile of a parent, - Neither the board of a god nor the bed of a goddess is worthy.” - -But to turn from comparative trifles. No one who reads this version of -the _Eclogues_ can doubt that Sir Osborne Morgan has proved his point, -that the English hexameter, when skilfully used, is the measure best -adapted for reproducing Virgil’s music in English. The following passage -(_Ec._ VII. 45-48) is happily turned; let us place the original beside -the translation:-- - - “Muscosi fontes et somno mollior herba, - Et quæ vos rarâ viridis tegit arbutus umbrâ, - Solstitium pecori defendite: jam venit æstas - Torrida, jam læto turgent in palmite gemmæ.” - - “Moss-grown fountains and sward more soft than the softest of slumbers, - Arbutus tree that flings over both its flickering shadows, - Shelter my flock from the sun. Already the summer is on us, - Summer that scorches up all! See the bud on the glad vine is swelling.” - -Again (_Ec._ X. 41-48):-- - - “Serta mihi Phyllis legeret, cantaret Amyntas: - Hic gelidi fontes, hic mollia prata, Lycori, - Hic nemus: hic ipso tecum consumerer ævo. - Nunc insanus amor duri me Martis in armis - Tela inter media atque adversos detinet hostes: - Tu procul a patriâ--nec sit mihi credere tantum!-- - Alpinas, ah dura, nives et frigora Rheni - Me sine sola vides.” - - “Phyllis would gather me flowers and Amyntas a melody chant me; - Cool is the fountain’s wave and soft is the meadow, Lycoris; - Shady the grove! Here with thee I would die of old age in the greenwood. - Mad is the lust of war, that now in the heart of the battle - Chains me where darts fall fast, and the charge of the foemen is fiercest, - Far, far away from your home--Oh, would that I might not believe it-- - Lost amid Alpine snows or the frozen desolate Rhineland, - Lonely without me you wander.” - -Many other felicitous passages might be quoted; indeed, there is no -Eclogue without them; but the translator is not sure-footed, and, if he -occasionally illustrates the hexameter in its excellence, he -illustrates, unhappily too often, some of its worst defects. Two -qualities are indispensable to the success of this measure in English. -Our language, unlike the classical languages, being accentual and not -quantitative, if the long syllable is not represented where the stress -naturally falls, and the short syllables where it does not fall, the -effect is sometimes grotesque, sometimes distressing, and always -unsatisfactory. Nothing, for example, could be worse in their various -ways than the following:-- - - “Wept when you saw they were given the lad, and had you not managed.” - “Let not the frozen air harm you.” - “Scatter the sand with his hind hoofs.” - “The pliant growth of the osier.” - “Worthy of Sophocles’ sock, trumpet-tongued through the Universe echo.” - “Own’d it himself, and yet he would not deliver it to me.” - -A very nice ear, too, is required to adjust the collocation of words in -which either vowels or consonants predominate, and the relative position -of monosyllabic and polysyllabic words, the predominance of the former -in our language increasing enormously the difficulty. No measure, -moreover, so easily runs into intolerable monotony--a monotony which -Clough sought to avoid by overweighting his verses with spondees, and -which Longfellow illustrates by the cloying predominance of the dactylic -movement. Sir Osborne Morgan tells us that he took Kingsley as his -model. Kingsley’s hexameters are respectable, but they have no -distinction, and he had certainly not a good ear. Longfellow’s are far -better, and are sometimes exquisitely felicitous, as in a couplet like -the following, which, with the exception of one word, is flawless:-- - - “Men whose lives glided on like the rivers that water the woodlands, - Darken’d by shadows of earth, but reflecting an image of Heaven.” - -Probably the best hexameters which have been composed in English are -those in William Watson’s _Hymn to the Sea_ and those in which Hawtry -translated Iliad III. 234-244, and the parting of Hector and Andromache -in the Sixth Iliad, models--these versions--not merely of translation, -but of hexametrical structure. There are, however, certain magical -effects, particularly in the Virgilian hexameter, produced by an -exquisite but audacious tact in the employment of licences, which can -never be reproduced in English. - -Such would be-- - - “Nam neque Parnassi vobis juga, nam neque Pindi - Ulla moram fecere, neque Aonie Aganippe. - Illum etiam lauri, etiam flevere myricæ; - Pinifer illum etiam solâ sub rupe jacentem - Mænalus et gelidi fleverunt saxa Lycæi.” - -Milton, and Milton alone among Englishmen, had the secret of this music, -but he elicited it from another instrument. - - - - -THE LATEST EDITION OF THOMSON[46] - -[Footnote 46: _The Poetical Works of James Thomson._ A New Edition, with -Memoir and Critical Appendices, by the Rev. D. C. Tovey. 2 vols. -London.] - - -“Jacob Thomson, ein vergessener Dichter des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts”--a -forgotten poet of the eighteenth century--such is the title of a recent -monograph on the author of _The Seasons_ by Dr. G. Schmeding. Dr. G. -Schmeding is, however, so obliging as to pronounce that, in his opinion, -this ought not to be Thomson’s fate; that there remains in his work, -especially in _The Seasons_ merit enough to entitle him to be “enrolled -among poets,” and to find appreciation, at all events in schools and -reading societies. Dr. Schmeding may rest assured that Thomson’s fame is -quite safe. It has no doubt suffered, as that of all the poets of the -eighteenth century has suffered, by the great revolution which has, in -the course of the last ninety years, passed over literary tastes and -fashions. But during the present century there have been no less than -twenty editions of his poems, to say nothing of separate editions of -_The Seasons_; while his works, or portions of them, have been -translated into German, Italian, modern Greek, and Russian. Only two -years ago M. Léon Morel, in his _J. Thomson, sa vie et ses œuvres_, -published an elaborate and admirable monograph on this “forgotten poet.” -And now Mr. Tovey, who, we are glad to see, has been appointed Clarke -Lecturer at Cambridge, has given us a new biography of him and a new -edition of his works, making, if we are not mistaken, the thirty-second -memoir of him and the twenty-first edition of his works which have -appeared since the beginning of the century. This is pretty well for a -forgotten poet! - -Mr. Tovey’s name is a sufficient guarantee for accurate and scholarly -work. But it might naturally be asked, what is there to justify another -edition of this poet, when so many editions are already in the field and -so easily accessible? We have little difficulty in answering this -question. The special features of Mr. Tovey’s edition are as important -as they are interesting. In the first place, he has given us a much -fuller biography than has hitherto appeared in English; in the second -place, he has thrown much interesting light on the political bearing of -Thomson’s dramas; and, in the third place, he has given, what no other -editor of Thomson has given, a full collation of Thomson’s own MS. -corrections, preserved in Mitford’s copy, now deposited in the British -Museum. The critical notes have cost him, he says, and we can quite -believe it, much time and labour, and in his preface he half apologizes -for what may seem “a ridiculous travesty of more important labours.” -There was no necessity for such an apology: he observes justly that he -has “not spent more pains on Thomson’s text than so many of our scholars -bestow upon some Greek and Latin poets whose intrinsic merit is no -greater than Thomson’s.” - -To serious readers these critical notes will constitute the most -valuable part of Mr. Tovey’s labours; they are, in truth, the speciality -of this particular edition, and will make it indispensable to all -students of this most interesting poet. And now Mr. Tovey will, we -trust, forgive us if, with due deference, we point out what seem to us -to be defects in his work. The first thing that might have been expected -from so learned and careful an editor of Thomson was an adequate -discussion of the great problem of the authorship of _Rule Britannia_, -and the second an exposure of one of the most extraordinary -“mare’s-nests” to be found in English literature. But nothing, we regret -to say, can be more perfunctory and inadequate than the two notes in -which the first question is hurried over with references to _Notes and -Queries_, and nothing more irritating than the confusion worse -confounded in which Mr. Tovey leaves the second. We shall therefore -make no apology for entering somewhat at length into both these -questions. - -And first for the authorship of _Rule Britannia_. The facts are these. -In 1740 Thomson and Mallet wrote, in conjunction, a masque entitled -_Alfred_, which, on 1st August in that year, was represented before the -Prince and Princess of Wales at Clifden. It was in two acts, and it -contained six lyrics, the last being _Rule Britannia_, which is entitled -an “Ode,” the music being by Dr. Arne. In 1745 Arne turned the piece -into an opera, and also into “a musical drama.” By this time the lyric -had become very popular, but there is no evidence to show that it had -been definitely attributed to either of the coadjutors. In 1748 Thomson -died. In 1751 Mallet re-issued _Alfred_, but in another form. It was -entirely remodelled, and almost entirely re-written, and, in an -advertisement prefixed to the work, he says: “According to the present -arrangement of the fable I was obliged to reject a great deal of what I -had written in the other: neither could I retain, of my friend’s part, -more than three or four speeches, and a part of one song.” Now, of the -parts retained from the former work, there were the first three stanzas -of _Rule Britannia_, the three others being excised, and their place -supplied by three stanzas written by Lord Bolingbroke. If Mallet is to -be believed, then, “part of one song” must refer, either to a song in -the third scene of the second act, beginning “From those eternal -regions bright,” or to _Rule Britannia_, for these are the only lyrics -in which portions of the lyrics in the former edition are retained. -_Rule Britannia_ is, it is true, entitled “An Ode” in the former -edition, and the other lyric “A Song,” so that Mallet would certainly -seem to imply that what he had retained of his friend’s work was the -portion of the song referred to, and not _Rule Britannia_. But, as -Mallet was notoriously a man who could not be believed on oath, and was -an adept in all those bad arts by which little men filch honours which -do not belong to them, if he is to be allowed to have any title to the -honour of composing this lyric, it ought to rest on something better -than the ambiguity between the word “Ode” and the word “Song.” - -There is no evidence that, while both were alive, either Thomson or -Mallet claimed the authorship; but this is certain, it was printed at -Edinburgh, during Mallet’s lifetime, in the second edition of a -well-known song book, entitled _The Charmer_, with Thomson’s initials -appended to it. It is certain that Mallet had friends in Edinburgh, and -it is equally certain that neither he nor any of his friends raised any -objection to its ascription to Thomson. In 1743, in 1759, and in 1762 -Mallet published collections of poems, but in none of these collections -does he lay claim to _Rule Britannia_, and, though it was printed in -song-books in 1749, 1750, and 1761, it is in no case assigned to -Mallet. None of his contemporaries, so far as we know, attributed it to -him, and it is remarkable that, in a brief obituary notice of him which -appeared in the _Scots Magazine_ in 1765, he is spoken of as the author -of the famous ballad _William and Margaret_, but not a word is said -about _Rule Britannia_. A further presumption in Thomson’s favour is -this: in all probability Dr. Arne, who set it to music, knew the -authorship, and he survived both Thomson and Mallet, dying in 1778. The -song had become very popular and celebrated, so that if Mallet had -desired to have the credit of its composition, it is strange that he -should not have laid claim to it, had his claim been a good one. But if -his claim was not good, he could hardly have ventured to claim the -authorship, as Dr. Arne would have been in his way. It is quite possible -that the ambiguity in the advertisement to the recension of 1751 was -designed; it certainly left the question open, and we cannot but think -there is something very suspicious in what follows the sentence in -Mallet’s advertisement, where he speaks of his having used so little of -his friend’s work. “I mention this expressly,” he adds, “that, whatever -faults are found in the present performance, they may be charged, as -they ought to be, entirely to my account.” A vainer and more -unscrupulous man than Mallet never existed; and, while it is simply -incredible that he should not have claimed what would have constituted -his chief title to popularity as a poet, had he been able to do so, it -is in exact accordance with his established character that he should, as -he did in the advertisement of 1751, have left himself an opportunity of -asserting that claim, should those who were privy to the secret have -predeceased him, and thus enabled him to do so with impunity. - -The internal evidence--and on this alone the question must now be -argued--seems to us conclusive in Thomson’s favour. The Ode is simply a -translation into lyrics of what finds embodiment in Thomson’s -_Britannia_, in the fourth and fifth parts of _Liberty_, and in his -Verses to the Prince of Wales. Coming to details, there can be no doubt -that the third stanza-- - - “Still more majestic shalt thou rise, - More dreadful from each foreign stroke; - As the loud blast that tears the skies - Serves but to root thy native oak”-- - -was suggested by Horace’s - - “Duris ut ilex tonsa bipennibus - Nigræ feraci frondis in Algido, - Per damna, per cædes, ab ipso - Ducit opes animumque ferro.” - -Now, not only was Horace, as innumerable imitations and reminiscences -prove, one of Thomson’s favourite poets, but Thomson has, in the third -part of _Liberty_ translated this very passage:-- - - “Like an oak, - Nurs’d on feracious Algidum, whose boughs - Still stronger shoot beneath the rigid axe - By loss, by slaughter, from the steel itself - E’en force and spirit drew.” - -He has, elsewhere, two other reminiscences of the same passage, once in -the third part of _Liberty_-- - - “Every tempest sung - Innoxious by, or bade it firmer stand”-- - -and once in _Sophonisba_ (Act V. sc. ii.):-- - - “Thy rooted worth - Has stood these wintry blasts, grown stronger by them.” - -The epithet “azure” employed in the first stanza is, with “cerulean” and -“aerial,” one of the three commonest epithets in Thomson, the three -occurring at least twenty times in his poetry. A somewhat cursory -examination of his works has enabled us to find that “azure” or “azured” -alone occurs ten times. “Generous,” too, in the Latin sense of the term, -is another of his favourite words, it being used no less than sixteen -times in _Britannia_ and _Liberty_ alone. Another of his favourite -allusions is to England’s “native oaks.” Thus in _Britannia_ he speaks -of-- - - “Your oaks, peculiar harden’d, shoot - Strong into sturdy growth;” - -in the last part of _Liberty_ we find “Let her own naval oak be basely -torn,” and in the same part of the poem he speaks of the “venerable -oaks” and “kindred floods.” The epithet “manly” and the phrase “the -fair”--“manly hearts to guard the fair”--are also peculiarly Thomsonian, -being repeatedly employed by him, the phrase “the fair” occurring in his -poetry at least six times, if not oftener. “Flame,” too, is another of -his favourite words. - - “All their attempts to bend thee down - Will but arouse,” etc., - -is exactly the sentiment in _Britannia_. - - “Your hearts - Swell with a sudden courage, growing still - As danger grows.” - -The stanza beginning “To thee belongs,” etc., is simply a lyrical -paraphrase of the passage in _Britannia_ commencing “Oh first of human -blessings,” and of a couplet in the last part of _Liberty_:-- - - “The winds and seas are Britain’s wide domain; - And not a sail but by permission spreads.” - -The couplet - - “All thine shall be the subject main, - And every shore it circles thine” - -is simply the echo of a couplet in the fifth part of _Liberty_-- - - “All ocean is her own, and every land - To whom her ruling thunder ocean bears.” - -The phrase “blessed isle,” as applied to England, he employs three -times in _Liberty_. Again, the stanza in which _Rule Britannia_ is -written is the stanza in which the majority of Thomson’s minor lyrics -are written, and the rhythm and cadence, not less than the tone, colour -and sentiment, are exactly his. - -Mallet was undoubtedly an accomplished man and a respectable poet, as -his ballad _William and Margaret_, his _Edwin and Emma_, and his _Birks -of Invermay_ sufficiently prove, but he has written nothing tolerable in -the vein of _Rule Britannia_. Neatness, and tenderness bordering on -effeminacy, mark his characteristic lyrics, and, if we except a few -lines in his _Tyburn_ and the eight concluding lines in a poem entitled -_A Fragment_, there is no virility in his poetry at all. Of the -patriotism and ardent love of liberty which pervade Thomson’s poems, and -which glow so intensely in _Rule Britannia_, he has absolutely nothing. -Nor are there any analogues or parallels in his poems to this lyric -either in form--for if we are not mistaken, he has never employed the -stanza in which it is written--or in imagery, or phraseology. Like -Thomson, whom, in his narrative blank-verse poems, he servilely -imitates, he is fond of the words “azure” and “aerial”; and the word -“azure” is the only verbal coincidence linking the phraseology of his -acknowledged poems with the lyric in question. It may be added, too, -that a man who was capable of the jingling rubbish of such a masque as -_Britannia_, and who had the execrable taste to substitute Bolingbroke’s -stanzas for the stanzas which they supersede, could hardly have been -equal to the production of this lyric. We believe, then, that there can -be no reasonable doubt that the honour of composing _Rule Britannia_ -belongs to Thomson the bard, and not to Mallet the fribble. - -But to return to Mr. Tovey and the “mare’s-nest” to which we have -referred. This mare’s-nest is the assumption that Pope assisted Thomson -in revising _The Seasons_. Since Robert Bell’s edition this has come to -be received as an established fact, but we propose to show that it rests -on a hypothesis demonstrably baseless. - -There is, in the British Museum, an interleaved copy of the first volume -of the London edition of Thomson’s works, dated 1738, and the part of -the volume which contains _The Seasons_ is full of manuscript deletions, -corrections, and additions. These are in two handwritings, the one being -unmistakably the handwriting of Thomson, the other beyond all question -the handwriting of some one else. Almost all these corrections were -inserted in the edition prepared for the press in 1744, and now, -consequently, form part of the present text. The corrections in the hand -which is not the hand of Thomson are, in many cases, of extraordinary -merit, showing a fineness of ear and delicacy of touch quite above the -reach of Thomson himself. We will give two or three samples. Thomson -had written in _Autumn_ 290 seqq.:-- - - “With harvest shining all these fields are thine, - And if my rustics may presume so far, - Their master, too, who then indeed were blest - To make the daughter of Acasto so.” - -The unknown corrector substitutes the present reading:-- - - “The fields, the master, all, my fair, are thine; - If to the various blessings which thy house - Has lavished on me thou wilt add that bliss, - That dearest bliss, the power of blessing thee!” - -The other is famous. Thomson had written:-- - - “Thoughtless of beauty, she was beauty’s self, - Recluse among the woods, if City-dames - Will deign their faith. And thus she went compell’d - By strong necessity, with as serene - And pleased a look as patience can put on, - To glean Palemon’s fields.” - -For these vapid and dissonant verses is substituted by the corrector, -who very properly retains the first verse, what is now the text:-- - - “Recluse amid the close embow’ring woods, - As in the hollow breast of Apennine, - Beneath the shelter of encircling hills, - A myrtle rises, far from human eyes, - And breathes its balmy fragrance o’er the wild. - So flourished blooming, and unseen by all, - The sweet Lavinia,” etc. - -The transformation of a single line is often most felicitous: thus in -_Winter_ the flat line - - “Through the lone night that bids the waves arise” - -is grandly altered into - - “Through the black night that sits immense around.” - -Thus, in _Spring_, Thomson had merely written - - “Whose aged oaks and venerable gloom - Invite the noisy rooks;” - -but his corrector alters and extends the passage into - - “Whose aged elms and venerable oaks - Invite the rooks, who high amid the boughs - In early spring their airy city build, - And caw with ceaseless clamour.” - -Indeed, throughout _The Seasons_ Thomson’s indebtedness to his corrector -is incalculable; many of the most felicitous touches are due to him. -Now, who was this corrector? Let Mr. Tovey answer. “It has long been -accepted as a fact among scholars that Pope assisted Thomson in the -composition of _The Seasons_. Our original authority is, we suppose, -Warton.” The truth is that our original authority for this statement is -neither Warton nor any other writer of the eighteenth century, but -simply the conjecture of Mitford--in other words, Mitford’s mere -assumption that the handwriting of the corrector is the handwriting of -Pope; and, if we are not mistaken,--for Mitford may have given earlier -currency to it in some other place--the conjecture appeared for the -first time in Mitford’s edition of Gray, published in 1814. In his copy -of the volume, containing the MS. notes, he bolsters up his statement -by two assertions and references: “That Pope saw some pieces of -Thomson’s in manuscript is clear from a letter in Bowles’s _Supplement_, -page 194” (an obvious misprint for 294). But on turning to the -references all that we find is--it is in a letter dated February -1738/9--“I have yet seen but three acts of Mr. Thomson’s, but I am told, -and believe by what I have seen that it excels in the pathetic”; the -reference is plainly to Thomson’s tragedy, _Edward and Eleonora_. Again, -Mitford writes: “On Thomson’s submitting his poems to Pope” (see -Warton’s edition, vol. viii., page 340), and again we get no proof. All -that Pope says is, “I am just taken up”--he is writing to Aaron Hill -under date November 1732--“by Mr. Thomson in the perusal of a new poem -he has brought me;” this new poem being almost certainly _Liberty_, in -the composition of which Thomson was then engaged. So far from the -tradition having any countenance from Warton, it is as certain as -anything can be, that Warton knew nothing about it. In his _Essay on -Pope_ he gives an elaborate account of _The Seasons_, and he has more -than once referred to Pope and Thomson together; but he says not a word, -either in this Essay or in his edition of Pope’s Works, about Pope -having corrected Thomson’s poetry. If Pope assisted Thomson, to the -extent indicated in these corrections, such an incident, considering -the fame of Thomson and the fame of Pope, must have been known to some -at least of the innumerable editors, biographers, and anecdotists -between 1742 and 1814. It could hardly have escaped being recorded by -Murdoch, Mallet, or Warburton, by Ruffhead, by Savage or Spence, by -Theophilus Cibber or Johnson. It is incredible that such an interesting -secret should have been kept either by Thomson himself or by Pope. -Again, whoever the corrector was, he had a fine ear for blank verse, and -must indeed have been a master of it. There is no proof that Pope ever -wrote in blank verse; indeed, we have the express testimony of Lady -Wortley Montagu that he never attempted it, and his Shakespeare -conclusively proves that he had anything but a nice ear for its rhythm. -With all this collateral evidence against the probability of the -corrector being Pope, we come to the evidence which should settle the -question, the evidence of handwriting. There is no lack of material for -forming an opinion on this point. Pope’s autograph MSS. are abundant, -illustrating his hand at every period in his life. It is amazing to find -Mitford asserting that his friends Ellis and Combe, at the British -Museum, had no doubt about the hand of the corrector being the hand of -Pope. Mr. Tovey candidly admits that, “if the best authorities at the -Museum many years ago were positive that the handwriting was Pope’s, -their successors at the present time are equally positive that it is -not.” Such is the very decided opinion of Mr. Warner; such, also, as Mr. -Tovey acknowledges, is the opinion of Professor Courthope, and such, we -venture to think, will be the opinion of every one who will take the -trouble to compare the hands. Mr. Tovey himself is plainly very uneasy, -and indeed goes so far as to say that “it has all along been perplexing -to me how the opinion that this was Pope’s handwriting could ever have -been _confidently_” (the italics are his) “entertained”; and yet in his -notes he follows Bell, and inserts these corrections with Pope’s -initials. - -We search in vain among those who are known to have been on friendly -terms with Thomson for a probable claimant. It could not, as his other -stupid revisions of Thomson’s verses sufficiently show, have been -Lyttleton. Mallet’s blank verse is conclusive against his having had any -hand in the corrections. Collins and Hammond are out of the question. It -is just possible, though hardly likely, that the corrector was -Armstrong. He was on very intimate terms with Thomson. His own poem -proves that he could sometimes write excellent blank verse, but the -touch and rhythm of the corrections are, it must be admitted, not the -touch and rhythm of Armstrong. - -What has long, therefore, been represented and circulated as an -undisputed fact--namely, that Pope assisted Thomson in the revision of -_The Seasons_--rests not, as all Thomson’s modern editors have supposed, -on the traditions of the eighteenth century, and on the testimony of -authenticated handwriting, but on a mere assumption of Mitford. That the -volume in question really belonged to Thomson, and that the corrections -are originals, hardly admits of doubt, though Mitford gives neither the -pedigree nor the history of this most interesting literary relic. It is, -of course, possible that the corrections are Thomson’s own, and that the -differences in the handwriting are attributable to the fact that in some -cases he was his own scribe, that in others he employed an amanuensis; -but the intrinsic unlikeness of the corrections, made in the strange -hand, to his characteristic style renders this improbable. In any case -there is nothing to warrant the assumption that the corrector was Pope. - - - - -CATULLUS AND LESBIA.[47] - -[Footnote 47: _The Lesbia of Catullus._ Arranged and translated by J. H. -A. Tremenheere. London.] - - -Perhaps the best thing in this world is youth, and the poetry of -Catullus is its very incarnation. The “young Catullus” he was to his -contemporaries, and the young Catullus he will be to the end of time. To -turn over his pages is to recall the days when all within and all -without conspire to make existence a perpetual feast, when life’s lord -is pleasure, its end enjoyment, its law impulse, before experience and -satiety have disillusioned and disgusted, and we are still in Dante’s -phrase, “trattando l’ombre come cosa salda.” And the poet of youth had -the good fortune not to survive youth; of the dregs and lees of the life -he chose he had no taste. While the cup which “but sparkles near the -brim” was still sparkling for him, death dashed it from his lips. At -thirty his tale was told,--and a radiant figure, a sunny memory and a -golden volume were immortal. - -Revelling alike in the world of nature, and in the world of man, at once -simple and intense, at once playful and pathetic, his poetry has a -freshness as of the morning, an abandon as of a child at play. He has -not, indeed, escaped the taint of Alexandrinism any more than Burns -escaped the taint of the pseudo-classicism of the conventional school of -his day, but this is the only note of falsetto discernible in what he -has left us. It is when we compare him with Horace, Propertius, and -Martial that his incomparable charm is most felt. As a lyric poet, -except when patriotic, and when dealing with moral ideas, Horace is as -commonplace as he is insincere; he had no passion; he had little pathos; -he had not much sentiment; he had no real feeling for nature, he was -little more than a consummate craftsman, to adopt an expression from -Scaliger “ex alienis ingeniis poeta, ex suo tantum versificator.” In his -Greek models he found not merely his form, but his inspiration. Most of -his love odes have all the appearance of being mere studies in fancy. -When he attempts threnody he is as frigid as Cowley. Whose heart was -ever touched by the verses to Virgil on the death of Quintilian, or by -the verses to Valgius on the death of his son? The real Horace is the -Horace of the Satires and Epistles, and the real Horace had as little of -the temperament of a poet as La Fontaine and Prior. Propertius had -passion, and he had certainly some feeling for nature, but he was an -incurable pedant both in temper and in habit. Martial applied the -epigram, in elegiacs and in hendecasyllabics, to the same purposes to -which it was applied by Catullus, with more brilliance and finish, but -he had not the power of informing trifles with emotion and soul. What -became with Catullus the spontaneous expression of the dominant mood, -became in the hands of Martial the mere _tour de force_ of the ingenious -wit. Catullus is the most Greek of all the Roman poets; Greek in the -simplicity, chastity and propriety of his style, in his exquisite -responsiveness to all that appeals to the senses and the emotions, in -his ardent and abounding vitality. But, in his enthusiasm for nature, in -the intensity of his domestic affections, and in his occasional touches -of moral earnestness--and we have seldom to go far for them--he was -Roman. His sketches from nature are delightful. What could be more -perfect than the following? Has even Tennyson equalled it?-- - - Hic, qualis flatu placidum mare matutino - Horrificans Zephyrus proclivas incitat undas, - Aurorâ exoriente, vagi sub lumina solis; - Quæ tarde primum clementi flamine pulsæ - Procedunt, leviterque sonant plangore cachinni: - Post, vento crescente, magis magis increbescunt, - Purpureâque procul nantes a luce refulgent. - - “As in early morning when Zephyr’s breath, ruffling the stilly - sea, stirs it into slanting waves up against the glow of the - travelling sun; and at first, while the impelling breeze is - gentle, they move in slow procession, and the plash of their - ripples is not loud; but then, as the breeze freshens, they - crowd faster and faster on, and far out at sea, as they float, - flash back the splendour of the crimsoning day in their front.” - -Or, again, in the epistle to Manlius-- - - Qualis in aerii _pellucens_ vertice montis - Rivus _muscoso prosilit e lapide_. - -How vivid is the picture of the rising sun and of early morning in the -Attis, 39-41. - - Ubi oris aurei sol radiantibus oculis - Lustravit æthera album, sola dura, mare ferum, - Pepulitque noctis umbras vegetis sonipedibus. - -In his “Asian Myrtle, in all the beauty of its blossom-laden branches, -which the Wood-Nymphs feed with honey dew to be their toy:”-- - - Floridis velut enitens - Myrtus Asia ramulis, - Quos Hamadryades Deæ - Ludicrum sibi roscido - Nutriunt humore.-- - ---who does not recognise Matthew Arnold’s “natural magic”? - -Flowers he loved, as Shakespeare loved them. What tenderness there is in -the image of the love that perished-- - - Prati - Ultimi flos, prætereunte postquam - Tactus aratro est, - - (xi. 19-21.) - ---in the beautiful simile, so often imitated in every language in -Europe, where the unmarried maiden is compared to the uncropped flower, -lxii., 39-45; or where in the - - Alba parthenice, - Luteumve papaver, - - (lxi. 194-5.) - -he sees the symbol of maidenhood; or where Ariadne is compared to the -myrtles on the banks of the Eurotas, and to the “flowers of diverse hues -which the spring breezes evoke”; and, again, the exquisite simile -picturing the husband’s love binding fast the bride’s thoughts, as a -tree is entwined in the clinging clasp of the gadding ivy-- - - Mentem amore revinciens, - Ut tenax hedera huc et huc - Arborem implicat errans. - -Then we have the garland of Priapus with its felicitous epithets (xix., -xx.). - -It may be said of Catullus as Shelley said of his Alastor-- - - Every sight - And sound from the vast earth and ambient air - Sent to his heart their choicest impulses. - -What rapture inspires and informs the lines to his yacht, and to Sirmio, -as well as the _Jam ver egelidos refert tepores_! - -As the author of the _Attis_ Catullus stands alone among poets. There -was, so far as we know, nothing like it before, and there has been -nothing like it since. If it be a study from the Greek, as it is -generally supposed to be, it is very difficult to conjecture at what -period its original could have been produced. There is nothing at all -resembling it which has come down from the lyric period; its theme is -not one which would have been likely to attract the Attic poets. If its -model was the work of some Alexandrian, we can only say that such a poem -must have been an even greater anomaly in that literature than Smart’s -_Song to David_ is to our own literature, in the eighteenth century. It -may, of course, be urged that it is equally anomalous in Latin poetry, -and that, if resolved into its elements, it has much more affinity with -what may be traced to Greek than to Roman sources. In its compound -epithets, and more particularly in the singular use of “foro,” so -plainly substituted for the Greek αγορα and its associations, -it certainly reads like a translation from the Greek; and yet, in the -total impression made by it, the poem has not the air of a translation, -but of an original, and of an original struck out, in inspiration, at -white heat. - -Only by an extraordinary effort of imaginative sympathy are we now able -to realize to ourselves the tragedy of the _Attis_, while its rushing -galliambics whirl us through the panorama of its swift-succeeding -pictures. But home to every heart must come the poems which Catullus -dedicates to the memory of his brother, and the poem in which he tries -to soothe Calvus for the death of Quintilia. - - Multas per gentes, et multa per aequora vectus - Advenio has miseras, frater, ad inferias, - Ut te postremo donarem munere mortis, - Et mutum nequidquam alloquerer cinerem: - Quandoquidem fortuna mihi tete abstulit ipsum: - Heu miser indigne frater adempte mihi! - Nunc tamen interea prisco quæ more parentum - Tradita sunt tristi munere ad inferias, - Accipe, fraterno multum manantia fletu: - Atque in perpetuum, frater, ave atque vale. - - “Many are the peoples, many the seas I have passed through to - be here, dear brother, at this, thine untimely grave, that I - might pay thee death’s last tribute, and greet,--how - vainly,--the dust that has no response. For well I know Fortune - hath bereft me of thy living self--Ah! hapless brother, cruelly - torn from me! Yet here, see, be the offerings which, from of - old, the custom of our fathers hath handed down as a sad - oblation to the grave--take them--they are streaming with a - brother’s tears. And now--for evermore--brother, hail and - farewell!” - -Could pathos go further? How exquisite, too, is the following:-- - - Si quidquam mutis gratum acceptumque sepulcris - Accidere a nostro, Calve, dolore potest, - Quum desiderio veteres renovamus amores, - Atque olim amissas flemus amicitias: - Certe non tanto mors immatura dolori est - Quintiliæ, quantum gaudet amore tuo.[48] - -Shakespeare merely unfolded what was included here, when he wrote those -haunting lines:-- - - When to the sessions of sweet silent thought - I summon up remembrance of things past, - I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought, - And with old woes new wail my dear time’s waste - Then can I drown an eye, unus’d to flow, - For precious friends hid in death’s dateless night, - And weep afresh love’s long-since cancell’d woe, - And moan the expense of many a vanish’d sight. - -Never, too, has any poet given such pathetic expression to a sorrow, -which to the young is even harder to bear than the loss inflicted by -death, the perfidy and treachery of friends. The verses to Alphenus -(xxx.), to the anonymous friend in lxviii., and the epigram to Rufus -(lxxvii.), are indescribably touching. What infinite sadness there is -in:-- - - Si tu oblitus es, at Dii meminerunt, meminit Fides, - Quæ te ut pæniteat postmodo facti faciet tui. - -What passion of grief in:-- - - Heu, heu, nostræ crudele venenum - Vitæ, heu, heu, nostræ pestis amicitiæ! - -But nothing that Catullus has left us equals in fascinating interest, or -exceeds in charm, the poems inspired by the woman who was at once the -bliss and the curse of his life-- - - Lesbia nostra, Lesbia illa, - Illa Lesbia, quam Catullus unam - Plusquam se, atque suos amavit omnes. - -Whether she is to be identified with the sister of P. Clodius Pulcher, -and the wife of Metellus Celer, seems to us, in spite of the arguments -of Schwaber, Munro, Ellis, and Sellar, extremely doubtful. It is a point -which need not be discussed here, and is, indeed, of little importance. -That she was a woman of superb and commanding beauty, a false wife, a -false mistress, and of immeasurable profligacy, Catullus has himself -told us. There could only be one end to a passion of which such a siren -was the object; and, exquisite as the poems are which precede the -breaking of the spell, it is in the poems recording the gradual process -of disenchantment, and the struggle between the old love and the new -loathing, that Catullus touches us most. How piercing is the pathos of -such a poem as the _Si qua recordanti_ (lxxvi.), or the epigram in which -he says that he loves and loathes, but knows not why, only knows that it -is so, and that he is on the rack:-- - - Odi et amo. Quare id faciam, fortasse requiris. - Nescio: sed fieri sentio et excrucior. - -Or where he says that, pest as she is, he cannot curse a love who is -dearer to him than both his eyes:-- - - Credis me potuisse meæ maledicere vitæ, - Ambobus mihi quæ carior est oculis? - Non potui, nec, si possem, tam perdite amarem. - -And he suffered the more, as he had lavished on her the purest -affections of his heart. His love for her--such was his own -expression--was not simply that which men ordinarily feel for their -mistresses, but such as the father feels for his sons and his -sons-in-law:-- - - Dilexi tum te, non tantum ut vulgus amicam, - Sed pater ut gnatos diligit et generos. - -But shameless as she is, and it is an impossibility for her to be -otherwise, he cannot abandon her. Do what she will he is her slave. His -mind, he says, was so straitened by her frailty, so beggared by its own -devotion, that, even if she became virtuous, he could not love her with -absolute goodwill, and if she stuck at nothing--drained vice to its very -dregs--he could not give her up:-- - - Huc est mens deducta tuâ, mea Lesbia, culpâ - Atque ita se officio perdidit ipsa suo, - Ut jam nec bene velle queam tibi, si optima fias, - Nec desistere amare, omnia si facias. - -He compares himself to a man labouring under a cruel and incurable -disease, a disease which is paralysing his energy, and draining life of -its joy:-- - - Me miserum adspicite, et si vitam puriter egi, - Eripite hanc pestem perniciemque mihi, - Quæ mihi subrepens imos, ut torpor, in artus - Expulit ex omni pectore lætitias. - -Nearly sixteen hundred years had to pass before the world was to have -any parallel to these poems. And the parallel is certainly a remarkable -one. In the “Dark Lady” of Shakespeare’s Sonnets, Lesbia lives again; in -the lover of the dark lady, Lesbia’s victim. Once more a false wife and -a false mistress, not indeed beautiful, but with powers of fascination -so irresistible that deformity itself becomes a charm, makes havoc of a -poet’s peace. Once more a passion, as degraded as it is degrading, sows -feuds among friends, and “infects with jealousy the sweetness of -affiance.” Once more rises the bitter cry of a soul, conscious of the -unspeakable degradation of a thraldom which it is agony to endure, and -from which it would be agony to be emancipated. Compare for instance:-- - - My love is as a fever, longing still - For that which longer nurseth the disease, - Feeding on that which doth preserve the ill, - The uncertain sickly appetite to please. - - * * * * * - - Past cure I am, now reason is past care, - And frantic mad with evermore unrest, - My thoughts and my discourse as madman’s are, - - (Sonnet cxlvii.) - -with Catullus, lxxvi. - -And:-- - - Whence hast thou this becoming of things ill, - That in the very refuse of thy deeds - There is such strength and warrantise of skill, - That in my mind thy worst all best exceeds. - Who taught thee how to make me love thee more, - The more I hear and see just cause of hate? - - (Sonnet cl.) - -with Catullus, lxxii., lxxiii., lxxv.; while Sonnet cxxxvii. presents a -ghastly parallel with Catullus, lviii. Again, how exactly analogous is -the adjuration to Quintius in Epigram lxxxii., with what finds -expression in Sonnets xl.-xlii., and Sonnet cxx. But it would be tedious -as well as superfluous to cite particular parallels where the whole -position--which may be summed up in the two words of Catullus, “Odi et -amo,”--is identical. - -Not the least remarkable thing about Catullus is his range and his -versatility. It is truly extraordinary that the same pen should have -given us such finished social portraits as “Suffenus iste” (xxii.), “Ad -Furium” (xxiii.), “In Egnatium” (xxxix.); the perfection of such serious -fooling as we find in the “Lugete, O Veneres” (iii.), and, if we may -apply such an expression to the most delicious love poem ever written, -the “Acme and Septimius” (xlv.); of such humorous fooling as we find in -the “Varus me meus ad suos amores” (x.), the “O Colonia quæ cupis” -(xvii.), the “Adeste, hendecasyllabi,” the “Oramus, si forte non -molestum” (lv.); such epic as we have in the “Peleus and Thetis”; such -triumphs of richness, splendour, and grace as we have in the three -marriage poems; such a superb expression of the highest imaginative -power, penetrated with passion and enthusiasm, as we have in the -_Attis_; such concentrated invective and satire as mark some of the -lampoons; such mock heroic as we have in the _Coma Berenices_; such -piercing pathos as penetrates the autobiographical poems, and the poems -dedicated to Lesbia. - -Catullus has been compared to Keats, but the comparison is not a happy -one. His nearest analogy among modern poets is Burns. Both were, in -Tennyson’s phrase, “dowered with the love of love, the scorn of scorn,” -and, in the poems of both, those passions find the intensest expression. -Both had an exquisite sympathy with all that appeals, either in nature -or in humanity, to the senses and the affections. Both were sensualists -and libertines without being effeminate, or without being either -depraved or hardened. In both, indeed, an infinite tenderness is perhaps -the predominating feature. Both had humour, that of Catullus being the -more caustic, that of Burns the more genial. Both were distinguished by -sincerity and simplicity; both waged war with charlatanry and baseness. -Burns had the richer nature and was the greater as a man; Catullus was -the more accomplished artist. - -But it is time to turn to the book which has recalled Catullus and -Lesbia. Mr. Tremenheere has, with great ingenuity, succeeded in -concocting by a process of elaborate dovetailing a very pretty romance -which he divides into nine chapters, the first being “The Birth of -Love,” the second, third and fourth, “Possession,” “Quarrels” and -“Reconciliation,” the fifth, sixth, and seventh, “Doubt,” “A Brother’s -Death” and “Unfaithfulness,” the last two, “Avoidance” and “The Death of -Love.” The chief objection to this is that it is for the most part -fanciful, and is absolutely without warrant, either from tradition or -from probability. Many of the poems pressed into the service of his -narrative by Mr. Tremenheere have nothing whatever to do with Lesbia. -Such would be xiii., “The invitation to Fabullus,” xiv., “The Acme and -Septimius.” - -The translations are very unequal. Of many of them it may be said in -Dogberry’s phrase that they “are tolerable and not to be endured,” or to -borrow an expression from Byron “so middling bad were better.” Thus the -powerful poem to Gellius (xci.) is attenuated into:-- - - ’Twas not that I esteem’d you were - As constant or incapable - Of vulgar baseness, but that she - For whom great love was wasting me, - The spice of incest lacked for you; - And though we were old friends, ’tis true, - That seem’d poor cause to my poor mind, - Not so to yours. - -Sometimes the versions are detestable. Nothing could be worse than to -turn:-- - - Nulli illum pueri nullæ optavere puellæ - - No more is she glad to the eyes of a lad, - To the lasses a pride,-- - -or - - Dulcis pueri ebrios ocellos - -as - - Her minion’s passion-sodden eyes,-- - -which might do very well for a coarse phrase like “In Venerem putres,” -but not for “Ebrios.” But sometimes the renderings are very felicitous. -As here:-- - - Quid vis? quâlubet esse notus optas - Eris: quandoquidem meos amores - Cum longâ voluisti amare pœnâ. - - Cost what it may, you’ll win renown! - You shall, such longing you exhibit - Both for my mistress--and a gibbet! - -And the following is happy:-- - - Nullum amans vere, sed identidem omnium - Ilia rumpens. - Nec meum respectet, ut ante, amorem - Qui illius culpâ cecidit; velut prati - Ultimi flos, prætereunte postquam - Tactus aratro est. - - Ah, shameless, loveless lust, sweet, seek no more - To win love back, by thine own fault it fell, - In the far corner of the field though hid, - Touch’d by the plough at last,--the flower is dead. - -The following also is neat and skilful, but how inferior to the almost -terrible impressiveness of the original:-- - - O Di si vostrûm est misereri, aut si quibus unquam - Extremâ jam ipsâ in morte tulistis opem. - Me miserum adspicite, et si vitam puriter egi, - Eripite hanc pestem perniciemque mihi, - Quæ mihi subrepens imos, ut torpor, in artus - Expulit ex omni pectore lætitias. - - Oh God! if Thine be pity, and if Thou - E’en in the jaws of death ere now, - Hast wrought salvation--look on me; - And if my life seem fair to Thee - O tear this plague, this curse away, - Which gaining on me day by day, - A creeping slow paralysis, - Hath driven away all happiness. - -Six love stories stand out conspicuous in the records of poetry--those -which find expression in the _Elegies_ of Propertius, in the _Sonnets -and Canzoni_ of Dante and Petrarch, in the _Sonnets_ of Camoens, in the -_Astrophel and Stella_ of Sidney, in the _Sonnets_ of Shakespeare. But -never has passion, never has pathos, thrilled in intenser or more -piercing utterance than in the poems which that fatal “Clytemnestra -quadrantaria”--to employ the phrase which may actually have been applied -to her--inspired, and in which the rapture and loathing and despair of -Catullus found a voice. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 48: “If the silent dead can feel any pleasure, or solace from -our sorrow, Calvus, when, in wistful regret, we recall past loves, and -weep for the friendships severed long ago, then be sure that Quintilia’s -grief for her early death is not so great as the joy she feels in -knowing your love for her.”] - - - - -THE RELIGION OF SHAKESPEARE[49] - -[Footnote 49: _The Religion of Shakespeare._ Chiefly from the writings -of the late Mr. Richard Simpson. By Henry Sebastian Bowden. London.] - - -This book, which is partly a compilation from the uncollected writings -of the late Richard Simpson and partly the composition of Father Bowden -himself, is an attempt to show that Shakespeare was a Roman Catholic. It -contains much interesting information; it is well written, and we have -read it with pleasure. With much which we find in it we entirely concur -and are in full sympathy. We take Shakespeare quite as seriously as -Father Bowden does. We believe that the greatest of dramatic poets is -also one of the greatest of moral teachers, that his theology and ethics -deserve the most careful study, and that they have, too frequently, been -either neglected or misinterpreted. We agree with Father Bowden that -nothing could be sounder and more persistently emphasised than the -ethical element in this poet’s dramas; that his ethics are, in the -main, the ethics of Christianity, and that so far from Shakespeare being -simply an agnostic and having no religion at all, as Birch and others -have contended, he is, if not formally, at least in essence, as -religious as Æschylus and Sophocles. - -And now Father Bowden must forgive us if we are unable to go further -with him. We have no prejudice against Roman Catholicism, or against any -of the creeds in which religious faith and reverence have found -expression,--“Tros Rutulusve fuat nullo discrimine agetur.” Our sole -wish is, if possible, to get at the truth. It is of comparatively little -consequence now to what form of religion Shakespeare belonged, but it -would be at least interesting, if it could be shown that any particular -sect could legitimately claim him. - -In discussing this question we must bear in mind that in Shakespeare’s -time, as in the time of the ancients, religion had two aspects, its -private and its public. In its public aspect it was a part of the -machinery of the state, an essential portion of the political fabric. -Till the Reformation there had been practically no schism and no -difficulty. After the Reformation a most perplexing problem presented -itself. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, in a long and terrible -conflict, struggled for the mastery. At the accession of Elizabeth the -victory had been won, so far as England was concerned, by Protestantism, -and Protestantism was the accepted religion of the nation. As such, it -was the duty of every loyal citizen to uphold it; it became with the -throne one of the two pillars on which the fabric of the state rested. -Roman Catholicism became identified with the political rivals and -enemies of England. Protestantism became identified with her lovers and -upholders. Thus the Church and the Throne became indissoluble, at once -the symbols, centres, and securities of political harmony and union. -This accounts for the attitude of Hooker, Spenser, Shakespeare and Bacon -towards Episcopalian Protestantism on the one hand, and towards -Puritanism on the other. About Shakespeare’s political opinions there -can be no doubt at all, for, if we except the Comedies, he preaches them -emphatically in almost every drama which he has left us. They were those -of an uncompromising and intolerant Royalist, in whose eyes the only -security for all that is dear to the patriot lay in implicit obedience -to the will of the sovereign, and in upholding a system to which that -will was law. That he should, therefore, have had any sympathy with the -Roman Catholics is, on _a priori_ grounds, exceedingly improbable. We -turn to his Dramas, and what do we find? It would be no exaggeration to -say, that there is not a line in them which indicates that he regarded -the Roman Catholics with favour. On the contrary, they abound in points -directed against them. Thus he twice goes out of his way, once in -_Henry V._[50] and once in _All’s Well that Ends Well_, to observe that -“miracles have ceased.” There is a bitter sneer at them in the reference -to the sanctimonious pirate and the commandments, in _Measure for -Measure_.[51] There can be little doubt that the words in the porter’s -speech in _Macbeth_, “here’s an equivocator that could swear in both the -scales against either scale, who committed treason enough for God’s -sake, yet could not equivocate to Heaven,” have sarcastic reference to -the doctrine of equivocation avowed by Garnett and popularly associated -with the Jesuits; while the remark about the fitness of “the nun’s lip -to the friar’s mouth”[52] in _All’s Well that Ends Well_ is another -concession to Protestant prejudice. - -In _King John_ such a speech as the following may be dramatic, but who -can doubt that it expressed the poet’s own sentiments?-- - - Tell him this tale; and from the mouth of England - Add thus much more,--that no Italian priest - Shall tithe or toll in our dominions; - But, as we under Heaven are supreme head, - So, under Him, that great supremacy, - - Where we do reign, we will alone uphold, - Without the assistance of a mortal hand: - So tell the Pope; all reverence set apart - To him, and his usurp’d authority. - -_King John_ is, indeed, simply the manifesto of Protestantism against -papal aggression. What could be more contemptible than the character of -Pandulph and the part which he plays? Is it credible that Shakespeare -could have had any sympathy with a religion whose minister is one whom -he represents as saying: - - Meritorious shall that hand be called, - Canonized, and worshipped as a saint, - That takes away by any secret course - Thy hateful life. - -In _Henry VIII._, again, we have an elaborate eulogy of the Reformation, -Cranmer being presented in the most favourable light, Gardiner in the -most unfavourable, while Wolsey is almost as detestable as Pandulph. - -It is really pitiable to see the shifts to which the authors of this -book are reduced to make out their theory. They have even pressed into -its service Jordan’s palpable and long-exploded forgery of John -Shakespeare’s Will, and the fact that John Shakespeare’s name is found -on a list of Recusants, when it is, in that very list, expressly stated -that he had absented himself from church, simply from fear of process -for debt. Passages in the dramas are similarly perverted. Shakespeare’s -hostility to the Protestants induced him, we are told, to pour contempt -on Oldcastle by depicting him as Falstaff. His delineation of Malvolio, -and his frequent sneers at the Puritans, are attributed to the same -motive. The famous lines in _Hamlet_, placed in the mouth of the Ghost, -are cited to prove his belief in purgatory; the comical penances imposed -on Biron and his friends in _Love’s Labour Lost_ to prove his belief in -penance. When in _Lear_ it is said of Cordelia that:-- - - She shook - The holy water from her heavenly eyes. - -we are to see another indication of Shakespeare’s religion as “they have -a Catholic ring about them.” Sentiments which are common to all sects of -Christians are regarded as peculiar to Roman Catholicism; mere dramatic -utterances are forced into illustrations of supposed personal -convictions. What is habitually and systematically ignored is, that -Shakespeare, being a dramatic poet, must necessarily make his characters -express themselves dramatically, and that, as he was depicting times -preceding the Reformation, his sentiments and expressions very naturally -took the colour of the world in which his characters moved. The wonder -is not that this should have occurred, but that Shakespeare should, in -spite of the gross anachronism of such a process, have so -_Protestantized_ pre-Reformation times. We are quite willing to concede -to Father Bowden that there is enough to warrant us in assuming that -Shakespeare did not regard the Puritans with favour. But his dislike to -them arose not from the fact that they were Protestants, but that they -were not orthodox Protestants. He was opposed to them for the same -reasons that Elizabeth and James, Hooker and Bacon were opposed to them. -Their hostility to his profession, their sanctimonious cant, and the -surly asceticism of their lives, no doubt contributed to his prejudice -against them. - -Nor are we in any way justified in concluding that Shakespeare accepted -the teaching of the Church of Rome in spiritual matters. Nothing could -be more unwarranted than what is assumed by Father Bowden in the -following passage. He is speaking of Shakespeare’s attitude in relation -to death. “‘Ripeness is all’; and he shows us in all his penitents how -that ripeness is secured, sin forgiven, and heaven won on the lines of -Catholic dogma and by the Sacraments of the Church.” - -What are the facts? Shakespeare’s reticence about a future state, and -what may await man, in the form of reward and punishment hereafter, is -one of his most striking characteristics. Neither Cordelia nor -Desdemona, neither Constance nor Imogen in their darkest hours expresses -any confidence in the final mercy and justice of Heaven. Othello, -falling by a fate as terrible as it was undeserved, dies without a -syllable of hope. “The rest is silence” are the ominous words with which -Hamlet takes leave of life. When Gloucester believes himself to be -standing on the brink of death, in the farewell which he takes of the -world he has no anticipation of any other; all he contemplates is “to -shake patiently his great affliction off.” So die Lear, Hotspur, Romeo, -Antony, Eros, Enobarbus, Macbeth, Beaufort, Mercutio, Laertes. So die -Brutus, Coriolanus, King John. In the Duke’s speech in _Measure for -Measure_, where he is preparing Claudio to meet death, death is merely -contemplated as an escape from the pains and discomforts of life. -Macbeth would ‘jump’ the world to come if he could escape punishment in -this. Prospero suggests no hope of any waking from the “rounding sleep.” -Even Isabella, dedicated as she was to religion, in fortifying Claudio -against his fate draws no weapon from the armoury of faith. It is just -the same in the dirge in Cymbeline, in the soliloquy of Posthumus, in -the consolations addressed by the gaoler to Posthumus.[53] - -The last passage is perhaps more remarkable than any, because it shows -the utter ambiguity of the directest expression which the poet has left -on the subject. - - _Gaol._--Look you, sir, you know not which way you go. - - _Post._--Yes, indeed do I, fellow. - - _Gaol._--Your death has eyes in ’s head then; I have not seen - him so pictured: you must either be directed by some that take - upon them to know, or take upon yourself, that which I am sure - you do not know; or jump the after inquiry on your own peril; - and how you shall speed in your journey’s end, I think you’ll - never return to tell one. - - _Post._--I tell thee, fellow, _there are none want eyes to - direct them the way I am going, but such as wink, and will not - use them_. - - _Cymbeline_, V. 4. - -Shakespeare, in truth, never attempts to lift the veil which for living -man can be raised only by Revelation. The silence of his -philosophy,--for we must not confound occasional sentiments and mere -dramatic utterances with what justifies us in deducing that -philosophy,--in relation to a life after this, is unbroken. It is, -indeed, remarkable that he represents such speculations,--the dwelling -on such problems,--as more likely to disturb, perplex, and hamper us, -than to give us any comfort. As Hamlet puts it in the well-known -lines:-- - - The native hue of resolution - Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought, - And enterprises of great pith and moment, - With this regard, their currents turn awry, - And lose the name of action. - -Did he believe in the immortality of the soul and in a future state? Who -can say? What we can say is, that if we require affirmative evidence of -such a faith, we shall seek for it in vain. In the Sonnets, where he -seems to speak from himself, the only immortality to which he refers is -the permanence of the impression which his genius as a poet will -leave--immortality in the sense in which Cicero and Tacitus have so -eloquently interpreted the term. But on the other hand, if there is -nothing to warrant a conclusion in the affirmative, there is nothing to -warrant one in the negative. His attitude is precisely that of Aristotle -in the _Ethics_; a life beyond this is neither affirmed nor denied, but -the scale of probability inclines towards the negative, and his moral -philosophy proceeds on the assumption that life is the end of life.[54] - -Goethe has said that man was not born to solve the problems of the -universe, but to attempt to solve them, that he might keep within the -limits of the knowable. And it is within the limits of the knowable that -Shakespeare’s theology confines itself. Starting simply, as Gervinus -says, from the point, that man is born with powers and faculties which -he is to use, and with powers of self-regulation and self-determination -which are to direct aright the powers of action, the “Whence we are,” -and the “Whither we are going,” are problems for which he has no -solution.[55] - - Men must endure - Their going hence e’en as their coming hither: - Ripeness is all. - -And for ripeness or unripeness, man’s will is responsible. He would -probably have agreed with the saying of Heraclitus, ηθος -ανθρωπω δαιμων. Throughout his Dramas all is explicable, with the -single exception of Macbeth, without reference to supernaturalism. -Perfectly intelligible effects follow perfectly intelligible causes; the -moral law solves all. But especially conspicuous is the absence of the -theological element where we should especially have looked for it. “Men -and women,” says Brewer, “are made to drain the cup of misery to the -dregs; but, as from the depths into which they have fallen, by their own -weakness, or by the weakness of others, the poet never raises them, in -violation of the inexorable laws of nature, so neither does he put a new -song in their mouths, or any expression of confidence in God’s righteous -dealing. With as hard and precise a hand as Bacon does he sunder the -celestial from the terrestrial kingdom, the things of earth from the -things of heaven.”[56] - -His theology, indeed, in its application to life, seems to resolve -itself into the recognition of universal law, divinely appointed, -immutable, inexorable, ubiquitous, controlling the physical world, -controlling the moral world, vindicating itself in the smallest facts of -life, and in the most stupendous convulsions of nature and society. In -morals it is maintained by the observance of the mean on the one hand, -and the due fulfilment of duty and obligation on the other. In politics -it is maintained by the subordination of the individual to the state, -and of the state to the higher law. Hooker says of Law, that as her -voice is the harmony of the world, so her seat is the bosom of God. The -Law Shakespeare recognises; of the Law-giver he is silent. As he is dumb -before the mystery of death, so is he equally reticent in the face of -that other mystery. He has nothing of the anthropomorphism of the Old -Testament, of the Homeric poems, and of Milton. Nor has he ever -expressed himself as Goethe has done in the famous passage in _Faust_, -beginning: “Wer darf ihn nennen.” In two important respects he seems to -differ from the Christian conception. He represents no miraculous -interpositions of Providence, no suspension of natural laws in favour of -the righteous, and to the detriment of the wicked. He is too reverend to -say with Goethe, that man, so far as direction in action goes, is -practically his own divinity. But he does say and represent--and that -repeatedly--what is expressed in such passages as these:-- - - Our remedies oft in ourselves do lie - Which we ascribe to Heaven: the fated sky - Gives us full scope. - - _All’s Well that Ends Well._ - - Men at some time are masters of their fate. - - _Julius Cæsar._ - - Omission to do what is necessary - Seals a commission to a blank of danger. - - _Troilus and Cressida._ - -And we have no right to expect that Providence will cancel it. If deeds -do not go with prayer, prayer is not likely to be of much avail. So the -Bishop of Carlisle in _Richard II._:-- - - The means that Heaven yields must be embrac’d - And not neglected; else if Heaven would - And we will not, Heav’n’s offer we refuse:-- - -while the words which he puts into the mouth of Leonine in _Pericles_ -are, we feel, significant:-- - - Pray: but be not tedious, - For the Gods are quick of ear, and I am sworn - To do my work with haste. - -He has no sympathy with pious recluses. He has depicted no saint or -religious enthusiast, or written a line to indicate that he had any -respect for their ideals. With him,-- - - Spirits are not finely touched - But to fine issues. - - They say best men are moulded out of faults, - And, for the most, become much more the better - For being a little bad. - - Most subject is the fattest soil to weeds - -are typical axioms in his philosophy of life. And the nearest approaches -he has given us to the saintly type of character are the sentimental -pietists, Henry VI. and Richard II., both of whom are failures, and -border closely on moral imbecility. On the spiritual and moral efficacy -of faith, he has nowhere laid stress. In his innumerable reflections on -life and man, in his maxims and precepts, there is, as a rule, scarcely -any flavour of Christian theology. They are just such as might be -expected from a pure rationalist. Such is the philosophy of Hamlet, of -Jacques, of the Duke in _Measure for Measure_, and of Prospero. Even -Friar Laurence, though an ecclesiastic, reasons and advises just as a -Stoic philosopher might have done. The friars in _Much Ado about -Nothing_, and in _Measure for Measure_, the Bishop of Carlisle in -_Richard II._, and the Archbishops of Canterbury and York in _Henry IV._ -and _Henry V._, and Cardinal Beaufort in _Henry VI._, act and speak like -mere men of the world. A bulky volume would scarcely sum up the ethical -and political reflections scattered up and down his plays; a few pages -would comprise all that could be put down as exclusively theological. -This complete subordination of the theological element to the ethical is -the more conspicuous when we compare his dramas with the Homeric Epics, -and with the tragedies of Æschylus and Sophocles. - -And yet if a thoughtful person, after going attentively through the -thirty-six plays, were asked what the prevailing impression made on him -was, he would probably reply the profound reverence which Shakespeare -shows universally for religion--his deep sense of the mysterious -relation which exists between God and man. We feel that his silence on -transcendental subjects springs not from indifference, but from awe. The -remarkable words which he places in the mouth of Lafeu, in _All’s Well -that Ends Well_ (Act II. 3), merely sum up what we hear _sotto voce_ in -various forms of expression throughout his dramas; “we have our -philosophical persons, to make modern and familiar, things supernatural -and causeless. Hence it is that we make trifles of terrors, ensconcing -ourselves into seeming knowledge, when we should submit ourselves to an -unknown fear.” And the same reverence and humility find a voice in the -verses in which, in all probability, he took leave of the world of -active life. - - Now my charms are all overthrown, - And what strength I have’s mine own, - Which is most faint. - ... Now I want - Spirits to enforce, art to enchant, - And my ending is despair - Unless I be relieved by prayer, - Which pierces so that it assaults - Mercy itself, and frees all faults. - -No poet has dwelt more on the duty and moral efficacy of prayer, on the -omnipresence of God, and on the fact that in conscience we have a -Divine monitor. - -Of the respect which Shakespeare entertained for Christianity as a -creed, of his conviction of its competency to fulfil and satisfy all the -ends of religion in men of the highest type of intelligence and ability, -we require no further proof than his Henry V. Henry V. is undoubtedly -his ideal man, as Theseus in the _Œdipus Coloneus_ is the ideal man -of Sophocles. And Henry V. is pre-eminently a Christian. Wherever -Shakespeare refers to the person and to the teachings of Christ, it is -always with peculiar tenderness and solemnity. His ethics are in one -respect essentially Christian, and that is in their emphatic insistence -on the virtues of mercy and forgiveness of injuries. In _Measure for -Measure_, he stretched the first as far as the Master Himself stretched -it, at the eleventh hour, to the penitent thief. And in the _Tempest_, -that play which seems to embody in allegory Shakespeare’s mature and -final philosophy of life, who does not recognise the symbol of Him who -rules, not merely in justice and righteousness, but in benevolence and -mercy, when Prospero, with sinners and traitors and foes in his power, -proclaims-- - - The rarer action is - In virtue than in vengeance: they being penitent, - The sole drift of my purpose doth extend - Not a frown further. - -He struck this note in one of the earliest of his plays:-- - - Who by repentance is not satisfied, - Is nor of heaven, nor earth: for these are pleas’d. - By penitence th’ Eternal’s wrath’s appeas’d.[57] - -and the note vibrates through his works. It is the crowning moral of -_Measure for Measure_; it is one of the dominant notes in _Cymbeline_. -He also reflects Christianity in the beautiful optimism which discerns -in evil the agent of good, and in calamity and sorrow the benevolence -and mercy of God. This is the philosophy which penetrates what were -probably his last three dramas, _The Winter’s Tale_, _Cymbeline_, and -_The Tempest_. - -In these respects, then, it may fairly be maintained that Shakespeare is -Christian. For the rest his dramas might, so far as their philosophy is -concerned, have come down to us from classical antiquity. Nothing can be -more Greek than the main basis on which his ethics rest--the observance -of the mean, and the recognition of the relation of virtue to the -becoming. When Claudio says:-- - - As surfeit is the father of much fast, - So every scope by the immoderate use - Turns to restraint; - -when Norfolk says:-- - - The fire that mounts the liquor till ’t o’erflow - In seeming to augment it wastes it; - -when Friar Laurence tells us that:-- - - Virtue itself turns vice, being misapplied, - And vice sometime ’s by action dignified; - -and Portia that - - There is no good without respect, - -we have not only the keys to his ethics but the texts for sermons which -find living illustrations in the fall of Angelo, of Coriolanus, of -Timon, and of many others of his protagonists. Thus do his ethics temper -and readjust for the sphere of working life, those of the Divine -Enthusiast who legislated, in some respects, too exclusively perhaps, -for a kingdom which is not of this world. - -And so, his ‘religion’ being, to borrow an expression of his own, “as -broad and general as the casing air,” it has come to pass, that -Shakespeare has been claimed as an orthodox Protestant by Knight, Bishop -Wordsworth, and Trench; as an orthodox Roman Catholic by M. Rio, Mr. -Simpson, and Father Bowden; and as a simple agnostic by Gervinus, -Kreysig, and Professor Caird. - -“He hath,” says Sir Thomas Browne speaking of himself, “one common and -authentic philosophy which he learnt in the schools, whereby he reasons -and satisfies the reason of other men: another more reserved and drawn -from experience whereby he satisfies his own.” It may be, it may quite -well be, for he has left nothing to justify conclusion to the contrary, -that the words of Shakespeare’s Will--mere formula though they be--are -the expression of what he “reserved” to satisfy himself, and that he -accepted the Christian Revelation. It may be, that what we are -_certainly_ warranted in concluding about him, represents all that can -be concluded, namely, that:-- - - He at least believed in soul, was very sure of God. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 50: Act I. Sc. i. This is a very pointed reference, but in the -second instance, in _All’s Well that Ends Well_, Act II. Sc. i., “They -say miracles are past,” he gives a turn to the expression which converts -it into a rebuke of Rationalism.] - -[Footnote 51: Act I. Sc. ii.] - -[Footnote 52: Act II. Sc. ii.] - -[Footnote 53: In opposition to these may, it is true, be cited Othello’s -words to Desdemona--_Othello_, V. 2: the Duke’s remark about putting the -unrepentant Barnardine to death--_Measure for Measure_, IV. 3: the dying -speeches of Buckingham and Catharine in _Henry VIII._, II. 1; IV. 2: -Laertes on Ophelia,--_Hamlet_, V. 1. But these passages, and others like -them, cannot be cited as evidence to the contrary; they are merely -dramatic utterances.] - -[Footnote 54: Cf. _Ethics_, I. x. 11, and III. vi. 6.] - -[Footnote 55: _Shakespeare Commentaries_, Vol. II. 620-1.] - -[Footnote 56: Article on Shakespeare, _Quarterly Review_ for July, 1871, -p. 46.] - -[Footnote 57: _Two Gentlemen of Verona_: V. 4.] - - - - -INDEX - - - ACCIUS quoted, 244 - - ADDISON, 15: 272: 281 - - ÆSCHYLUS, 59; - quoted, 62; - his descriptions of Nature, 241; - his theology, 267: 261: 364 - - ALCÆUS, 287 - - ALCMAN quoted, 240 - - ALAMANNI, 123 - - ANACREON, 286 - - ANTHOLOGY, Greek, 116: 117: 243 - - ANTIMACHUS of Colophon, his Poems, 289 - - ANTIPATER of Sidon, 116 - - APOLLONIUS RHODIUS, 78; - beauty of his descriptions, 242-3 - - ARCHILOCHUS quoted, 287 - - ARIOSTO quoted, 79; - his _Orlando_, 113 - - ARISTOPHANES, 242: 260: 280; - his censure of Euripides, 265 - - ARISTOTLE, 63: 67; - influence on Spenser, 120-1; - style, 122; - his doctrine of the καθαρσις, 264-5; - his Æsthetics, 265-6; - Poetics, 274-6; - his _Rhetoric_, 287 - - ARMSTRONG, Dr. John, his connection with Thomson, 333 - - ARNOLD, Matthew, 63; - quoted, 21: 105: 106: 194: 272-3 - - ATHENÆUS, 293 - - AUSONIUS, his _Rosæ_, 246 - - AVITUS, 251 - - - BACON, Lord, his _Sylva Sylvarum_, 114; - his Latin style, 122; - quoted, 182; - on poetry, 279 - - BARCLAY, his _Argenis_, 129 - - BARNUM, the late Mr., on Advertisement, 158 - - BEACONSFIELD, Lord, quoted, 219 - - BENECKE, Mr. E. F. M., his _Antimachus of Colophon_ and - _Position of Women in Greek Poetry_ reviewed, 255-93 - - BENTLEY, Richard, 156 - - BERNAYS, Prof., on the καθαρσις of Aristotle, 265 - - BOILEAU, 125 - - BOLINGBROKE, Lord, 119: 321 - - BOSWELL, James, 134 - - BOWDEN, Rev. H. Sebastian, his _Religion of Shakespeare_ reviewed, 351-69 - - BREWER, Rev. Prof., quoted, 361 - - BROWN, Mr. J. T. T., his _Authorship of - the Kingis Quair_ reviewed, 172-82 - - BROWNE, Sir Thomas, his _Hydriotaphia_, 102; - quoted, 368 - - BROWNING, Robert, on the Comparative Study of Ancient and - Modern Classical Literature, 64 - - BROWNING, Mrs., 297 - - BURKE, Edmund, 71: 100-1: 125: 126 - - BURNS, Robert, 145; - Comparison with Catullus, 347 - - BUTCHER, Prof. S. H., his _Some Aspects of - the Greek Genius_ reviewed, 255-69 - - BUTLER, Bishop, quoted, 214 - - BUTLER, Mr. Samuel, on Shakespeare’s Sonnets, 222-4 - - - CÆDMON quoted, 95 - - CAINE, Mr. Hall, 28 - - CALLIMACHUS, 242 - - CAMOENS, 350 - - CAMPBELL, Prof. Lewis, 259 - - CAREW, Thomas, 305 - - CATULLUS, his descriptions of Nature, 245: 336-9; - quoted, 285; - characteristics of his genius, 335; - his _Attis_, 339-40; - his pathos, 337-8; - his connection with Lesbia, 342-5; - parallel between Poems to Lesbia and Shakespeare’s Sonnets, 345-6; - his versatility, 346; - comparison with Burns, 347; - Mr. Tremenheere’s version of the Love Poems, 347-9 - - CAWTHORN, John, 60 - - CHAUCER, 53: 8: 122-3 - - CHURCHILL, Charles, quoted, 159 - - CICERO, influence on English prose, 61; - as a critic of rhetoric, 278-9; - on immortality, 360 - - CLARENDON, 123 - - CLASSICS, influence of the Greek and - Roman Classics on English Literature, 58-63; - exclusion of from Schools of Literature - by the English Universities, 45-64; - effects of this illustrated, 76-83 - - CLAUDIAN quoted, 246 - - COLVIN, Mr. Sidney, his edition of Stevenson’s Letters reviewed, 165-71 - - COLERIDGE, S. T., 127: 130: 281 - - COLERIDGE, the late Lord, on Greek, 255 - - CORY, William, 253 - - COUSIN, Victor, his theory of beauty and art, 272 - - CRITICISM, reasons of present degraded state of, 13-26; - characteristics of current criticism described, 26-30: 270-1; - effects on literature generally, 31-4; - refusal of the Universities to train critics and men of letters, 38-44; - lethargy and indifference of scholars, - progressive degradation of literature the certain result, 43-44 - - CRITICS, characteristics of popular, 27-31: 93-109: 110-32: 151-7 - - CROWE, William, 249 - - CYNEWULF, 95 - - - DANTE, 49; - quoted, 335; - his _Sonnets and Canzoni_, 350 - - DE QUINCEY, Thomas, characteristics of, 203-4; - his comparative failure, 305; - Mr. Hogg’s recollections of, 203-10 - - DOUGLAS, Gavin, his translation of Virgil, 96-7 - - DRAYTON, Michael, 60 - - DRYDEN, his _Discourse on Epic Poetry_, 65; - quoted, 153; - on the functions of poetry, 280; - his translations, 148 - - DUBOS, the Abbé, 281 - - DUNBAR, William, 176; - Mr. Smeaton’s _Life of_, reviewed, 183-92; - characteristics of his poetry, 190-1 - - DYER, John, his descriptive poetry, 248 - - - EARLE, Prof., on relation of Classics to English Literature, 59 (note) - - EARLE, John, his _Microcosmographie_, 129 - - EDITORS, their relation to current literature, 22; - in no way responsible for the present condition - of current literature, 23-24 - - ENNIUS, 59 - - EURIPIDES, 82; - his fine pictures of Nature, 242; - quoted, 262; - his _Alcestis_ quoted, 286 - - - FELTHAM, Owen, his _Resolves_, 129 - - FLACCUS, Valerius, 246 - - FLETCHER, Phineas, 101 - - FOOTE, Samuel, quoted, 205 - - FOX, John, his _Book of Martyrs_, 113 - - FRAUNCE, Abraham, his _Countess of Pembroke’s Ivy Church_, 309 - - FROUDE, James Anthony, on the effect of discouraging - the study of the Classics, 65 - - - GARNETT, Father, 354 - - GEOFFREY of Monmouth, 102 - - GERVINUS, Prof., quoted, 360 - - GLANVILLE, Joseph, 104 - - GIBBON, Edward, 125: 150: 198 - - GOETHE, 49: 86; - quoted, 273: 360: 362 - - GOLDSMITH quoted, 247 - - GOSSE, Edmund, his _Short History of Modern - English Literature_ reviewed 110-32 - - GOSSING, analysis of the accomplishment, 115; - compared with Euphuism, id. - - GOWER, John, 124; - _Confessio Amantis_, 196 - - GRAY, Thomas, on Lydgate, 98 - - GREENE, Robert, 14 - - - HALL, William, Mr. Sidney Lee on, 216 - - HAMPOLE, Richard of, his _Pricke of Conscience_, 179 - - HARRISON, Mr. Frederic, 35 - - HAWES, Stephen, his _Pastime of Pleasure_, 200 - - HERACLITUS quoted, 361 - - HERMESIANAX quoted, 287 - - HILL, Aaron, 331 - - HOCCLEVE, Thomas, 198 - - HOGG, Mr. James, his _Recollections of De Quincey_ reviewed, 203-10 - - HOMER quoted, his fine descriptions of Nature, 237-9; - his women, 286: 288; - his description of Hades, 297 - - HOOKER quoted, 362 - - HORACE, influence of his Epistles and Satires on English poetry, 60; - quoted, 151: 297: 301; - deficient in poetic sensibility, 336 - - HROSWITHA, 251 - - HUXLEY, Prof., on Merton Chair at Oxford, 38 - - - IBYCUS, 240 - - - JAGO, Richard, 249 - - JAMES I. of Scotland, his _Kingis Quair_, 172; - its genuineness vindicated, 174-82 - - JAPP, Dr. Alexander, _Life of De Quincey_, 209 - - JEBB, Prof., his services to Greek Literature, 258 - - JOHNSON, Dr., quoted, 152 - - JONSON, Ben, on Poetry, 280 - - JOWETT, Prof., quoted, 64 - - JUSSERAND, M., his _Literary History of - the English People_ reviewed, 193-202 - - - KEATS, John, 127: 298: 347 - - - LANDOR, W. S., 298 - - LANG, Mr. Andrew, 259 - - LAUDERDALE, 310 - - LEAF, Mr. Walter, 259 - - LEE, Mr. Sidney, his _Life of Shakespeare_ reviewed, 211-8; - on Shakespeare’s Sonnets, 229-30 - - LE GALLIENNE, Mr. Richard, his _Retrospective Reviews_ reviewed, 151-7 - - LEOPARDI quoted, 20: 300 - - LESBIA and CATULLUS, 335-50 - - LESSING, on Philologists, 86; - his _Laocoon_, 41; - his _Hamburgishe Dramaturgie_, 67 - - LOG-ROLLING, its pernicious effects, 133-44 - - LONGINUS, the Treatise attributed to, discussed, 276-8; - quoted, 270 - - LYDGATE, his style and versification, 98; - id., 115; - characteristics of his poetry, 198-9 - - - MACAULAY, Lord, 145: 151 - - MALLET, David, claim to authorship of _Rule Britannia_ discussed, 321-4 - - MALORY, Thomas, 201 - - MANNYNG, his _Handlying of Synne_, 195 - - MARLOWE, Christopher, 14 - - MARTIAL, his epigrams, 337 - - MAX MÜLLER, Prof., 52 - - MELEAGER, his Anthology, 116-7; - quoted, 243 - - MENANDER quoted, 262 - - MIMNERMUS, his love poetry to Nanno, 287 - - MILTON quoted, 41 (note): 62; - his apology for _Smectymnuus_, quoted, 103; - on poetry, 267; - quoted, 212; - music of his verse, 317 - - MITFORD, Rev. J., on the corrections in Thomson’s _Seasons_, 330-4 - - MONTAGUE, Lady Mary Wortley, 125: 306 - - MOREL, M. Léon, his Monograph on Thomson, 319 - - MORE, Sir Thomas, his Utopia, 101 - - MORE, Henry, 274 - - MORGAN, Sir George Osborne, his _Translation - of Virgil’s Eclogues_ reviewed, 308-17 - - MORLEY, Mr. John, 63; - quoted, 64 - - MYERS, Mr. Ernest, 259 - - MÜLLER, Prof. E., his _Geschichte der Theorie - der Kunst bei den Alten_, 264 - - - OGILVIE, John, 310 - - OVID, 60: 177: 178: 246 - - - PACUVIUS, his _Dulorestes_ quoted, 244 - - PALGRAVE, Francis Turner, his _Landscape in Poetry_ reviewed, 236-49; - an appreciation of, 250-4 - - PATER, Walter, 62: 152: 265: 267 - - PECOCK, Reginald, his _Repressor_, 128-9 - - PETRARCH, 287: 296 - - PERSIUS quoted, 15 - - PHILLIPS, Mr. Stephen, his poems reviewed, 294-300 - - PINDAR quoted, 262; - his word pictures, 240 - - PLATO, his Symposium, 78-9; - quoted, 263; - his theory of poetry, 274: 276 - - PLUTARCH, his pictures of women, 290 - - POMFRET, John, his _Choice_, 101 - - POPE quoted, 84; - on Philologists, 86; - quoted, 139; - his _Satires_ and _Epistles_, 125; - his alleged revision of Thomson’s _Seasons_ discussed, 328-32 - - PROPERTIUS quoted, 246 - - PUBLISHERS, honourable character of the leading, 23 - - - QUARTERLY REVIEW, article on _From Shakespeare to Pope_, 40 - - QUINTILIAN as a critic, 278 - - - RAFFETY, Mr. Frank W., his _Books worth Reading_ reviewed, 145-50 - - ROSSETTI, Dante Gabriel, quoted, 173 - - ROSSETTI, William Michael, his edition of Shelley’s _Adonais_, 76-83 - - RUCELLAI, his dramas and his _L’Api_, 124 - - - SAINTE-BEUVE, his essays, 41; - on Philologists, 86; - his criticism, 270; - the master of Matthew Arnold, 281 - - SAINTSBURY, Prof., his _Short History - of English Literature_ reviewed, 93-109 - - SALLUST, 61 - - SCHILLER, 41 - - SCHICK, Dr., on Lydgate’s versification, 99 - - SCHIPPER, Dr. J., on Dunbar, 183 - - SCHMEDING, Dr. G., his Monograph on Thomson, 318 - - SCHOOL OF ENGLISH LITERATURE AT OXFORD, - its deplorable organization, 45-72; - how this may be remedied, 73-5 - - SCOTT OF AMWELL, 249 - - SCOTT, Sir Walter, on Dunbar, 186 - - SELF-ADVERTISEMENT, its organization and effects, 158-64 - - SENECA, influence on English prose, 61 - - SEDULIUS, 251 - - SHAFTESBURY, third Earl of, his style, 117-9 - - SHAKESPEARE, 62: 81-2; - Clarendon Press edition of his _Hamlet_, 84-92; - quoted, 154: 158; - Mr. Lee’s _Life of_, 211-8; - scantiness of traditions of, 213; - his sonnets, various theories, 219-20; - about difficulties of supposing them autobiographical, 225-6; - his relations with Southampton and Pembroke, 228-34; - story in the Sonnets probably fictitious, 235; - religion of Shakespeare, 351-69; - his politics, 352-3; - not a Roman Catholic, 352-6; - on death, 357-8; - silence about a future life, 359, - and about metaphysical questions, 360; - comparison in this respect with Aristotle, 360; - his theology, 362-4; - on prayer, 365; - on conscience, 366; - his attitude to Christianity, 366; - when his ethics are Christian, 368; - his religious ideas summed up, 368-9 - - SHARP, Archbishop, quoted, 218 - - SHELLEY, his _Adonais_, 76-83; - absurd criticism of his style, 126 - - SHENSTONE, William, 249 - - SIDNEY, Sir Philip, 131 - - SIMPSON, Richard, 351: 368 - - SMART, Christopher, his _Song to David_, 340 - - SMEATON, Mr. Oliphant, his life of Dunbar reviewed, 183-92 - - SOPHOCLES, 242; - his ethics, 267-9; - quoted, 285; - his ideal man, 366 - - SPENSER, Edmund, 112: 113; - influence of Greek and Latin Classics on, 120-1; - influence of, on Milton, 121; - on the functions of poetry, 280 - - STANIHURST, Richard, 308 - - STEPHEN, Mr. Leslie, 35 - - STESICHORUS, his _Calyce_, 287 - - STEVENSON, R. L., _Letters_ reviewed, 165-71 - - STRABO quoted, 287 - - SWIFT, Jonathan, his _Sentiments of a Church of England Man_, 113; - _Tale of a Tub_, 144 - - - TACITUS quoted, 20: 192: 254; - as a critic, 278-9; - on immortality, 360 - - TALLEYRAND quoted, 210 - - TENNYSON, Lord, 62: 162-3: 245: 247: 298: 337; - as a critic, 252 - - TERENCE, women of, 292 - - TEXT-BOOKS on English Literature, specimens of, 76-150 - - THACKERAY on Wordsworth and Moore, 250 - - THEOCRITUS, 243 - - THEOGNIS quoted, 262 - - THOMSON, James, 243; - quoted, 248; - claim to the authorship of _Rule Britannia_ vindicated, 321-8; - corrections in the _Seasons_ discussed, 328-34 - - THORPE, Thomas, 216: 227: 235 - - TOVEY, Rev. D. C., his edition of Thomson’s poems reviewed, 318-34 - - TREMENHEERE, Mr. J. H. A., his version of Catullus’ Love Poems, 335-50 - - TRISSINO, his _Sofonisba_, 123 - - THUCYDIDES, 258: 260; - on hope, 262 - - TUPPER, Martin, 251 - - TYLER, Mr. Thomas, on Shakespeare’s Sonnets, 228 - - TYRWHITT, Thomas, 223: 234 - - - UNIVERSITIES, their indifference to - the interests of literature, 38-40: 45-50; - effects of the exclusion of the Greek and Roman Classics from - the so-called Schools of Literature at Oxford and Cambridge, 55-71 - - - VARRO, as a critic, 278 - - VIRGIL, his beautiful descriptions of Nature, 245-6; - his Eclogues, 308-17 - - VOLTAIRE on Philologists, 86 - - - WALTERS, Cuming, on Shakespeare’s Sonnets, 220-1 - - WARBURTON, Bishop, 205; - quoted, 270 - - WARTON, Dr. Joseph, on Thomson’s poetry, 330 - - WARTON, Thomas, on Lydgate, 98 - - WATSON, Mr. William, great beauty of his English hexameters, 317 - - WHARTON, Dr., his _Sappho_, 148 - - WILLMOTT, Rev. Aris, his _Gems from English Literature_, 163-4 - - WILLOUGHBY, his _Avisa_, 101: 225 - - WORDSWORTH, William, 153; - on Dyer’s poetry, 248; - his poems on classical legends, 298 - - WORSFOLD, Mr. Basil, his _Principles of Criticism_ reviewed, 270-82 - - WRANGHAM, Archdeacon, 310 - - WRIGHT, Dr. Aldis, his edition of Shakespeare’s _Hamlet_, 84-92 - - WRIGHT, Mr. W. H. Kearley, his _West Country Poets_ reviewed, 301-7 - - WYNTOWN, his _Chronicle_, 180-1 - - - XENOPHON on women, 290 - - - YOUNG, Edward, quoted, 87 - - -Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. - - - - --------------------- -Corrections: - - - Page 81 “Hamlet, act iv. sc .1” should be sc. 5 (There is pansies) - - -The following errors have been corrected in the text. - - - Page 8 changed ‘Jasserand’ to ‘Jusserand’ (done M. Jusserand - grave injustice) - - Page 63 added space (Addington Symonds) - - Page 90 added single quotes (The rest is silence.’ ‘O, O,) - - Page 90 changed ‘than’ to ‘that’ (it would be more natural that) - - Page 96-7 moved double quotes from (evicit gurgite moles,”) - to end of last line (armenta trahit.”) - - Page 97 added opening double quotes (“Not sa fersly) - - Page 101 added double quotes (Lord_, 1790.” _A Letter to) - - Page 107 changed ‘”)’ to ‘)”’ (teeth of its subject)”. “His voluminous) - - Page 184 added comma (and the few outsiders, whether) - - Page 205 added single quote (Warburton on Shakespeare.’”) - - Page 212 added comma (every alley green,) - - Page 252 changed ‘charactistic’ to ‘characteristic’ (distinctive - feature is the characteristic) - - Page 321 changed comma to period (both these questions.) - - Page 326 changed period to semicolon (Britain’s wide domain;) - - -The following inconsistencies have been left as printed. - - ‘bookmaker’ vs. ‘book-maker’ vs. ‘book maker’ - - ‘notebooks’ vs. ‘note-books’ - - ‘overestimated’ vs. ‘over-estimated’ - - ‘overestimation’ vs. ‘over-estimation’ - - ‘rodomontade’ vs. ‘rhodomontade’ - - ‘Wriothesley’ vs. ‘Wriothesly’ - - ‘analysed’ vs. ‘analyzed’ - - ‘Mort d’Arthur’ vs. ‘Morte d’Arthur’ - - ‘Quinctilian’ vs. ‘Quintilian’ - (‘Quintilia’ (Latin ‘Quintiliæ’) is a different person) --------------------- - - - - - -End of Project Gutenberg's Ephemera Critica, by John Churton Collins - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EPHEMERA CRITICA *** - -***** This file should be named 34370-0.txt or 34370-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/3/4/3/7/34370/ - -Produced by Juliet Sutherland, Hannah Joy Patterson and -the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at -http://www.pgdp.net - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/old/34370-0.zip b/old/34370-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 766d7d2..0000000 --- a/old/34370-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/34370-h.zip b/old/34370-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 1d44fa6..0000000 --- a/old/34370-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/34370-h/34370-h.htm b/old/34370-h/34370-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 349f0cd..0000000 --- a/old/34370-h/34370-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,13515 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<!-- $Id: header.txt 236 2009-12-07 18:57:00Z vlsimpson $ --> - -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> - <title> - The Project Gutenberg eBook of Ephemera Critica, by John Churton Collins - </title> - <style type="text/css"> - -body {margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%;} - -h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h {text-align: center; - clear: both;} - -p {margin-top: .75em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .75em;} - - .center {text-align:center; - margin: .5em auto; - display:table} - - .right {text-align:right;} - - .cite {text-align:right; - margin-right: -20em;} - - .md {font-size:1.1em} - - .sm {font-size:1em} - - .xsm {font-size:.75em;} - - .space {line-height: 150%;} - -hr {width: 65%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; - clear: both;} - -table {margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto;} - - .pagenum {position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right;} - - .pagenum a {color: #999999; - text-decoration: none;} - - .pagenum a:hover {color: #000000; - text-decoration: underline;} - - .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} - -ins {text-decoration:none; - border-bottom: thin dotted gray;} - - .transnotes {border: dashed 1px; - background-color: #DDDDF5; - padding: 0em 1.5em .5em; - margin-bottom: 3em;} - - .footnotes {border: dashed 1px;} - - .footnote {margin: .5em 10%;font-size: 0.9em;} - - .footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} - - .fnanchor {vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration:none;} - -ul,li {list-style-type: none} - -ul.nest {margin-top: .15em; - margin-bottom: .15em; - text-indent: -1.5em;} - -li {margin-top: .15em; - margin-bottom: .15em;} - - .entry {margin-top: .7em;} - - .entry2 {margin-top: 2em;} - - .poem {text-align: left} - - .i0 {margin-left: 0em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i1 {margin-left: 1em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i2 {margin-left: 2em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i3 {margin-left: 3em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i4 {margin-left: 4em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i5 {margin-left: 5em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i6 {margin-left: 6em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i7 {margin-left: 7em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i8 {margin-left: 8em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i9 {margin-left: 9em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i10 {margin-left: 10em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i11 {margin-left: 11em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - .i12 {margin-left: 12em; - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -3em} - - </style> -<!--[if IE]> - <style type="text/css"> - .center {text-align:center; - margin: .5em auto; - padding-left: 3em; - display:table} - </style> - <![endif]--> - </head> -<body> - - -<pre> - -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Ephemera Critica, by John Churton Collins - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - - -Title: Ephemera Critica - or plain truths about current literature - -Author: John Churton Collins - -Release Date: November 19, 2010 [EBook #34370] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EPHEMERA CRITICA *** - - - - -Produced by Juliet Sutherland, Hannah Joy Patterson and -the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at -http://www.pgdp.net - - - - - - -</pre> - - -<div class="transnotes"> -<h3>Transcriber's Notes:</h3> - -<p>This text uses UTF-8 (Unicode) file encoding for Greek and other non-ASCII characters such as Œ. -If they don't appear correctly, you may need to change your browser settings. -Make sure that your browser's "character set" or "file encoding" is set to Unicode (UTF-8). -You may also need to change the default font.</p> - -<p>Transliterations have been provided for the Greek. -If you hover your mouse over the <ins title="transliteration">underlined text</ins>, the transliteration should pop up.</p> - -<p>For clarity, some footnotes have been placed under the chapter -headings where they are referenced. Other footnotes will be -found at the end of each chapter.</p> - -<p>Typographical errors corrected are listed at the <a href="#Corrections">end of the text</a>.</p> -</div> - -<div> -<p><span class="pagenum" style="visibility:hidden"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1" href="#Page_1">[1]</a></span></p> - -<h1>EPHEMERA CRITICA</h1> - -<h3>OR PLAIN TRUTHS ABOUT <br /> -CURRENT LITERATURE</h3> - -<br /> - -<h4>BY JOHN CHURTON <br /> COLLINS</h4> - -<br /> -<br /> -<br /> - -<p class="center xsm">Non verebor nominare singulos, quo facilius, propositis exemplis,<br /> -<span style="margin-left: -4em">appareat, quibus gradibus fracta sit et deminuta eloquentia.</span><br /> -<span class="cite"><i>—Dial. de Orat.</i></span></p> - -<br /> - -<p class="center xsm"><ins title="aineôn ainêta, momphan di' epispeirôn alitrois.">αινεων αινητα, μομφαν δι' επισπειρων αλιτροις.</ins><br /> -<span class="cite"><i>—Pindar</i></span></p> - -<br /> -<br /> -<br /> - -<p class="center sm"><span class="smcap">Fourth Edition</span></p> - -<br /> -<br /> -<br /> - -<p class="center space"><span class="sm">NEW YORK</span><br /> -<span class="md">E. P. DUTTON & COMPANY</span><br /> -<span class="md">ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE AND CO LTD</span><br /> -<span class="sm">2 WHITEHALL GARDENS, WESTMINSTER</span><br /> -<span class="sm">1902</span></p> -<p><span class="pagenum" style="visibility:hidden"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2" href="#Page_2">[2]</a></span></p> - -<br /> -<br /> -<br /> - -<p class="center space"><span class="smcap sm">Butler & Tanner,</span><br /> -<span class="smcap sm">The Selwood Printing Works,</span><br /> -<span class="smcap sm">Frome, and London.</span><br /></p> - -</div> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3" href="#Page_3">[3]</a></span></p> - -<h2>PREFACE</h2> - - -<p>It is time for some one to speak out. When -we compare the condition and prospects of -Science in all its branches, its organization, its -standards, its aims, its representatives with those -of Literature, how deplorable and how humiliating -is the contrast! In the one we see an -ordered realm, in the other mere chaos. The -one, serious, strenuous, progressive, is displaying -an energy as wonderful in what it has accomplished -as in what it promises to accomplish; -the other, without soul, without conscience, without -nerve, aimless, listless and decadent, appears -to be stagnating, almost entirely, into the monopoly -of those who are bent on futilizing and degrading -it.</p> - -<p>Science stands where it does, not simply by -virtue of the genius, the industry, the example -of its most distinguished representatives, but because -by those representatives the whole sphere -of its activity is being directed and controlled. -The care of the Universities, the care of learned -societies, the care of devoted enthusiasts, its interests -and honour are watchfully and jealously<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4" href="#Page_4">[4]</a></span> -guarded. The qualifications of its teachers are -guaranteed by tests prescribed by the highest -authorities on the subjects professed. To standards -fixed and maintained by those authorities -is referred every serious contribution to its -literature. Even a popular lecturer, or a popular -writer, who undertook to be its exponent would -be exploded at once if he displayed ignorance -and incompetence. Such, indeed, is the solidarity -of its energies that it is rather in the degrees -and phases of their manifestation than in their -essence and characteristics that they vary. -There is not a scientific institution in England -the regulations and aims of which do not bear -the impress of such masters as Huxley and -Tyndall and their disciples; not a work issuing -from the scientific Press which is not a proof -of the influence which such men have exercised -and are exercising, and of the high standard -exacted and attained wherever Science is taught -and interpreted.</p> - -<p>It is far otherwise with Literature. Those -who represent it, in a sense analogous to that -in which the men who have been referred to -represent Science, have neither voice nor influence -in its organization, as a subject of instruction, -at the centres of education. They -neither give it the ply, nor in any way affect -its standards and its character in practice and -production. As examples few follow them, as -counsellors no one heeds them. They constitute<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5" href="#Page_5">[5]</a></span> -what is little more than an esoteric body, -moving in a sphere of its own.</p> - -<p>And yet there is no reason at all why there -should not be the same solidarity in the activity -of Literature as there is in the activity of Science, -and why the standard of aim and attainment -in the one should not be as high as in the other. -But this can never be accomplished until certain -radical reforms are instituted, and the first step -towards reform is to demonstrate the necessity -for it. I have done so here. I have drawn attention -to the state of things in our Universities,—in -other words, to what I must take leave to -call the scandalous and incredible indifference of -the Councils of those Universities to the appeals -which have, during the last fifteen years, been -made to them to place the study of Literature, in -the proper sense of the term, upon the footing -on which they have placed other studies. I have -pointed out what have been, and what must -continue to be, the effects of that indifference. -I have given specimens of the books to which -the Universities are not ashamed to affix their -<i>imprimatur</i>, and I have shown that, so far from -them considering even their reputation involved -in such a matter, they do not scruple to circulate -works teeming with blunders and absurdities of -the grossest kind, blunders and absurdities to -which their attention has been publicly called -over and over again. I have given specimens -of the kind of works which the occupants of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6" href="#Page_6">[6]</a></span> -distinguished Chairs of Literature can, with perfect -impunity, address to students; and I would -ask any scientific man what would be thought -of a Professor, say, of the Royal Naval College, -or of the City and Guilds of London Institute, -who should put his name to analogous publications—to -publications, that is to say, as unsound -in their theories, as inaccurate in their facts, as -slovenly and perfunctory in general execution, -as those to which I have here directed attention? -If such things are done in the green tree, what -is likely to be done in the dry? or, as Chaucer -puts it, "if gold ruste, what schal yren doo?" -That is one of the questions on which these -essays may, perhaps, throw some light.</p> - -<p>To be misrepresented and misunderstood is -the certain fate of a book like this, and I am -well aware of the responsibilities incurred in -undertaking it. It is very distasteful to me to -give pain or cause annoyance to any one, and, -whether I am believed or not, I can say, with -strict truth, that I have not the smallest personal -bias against any of those whom I have censured -most severely. I believe, for the reasons -already explained, that Belles Lettres are sinking -deeper and deeper into degradation, that -they are gradually passing out of the hands of -their true representatives, and becoming almost -the monopoly of their false representatives, and -that the consequence of this cannot but be most -disastrous to us as a nation, to our reputation<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7" href="#Page_7">[7]</a></span> -in the World of Letters, to taste, to tone, to -morals. It is surely a shame and a crime in -any one, and more especially in men occupying -positions of influence and authority, to assist in -the work of corruption, either by deliberately -writing bad books or by conniving, as critics, at -the production of bad books; and I am very -sure it has become a duty, and an imperative -duty, to expose and denounce them.</p> - -<p>These essays are partly a protest and partly -an experiment. As a protest they explain, and, I -hope, justify themselves; as an experiment they -are an attempt to illustrate what we should be -fortunate if we could see more frequently illustrated -by abler hands. They are a series of -studies in serious, patient, and absolutely impartial -criticism, having for its object a comprehensive -survey of the vices and defects, as well as -of the merits, characteristic of current Belles -Lettres. I do not suppose that anything I have -said will have the smallest effect on the present -generation, but on the rising generation I believe -that much which has been said will not be -thrown away. In any case, what I was constrained -to write I have written. And it is my -last word in a long controversy.</p> - -<p>It remains to add that most of these essays -appeared originally in the <i>Saturday Review</i>, and -I desire to express my thanks to the late and present -Editors, not merely for permission to reproduce -the essays, but for much kindness besides.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8" href="#Page_8">[8]</a></span> -Three appeared in the <i>Pall Mall Gazette</i>, and -one, the first essay on "English Literature -at the Universities," in the <i>Nineteenth Century</i>; -and my thanks are due to the Editor of the <i>Pall -Mall Gazette</i> and to Mr. Knowles. But all of -them have been carefully revised and greatly -enlarged, in some cases to more than double -their original form. The introductory essay is, -with the exception of the opening pages, in -which I have drawn on an old article of mine in -the <i>Quarterly Review</i>, quite new; and, indeed, -that may be said of a great part of the volume.</p> - - -<p> -<br /> -<br /> -NOTE TO THE SECOND EDITION</p> - -<p>I regret to find that I have <a name="Correct2" id="Correct2">done M. Jusserand -grave injustice</a> in censuring him for being -ignorant of the existence of the <i>Speculum -Meditantis</i>, the MS. of which was identified after -the publication of his work.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9" href="#Page_9">[9]</a></span></p> - -<h2>LIST OF CONTENTS</h2> -<table cellpadding="4"> -<tr><td align="right">CHAPTER</td><td></td><td align="right">PAGE</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">I.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#THE_PRESENT_FUNCTIONS_OF_CRITICISM">The Present Functions of Criticism</a></span></td><td align="right"> 13</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">II.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_I">English Literature at the Universities. Part I.</a></span></td><td align="right"> 45</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">III.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_II">English Literature at the Universities. Part II.</a></span></td><td align="right"> 76</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">IV.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_III">English Literature at the Universities. Part III.</a></span></td><td align="right"> 84</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">V.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_I">Our Literary Guides. Part I.</a></span></td><td align="right"> 93</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">VI.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_II">Our Literary Guides. Part II.</a></span></td><td align="right"> 110</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">VII.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#LOG-ROLLING_AND_EDUCATION">Log-Rolling and Education</a></span></td><td align="right"> 133</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">VIII.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_III">Our Literary Guides. Part III.</a></span></td><td align="right"> 145</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">IX.</td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#THE_NEW_CRITICISM">The New Criticism</a></span></td><td align="right"> 151<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10" href="#Page_10">[10]</a></span></td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">X. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#THE_GENTLE_ART_OF_SELF-ADVERTISEMENT">The Gentle Art of Self-Advertisement</a></span></td><td align="right"> 158</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XI. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#R_L_STEVENSONS_LETTERS">R. L. Stevenson's Letters</a></span></td><td align="right"> 165</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XII. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#LITERARY_ICONOCLASM">Literary Iconoclasm</a></span></td><td align="right"> 172</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XIII. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#WILLIAM_DUNBAR">William Dunbar</a></span></td><td align="right"> 183</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XIV. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#A_GALLOP_THROUGH_ENGLISH_LITERATURE">A Gallop Through English Literature</a></span></td><td align="right"> 193</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XV. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#DE_QUINCEY_AND_HIS_FRIENDS">De Quincey and His Friends</a></span></td><td align="right"> 203</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XVI. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#LEES_LIFE_OF_SHAKESPEARE">Lee's Life of Shakespeare</a></span></td><td align="right"> 211</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XVII. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#SHAKESPEARES_SONNETS">Shakespeare's Sonnets</a></span></td><td align="right"> 219</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XVIII. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#LANDSCAPE_IN_POETRY">Landscape in Poetry</a></span></td><td align="right"> 236</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XIX. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#AN_APPRECIATION_OF_PROFESSOR_PALGRAVE">An Appreciation of Francis Turner Palgrave</a></span></td><td align="right"> 250</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XX. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#ANCIENT_GREEK_AND_MODERN_LIFE">Ancient Greek and Modern Life</a></span></td><td align="right"> 255</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XXI. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#THE_PRINCIPLES_OF_CRITICISM">The Principles of Criticism</a></span></td><td align="right"> 270</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XXII. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#WOMEN_IN_GREEK_POETRY">Women in Greek Poetry</a></span></td><td align="right"> 283</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XXIII. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#MR_STEPHEN_PHILLIPS_POEMS">Mr. Stephen Phillips' Poems</a></span></td><td align="right"> 294</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XXIV. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#THE_ILLUSTRIOUS_OBSCURE">The Illustrious Obscure</a></span></td><td align="right"> 301<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11" href="#Page_11">[11]</a></span></td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XXV. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#VIRGIL_IN_ENGLISH_HEXAMETERS">Virgil in English Hexameters</a></span></td><td align="right"> 308</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XXVI. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#THE_LATEST_EDITION_OF_THOMSON">The Latest Edition of Thomson</a></span></td><td align="right"> 318</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XXVII. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#CATULLUS_AND_LESBIA">Catullus and Lesbia</a></span></td><td align="right"> 335</td> -</tr> -<tr><td align="right">XXVIII. </td><td><span class="smcap"><a href="#THE_RELIGION_OF_SHAKESPEARE">The Religion of Shakespeare</a></span></td><td align="right"> 351</td> -</tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12" href="#Page_12">[12]</a></span></p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13" href="#Page_13">[13]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="THE_PRESENT_FUNCTIONS_OF_CRITICISM" id="THE_PRESENT_FUNCTIONS_OF_CRITICISM"> -</a>THE PRESENT FUNCTIONS OF CRITICISM</h2> - - -<p>It may sound paradoxical to say that the more -widely education spreads, the more generally -intelligent a nation becomes, the greater is -the danger to which Art and Letters are exposed. -And yet how obviously is this the case, -and how easily is this explained. The quality -of skilled work depends mainly on the standard -required of the workman. If his judges and -patrons belong to the discerning few who, -knowing what is excellent, are intolerant of -everything which falls short of excellence, the -standard required will necessarily be a high one, -and the standard required will be the standard -attained. In past times, for example, the only -men of letters who were respected formed a -portion of that highly cultivated class who will -always be in the minority; and to that class, -and to that class only, they appealed. A community -within a community, they regarded the -general public with as much indifference as the -general public regarded them, and wrote only -for themselves, and for those who stood on the -same intellectual level as themselves. It was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14" href="#Page_14">[14]</a></span> -so in the Athens of Pericles; it was so in the -Rome of Augustus; it was so in the Florence -of the Medici; and a striking example of the -same thing is to be found in our own Elizabethan -Dramatists. Though their bread depended -on the brutal and illiterate savages for -whose amusement they catered, they still talked -the language of scholars and poets, and forced -their rude hearers to sit out works which could -have been intelligible only to scholars and poets. -Each felt with pride that he belonged to a great -guild, which neither had, nor affected to have, -anything in common with the multitude. Each -strove only for the applause of those whose -praise is not lightly given. Each spurred the -other on. When Marlowe worked, he worked -with the fear of Greene before his eyes, as -Shakespeare was put on his mettle by Jonson, -and Jonson by Shakespeare. We owe <i>Hamlet</i> -and <i>Sejanus</i>, <i>Much Ado about Nothing</i> and the -<i>Alchemist</i>, not to men who bid only for the -suffrage of the mob, but to men who stood in -awe of the verdict which would be passed on -them by the company assembled at the Mermaid -and the Devil.</p> - -<p>As long as men of letters continue to form -an intellectual aristocracy, and, stimulated by -mutual rivalry, strain every nerve to excel, and -as long also as they have no temptation to -pander to the crowd, so long will Literature -maintain its dignity, and so long will the standard<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15" href="#Page_15">[15]</a></span> -attained in Literature be a high one. In -the days of Dryden and Pope, in the days even -of Johnson and Gibbon, the greater part of -the general public either read nothing, or read -nothing but politics and sermons. The few -who were interested in Poetry, in Criticism, -in History, were, as a rule, those who had -received a learned education, men of highly -cultivated tastes and of considerable attainments. -A writer, therefore, who aspired to -contribute to polite literature, had to choose -between finding no readers at all, and finding -such readers as he was bound to respect—between -instant oblivion, and satisfying a class -which, composed of scholars, would have turned -with contempt from writings unworthy of -scholars. A classical style, a refined tone, and -an adequate acquaintance with the chief authors -of Ancient Rome and of Modern France, -were requisites, without which even a periodical -essayist would have had small hope of obtaining -a hearing. Whoever will turn, we do not say -to the papers of Addison and his circle in the -early part of the last century, or to those of -Chesterfield and his circle later on, but to the -average critical work of Cave's and Dodsley's -hack writers, cannot fail to be struck with its -remarkable merit in point of literary execution.</p> - -<p>But as education spreads, a very different -class of readers call into being a very different -class of writers. Men and women begin to seek<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16" href="#Page_16">[16]</a></span> -in books the amusement or excitement which -they sought formerly in social dissipation. To -the old public of scholars succeeds a public, in -which every section of society has its representatives, -and to provide this vast body with -the sort of reading which is acceptable to it, -becomes a thriving and lucrative calling. An -immense literature springs up, which has no -other object than to catch the popular ear, and -no higher aim than to please for the moment. -That perpetual craving for novelty, which has -in all ages been characteristic of the multitude, -necessitates in authors of this class a corresponding -rapidity of production. The writer of -a single good book is soon forgotten by his -contemporaries; but the writer of a series of -bad books is sure of reputation and emolument. -Indeed, a good book and a bad book stand, -so far as the general public is concerned, on -precisely the same level, as they meet with -precisely the same fate. Each presents the -attraction of a new title-page. Each is glanced -through, and tossed aside. Each is estimated -not by its intrinsic worth, but according to the -skill with which it has been puffed. Till within -comparatively recent times this literature was, -for the most part, represented by novels and -poems, and by those light and desultory essays, -sketches and <i>ana</i>, which are the staple commodity -of our magazines. And so long as it -confined itself within these bounds it did no<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17" href="#Page_17">[17]</a></span> -mischief, and even some good. Flimsy and -superficial though it was, it had at least the -merit of interesting thousands in Art and Letters, -who would otherwise have been indifferent -to them. It afforded nutriment to minds which -would have rejected more solid fare. To men -of business and pleasure who, though no longer -students, still retained the tincture of early -culture, it offered the most agreeable of all -methods of killing time, while scholars found -in it welcome relaxation from severer studies. -It thus supplied a want. Presenting attractions -not to one class only, but to all classes, it grew -on the world. Its patrons, who half a century -ago numbered thousands, now number millions.</p> - -<p>And as it has grown in favour, it has grown -in ambition. It is no longer satisfied with the -humble province which it once held, but is extending -its dominion in all directions. It has -its representatives in every department of Art -and Letters. It has its poets, its critics, its -philosophers, its historians. It crowds not our -club-tables and news-stalls only, but our libraries. -Thus what was originally a mere excrescence -on literature, in the proper sense of the -term, has now assumed proportions so gigantic, -that it has not merely overshadowed that literature, -but threatens to supersede it.</p> - -<p>No thoughtful man can contemplate the present -condition of current literature without -disgust and alarm. We have still, indeed,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18" href="#Page_18">[18]</a></span> -lingering among us a few masters whose works -would have been an honour to any age; and -here and there among writers may be discerned -men who are honourably distinguished by a -conscientious desire to excel, men who respect -themselves, and respect their calling. But to -say that these are in the minority, would be to -give a very imperfect idea of the proportion -which their numbers bear to those who figure -most prominently before the public. They are, -in truth, as tens are to myriads. Their comparative -insignificance is such, that they are -powerless even to leaven the mass. The position -which they would have occupied half a -century ago, and which they may possibly -occupy half a century hence, is now usurped by -a herd of scribblers who have succeeded, partly -by sheer force of numbers, and partly by judicious -co-operation, in all but dominating literature. -Scarcely a day passes in which some book -is not hurried into the world, which owes its -existence not to any desire on the part of its -author to add to the stores of useful literature, -or even to a hope of obtaining money, but -simply to that paltry vanity which thrives on -the sort of homage of which society of a certain -kind is not grudging, and which knows no distinction -between notoriety and fame. A few -years ago a man who contributed articles to a -current periodical, or who delivered a course of -lectures, had, as a rule, the good sense to know<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19" href="#Page_19">[19]</a></span> -that when they had fulfilled the purpose for -which they were originally intended, the world -had no more concern with them, and he would -as soon have thought of inflicting them in the -shape of a volume on the public, as he would -have thought of issuing an edition of his private -letters to his friends. Now all is changed. The -first article in the creed of a person who has -figured in either of these capacities, appears to -be, that he is bound to force himself into notice -in the character of an author. And this, happily -for himself, but unhappily for the interests -of literature, he is able to do with perfect -facility and with perfect impunity. Books are -speedily manufactured and as speedily reduced -to pulp. A worthless book may be as easily -invested with those superficial attractions which -catch the eye of the crowd as a meritorious one. -As the general public are the willing dupes of -puffers, it is no more difficult to palm off on -them the spurious wares of literary charlatans, -than it is to beguile them into purchasing the -wares of any other kind of charlatan. No one -is interested in telling them the truth. Many, -on the contrary, are interested in deceiving -them. As a rule, the men who write bad books -are the men who criticise bad books; and as -they know that what they mete out in their -capacity of judges to-day is what will in turn -be meted out to them in their capacity of -authors to-morrow, it is not surprising that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20" href="#Page_20">[20]</a></span> -the relations between them should be similar -to those which Tacitus tells us existed between -Vinius and Tigellinus—"nulla innocentiæ cura, -sed vices impunitatis."</p> - -<p>Meanwhile all those vile arts which were -formerly confined to the circulators of bad -novels and bad poems are practised without -shame. It is shocking, it is disgusting to contemplate -the devices to which many men of -letters will stoop for the sake of exalting themselves -into a factitious reputation. They will -form cliques for the purpose of mutual puffery. -They will descend to the basest methods of self-advertisement. -And the evil is fast-spreading. -Indeed, things have come to such a pass, that -persons of real merit, if they have the misfortune -to depend on their pens for a livelihood, -must either submit to be elbowed and jostled -out of the field, or take part in the same ignoble -scramble for notoriety, and the same detestable -system of mutual puffery. Thus everything -which formerly tended to raise the standard of -literary ambition and literary attainment has -given place to everything which tends to degrade -it. The multitude now stand where the scholar -once stood. From the multitude emanate, to -the multitude are addressed two-thirds of the -publications which pour forth, every year, from -our presses.</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i5">Viviamo scorti</div> -<div class="i0">Da mediocrità: sceso il sapiente,</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21" href="#Page_21">[21]</a></span> -<div class="i0">E salita è la turba a un sol confine</div> -<div class="i0">Che il mondo agguaglia.</div> -</div></div> - -<p>Matthew Arnold very truly observed, that one of -the most unfortunate tendencies of our time was -the tendency to over-estimate the performances -of "the average man." The over-estimation of -these performances is no longer a tendency, but -an established custom. Literature, in all its -branches, is rapidly becoming his monopoly. -As judged and judge, as author and critic, -there is every indication that he will proceed -from triumph to triumph, and establish his -cult wherever books are read. Now the only -sphere in which "the average man" is entitled -to homage is a moral one, and he is most venerable -when he is passive and unambitious. But -if ambition and the love of fame are awakened -in him, he is capable of becoming exceedingly -corrupt and of forfeiting every title to veneration. -He is capable of resorting to all the -devices to which men are forced to resort in -manufacturing factitious reputations, to imposture, -to fraud, to circulating false currencies of -his own, and to assisting others in the circulation -of theirs. Even when he is free from these -vices, so far as their deliberate practice is concerned, -he is scarcely less mischievous, if he be -uncontrolled. To say that his standard is never -likely to be a high one, either with reference to -his own achievements or with reference to what -he exacts from others, and to say that the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22" href="#Page_22">[22]</a></span> -systematic substitution of inferior standards for -high ones must affect literature and all that -is involved in its influence, most disastrously, -is to say what will be generally acknowledged. -And he has everything, unhappily, in his favour—numbers, -influence, the spirit of the age. -For one who sees through him and takes -his measure, there are thousands who do not: -for one who could discern the justice of an -exposure of his shortcomings, there are thousands -who would attribute that exposure to -personal enmity and to dishonest motives. His -power, indeed, is becoming almost irresistible. -The one thing which he and his fellows -thoroughly understand is the formidable advantage -of co-operation. The consequence is that -there are probably not half a dozen reviews -and newspapers now left which they are not -able practically to coerce. An editor is obliged -to assume honesty in those who contribute to -his columns, and also to avail himself of the -services of men who can write good articles, if -they write bad books. In the first case, it is -not open to him to question the justice of the -verdict pronounced; in the second case, the -courtesy of the gentleman very naturally and -properly predominates, under such circumstances, -over public considerations—and how -can truth be told? Nor is this all. Assuming -that an editor is free from such ties, he has -to consult the interests of his paper, to study<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23" href="#Page_23">[23]</a></span> -popularity, and not to estrange those who are, -from a commercial point of view, the mainstays -of all our literary journals, those who -advertise in them,—the publishers. "If," said -an editor to me once, "I were to tell the -truth, as forcibly as I could wish to do, about -the books sent to me for review, in six months -my proprietors would be in the bankruptcy -court." It is in the power of the publishers to -ruin any literary journal. There is probably -not a single Review in London which would -survive the withdrawal of the publishers' advertisements.</p> - -<p>A more honourable class of men than those who -form the majority of the London publishers does -not exist, nor have the interests of Literature, -as distinguished from commercial interests, ever -found heartier and more ungrudging support, -than they have long found in three or four of -the leading firms, and as they are now finding in -two or three of the firms which have been more -recently established. But, unhappily, this is not -everywhere the case. While the firms, to which I -have referred, have never, in any way, attempted -to interfere with the independence of reviewers, -others have made no secret of their intention to -make their patronage in advertisement dependent -on favourable notices of their publications. -The strain of temptation and peril to which -editors are thus exposed may be estimated by -the fact that, a flattering review may, if supplemented<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24" href="#Page_24">[24]</a></span> -by similar ones, put some three hundred -a year into the pockets of their proprietors, -while severity and justice would involve a corresponding -loss. It need hardly be said that no -editor of a respectable review would allow any -definite understanding of this kind to exist, or -that any publisher would ever dare to suggest -it, but there can be no doubt that such considerations -have to be taken into account almost -universally, and place serious restraint on freedom -of judgment.</p> - -<p>There is, it is true, another aspect of this -question. Publishers must protect themselves. -Though reviews offend much more frequently -on the side of dishonest and interested puffery, -they are very often made the vehicles of equally -unscrupulous rancour and spite. If they do -their readers injustice, by attempting to foist -bad books on them, they do every one concerned -injustice, by damning good ones. No one could -blame a publisher for declining to support a -paper which was continually making his books -the subjects of unmerited attacks. But a publisher -who attempts to prevent the truth from -being told, and so secures, or seeks to secure, -currency for his spurious wares, is guilty of an -act which borders closely on fraud.</p> - -<p>Another circumstance very favourable to the -encouragement of inferiority, and not of inferiority -only, but of charlatanism and imposture, -is the increasing tendency to regard<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25" href="#Page_25">[25]</a></span> -nothing of importance compared with the spirit -of tolerance and charity. An all-embracing -philanthropy exempts nothing from its protection. -Every one must be good-natured. Severity, -we are told, is quite out of fashion. Such censors -as the old reviewers are now mere anachronisms. -It is vain to plead that tolerance and charity -must discriminate; that, like other virtues, they -may be abused, and that in their abuse they -may become immoral; that there are higher -considerations than the feelings of individuals; -and that, if to give pain or annoyance admits -of no justification but necessity, necessity may -exact their infliction as an exigent duty.</p> - -<p>But this spirit of tolerance and charity has -also become attenuated into the spirit of mere -<i>laissez-faire</i>. We have no lack of real scholars -and of real critics, who see through the whole -thing, and probably deplore it; but they make -no sign, look on with a sort of amused perplexity, -and do their own work, thankful, no -doubt, sometimes, when it is oppressive, that -they need not be over-scrupulous about its -quality. If, occasionally, they get a little impatient -and indulge their genius, protest goes -no further than sarcasm and irony, so fine that -it is intelligible only among themselves; while -the objects of their satire, as well as the general -public, missing the one and misinterpreting the -other, take it all for applause. Resistance, it is -said, is useless. Literature is a trade. What<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26" href="#Page_26">[26]</a></span> -has come was inevitable: <i>vive la bagatelle</i>, and -drift with the stream.</p> - -<p>And now let us consider what are the results -of all this. The first and most important is the -degradation of criticism. Criticism is to Literature -what legislation and government are to -States. If they are in able and honest hands -all goes well; if they are in weak and dishonest -hands all is anarchy and mischief. And as -government in a Republic, the true analogy to -the sphere of which we are speaking, is represented -not by those who form the minority -in its councils, but by those who form the majority, -so in criticism, it is not on the few but -on the many among those who represent it, that -its authority and influence depend. And what -are its characteristics in the hands of its prevailing -majority—in the hands of those who are -its legislators in a realm co-extensive with the -reading world? It is not criticism at all. To -criticism, in the true sense of the term, it has no -claim even to approximation. It seems to have -resolved itself into something which wants a -name,—something which is partly dithyramb -and partly rhetoric. Without standards, without -touchstones, without principles, without knowledge, -it appears to be regarded as the one calling -for which no equipment and no training are -needed. What a master of the art has called the -final fruit of careful discipline and of much experience -is assumed to come spontaneously. A<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27" href="#Page_27">[27]</a></span> -man of literary tastes is born cultured. A critic, -like a poet, is the pure product of nature. Such -canons as these "critics" have are the mysterious -and somewhat perplexing evolutions of their -own inner consciousness, or derived, not from -the study of classical writers in English or in -any other language, of all of whom they are -probably profoundly ignorant, but from a -current acquaintance with the writings of contemporaries, -who are, in intelligence and performance, -a little in advance of themselves. -But what they lack in attainments they make -up in impudence. The effrontery of some of -these "critics," whose verdicts, ludicrous to -relate, are daily recorded as "opinions of the -Press," literally exceeds belief. They will sit in -judgment on books written in languages of -whose very alphabets they are ignorant. They -will pose as authorities and pronounce <i>ex -cathedrâ</i> on subjects literary, historical, and -scientific of which they know nothing more -than what they have contrived to pick up from -the works which they are "reviewing." Their -estimates of the books, on the merits and -demerits of which they undertake to enlighten -the public, correspond with their qualifications -for forming them. Books displaying in their -writers the grossest ignorance of the very -rudiments of the subjects treated, and literally -swarming with blunders and absurdities, all of -which pass undetected and unnoticed, are made<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28" href="#Page_28">[28]</a></span> -the subjects of elaborate panegyrics, which -would need some qualification if applied to the -very classics in the subjects under discussion. -Books, on the other hand, of unusual and -distinguished merit are despatched summarily -in a few lines of equally undeserved depreciation; -books written in the worst taste and in the vilest -style are pronounced to be models of both. -Sobriety, measure, and discrimination have no -place either in the creed or in the practice of -these writers. They think in superlatives; they -express themselves in superlatives. It never -seems to occur to them that if criticism has to -reckon with Mr. Le Gallienne it has also to reckon -with Shakespeare; that if it has to take the -measure of Mr. Hall Caine, it has likewise to -take the measure of Cervantes and Fielding, and -that of some dozen prose writers and poets, it -cannot be pronounced, at the same time of each, -that he is "the greatest living master of English -prose," or "without parallel for his superlative -command of all the resources of rhythmical -expression." There is one accomplishment in -which these critics are particularly adroit, and -that is in keeping out of controversy, and so -avoiding all chance of being called to account. -For this reason they deal more in eulogy than -in censure, for the public is less likely to -complain of a bad book being foisted on them -for a good one, than its irate author to sit silent -under reproof.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29" href="#Page_29">[29]</a></span></p> - -<p>If we go a little higher, things are almost as -bad, if not quite so ridiculous. In everything but -in criticism it is necessary to specialize. A man -who posed as an authority on all the literatures -of the world, and on the history of every nation -in the world, would be very justly set down as -an impostor. And yet pretentions which men -would be the first to ridicule, as private individuals, -they do not scruple to claim, as critics. -An historical student enriches History with a -volume throwing new and important light on -some obscure episode or period; a classical -student deserves the gratitude of scholars for an -invaluable monograph; English Literature or one -of the Continental Literatures is illustrated by a -series of dissertations as instructive as they are -original; or a truly memorable contribution has -been made to political philosophy, to æsthetics, -or to ethics. What is their fate? It is by no -means improbable that they will be 'reviewed,' in -the course of a few days, by the same man for -three or four, or it may be for five or six, daily and -weekly journals, and their fortune in the market -made or marred by a censor who has probably -done no more than glance at their half-cut pages, -and who, if he had studied them from end to -end, would have been no more competent to take -their measure than he would have been to write -them. This leads, it is needless to say, to every -kind of abuse: to works which deserve to be -authorities on the subjects of which they treat<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30" href="#Page_30">[30]</a></span> -dropping at once into oblivion, to works which -every scholar knows to be below contempt -usurping their places; to the deprivation of all -stimulus to honourable exertion on the part -of authors of ability and industry; to the encouragement -of charlatans and fribbles; to -gross impositions on the public. A very amusing -and edifying record might be compiled -partly out of a selection of the various verdicts -passed contemporaneously by reviews on particular -works, and partly out of comparisons of -the subsequent fortunes of works with their -fortunes while submitted to this censorship.</p> - -<p>But it is not these causes only which contribute -to the degradation of criticism. A very -important factor is the prevalence, or rather the -predominance, of mere prejudice, the prejudice -of cliques in favour of cliques, the prejudice of -cliques against cliques, the prejudice of the -veteran against or in favour of the novice, the -subsequent compensation, in corresponding prejudice -on the part of the novice, when his -novitiate is over. The two things which never -seem to be considered are the interests of Literature -and the interests of the public. The appearance -of a work by the member of a particular -coterie is the signal, on the one hand, for a series -of preposterously intemperate eulogies, and for -a series, on the other hand, of equally intemperate -depreciations, in such organs as are accessible to -both parties. If a work, with any pretension to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31" href="#Page_31">[31]</a></span> -originality, by a previously unknown author -makes its appearance, it is pretty sure to fare -in one of three ways: it will scarcely be noticed -at all; it will be made the theme of a philippic -against innovating eccentricities and newfangled -notions; or it will fall into the hands -of a critic who is on the look-out for a "discovery." -Its fortune, so far as notoriety is concerned, -will, in that case, be made. The critic, -thus on his mettle and with his character for discernment -at stake, will not only become proportionately -vociferous but will rally his equally -vociferous partisans. Hyperbole will be heaped -on hyperbole, rodomontade on rodomontade, -till real merit will be made ridiculous, and -the unhappy author awake at last, to assume -his true proportions, in a Fool's Paradise.</p> - -<p>And to this pass has criticism come, and -Literature generally, in almost all its branches, -is necessarily following suit. It would be no exaggeration -to say, that the sole encouragement -now left to authors to produce good books is -the satisfaction of their own conscience, and the -approbation of a few discerning judges; and -this attained, they must starve if their bread -depends upon their pen. It is not that a good -book will not be praised, but that bad books -are praised still more; it is not that it will fail -to find fair and competent reviewers, but that -for one fair and competent reviewer it will find -fifty who are unfair and incompetent. It is on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32" href="#Page_32">[32]</a></span> -its acceptance, not with the few who can estimate -its merits, but with the many who take -that estimate on trust from judges, whose competence -or incompetence they are equally unable -to gauge, that the possibility of a book yielding -any return to its author depends. The public -neither can nor will distinguish. A book which -has two or three favourable press notices which -are merited cannot stand against a book having -twenty or thirty which are unmerited. Nor is -this all. Measured and discriminating eulogy, -which means precisely what it expresses, and -which is always the note of sound and just -criticism, is to the uninitiated poor recommendation -compared with that which has no limitation -but extremes. How can the still small -voice of truth expect to get a hearing amid a -bellowing Babel of its undistinguishable mimic? -What inducement has an author to aim at excellence, -to spend three or four years on a monograph -or a history that it may be sold for waste -paper, when some miserable compilation, vamped -up in as many weeks, will, with a little management, -give him notoriety and fill his purse? -There is not a scholar, not a discerning reader in -England who will not bear me witness when I say -that, as a rule, the best books produced in Belles -Lettres are those of which the general public -knows nothing, and that he has been guided -to them sometimes by pure accident, and sometimes, -it may be, by a depreciatory notice or curt<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33" href="#Page_33">[33]</a></span> -paragraph in "our library table" limbo. And -what does this mean? It means that a writer -has discovered that it is impossible for him to -have a conscience, or aim at an honourable reputation, -unless he can afford to lose money. It -means more; it means that publishers are -obliged to discourage the production of solid and -scholarly works. It is notorious that the Delegates -of the Clarendon Press at Oxford, and one -or two firms in London, having regard to the -honourable traditions of their predecessors, have -wished to maintain those traditions by encouraging -the production of such works, and -have, at a great pecuniary loss, persevered in -this ambition. But no publisher can continue -to multiply books which do not pay their -expenses, and whose sale begins and ends in -the remainder market.</p> - -<p>This state of things is the more deplorable -when we consider its effect, not merely in degrading -and corrupting Literature on its productive -side, but in detracting so seriously from -its efficacy on its influential side. During the -last few years the rapid spread of higher -education, the popularization of liberal culture -through such agencies as the University Extension -Lectures, the National Home Reading -Union and similar institutions have called into -being an immense and constantly multiplying -class of serious readers and students. These -already number tens of thousands, they will<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34" href="#Page_34">[34]</a></span> -before long number hundreds of thousands. -Now it is of the utmost importance that these -readers, who are quite prepared to appreciate -what is excellent, should be guided to what is -excellent, and discouraged in every way from -conversing with what is bad and inferior in -Literature. But how is this to be done when -those who are striving, in every way, to raise -the standard of popular taste and of popular -culture, as teachers, find all their efforts counteracted -by the intense activity of those who are -doing their utmost to degrade both, as writers. -It is only those engaged in education, and more -particularly in popular education, who can understand -the extent of the mischief which bookmakers -and the puffers of bookmakers are -doing, who can understand the tone, the taste, -the temper induced by the habitual and exclusive -perusal of the writings characteristic of -these pests,—the inaccuracies and errors, the -misrepresentations and absurdities, to which -these writings give currency.</p> - -<p>In the days of our forefathers, a reader of -literary tastes, if he wished to acquaint himself -with an English classic, went to the fountain -head and read Spenser or Milton, Pope or -Addison for himself. If he desired to know -what criticism had said about them, he had -criticism of authority at hand, and he consulted -it. In our day it is about an even -chance whether the ordinary reader would<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35" href="#Page_35">[35]</a></span> -trouble himself to turn to the originals or not: -he would probably content himself with the -notices of them in some current manual of -English Literature, or with some essay or monograph. -Now, in the myriads of such publications, -in vogue or out of vogue, knocked under -by their successors or scuffling with their -contemporaries, he might have the luck to -light on a good guide; he might have the luck -to light on Dean Church, or Mark Pattison, or -Mr. Leslie Stephen, or Professor Courthope, or -Mr. Frederic Harrison; but he is much more -likely to make his way to a luminary in the -last well-puffed "series." The first article in -the creed of the modern book-maker seems -to be that the appearance or existence of a -good book is a sufficient justification for the -production of a bad one to take its place. An -excellent monograph is published, and is popular. -This is the signal for the manufacture of -half a dozen inferior ones, which are mutually -destructive, and serve no end except to substitute -bad books for a good one, and to make -the good one forgotten. Again, a work which -has long been classical in criticism is assumed -not to be "up to date," and is either edited on -this hypothesis, or we have another substituted -for it. This in turn yields its vogue—for -fashions change quickly in modern taste—to a -similar experiment, till a third is announced. Of -the relation of criticism to principles, or indeed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36" href="#Page_36">[36]</a></span> -to anything else but to their own whims or -impressions, these iconoclasts appear to be profoundly -unaware.</p> - -<p>It requires, needless to say, the utmost -wariness and care on the part of those who -regulate, and on the part of those who are engaged -in, education, to keep this inferior literature -in its place. If it were allowed to make its -way authoritatively into our schools and Universities, -or indeed into any of our educational -institutions, the consequences would be most -disastrous. It is not so much that it would -disseminate error as that it would become influential -in more serious ways, æsthetically in -its influence on taste, morally in its influence on -tone and character, intellectually in lowering the -whole standard of aim and attainment in studies.</p> - -<p>That the evils which have been described -admit of no remedy at present, or perhaps in -the present generation, may be fully conceded. -But they may be palliated if they cannot be -cured, and they must be palliated by the agents -to whom we may ultimately look for their cure, -education and fearless criticism. As their origin -may be mainly ascribed to the failure of the -Universities to adapt themselves to new conditions, -so on the willingness of the Universities -to repair their error must depend all possibility -of rectifying the results of it. From its organization -at the Universities everything comprehended -in the system of liberal study takes its<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37" href="#Page_37">[37]</a></span> -ply; its standards are there determined, its -methods formulated, its aims defined. As a -subject of teaching, and as the result of teaching, -in its relation to theory and in its relation -to practice, it there receives an impression which -is permanent. It has been so with classical -scholarship, and with Philology; it has been -so with Philosophy and Theology, with Jurisprudence -and History. What has been imparted -in the lecture-rooms of Oxford and -Cambridge has orally, and by the pen, become -influential wherever these subjects are represented. -There is not an educational institute in -Great Britain or in the colonies, there is not a -serious magazine or review on which it has not -set its seal. We have a striking illustration of -this in the case of Modern History. Some thirty -years ago it was practically unrepresented, -either at Oxford or Cambridge. Since then its -study has been organized. What has been the -result? It has become one of the most flourishing -branches of learning. It has reduced chaos -to order; it has raised its teaching, and by -implication its literature, to a very high standard; -it has put the <i>canaille</i> of sciolists and -fribbles into their proper place; while disciplining -energy it has directed it to fruitful objects; -it has revolutionized the study of the whole -subject.</p> - -<p>Thus the condition and fortune of everything -which is affected by education depend on the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38" href="#Page_38">[38]</a></span> -Universities. All that they do, or neglect to do, -passes into precedent. There is nothing susceptible -of educational impression which does -not take its colour and its characteristics from -them. They have made the subjects which are -represented in their schools what they are, and -every intelligent English citizen proud and -grateful.</p> - -<p>But, owing to a disastrous confusion between -two branches of study which are radically and -essentially distinct,—Philology and Belles Lettres,—both -Oxford and Cambridge have not only -left unorganized, but assisted in the degradation -of studies, which are of as much concern, and -vital concern, to national life as any which are -represented in their Schools. To leave an important -department of education unrecognised -in their system, is sufficient cause for surprise -and regret; but that they should be doing all in -their power to prevent any possibility of such a -defect being supplied is deplorable. And yet -this is what is being done. That Chairs, Schools -and Degrees may be established in the interests -of Philology, Philology is, by a palpable fiction, -identified with Literature. As the result of what -the late Professor Huxley denounced as "a fraud -upon letters," a Chair founded in the interests of -Literature was at Oxford appropriated by the -philologists. This has been followed by the establishment -of a School, in which all that can -provide for the honour of Philology is blended<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39" href="#Page_39">[39]</a></span> -with all that contributes to the degradation of -Literature; while, to give further currency and -authority to this absurd complication, the approval -of a thesis, on some subject pertaining -purely to Philology, entitles the writer to the -diploma, not of a Doctor in Philology, but of a -Doctor in Literature!</p> - -<p>Meanwhile, to make confusion worse confounded, -the Universities, or, to speak more -correctly, a party in the Universities, are undertaking -to provide the country with teachers -for the dissemination of literary culture,—for -the interpretation of Literature in the proper -sense of the term. Whether this is done competently -or incompetently depends, of course, -and must depend purely on accident, on the willingness -and ability, that is to say, of individual -teachers to educate themselves. Common standards -and common aims they have none. Each -does what is right in his own eyes. As some -have graduated in the classical schools, some in -the Mediæval and Modern Languages Tripos, -some in Modern History, some in Moral Science -or Theology, and some in nothing, there is -naturally much variety in their methods and -aims.</p> - -<p>But it is when we turn to the works in -modern Belles Lettres, and more particularly -to those dealing with English Literature, which -the University Presses publish, that we realize -the full significance of this anarchy. It would<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40" href="#Page_40">[40]</a></span> -not be going too far to say, that all which is -worst in current literature, when at its worst -finds in some of these works comprehensive -illustration. It is indeed almost an even chance -whether a work issuing from those Presses is -excellent, whether it is indifferent, or whether -it is executed with shameful incompetence.<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></p> - -<p>All, therefore, so far as Belles Lettres are concerned -is chaos at the Universities, and all consequently -is chaos everywhere else.</p> - -<p>The next appeal—for all appeals to the Universities -have been vain—must be made to those -who regulate the curriculums where Literature -is made a subject of teaching. Let them rigorously -exclude all but the best books. Let them -discourage the study of such Epitomes, Manuals, -and Histories as are the work of mere irresponsible -book makers, and prescribe in its -place the study of literary masterpieces. Without -excluding the best modern poetry and prose,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41" href="#Page_41">[41]</a></span> -let most attention—for obvious reasons—be -paid to the writings of the older masters. Let -them lay special stress on the study of criticism,—of -works treating of its principles, of works -illustrating the application of its principles to -particular writers; and let no work be recognised -which is not of classical authority. Translations -should, of course, as a rule, be avoided; -but in such a subject as the principles of -criticism, there is not the smallest reason why -those works which are most excellent in other -languages, such as the <i>Treatise on the Sublime</i>, -and some portions of Aristotle's <i>Poetic</i>, such as -Lessing's <i>Laocoon</i>, Schiller's <i>Letters on Æsthetics</i>, -the best Essays of Sainte-Beuve should not -be included.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> Nor can it be emphasized too -strongly that the theory on which all literary -teaching should proceed is that its object is not -so much to plant as to cultivate, not so much to -convey information, which, after all, is but its -medium, as to inspire, to refine, to elevate. I -cannot but think, too, that the foundations of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42" href="#Page_42">[42]</a></span> -all this might be laid much earlier than they -are, especially in our classical schools, by -encouraging, as, according to Coleridge, Dr. -Boyer used to do, the study of some of our -greater writers, such as Shakespeare and Milton, -side by side with that of Homer and Sophocles.</p> - -<p>But it is in criticism, in criticism competently, -honestly, and fearlessly applied, that -the chief salvation lies. There is probably -no review or newspaper in London which -does not number among its contributors men -of the first order of ability and intelligence, -men who are real scholars and real critics, -men who see through all that I have been -describing and are sick of it. Let them not -remain an impotent minority, but combine, -and become influential. If popular Literature -aspires to be ambitious, and trespasses on the -domains of scholarship and criticism, let them -submit it to the tests which it invites, let -them try it by the standards which it exacts. -There is no more reason for the co-existence -of two standards, as is now practically the -case, in the production of writings treating of -our own Literature than there is in the production -of writings dealing with Classical Literature. -The work of any one who meddles with -the last, even in the way of popularizing it, is -instantly called by scholars to a strict account, -and sciolism and charlatanry are exploded at -once. But in the case of our own Literature<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43" href="#Page_43">[43]</a></span> -there is no such solidarity. It seems to be -assumed that a scholar is one thing and a man -of letters another, that the difference between -work which appeals to connoisseurs and work -which appeals to the public is not simply a -difference in degree, but a difference in kind, -and that the criteria of the multitude need be -the only criteria of what is addressed to the -multitude. The manuscript of a History of -Greek or Roman Literature, or a monograph -on an ancient classic, if it were not at least -solid and trustworthy, would have no chance -of ever getting beyond a publisher's reader. -But a History of English Literature, or a monograph -on an English classic, teeming with -errors in fact and with absurdities in theory -and opinion, will not improbably be regarded -as an authority, and pass, unrevised, into more -than one edition.</p> - -<p>The progressive degradation of Literature and -of what is involved in its influence is, and must -be, inevitable, unless criticism is prepared watchfully -and faithfully to do its duty. Let it guard -jealously the standards and touchstones of excellence -as distinguished from mediocrity, even -though it may be prudent to make great allowances -in applying them; let it institute a -rigorous censorship over books designed for the -use of students at the Universities and in other -educational establishments; let it permit no -writer to pose in a false position, and deliberately<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44" href="#Page_44">[44]</a></span> -trade on the ignorance and inexperience -of his readers; let it discourage in every way -the production of worthless and superfluous -books, whether in poetry or in prose; and -lastly, while fully recognising how much must -be conceded to professional authors writing -against time, having to court popularity or -being fettered by conditions imposed on them -by their employers, let it take care that their -productions shall at least not be mischievous, -either by disseminating error or by corrupting -taste.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> One illustration of the indifference of the authorities of -our University Presses to the interest of Literature is so -scandalous that it must be specified. Fourteen years ago a -series of lectures was delivered by the then Clarke Lecturer -in the Hall of Trinity College, Cambridge. They were afterwards -published under the title of <i>From Shakespeare to Pope</i>, -and reviewed in the <i>Quarterly Review</i> for October, 1886. -The lectures, as the Review showed, absolutely swarmed -with blunders, many of them so gross as to be almost incredible. -Ever since then the volume has been circulated by -the Press, absolutely unrevised, indeed without a single correction, -and is now in circulation.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Cf. what Milton says in prescribing the study of masterpieces -in criticism: "This would make them (students) soon -perceive what despicable creatures our common rimers and -play-writers be, and show them what religious, what glorious -and magnificent use might be made of poetry, both in -Divine and human things. From hence, and not till now, -will be the right season of forming them to be able writers -and composers in every excellent matter, when they shall be -thus fraught with an universal insight into things."—<i>Tractate -on Education.</i></p></div> -</div> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45" href="#Page_45">[45]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_I" id="ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_I"> -</a>ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES</h2> - -<h3>I. LANGUAGE <i>VERSUS</i> LITERATURE AT OXFORD</h3> - - -<p>To say that the anarchy which has resulted -from confusing the distinction between the -study and interpretation of Literature as the -expression of art and genius, and its study and -interpretation as a mere monument of language, -has had a most disastrous effect on education -generally, would be to state very imperfectly -the truth of the case. It has led to inadequate -and even false conceptions of what constitutes -Literature. It has led to all that is of essential -importance in literary study being ignored, and -all that is of secondary or accidental interest -being preposterously magnified; to the substitution -of grammatical and verbal commentary for -the relation of a literary masterpiece to history, -to philosophy, to æsthetics; to the mechanical -inculcation of all that can be imparted, as it -has been acquired, by cramming, for the intelligent -application of principles to expression. It<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46" href="#Page_46">[46]</a></span> -has led to the severance of our Literature from -all that constitutes its vitality and virtue as an -active power, and from all that renders its -development and peculiarities intelligible as a -subject of historical study. In a word, it has -led to a total misconception of the ends at which -literary instruction should aim, as well as of its -most appropriate instruments and methods. All -this is illustrated nowhere more strikingly than -in the publications of the two great University -Presses. It would be easy to point to editions -of English classics, and to works on English -Literature, bearing the <i>imprimatur</i> of Oxford -and Cambridge, in which all that is worst in the -opposite extremes of pedantry and dilettantism -finds ludicrous expression.</p> - -<p>And in thus speaking we are saying nothing -more than is notorious, nothing more than is -admitted, and admitted unreservedly, in the -Universities themselves, or at least at Oxford. -But different sections of Academic society regard -the matter in different lights. The majority of -the classical professors and teachers, deprecating -any attempt on the part of the University to -meddle with "Literature," treat the whole thing -as a joke, and, so far from supposing that -the reputation of the University is concerned, -find infinite amusement in the constant exposures -which are being made in the reviews -and newspapers of the absurdities of the "English -Literature party." They regard the "study<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47" href="#Page_47">[47]</a></span> -of Literature" precisely as they regard the University -Extension Movement—the one as a contemptible -excrescence on our Academic system, -the other as a contemptible excrescence on -Academic curricula. Another section takes a -very different view. Recognising the reasonableness -of the appeals which have, during the -last twelve years, been made to Oxford to place -the study of Literature on the same sound footing -as she has placed that of other subjects included -in her courses, and discerning clearly that what -is required cannot be obtained as long as the -interests of Philology and those of Literature -continue to collide, this party, unhappily a small -minority, has pleaded for the establishment of a -School of Literature. They have very properly -laid stress on four points: First, that, as the chief -justification for the establishment of such a School -is the fact that the University is undertaking by -innumerable agencies, its Press, its oral teachers -both at home and abroad, to disseminate liberal -instruction through the medium of English -Literature, the principal object of the School -should be the education of these agencies. -Secondly, they have insisted that, if the interpretation -of Literature is to effect what it is of -power to effect, if, as an instrument of political -instruction, it is to warn, to admonish, to -guide, if, as an instrument of moral and æsthetic -instruction, it is to exercise that influence on -taste, on tone, on sentiment, on opinion, on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48" href="#Page_48">[48]</a></span> -character—on all, in short, which is susceptible -of educational impression—it must both be -properly defined and liberally studied; and they -contend that, if it is to be so defined and so -studied outside the Universities, it must first be -so defined and so studied within. Thirdly, they -insist that the study of our own Literature -should be associated with that of ancient classical -literature, for two indisputable reasons: first, -because the basis of all liberal literary culture, of a -high standard, must necessarily rest on competent -classical attainments, and because, historically -speaking, the development and characteristics of -the greater part of what is most valuable in our -Literature would be as unintelligible, without -reference to the Greek and Roman classics, as the -Literature of Rome would be without reference -to that of Greece. Fourthly, they point out that, -as our Literature is, in various intimate ways, -associated with the Literatures of Italy, France, -and Germany, and that, as an acquaintance -with the classics of those countries must form -an essential element in a literary education, the -comparative study of those Literatures and our -own ought, by all means, to be encouraged and -provided for. And, fifthly, they show that what -is demanded is perfectly feasible. There already -exists in the University, they contend, every -facility for organizing such a course of Literature -as is required. All that is needed is co-ordination. -In the Classical Moderations and in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49" href="#Page_49">[49]</a></span> -the <i>Literæ Humaniores</i> Honour Schools a liberal -literary education on the classical side is already -provided; two-thirds in fact of the discipline, -culture, and attainments desiderated in a literary -teacher it is the aim of those Schools to impart. -The Taylorian Institute provides instruction in -the languages and literatures of the Continent; -and, if its professors could be roused into a little -more activity, a youth might, in two years, if he -pleased,—and that side by side with his severer -studies—acquire something more than a superficial -acquaintance with the language and writings -of Dante and Machiavelli, of Montaigne and -Molière, of Lessing and Goethe. What he could -not obtain would be instruction and guidance in -the study of our own Literature. In a word, all -that is required to secure what this party plead -for is simply the establishment of a School of -English Literature, in the proper acceptation of -the term, and the co-ordination of studies which -are at present pursued independently. It was -proposed that it should take the form of a Post-graduate -Honour School, standing in the same -relation to the other schools in the University -as the old Law and History School used to stand -to the old <i>Literæ Humaniores</i> School, and as the -examination for the Bachelorship in Civil Law -now stands to the ordinary Law School. Thus -a youth who had graduated in honours in -Moderations and in the Final Classical School, -who had studied modern literatures at the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50" href="#Page_50">[50]</a></span> -Taylorian and our own Literature under its -professor, or even by himself, would have an -opportunity of displaying his qualifications for -an honour diploma in Literature. But the -appeals and arguments of this party have been -of no avail.</p> - -<p>Next come the philologists. They are in -possession of the field. All the revenues supporting -the Chairs of Language and Literature -are their monopoly. They have steadily resisted -all attempts on the part of what may be denominated -the Liberal party to encroach on their -dominions. In their eyes the Universities are -simply nurseries for esoteric specialists, and to -talk of bringing them into touch with national -life is, in their estimation, mere cant. Their -attitude towards Literature, generally, is precisely -that of the classical party towards our own -Literature; they regard it simply as the concern -of men of letters, journalists, dilettants, -and Extension lecturers. They defeated sixteen -years ago an attempt to establish a Chair of -English Literature by transforming it into a -Chair of Language and securing it for themselves. -They attempted, subsequently, to supplement -what they had done by the establishment of a -School of Language on the model of the Mediæval -and Modern Languages Tripos at Cambridge. -They were defeated by a coalition of the classical -party, the Liberals, of whom we have just -spoken, and a third party which insisted on a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51" href="#Page_51">[51]</a></span> -compromise between Philology and Literature. -Reviving the scheme, they have, by accepting -the modifications of the compromisers, just -succeeded in getting it accepted. The new -School of English Language and Literature is -the result of that compromise.</p> - -<p>Now it will not be disputed that if the Universities -ought, in the interests of liberal culture, -to provide adequately for instruction in Literature, -they ought also, in the interests of science, -to provide adequately for instruction in Philology. -It is a branch of learning of immense importance. -It is, and ought to be, the peculiar care of -Universities, and nothing could be more derogatory -to a University than deficiency in such a -study. But it is a study in itself. As a science -it has no connection with Literature. Indeed -the instincts and faculties which separate the -temperament of the mathematician from the -temperament of the poet are not more radical -and essential than the instincts and faculties -which separate the sympathetic student of -Philology from the sympathetic student of -Literature. But no science resolves itself more -easily into a pseudo-science, and it is in this -degenerate form that it has become linked with -Literature and been, in all ages, the butt of wits -and men of letters. Nothing but anarchy can -result till this mutually degrading alliance be -dissolved. It has been forced on the philologists -by the compromise to which reference has been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52" href="#Page_52">[52]</a></span> -made. Let them be free to rescind it. Let the -"pia vota" of Professor Max Müller be fulfilled -and Oxford have her School of Philology. That -such a School should be established is desirable -for three reasons. In the first place, it would -define what is at present vague and indeterminate, -the scope and functions of Philology. -Secondly, it would place that study on its -proper footing, and, by placing it on its proper -footing, it would not only demonstrate its relation -to other studies, but it would enable it -to effect fully what it is competent to effect. -Thirdly, it might, and probably would, do something -to relieve Oxford of the opprobrium of -being behind the rest of the learned world in -this branch of science. The School would probably -not attract many students, for Philology, -unlike Literature, can never appeal to more -than a small minority. If, therefore, the choice -lay between the institution of a School of Philology -and that of a School of Literature, there -can be no doubt which should have precedence. -But no such choice is offered. If the philologists -were not strong enough to refuse to compromise, -they are strong enough to crush any attempt to -forestall them.</p> - -<p>Let us now turn to the constitution of the -School which has been the result of this arrangement, -and which will authorize the University -to confer, not, be it remembered, an ordinary, -but an honour, degree in English Language and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53" href="#Page_53">[53]</a></span> -Literature. The following are the Regulations. -The subjects for examination are four. 1. Portions -of English authors. 2. The History of the -English Language. 3. The History of English -Literature. 4. In the case of those candidates -who aim at a place in the first or second class, a -Special Subject of language or literature. The -portions of the authors specified are these. -<i>Beowulf</i>, the texts printed in Sweet's <i>Anglo-Saxon -Reader</i>, <i>King Horn</i>, <i>Havelok</i>; Laurence -Minot, <i>Sir Gawain and the Green Knight</i>. Of -Chaucer's <i>Canterbury Tales</i>, the <i>Prologue</i>, <i>The -Knight's Tale</i>, <i>The Man of Law's</i>, <i>The Prioress's</i>, -<i>Sir Thopas</i>, <i>The Monk's</i>, <i>The Nun Priest's</i>, <i>The -Pardoner's</i>, <i>The Clerk's</i>, <i>The Squire's</i>, <i>The Second -Nun's</i>, <i>The Canon Yeoman's</i>. Next come the -<i>Prologue</i> and the first seven <i>passus</i> (text B) of -<i>Piers Ploughman</i>. Then come select plays of -Shakespeare, chosen apparently at haphazard, -<i>Love's Labour's Lost</i>, <i>Romeo and Juliet</i>, <i>Richard -the Second</i>, <i>Twelfth Night</i>, <i>Julius Cæsar</i>, <i>Winter's -Tale</i>, <i>King Lear</i>. Then we have the following -extraordinary farrago:—</p> - -<p>Bacon's <i>Essays</i>.</p> - -<p>Milton, with a special study of <i>Paradise Lost</i> -and the <i>Areopagitica</i>.</p> - -<p>Dryden's <i>Essay on Epic</i> (sic).</p> - -<p>Pope's <i>Satires and Epistles</i>.</p> - -<p>Johnson's <i>Lives of the Poets</i>—the Lives of -Eighteenth-Century Poets.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54" href="#Page_54">[54]</a></span></p> - -<p>Goldsmith's <i>Citizen of the World</i>.</p> - -<p>Burke's <i>Thoughts on the Present Discontents</i>.</p> - -<p>Lyrical Ballads (Wordsworth and Coleridge), -Shelley's <i>Adonais</i>.<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></p> - -<p>The second part of the examination will be on -the History of the English Language. "Candidates -will be examined in Gothic (the Gospel of -St. Mark), and in translation from Old English -and Middle English authors not specially -offered."</p> - -<p>This is to be followed by the History of English -Literature, to which portion of the Regulations -the following odd clause is appended: -"the examination will include the History of -Criticism and of style in prose and verse." -Last come the special subjects designed for -"those who aim at a place in the First or -Second Class." Six of these consist of certain -prescribed periods of English Literature. The -other subjects are as follows:—</p> - -<p>(1) Old English Language and Literature -down to 1150 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span></p> - -<p>(2) Middle English Language and Literature, -1150-1400 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span></p> - -<p>(3) Old French Philology with special reference -to Anglo-Norman French, together with a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55" href="#Page_55">[55]</a></span> -special study of the following texts:—<i>Computus -of Phillippe de Thaun</i>, <i>Voyage of St. Brandan</i>, -<i>The Song of Dermot and the Earl</i>, <i>Les Contes -moralisés de Nicole Bozon</i>.</p> - -<p>(4) Scandinavian Philology, with special reference -to Icelandic, together with a special study -of the following texts:—<i>Gylfaginning</i>, <i>Laxdæla -Saga</i>, <i>Gunnlaugssaga Ormstungu</i>.</p> - -<p>(5) French Literature down to 1400 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span> in its -bearing on English Literature.</p> - -<p>(6) Italian Literature as influencing English -down to the death of Milton.</p> - -<p>(7) German Literature from 1500 <span class="smcap">A.D.</span> to the -death of Goethe in its bearing on English Literature.</p> - -<p>(8) History of Scottish Poetry.</p> - -<p>Such is the scheme which will, in conjunction -with the similar scheme at Cambridge, supply -England and the colonies with their literary professors. -Let us examine it in detail. The first -thing which strikes us is the contrast between -the competence and judgment displayed in the -organization of the philological part of the -course and the confusion, inadequacy, and flimsiness -so conspicuous in the literary part. Nothing -could be more satisfactory than the provisions -made for the study of Language. They are obviously -the work of legislators who knew what -they were about, and who, but for the thwarting -requirements of the provisions for Literature,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56" href="#Page_56">[56]</a></span> -would have proceeded to a superstructure worthy -of the foundation. A student who, in addition -to having mastered the prescribed works in -Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, and Middle English, is -competent to translate and comment on unprepared -passages from those dialects, has certainly -laid the foundation of sound scholarship in an -important department of Philology. In the fact -that what properly belongs to his study has been -relegated to the subjects out of which he has -only the option of choosing one, we have a -lamentable illustration of the effects of the compromise -forced on the philologists. If, for the -literary portion of the curriculum, a candidate -could substitute the first four of the special subjects, -he would have completed a thoroughly -satisfactory course of Philology, so far at least as -relates to the Teutonic and Romance languages.</p> - -<p>But to pass from what concerns Philology to -what concerns Literature. Now in considering -this point it is necessary to remember that we -are not dealing with the regulations of any subordinate -institution or curriculum, with provincial -Universities and seminaries, or with schemes -of study in which Literature is only one out of -many subjects. We are dealing with a Final -Honour School at Oxford, with regulations which -will inevitably form a precedent and model -wherever the study of English literature shall -be organized in Great Britain. We are dealing -with a school which is to educate those who are<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57" href="#Page_57">[57]</a></span> -to educate the country. Nothing, therefore, -could be more disastrous than unsoundness and -deficiency in the provisions of such an institution, -nothing more deplorable than its giving -countenance and authority to error and inadequacy. -It is not too much to say that, if this -scheme had been designed with the express object -of degrading the standard of literary teaching, -and of perpetuating all that is worst in -present systems, it could hardly have been better -adapted for its purpose. Not to dwell upon subordinate -defects, it completely severs the study -of our own literature from that of the ancient -classical literatures. It necessitates no knowledge -of any of the Continental literatures. It -ignores absolutely the higher criticism. Contracting -Literature within the narrowest bounds, -its selection of books for special study is worthy -of an Army Examination. In the wretched -jumble in which Goldsmith's <i>Citizen of the World</i> -jostles Shelley's <i>Adonais</i> and Burke's <i>Thoughts -on the Present Discontents</i> Wordsworth's and -Coleridge's <i>Lyrical Ballads</i>, no attempt is made -to discriminate between compositions which are -representative, either critically of the work of -particular authors, or historically of particular -epochs, and works which have no such significance, -while many of the most important departments -of our prose Literature are unrepresented. -Nor is this all. It affords every facility for -cramming. It is adapted to test nothing but<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58" href="#Page_58">[58]</a></span> -what may be mechanically acquired and mechanically -imparted, what may be poured out -from lectures into notebooks, and from notebooks -into examination papers. Proceeding on -the assumption that a literary education is -merely the acquisition of positive knowledge, it -neither requires nor encourages, as the prescription -of an essay or thesis, or even "taste-paper," -might have done, any of the finer qualities of -literary culture, such, for example, as a sense of -style, sound judgment, good taste, the touch of -the scholar. We can assure these legislators, -and we speak from knowledge, that, setting -aside the philological portion of this curriculum, -which is, so far as it goes, solid enough, an experienced -crammer, would, in about three months -furnish an astute youth with all that is requisite -for graduating in this school.</p> - -<p>But to proceed to details. Conceive the qualifications -of an interpreter and critic of English -Literature, a graduate in Honours in his subject, -whose education has proceeded on the hypothesis -that he need have no acquaintance with the -classics of Greece and Rome. Would any competent -scholar deny that the history of English -Literature, in its mature expression, is little less -than the history of the modifications of native -genius and characteristics by classical influence, -that the development and peculiarities of our -epic, dramatic, elegiac, didactic, pastoral, much -of our lyric, of our satire and of other species of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59" href="#Page_59">[59]</a></span> -our poetry is, historically speaking, unintelligible -without reference to ancient classical literature? -That what is true of our poetry is true of our -criticism, of our oratory, sacred and secular, of -our dialectic and epistolary Literature, of our -historical composition, of the greater part, in -short, of our national masterpieces in prose? -What, indeed, the Literature of Greece was to -that of Rome, the Literatures of Greece and -Rome have been to ours.<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p> - -<p>It was the influence of Æschylus, Sophocles, -Euripides, Menander, Diphilus, which transformed -the <i>Ludi Scenici</i> and the Atellan farces -into the tragedies of Ennius and Pacuvius and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60" href="#Page_60">[60]</a></span> -the comedies of Plautus and Terence. It was -the influence of the Roman drama and of a -drama modelled on the Roman which transformed, -so far at least as structure and style are -concerned, our similarly rude native experiments -into the tragedies and comedies of Shakespeare. -On the epics of Greece were modelled the epics -of Rome, and on the epics of Greece and Rome -are modelled our own great epics. Of our -elegiac poetry, to employ the term in its conventional -sense, one portion is largely indebted to -Theocritus, Moschus, and Virgil, and another to -Catullus and Ovid. Almost all our didactic -poetry is modelled on the didactic poetry of -Rome. Theocritus and Virgil have furnished -the archetypes for our eclogues and pastorals. -One important branch of our lyric poetry springs -directly from Pindar, another important branch -directly from Horace, another directly from the -choral odes of the Attic dramatists and of Seneca. -Our heroic satire, from Hall to Lord Lytton, is -simply the counterpart—often, indeed, a mere -imitation—of Roman satire. And if this is true -of our satire, it is equally true of our best -ethical poetry. The Epistles, which fill so large -a space in the poetical literature of the seventeenth -and eighteenth century, derive their -origin from those of Horace. To the <i>Heroides</i> -of Ovid we owe a whole series of important -poems from Drayton to Cawthorn. The -Greek anthology and Martial have furnished<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61" href="#Page_61">[61]</a></span> -the archetypes of our epigrams and of our epitaphs. -It is the same with our prose. The -history of English eloquence begins from the -moment when the Roman classics moulded and -coloured our style, when periodic prose was -modelled on Cicero and Livy, when analytic -prose was modelled on Sallust, Seneca, and -Tacitus. With the exception of fiction, there -is no important branch of our prose composition, -the development and characteristics of which are -historically intelligible without reference to the -ancients. How radically inadequate must any -study of the principles of criticism be, which has -no reference to the critical works of the Greek -and Roman writers, is obvious. But it is not -merely in tracing the development and explaining -the peculiarities generally of our prose and of -our poetry that competent classical scholarship is -indispensable. Is it not notorious that in each -generation, from Spenser to Tennyson, from -More to Froude, our leading poets and prose -writers have been, with very few exceptions, -men nourished on classical literature and saturated -with its influence? Many entire masterpieces, -much, and in some cases the greater -portion, of other masterpieces, particularly in -our poetry, are simply unintelligible—we are -speaking, of course, of serious critical students—except -to classical scholars. Take, for example, -the <i>Faerie Queen</i>, and the <i>Hymns</i> of -Spenser, Milton's <i>Paradise Lost</i>, <i>Comus</i>, <i>Lycidas</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62" href="#Page_62">[62]</a></span> -and <i>Samson Agonistes</i>, Pope's satires, the two -great odes of Gray, Collins's odes to <i>Fear</i> and -the <i>Passions</i>, Wordsworth's great <i>Ode</i> and his -<i>Laodamia</i>, Shelley's <i>Adonais</i> and <i>Prometheus -Unbound</i>, Landor's <i>Hellenics</i>, much of the poetry -of Tennyson, Browning, and Matthew Arnold. -Indeed it would be as preposterous to attempt -any critical study of our Literature, without reference -to the ancients, as it would be for a man to -set up as an interpreter in Roman Literature -without reference to the Greek.</p> - -<p>And the effect of this severance of the study of -the ancient classics from the study of our own is -written large throughout the whole domain of -education, in the instruction given in schools and -institutes, in the monographs, manuals, and "editions" -which pour from scholastic presses. In one -of the most popular manuals now in circulation, -the writer gravely tells us that "the pastoral name -of <i>Lycidas</i> was chosen by Milton to signify purity -of character," adding "in Theocritus a goat was -so called <ins title="leukitas">λευκιτας</ins> for its whiteness," that Comus -"the drinker of human blood" revelled in the -palace of Agamemnon.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> Another writer confounds -the "choruses" in Shakespeare with the -choruses of the Greek plays. Another, commenting -on the symbolism of ivy in the wreath<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63" href="#Page_63">[63]</a></span> -of a poet, tells us that it indicates "constancy."<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> -Nothing is more common than to find elaborate -critical comments on the <i>Faerie Queen</i> without -the smallest reference to its connection with -Aristotle's <i>Ethics</i>, and on Wordsworth's great -<i>Ode</i> without any reference to Plato. But such -is the confidence reposed in Professor Earle and -his theory, and so determined are the legislators -for the new School to exclude all connection -with classical literature, that it is not admitted -even as a special subject. A candidate has, as we -have seen, the option of studying the influence -exercised on old English literature by French, -and on later literature by Italian and German; -but the one thing which he has not the option of -studying is the influence exercised on it by the -literatures of Greece and Rome. Some of our -readers may remember that a few years ago a -public appeal was made for an expression of -opinion on the question of associating the study -of our own classics and that of the ancients. -Opinions were elicited from many of the most distinguished -men in England. They were all but -unanimous, not merely in supporting the association, -but in deprecating the severance. So wrote -Mr. Gladstone, Cardinal Manning, Professor -Jowett, Matthew Arnold, Lord Lytton, Mr. John -Morley, Walter Pater, <a name="Correct3" id="Correct3">Addington Symonds</a>; so<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64" href="#Page_64">[64]</a></span> -wrote the Archbishop of Canterbury and the -Bishop of London, the Rector of Lincoln, the -President of Magdalen, the Warden of All Souls, -and many others. We may add, also—for we -are now at liberty to state it publicly—that this -was emphatically the opinion of Robert Browning. -We cannot, of course, quote these opinions -<i>in extenso</i>,<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> and that of the late Professor -Jowett and a portion of that of Mr. John -Morley must suffice.</p> - -<blockquote><p>I am as strongly of opinion that in an Honour School of -English Literature or Modern Literature the subject should -not be separated from classical literature, as I am of opinion -that English literature should have a place in our curriculum.</p></blockquote> - -<p>So writes Professor Jowett.</p> - -<blockquote><p>It seems to me to be as impossible effectively to study -English literature, except in close association with the -classics, as it would be to grasp the significance of mediæval -or modern institutions without reference to the political -creations of Greece and Rome. I should be very sorry to see -the study of Greek and Latin writers displaced, or cut off -from the study of our own.</p></blockquote> - -<p>So writes Mr. John Morley.</p> - -<p>But the Professor of Anglo-Saxon and his -friends, as we have seen, think otherwise, and -have, unhappily for the interests of letters and -education, persuaded Oxford to think otherwise -too. We say advisedly the interests of letters and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65" href="#Page_65">[65]</a></span> -education. For the precedent of excluding from -a School of "Literature," and that at the chief -centre and nursery of liberal culture, the Literatures -of Greece and Rome cannot but be detrimental -to the vitality and influence of the ancient -classics; and, as Froude truly observed, both the -national taste and the tone of the national intellect -would suffer serious decline, if they lost their -authority. The reaction against philological -study which has set in during the last ten years -has given them a new lease of life. But the -spirit of the age is against them; they have -rivals in languages far easier to acquire; they -are not, and never can be, in touch with the -many. Let them become disassociated from our -curriculums of Literature, and they will cease -to be influential, They will cease to be studied -seriously, to be studied even in the original, -except by mere scholars.</p> - -<p>Another absurdity, not less monstrous, in these -regulations, is the absence of all provision for instruction -in the principles of criticism. There -is indeed an unmeaning clause about the history -of criticism, and of style in verse and prose, -being included in the examination; but as nothing -is specified, and as no work on criticism, -with the exception of Dryden's <i>Discourse on -Epic Poetry</i>, and Johnson's <i>Lives</i> (of eighteenth-century -poets),<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> is included in the books<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66" href="#Page_66">[66]</a></span> -prescribed for special study, it is plain that this -important subject has no place. Why it should -not have occurred to these legislators to substitute, -say, for Goldsmith's <i>Citizen of the World</i> -and Burke's <i>Thoughts on the Present Discontents</i>, -some work which would at least have opened -the eyes of the literary professors of the future -to the existence of philosophical criticism, is -certainly odd. Had they prescribed select -essays from Hume; and Shaftesbury's <i>Advice -to an Author</i>, or Campbell's <i>Philosophy of -Rhetoric</i>, or Burke's <i>Treatise on the Sublime -and Beautiful</i>, or even the critical portions of -Coleridge's <i>Biographia Literaria</i>, with the two -essays of Wordsworth, it would have been -something. But the truth is that, as they have -excluded, except from the optional subjects, all -literatures but the English, one absurdity has -involved them in another. The course for the -literary education of our future professors, -proceeding on the principle that they need -know no language but Gothic and Anglo-Saxon, -has necessitated the elimination of all the great<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67" href="#Page_67">[67]</a></span> -masterpieces of critical literature. As they are -assumed to know no Greek, they can have no -serious instruction in such works as Aristotle's -<i>Poetic</i> and <i>Rhetoric</i>, and in the <i>Treatise on the -Sublime</i>. As they are assumed to know no -Latin, they can have no instruction in Roman -criticism. On the same principle such works -as Lessing's <i>Laocoon</i> and <i>Hamburgische Dramaturgie</i>, -Schiller's Æsthetical Letters and Essays, -Villemain's Lectures, and Sainte-Beuve's Essays, -can find no place in their curriculum of study. -And so it comes to pass that Dryden's <i>Discourse -on Epic Poetry</i> and Johnson's <i>Lives</i> of -the eighteenth-century poets, represent—<i>proh -pudor!</i>—the course in Criticism.</p> - -<p>Now it is not too much to say that, for a -University like Oxford to confer an honour -degree in English Literature on a student who -need never have read a line of the works to -which we have referred, is to authorize not simply -superficiality, but sheer imposture. How can a -teacher deal adequately even with the subject -which these regulations profess to include—the -history of criticism—who need have no acquaintance -with the <i>Poetic</i> and <i>Rhetoric</i>, the <i>Treatise -on the Sublime</i>, and the <i>Institutes of Oratory</i>? -How could a teacher possibly be a competent -exponent and critic of the masterpieces of our -literature, who had not received a proper critical -training, and how could he have any pretension -to such a training when all that is best in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68" href="#Page_68">[68]</a></span> -criticism had been expressly excluded from his -education?</p> - -<p>It may be urged that he would himself supply -these deficiencies, that the study of our own -Literature would naturally lead him to the study -of other Literatures, that intelligent curiosity, -ambition, or a sense of shame would induce him -to supplement voluntarily, and by his own -efforts, what he needed in his profession. In -some instances this would undoubtedly be the -case. In the great majority of instances such -a supposition would be against all analogy. As -a general rule, a high honour degree in any -subject represented at the Universities is final. -It winds a man up for life. It determines, fixes, -and colours his methods, his views, his tone, in -all that relates to the subject in which he has -graduated. If he chooses teaching as a profession, -he has no inducement to correct, to -modify, or even materially add to what has -been imparted to him, for his scholastic reputation -has been made, and a comfortable independence -is assured. To very many men, indeed, -who go up to the Universities with the intention -of following teaching as a profession, a -high degree is a mere investment, the one -instinct in them which is not quite banausic -being the conscientious thoroughness with -which they impart what they have been taught. -Nothing, therefore, is of more importance to -education than the sound constitution of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69" href="#Page_69">[69]</a></span> -Honour Schools of Oxford and Cambridge, and -nothing could be more disastrous than the -toleration in those Schools of inadequate -standards, and of palpably erroneous theories -of study.</p> - -<p>But to return to the Regulations. The ridiculous -disproportion between the ground covered -and the work involved in the different "special -subjects" open to the option of candidates, would -seem to indicate, either that the regulators are -very inadequately informed on those subjects, or -that divided counsels have resulted in the settlement -of very different standards of requirement. -Compare, for instance, what is involved respectively -in such subjects as "English Literature -between 1700 and 1745," and "The History of -Scottish Poetry." Why, a competent knowledge -of the history of Scotch poetry in the -fifteenth century alone would be more than -an equivalent to the first subject. Not less -absurd is the prescription of "English Literature -between 1745 and 1797" as an alternative -for "English Literature between 1558 and 1637." -The prescription of such "special subjects" as -the influence exercised on our Literature by the -Literatures of Italy, Germany, and France, is -one of the few steps in a wise direction discernible -in these regulations; but, as no student is -free to take more than one of them, or required -to take any of them at all, their inclusion in no -way affects the constitution of the School. A<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70" href="#Page_70">[70]</a></span> -competent literary education is not very much -furthered by a student being invited to study -how our Literature has been affected by one -out of the five Literatures which have influenced -it. As, moreover, the integrity of a chain -depends on its weakest link, so the efficiency -of examinational tests, in their application to -purely optional subjects, depends on that subject -in the list which involves least labour. A -candidate who can "get a first" out of "English -Literature between 1700 and 1745," or between -1745 and 1797, will be much too wise to attempt -to "get a first" out of subjects which will -require treble the time and labour to master. -Is it likely that candidates, anxious, naturally, -from less lofty motives than the love of Literature -for its own sake, to obtain an honour degree, -will, after laboriously acquiring Anglo-Saxon -and Middle English, which are compulsory, -voluntarily specialize in a subject requiring a -knowledge of Italian and German, when it is -open to them to choose, as their special subject, -"Old English Language and Literature down to -1150"?</p> - -<p>The statute authorizing the foundation of this -School recites that in its curriculum and examinations -"equal weight" is, "as far as possible, -to be given to Language and Literature, provided -always that candidates who offer special subjects -shall be at liberty to choose subjects connected -either with Language or Literature, or<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71" href="#Page_71">[71]</a></span> -with both." It would be interesting to know -what this means. If by "equal weight" be -meant equality in the proportions of what is -prescribed for the study of Literature, and what -is prescribed for the study of Language, the provision -is stultified by the very constitution of the -course. To suppose that the history of English -Literature, and the special study of a few particular -works like Shelley's <i>Adonais</i>, Burke's -<i>Present Discontents</i>, and the <i>Lyrical Ballads</i>, is -equivalent to the History of the English language, -the Gospel of St. Mark in Gothic, the <i>Beowulf</i>, -and a volume of extracts in Anglo-Saxon, <i>King -Horn</i>, <i>Havelok</i>, <i>Sir Gawain</i>, and the prologue -and seven <i>passus</i> of <i>Piers Ploughman</i> in Middle -English, is palpably absurd. If by "equal -weight" be meant that an examiner is to assign -equal marks to candidates who distinguish themselves -in Literature, and to candidates who distinguish -themselves in Language, it involves -gross injustice. For while the latter have every -opportunity for displaying knowledge and competence, -the former have not. If a student has -literary tastes and sympathies, if he is conversant -with the Classics, if, attracted by what is best -not merely in our own but in other modern Literatures, -he has indulged himself in their study, -if he has made himself a good critic and acquired -a good style, what chance has he of doing his -attainments and accomplishments justice? But -if it be meant that "equal weight" will be given,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72" href="#Page_72">[72]</a></span> -not to literary merit regarded as Sainte-Beuve -and Matthew Arnold would regard it, but regarded -in relation to the standard indicated by -the regulations of the School, then the philologists -would have just reason to complain.</p> - -<p>As the constitution of this School is still open -to amendment, it is devoutly to be hoped that -Oxford will see its way to reconsidering a matter -so seriously affecting the interests of education -and culture. It is neither too late to remedy -what has been done, nor to devise a remedy. -Let it be remembered that there is an essential -distinction between what should constitute an -Honour School and what should constitute a Pass -School, between what is to educate those who -are to educate others, and what guarantees -nothing more than a smattering. The present -institution could be reformed in two ways. By -reducing the philological part of its provisions -to the level of the literary part, it could, with a -little further simplification, be made into an -excellent Pass School, which would supply a real -want. By eliminating the literary part, and -adding proportionately to the philological, it -could be transformed into a perfectly satisfactory -Honour School of Modern Languages. But -no modification could make it into an Honour -School of English Literature correspondingly -adequate, for the simple reason that the study -of English Literature cannot be isolated from -the study of those literatures with which it is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73" href="#Page_73">[73]</a></span> -inseparably linked. The absurdity of assuming -that the student of Philology could separate a -single language or dialect from the group to -which it belongs, that he could isolate Anglo-Saxon -from Gothic, or Middle English from -Anglo-Saxon, the Celtic of the Cymbry from the -Celtic of the Gaels, is not greater than to assume -that the study of our Literature can be severed -from the study of those literatures which stand -in precisely the same relation to it as one of -those dialects stands to the others in the same -group.</p> - -<p>If the legislators of this School decline to -reform it, then it is the duty of Oxford—a duty -which she owes alike to education and to her -own honour—to counteract the mischief which -this institution must, by degrading throughout -England and the colonies the whole level of -liberal instruction and study on its most important -side, inevitably do. To the herd of imperfectly -and erroneously disciplined teachers which -this institution will turn loose on education, let -her oppose, at least, a minority which shall -worthily represent her. Let her establish a -proper degree or diploma in Literature. There -exist, as we have already said, scattered throughout -the various institutions of the University, -nearly all the facilities for a complete course in -this subject, and nothing more is needed than to -encourage and render possible their co-ordination. -Let it be open to a man who has obtained<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74" href="#Page_74">[74]</a></span> -a high class in Moderations and in the Final -Classical Schools, who has availed himself of the -opportunities offered for the study of Modern -Languages and Literatures in the Taylorian Institute, -and who has studied what he would at -present have to study for himself, our own -Literature—let it be open to him to present himself -for examination in these subjects, and to -obtain, as the result of such an examination, a -degree analogous to the Bachelorship of Civil -Law. It would no doubt not be possible for -these studies to be pursued, systematically, side -by side with the work required for a high class -in Moderations and <i>Literæ Humaniores</i>. Nor is -it necessary. There need be no limit assigned -to the time at which a candidate would be free -to qualify himself for obtaining this diploma. -As a general rule it would probably be about -six months, possibly a year, after the attainment -of the present degree in Arts. And, considering -the high prizes open to teachers in Literature, it -would be well worth a student's while to spend -this additional time in preparing himself for the -examination. If a post-graduate scholarship, -analogous to the Craven or the Derby scholarships, -could be founded for the encouragement -of a comparative study of Classical and Modern -Literature, an important step would, at any rate, -be taken in a right direction; something would -be done for the competent equipment of future -Professors of Literature.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75" href="#Page_75">[75]</a></span></p> - -<p>Thus would a precedent, disastrous beyond -expression to the interests of liberal instruction -and culture, as well as to the reputation of the -University—we mean the severance of the study -of Classical Literature from that of our own—be -at least deprived of its authority. Thus would -the mass at any rate be leavened, and such institutions -in the provinces and elsewhere as have, -unlike Oxford and Cambridge, had the wisdom -to separate their Chairs of Language and Literature, -know where to go for those who should fill -them; and thus, finally, would there be some -chance of the literary curriculum in Oxford -ceasing to be a by-word in the Universities of -the Continent and America.</p> - -<blockquote><p>Since the first edition of these essays appeared the liberality -of Mr. John Passmore Edwards has supplied the scholarship -here desiderated, and Oxford has instituted a University -scholarship, bearing the donor's name, "for the encouragement -and promotion of the study of English Literature in -connection with the Classical Literatures of Greece and -Rome."</p></blockquote> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> For the sort of textbook from which the student who -is a candidate for "honours in English" will be required -to get his knowledge of this poem, see <i>infra</i>, the review of -the Clarendon Press Edition of Shelley's <i>Adonais</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> The Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford, one of the -chief legislators for the new School, thinks otherwise, and we -should like to place the following passage on record. In his -extraordinary <i>History of English Prose</i> (p. 485) he writes -thus: "The idea that English literature rests upon a -classical basis has been formulated and industriously circulated -as the watchword of a pedantic faction, and hardly -any organ of current literature has proved itself strong -enough, or vigilant enough, to secure itself against the -insidious entrance of the above indoctrination." And so it -comes to pass that we read in the account of the debate in -Congregation, on the occasion of the former attempt to -establish this School:— -</p><p> -"The proposal to add the Professors of Greek and Latin to -the Board of Studies was rejected by thirty-eight votes to -twenty-four, Professor Earle maintaining that the fallacious -notion that English literature was derived from the classics -was so strong that it was unwise to place even the Professor -of Latin on the Board."—<i>Times</i>, May 26, 1887.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a></p> -<div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="kai mên pepôkôs g', hôs thrasynesthai pleon,">και μην πεπωκως γ', ὡς θρασυνεσθαι πλεον,</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="broteion aima, kômos en domois menei">βροτειον αιμα, κωμος εν δομοις μενει</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="dyspemptos exô xyngonôn Erinyôn.">δυσπεμπτος εξω ξυγγονων Ερινυων.</ins></div> -<div class="i10">—<i>Agamem.</i>, 1159-61.</div> -</div></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> For ample illustration of this, see <i>infra</i> the review of -the Clarendon Press edition of Shelley's <i>Adonais</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> They may all be found in full in a <i>Pall Mall "Extra"</i> -(January, 1887), and in the present writer's <i>Study of English -Literature</i>.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> It is amusing to notice how carefully the greater part of -what is most precious and instructive in Johnson's work, -the lives namely of Cowley and Dryden, and the noble -critique of <i>Paradise Lost</i>, is expressly excluded, and the -greater part of what is most trivial, and regarded by himself -as trivial, the lives of the minor poets of the eighteenth -century, selected instead. Macaulay ranks the lives of -Cowley and Dryden, with that of Pope, as the masterpieces -of the work; and Johnson himself considered the life of -Cowley to be the best.</p></div> -</div> - - - - -<hr style="width: 65%;" /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76" href="#Page_76">[76]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_II" id="ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_II"> -</a>ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a></h2> - -<h3>II. TEXT BOOKS</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> -Shelley's <i>Adonais</i>, edited with introduction and notes by -William Michael Rossetti. (Oxford: at the Clarendon Press.)</p></div> - - -<p>If any proof were needed of what has been -insisted on over and over again, that, until -the Universities provide adequately for the proper -study of English Literature—for the study of it -side by side with Classical Literature—there will -be small hope of its finding competent critics and -interpreters, it would be afforded by the volume -before us. For this volume the delegates of -the Oxford University Press are responsible; -and in allowing it their <i>imprimatur</i> they have -been guilty of a very grave error. No such -standard of editing would have been tolerated -in any other subject in which they undertake -to provide books. A work pertaining to -Classics, to History, to Philosophy, to Science, -marked by corresponding deficiencies, would -have been suppressed at once, until those deficiencies<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77" href="#Page_77">[77]</a></span> -had been supplied. To Mr. Rossetti -himself we attach no blame. What he was -competent to do he has, for the most part, done -well and conscientiously,—conscientiously, as may -be judged from the fact that, while the poem -itself occupies twenty pages in large type, Mr. -Rossetti's dissertations and notes occupy one -hundred and twenty-eight in small type. It -was, indeed, his misfortune, rather than his fault, -to be entrusted with a work which required a -peculiar qualification, an intimate acquaintance, -that is to say, with Classical Literature. That -he has no pretension to this is abundantly plain -from his Introduction and from every page of -his notes.</p> - -<p>When one of the Universities undertakes to -provide our colleges and schools with comments -and notes on a poem so saturated with classicism -as <i>Adonais</i>, the least that could be expected -from bodies who are, as it were, the guardians -of classical literature, is the provision that the -classical part of the work should be done at -least competently; it would be hardly too much, -perhaps, to expect that it should be done excellently. -Of this part of Mr. Rossetti's work we -scarcely know which are the worse—his sins of -commission or his sins of omission. His classical -qualifications for commenting on a poem as unintelligible, -critically speaking, without constant -reference to the Platonic dialogues, particularly -to the <i>Symposium</i> and the <i>Timæus</i>, and to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78" href="#Page_78">[78]</a></span> -Greek poets, as the <i>Æneid</i> would be without -reference to the Homeric poems and the <i>Argonautica</i> -of Apollonius, appear to begin and end -with some acquaintance with Mr. Lang's version -of Bion and Moschus. We will give a few specimens. -Mr. Rossetti is greatly puzzled with -Shelley's allusion to Urania in stanzas 2 to 4.</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">"Where was lone Urania</div> -<div class="i0">When Adonais died?"</div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"Most musical of mourners, weep again.</div> -<div class="i0">Lament, anew, Urania!"</div> -</div></div> - -<p>"Why out of the nine sisters," he asks, "should -the Muse of Astronomy be selected? Keats -never wrote about astronomy." Perhaps, he -suggests, Shelley was not thinking of the Muse -Urania, "but of Aphrodite Urania." Yet, if so, -why should she be called "musical"?—a question -to be asked, no doubt, as our old friend Falstaff -would say. However, after balancing the -respective claims of both, he finally comes to the -conclusion that the Urania of <i>Adonais</i> is Aphrodite. -If Mr. Rossetti had been acquainted with -a work to which he never even refers, but which -exercised immense influence over Shelley's poem—the -<i>Symposium</i> of Plato—it would have saved -him two pages of speculation. His ignorance of -this is the more surprising as Shelley has himself -translated the dialogue. But Mr. Rossetti -need not, in this case, have gone so far afield. -Has he never read the prologue to the seventh<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79" href="#Page_79">[79]</a></span> -book of Milton's <i>Paradise Lost</i>? In his note on -the lines—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"The one remains, the many change and pass,"</div> -</div></div> - -<p>it is really pitiable to find him supposing that -this is an allusion to "the universal mind," and -"the individuated minds which we call human -beings," when any schoolboy could have told -him that the allusion is, of course, a technical -one to the Platonic "forms" or archetypes; -while "the power" in stanza 42, the "sustaining -love" in stanza 54, and the "one spirit" in -stanza 43, are allusions respectively to the -Aphrodite Urania in the discourse of Eryximachus -in the <i>Symposium</i>, and to the Divine -Artificer in the <i>Timæus</i>. And these dialogues -form the proper commentary on Shelley's metaphysics -in this poem.</p> - -<p>Still more extraordinary is Mr. Rossetti's note -on "wisdom the mirrored shield"—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i4">"What was then</div> -<div class="i0">Wisdom, the mirrored shield?"</div> -</div></div> - -<p>(st. 27), which is as follows: "Shelley was, I -apprehend, thinking of the <i>Orlando Furioso</i> of -Ariosto (!). In that poem we read of a magic -shield which casts a supernatural and intolerable -splendour ... a sea monster, not a dragon, -so far as I recollect, becomes one of the victims -of the mirrored shield." This slovenly and perfunctory -mode of reference is, we may remark in -passing, hardly the sort of thing to be expected<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80" href="#Page_80">[80]</a></span> -in works issued from University Presses. We -wonder what the Universities would say to an -editor of Virgil who, in commenting on some -Homeric allusion in his author, contented himself -with observing that Virgil "is here thinking -of the <i>Iliad</i>," and, "so far as I can recollect," etc. -The reference is, we need hardly remark, not to -any magic shield in the <i>Orlando</i>, but to the -<i>scutum crystallinum</i> of Pallas Athene, as any -well-informed fourth-form schoolboy would -know. If Mr. Rossetti will turn to Bacon's -<i>Wisdom of the Ancients</i>, chap. vii., he will find -some information on this subject, which may -be of use to him, should this work run into a -second edition. Take, again, the note on the -symbolism of the flowers and cypress cone in -stanza 33:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"His head was bound with pansies overblown,</div> -<div class="i1">And faded violets, white and pied and blue;</div> -<div class="i0">And a light spear topped with a cypress cone,</div> -<div class="i1">Round whose rude shaft dark ivy tresses grew."</div> -</div></div> - -<p>Here the editor's ignorance of ancient Classical -Literature has led him into a whole labyrinth of -blunders and misconceptions. "The ivy," he -says, "indicates constancy in friendship"! Is it -credible that a Clarendon Press editor should be -ignorant that ivy—<i>doctarum hederæ præmia -frontium</i>—is the emblem of the poet? The -violet, he remarks, indicates modesty. It neither -indicates, nor can possibly indicate, anything of -the kind. Its traditional signification, deduced<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81" href="#Page_81">[81]</a></span> -perhaps from Pliny's remark (<i>Nat. Hist.</i>, xxi. -c. 38), that it is one of the longest-lived of -flowers, is fidelity. But the passage of which -Shelley was thinking when he wrote this stanza—a -passage to which Mr. Rossetti makes no -reference at all, was <i>Hamlet</i>, <a name="Correct1" id="Correct1">act iv. sc. 1</a>: -"There is pansies that's for thoughts.... I -would give you some violets, but they withered -all when my father died." So that it is quite possible -that the "faded violets," associated as these -flowers are with the Muses and the Graces, merely -symbolize the fading and drooping towards what -may be further symbolized in the cypress cone,—death. -We are by no means sure, however, -that the cypress cone does, as Mr. Rossetti remarks, -"explain itself." Shelley, assuming he -gave the image another application, was doubtless -thinking of Silvanus—"teneram ab radice -ferens, Silvane, cupressum," <i>Georg.</i> i. 20 (see, -too, Spenser's <i>Faerie Queene</i>, I. vi. st. 14), and -may possibly have been symbolizing his sympathy -with the genius of the woods—have been -referring to that "gazing on Nature's naked -loveliness," which he describes in stanza 31. In -any case, Mr. Rossetti has entirely misinterpreted -the meaning of the whole passage.</p> - -<p>Wherever classical knowledge is required—as -it is in almost every stanza—he either gives no -note at all, or he blunders. Thus in stanza 24 -he gives no note on the use of the word "secret." -In stanza 28 he has evidently not the smallest<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82" href="#Page_82">[82]</a></span> -notion of the meaning of the word "obscene" -as applied to ravens. The fine adaptations from -<i>Lucretius</i> (II. 578-580) in stanza 21, and again -from II. 990-1010 in stanzas 20 and 42; the -adaptation from the <i>Agamemnon</i> (49-51) in -stanza 17; from the fragments of the <i>Polyidus</i> -of Euripides in stanza 39; from the <i>Iliad</i> (vi. -484) in stanza 34; from Theocritus, <i>Idyll.</i>, i. 66, -and Virg., <i>Ecl.</i>, x. 9-10 in stanza 2; and again -from Theocritus, <i>Idyll.</i>, i. 77 seqq., from which -the procession of the mourners is adapted, and -on which the whole architecture of the poem is -modelled—all these are alike unnoticed. Nor is -Mr. Rossetti more fortunate in explaining allusions -to passages in other literatures. The adaptation -of the sublime passage in Isaiah (xiv. 9, 10), -by which one of the finest parts of the poem -was suggested, stanzas 45 and 46; the singular -reminiscence in stanza 28:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i5">"The vultures</div> -<div class="i0">... Whose wings rain contagion;"</div> -</div></div> - -<p>of Marlowe's <i>Jew of Malta</i>, act ii. sc. 1, where he speaks of the raven -which</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Doth shake contagion from her sable wings;"</div> -</div></div> - -<p>the obvious reminiscence of Dante, <i>Inf.</i>, 44 seqq. -in stanza 44; of Shakespeare's <i>Romeo and Juliet</i>, -v. 3, which forms the proper commentary on -lines 7 and 8 of stanza 3; of none of these is -any notice taken. On many important points -of interpretation we differ <i>toto cœlo</i> from Mr.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83" href="#Page_83">[83]</a></span> -Rossetti. The "fading splendour," for example, -in stanza 22, cannot possibly mean "fading as -being overcast by sorrow and dismay" (cf. -stanza 25), it simply means vanishing, receding -from sight—a magnificently graphic epithet. -Is Mr. Rossetti acquainted with the proleptic -use of adjectives and participles? We may add -that Mr. Rossetti has not even taken the -trouble to ascertain who was the writer of the -famous article, of which so much is said both -in the preface of the poem and in the poem -itself, but "presumes," etc. <i>Et sic omnia.</i> And -<i>sic omnia</i> it will inevitably continue to be, until -the Universities are prepared to do their duty -to education by placing the study of our -national Literature on a proper footing.</p> - -<p>It is, we repeat, no reproach to Mr. Rossetti, -who has distinguished himself in more important -studies than the production of scholastic -text-books, that he should have failed in an -undertaking which happened to require peculiar -qualifications. Indeed, our respect for Mr. -Rossetti and our sense of his useful services -to Belles Lettres would have induced us to -spare him the annoyance of an exposure of -the deficiencies of this work, had it not illustrated, -so comprehensively and so strikingly, the -disastrous effects of the severance of the study -of English Literature from that of Ancient -Classical Literature at our Universities.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84" href="#Page_84">[84]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_III" id="ENGLISH_LITERATURE_AT_THE_UNIVERSITIES_PART_III"> -</a>ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></h2> - - -<h3>III. TEXT BOOKS</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> <i>Shakespeare—Select Plays. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark</i> -(Oxford: at the Clarendon Press. <span class="smcap">MDCCCXC</span>.)</p></div> - - -<p>More than a century and a half has passed -since Pope thus expressed himself about -philologists,—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"'Tis true on words is still our whole debate,</div> -<div class="i0">Dispute of <i>Me</i> or <i>Te</i>, of <i>aut</i> or <i>at</i>,</div> -<div class="i0">To sound or sink in <i>Cano</i> O or A,</div> -<div class="i0">To give up Cicero or C or K;</div> -<div class="i0">The critic eye, that microscope of wit,</div> -<div class="i0">Sees hairs and pores, examines bit by bit;</div> -<div class="i0">How parts relate to parts or they to whole,</div> -<div class="i0">The body's harmony, the beaming soul,</div> -<div class="i0">Are things which Kuster, Burmann, Wasse shall see,</div> -<div class="i0">When man's whole frame is obvious to a <i>Flea</i>."</div> -</div></div> - -<p>We need scarcely say that we have far too -much respect for Dr. Aldis Wright and for his -distinguished coadjutor to apply such a description -as this to them as individuals, for no one can -appreciate more heartily than we do their monumental -contribution to the textual criticism of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85" href="#Page_85">[85]</a></span> -Shakespeare, but we can make no such reserve -in speaking of this edition of <i>Hamlet</i>. A more -deplorable illustration, we do not say of the -subjection of Literature to Philology, for that -would very imperfectly represent the fact, but -of the absolute substitution of Philology, and -of Philology in the lowest sense of the term, for -Literature it would be impossible to imagine. -Had it been expressly designed to prove that its -editors were wholly unconscious of the artistic, -literary, and philosophical significance of Shakespeare's -masterpiece, it could scarcely have taken -a more appropriate form.</p> - -<p>The volume contains 117 pages of Shakespeare's -text, printed in large type; the text is -preceded by a preface of twelve pages, and followed -by notes occupying no less than 121 pages -in very small type; so that the work of the -poet stands in pretty much the same relation to -that of his commentators as Falstaff's bread stood -to his sack. In the case of a play like <i>Hamlet</i>, -so subtle, so suggestive, so pregnant with critical -and philosophical problems of all kinds, commentary -on a scale like this might have been -quite appropriate. But in this stupendous mass -of exegesis and illustration there is, with the -exception of one short passage, literally not a -line about the play as a work of art, not a line -about its structure and architecture, about its -style, about its relations to æsthetic, about its -metaphysic, its ethic, about the character of -Hamlet, or about the character of any other<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86" href="#Page_86">[86]</a></span> -person who figures in the drama. The only -indication that it is regarded in any other light -than as affording material for philological and -antiquarian discussion is a short quotation, -huddled in at the conclusion of the preface, -from Goethe's <i>Wilhelm Meister</i>, and an intimation -that "Hamlet's madness has formed the -subject of special investigation by several writers, -among others by Dr. Conolly and Sir Edward -Strachey."</p> - -<p>A more comprehensive illustration of the -truth of the indictment brought against philologists -by Voltaire, Pope, Lessing, and Sainte-Beuve -than is supplied by the notes in this volume -it would be difficult to find. Dulness, of course, -may be assumed, and of mere dulness we do -not complain; but a combination of prolixity, -irrelevance, and absolute incapacity to distinguish -between what to ninety-nine persons in -every hundred must be purely useless and what -to ninety-nine persons in every hundred is the -information which they expect from a commentator, -is intolerable. We will give a few -illustrations. A plain man or a student for -examination comes to these lines:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">"'Tis the sport to have the enginer</div> -<div class="i0">Hoist with his own petar;"</div></div></div> - -<p>and, though he knows what the general sense is -wishes to know exactly what Shakespeare means. -He turns to the note for enlightenment, and the -enlightenment he gets is this:<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87" href="#Page_87">[87]</a></span>—</p> - -<blockquote><p>"<i>Enginer.</i> Changed in the quarto of 1676 to the more -modern form of engineer. Compare <i>Troilus and Cressida</i> ii. -3. 8, "Then there's Achilles a rare enginer." For a cognate -form mutiner see note on iii. 4. 83. So we have pioner for -pioneer <i>Othello</i> iii. 3. 346. <i>Hoist</i> may be the participle either -of the verb 'hoise' or 'hoist.' In the latter case it would -be the common abbreviated form for the participles of verbs -ending in a dental. <i>Petar.</i> So spelt in the quartos, and by -all editors to Johnson, who writes 'petards.' In Cotgrave -we have 'Petart: a Petard or Petarre; an Engine (made -like a bell or morter) wherewith strong gates,' etc."—</p></blockquote> - -<p>And so the hungry sheep looks up and is not -fed. Again, he finds—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"He smote the sledded Polacks on the ice,"</div></div></div> - -<p>turns to the note, and reads:—</p> - -<blockquote><p>"<i>Polacks.</i> The quartos have 'pollax,' the two earliest -folios read 'Pollax,' the third 'Polax,' the fourth 'Poleaxe.' -Pope read 'Polack' and Malone 'Polacks.' The word occurs -four times in <i>Hamlet</i>. For 'the sledded Polacks' Molke -reads 'his leaded pole-axe.' But this would be an anticlimax, -and the poet, having mentioned 'Norway' in the -first clause, would certainly have told us with whom the -'parle' was held."</p></blockquote> - -<p>The poet Young noted how</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Commentators each dark passage shun,</div> -<div class="i0">And hold their farthing candles to the sun."</div></div></div> - -<p>The Clarendon Press editors are certainly -adepts in these accomplishments. Take one out -of a myriad illustrations. The line in Act i. sc. -2, "The dead vast and middle of the night," is -the signal for a note extending to twelve closely -printed lines. "'Tis bitter cold, and I am sick<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88" href="#Page_88">[88]</a></span> -at heart," says Francisco. If any note were -needed here, it might have been devoted to -pointing out to tiros the fine subjective touch. -The note is this:—</p> - -<blockquote><p>"<i>Bitter cold.</i> Here bitter is used adverbially to qualify -the adjective 'cold.' So we have 'daring hardy' in <i>Richard -II.</i> i. 3. 43. When the combination is likely to be misunderstood, -modern editors generally put a hyphen between the -two words. <i>Sick at heart.</i> So <i>Macbeth</i> v. 3. 19, 'I am sick -at heart.' We have also in <i>Love's Labour's Lost</i> ii. 1. 185, -'sick at the heart,' and <i>Romeo and Juliet</i> iii. 3. 72, 'heart-sick -groans.'"</p></blockquote> - -<p>Now let us see how the poor student fares -when real difficulties occur. Every reader of -Shakespeare is familiar with the corrupt passage, -Act iv. sc. 1:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i8">"The dram of eale</div> -<div class="i0">Doth all the noble substance of worth out</div> -<div class="i0">To his own scandal—</div></div></div> - -<p>a passage which, as all Shakespearian scholars -know, has been satisfactorily emended and explained. -We turn to the notes for guidance, -and find ourselves treated as poor Mrs. Quickly -was treated by Falstaff, "fubbed off"—thus:—</p> - -<blockquote><p>"We leave this hopelessly corrupt passage as it stands in -the two earliest quartos. The others read 'ease' for 'eale,' -and modern writers have conjectured for the same word -base, ill, bale, ale, evil, ail, vile, lead. For 'of a doubt' it -has been proposed to substitute 'of worth out,' 'soul with -doubt,' 'oft adopt,' 'oft work out,' 'of good out,' 'of worth -dout,' 'often dout,' 'often doubt,' 'oft adoubt,' 'oft delase,' -'over-cloud,' 'of a pound,' and others."</p></blockquote> - -<p>This, it may be added, is the sort of stuff—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89" href="#Page_89">[89]</a></span> -<i>incredibile dictu</i>—that our children have to get by -heart; for this Press, be it remembered, practically -controls half the English Literature examinations -in England. As students know -quite well that nine examiners out of ten will -set their questions from "the Clarendon Press -notes," it is with "the Clarendon Press notes" -that they are obliged to cram themselves. But -to continue. Even a well-read man might be -excused for not knowing the exact meaning of -the following expression:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"They clepe us drunkards, and with <i>swinish phrase</i></div> -<div class="i0"><i>Soil our addition</i>."</div></div></div> - -<p>He turns to the notes, and having been briefly -informed that <i>clepe</i> means "call," and <i>addition</i> -"title," is left to flounder with what he can get -out of—"Could Shakespeare have had in his -mind any pun upon 'Sweyn,' which was a common -name of the kings of Denmark?"</p> - -<p>Another leading characteristic of the <i>genus</i> -philologist, we mean the preposterous importance -attached by them to the smallest trifles, finds -ludicrous illustration in the following note:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"My father, in his habit, as he lived!"</div></div></div> - -<p>exclaims Hamlet to his mother. This is the -signal for:—</p> - -<blockquote><p>"There is supposed to be a difficulty in these words, because -in the earlier scenes the Ghost is in his armour, to which the -word 'habit' is regarded as inappropriate. In the earlier -form of the play, as it appears in the quarto of 1603, the -Ghost enters 'in his nightgowne,' and as the words 'in the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90" href="#Page_90">[90]</a></span> -habit as he lived' occur in the corresponding passage of that -edition, it is probable that on this occasion the Ghost appeared -in the ordinary dress of the king, although this is not indicated -in the stage directions of the other quartos or of the -folios."</p></blockquote> - -<p>As a possible solution of this grave difficulty, -we would suggest that, as the Ghost was undoubtedly -in a very hot place, he might have -found his nightgown less oppressive than his -armour, and though it would certainly have been -more decorous to have exchanged his nightgown -for his uniform on revisiting the earth, -yet, as the visit was to his wife, he thought -perhaps less seriously about his apparel than our -editors have done. We have nothing to warrant -us in assuming that he was in his "ordinary -dress." The choice must lie between the nightgown -and the armour. But a truce to jesting.</p> - -<p>If any one would understand the opacity and -callousness which philological study induces, we -would refer them to the note on Hamlet's last -sublime words, "The rest is silence":—</p> - -<blockquote><p>"The quartos have 'Which have solicited, the rest is -silence.' The folios, 'Which have solicited. <a name="Correct4" id="Correct4">The rest is -silence.' 'O, O,</a> O, O. <i>Dyes.</i>' If Hamlet's speech is interrupted -by his death <a name="Correct5" id="Correct5">it would be more natural</a> that the words -'The rest is silence' should be spoken by Horatio."</p></blockquote> - -<p>We said at the beginning of this article that -there was not a word of commentary on the -poetical merits of the play. We beg the editors' -pardon. They have in one note, and in one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91" href="#Page_91">[91]</a></span> -note only, ventured on an expression of critical -opinion. We all know the lines—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"There is a willow grows aslant a brook</div> -<div class="i0">That shows his hoar leaves in the glassy stream,"</div></div></div> - -<p>etc., etc. We transcribe the note on this passage -that it may be a sign to all men of what Philology -is able to effect, an omen and testimony of -what must inevitably be the fate of Literature -if the direction and regulation of its study be -entrusted to philologists:—</p> - -<blockquote><p>"This speech of the Queen is certainly unworthy of its -author and of the occasion. The enumeration of plants is -quite as unsuitable to so tragical a scene as the description -of Dover cliff in <i>King Lear</i> iv. 6. 11-24. Besides there was -no one by to witness the death of Ophelia, else she would -have been rescued."</p></blockquote> - -<p>As this beggars commentary, transcription -shall suffice.</p> - -<p>Now we would ask any sensible person -who has followed us, we do not say in our -own remarks—for they may be supposed to be -the expression of biassed opinion—but in the -specimens we have given of such an edition as -this of <i>Hamlet</i>, and of such an edition as we -have just reviewed of <i>Adonais</i>, what is likely to -be the fate of English Literature, as a subject of -teaching, so long as our Universities ignore their -responsibilities as the centres of culture by not -only countenancing, but assisting in the production -and dissemination of such publications -as these? How can we expect anything but<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92" href="#Page_92">[92]</a></span> -anarchy wherever the subject is treated?—there -an extreme of flaccid dilettantism, here an extreme -of philological pedantry. Conceive the -tone and temper which, especially at the impressionable -age of the students for whom the book -is intended, the study of Shakespeare, under such -guides as the editors of this <i>Hamlet</i>, would be -likely to induce. Is it not monstrous that young -students between the ages of about fifteen and -eighteen should have such text books as these -inflicted on them?</p> - -<p>The radical fault of those who regulate education -in our Universities and elsewhere, and prescribe -our schoolbooks, is their deplorable want -of judgment. They seem to be utterly incapable -of distinguishing between what is proper for -pure specialists and what is proper for ordinary -students. There is not a page in this edition -which does not proclaim aloud, that it could never -have been intended for the purposes to which it -has been applied, that it is the work of technical -scholars, concerned only in textual and philological -criticism and exegesis, and appealing -only to those who approach the study of Shakespeare -in the same spirit and from the same -point of view. Anything more sickening and -depressing, anything more calculated to make the -name of Shakespeare an abomination to the youth -of England it would be impossible for man to -devise. It is shameful to prescribe such books for -study in our Schools and Educational Institutes.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93" href="#Page_93">[93]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_I" id="OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_I"></a>OUR LITERARY GUIDES</h2> - -<h3>I. A SHORT HISTORY OF ENGLISH LITERATURE<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> <i>A Short History of English Literature.</i> By George -Saintsbury, Professor of Rhetoric and English Literature in -the University of Edinburgh.</p></div> - - -<p>This Short History is evidently designed for -the use of serious readers, for the ordinary -reader who will naturally look to it for general -instruction and guidance in the study of English -Literature, and to whom it will serve as a book -of reference; for students in schools and colleges, -to many of whom it will, in all likelihood, be -prescribed as a textbook; for teachers engaged -in lecturing and in preparing pupils for examination. -Of all these readers there will not be one -in a hundred who will not be obliged to take its -statements on trust, to assume that its facts are -correct, that its generalizations are sound, that its -criticisms and critical theories are at any rate not -absurd. It need hardly be said that, under these -circumstances, a writer who had any pretension -to conscientiousness would do his utmost to -avoid all such errors as ordinary diligence could -easily prevent, that he would guard scrupulously -against random assertions and reckless misstatements,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94" href="#Page_94">[94]</a></span> -that he would, in other words, spare no -pains to deserve the confidence placed in him by -those who are not qualified to check his statements -or question his dogmas, and who naturally -suppose that the post which he occupies is a -sufficient guarantee of the soundness and accuracy -of his work. But so far from Professor -Saintsbury having any sense of what is due to -his position and to his readers, he has imported -into his work the worst characteristics of irresponsible -journalism: generalizations, the sole -supports of which are audacious assertions, and -an indifference to exactness and accuracy, as -well with respect to important matters as in -trifles, so scandalous as to be almost incredible.</p> - -<p>Sir Thomas More said of Tyndale's version of -the New Testament that to seek for errors in it -was to look for drops of water in the sea. What -was said very unfairly of Tyndale's work may be -said with literal truth of Professor Saintsbury's. -The utmost extent of the space at our disposal -will only suffice for a few illustrations. We will -select those which appear to us most typical. -In the chapter on Anglo-Saxon literature the -Professor favours us with the astounding statement, -that in Anglo-Saxon poetry "there is -practically no lyric."<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> It is scarcely necessary -to say that not only does Anglo-Saxon poetry<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95" href="#Page_95">[95]</a></span> -abound in lyrics, but that it is in its lyrical note -that its chief power and charm consists. In the -threnody of the <i>Ruin</i>, and the <i>Grave</i>, in the -sentimental pathos of the <i>Seafarer</i>, of <i>Deor's -Complaint</i>, and of the remarkable fragment -describing the husband's pining for his wife, in -the fiery passion of the three great war-songs, -in the glowing subjective intensity of the <i>Judith</i>, -in the religious ecstasy of the <i>Holy Rood</i> and -of innumerable passages in the other poems attributed -to Cynewulf, and of the poem attributed -to Cædmon, deeper and more piercing lyric notes -have never been struck. Take such a passage -as the following from the <i>Satan</i>, typical, it may -be added, of scores of others:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"O thou glory of the Lord! Guardian of Heaven's hosts,</div> -<div class="i0">O thou might of the Creator! O thou mid-circle!</div> -<div class="i0">O thou bright day of splendour! O thou jubilee of God!</div> -<div class="i0">O ye hosts of angels! O thou highest heaven!</div> -<div class="i0">O that I am shut from the everlasting jubilee,</div> -<div class="i0">That I cannot reach my hands again to Heaven,</div> -<div class="i0">... Nor hear with my ears ever again</div> -<div class="i0">The clear-ringing harmony of the heavenly trumpets."<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a></div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96" href="#Page_96">[96]</a></span></div></div> - -<p>And this is a poetry which has "practically no -lyric"! On page 2 the Professor tells us that -there is no rhyme in Anglo-Saxon poetry; on -page 18 we find him giving an account of the -rhyming poem in the <i>Exeter Book</i>. Of Mr. Saintsbury's -method of dealing with particular works -and particular authors, one or two examples -must suffice. He tells us on page 125 that the -heroines in Chaucer's <i>Legend of Good Women</i> -are "the most hapless and blameless of Ovid's -Heroides." It would be interesting to know -what connexion Cleopatra, whose story comes -first, has with Ovid's Heroides, or if the term -"Heroides" be, as it appears to be, (for it is -printed in italics) the title of Ovid's Heroic -Epistles, what connexion four out of the ten -have with Ovid's work. In any case the statement -is partly erroneous and wholly misleading. -In the account given of the Scotch poets, the -Professor, speaking of Douglas' translation of -the <i>Æneid</i>, says, he "does not embroider on his -text." This is an excellent illustration of the -confidence which may be placed in Mr. Saintsbury's -assertions about works on which most -of his readers must take what he says on trust. -Douglas is continually "embroidering on his -text," indeed, he habitually does so. We open -his translation purely at random; we find him -turning <i>Æneid</i> II. 496-499:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Non sic, aggeribus ruptis cum spumeus amnis</div> -<div class="i0">Exiit, oppositasque <a name="Correct6" id="Correct6">evicit gurgite moles</a>,</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97" href="#Page_97">[97]</a></span> -<div class="i0">Fertur in arva furens cumulo, camposque per omnes</div> -<div class="i0">Cum stabulis armenta trahit."</div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><a name="Correct7" id="Correct7">"Not sa fersly</a> the fomy river or flude</div> -<div class="i0">Brekkis over the bankis on spait quhen it is wode.</div> -<div class="i0">And with his brusch and fard of water brown</div> -<div class="i0">The dykys and the schorys betis down,</div> -<div class="i0">Ourspreddand croftis and flattis wyth hys spate</div> -<div class="i0">Our all the feyldis that they may row ane bate</div> -<div class="i0">Quhill houssis and the flokkis flittis away,</div> -<div class="i0">The corne grangis and standard stakkys of hay."</div></div></div> - -<p>We open <i>Æneid</i> IX. 2:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Irim de cœlo misit Saturnia Juno</div> -<div class="i0">Audacem ad Turnum. Luco tum forte parentis</div> -<div class="i0">Pilumni Turnus sacratâ valle sedebat.</div> -<div class="i0">Ad quem sic roseo Thaumantias ore locuta est."</div></div></div> - -<p>We find it turned:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">"Juno that lyst not blyn</div> -<div class="i0">Of hir auld malyce and iniquyte,</div> -<div class="i0">Hir madyn Iris from hevin sendys sche</div> -<div class="i0">To the bald Turnus malapart and stout;</div> -<div class="i0">Quhilk for the tyme was wyth al his rout</div> -<div class="i0">Amyd ane vale wonnder lovn and law,</div> -<div class="i0">Syttand at eys within the hallowit schaw</div> -<div class="i0">Of God Pilumnus his progenitor.</div> -<div class="i0">Thamantis dochter knelys him before,</div> -<div class="i0">I meyn Iris thys ilk fornamyt maide,</div> -<div class="i0">And with hir rosy lippis thus him said."</div></div></div> - -<p>We turn to the end of the tenth <i>Æneid</i> and -we find him introducing six lines which have -nothing to correspond with them in the original. -And this is a translator who "does not embroider -on his text"! It is perfectly plain -that Professor Saintsbury has criticised and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98" href="#Page_98">[98]</a></span> -commented on a work which he could never -have inspected. The same ignorance is displayed -in the account of Lydgate. He is pronounced -to be a versifier rather than a poet, his -verse is described as "sprawling and staggering." -The truth is that Lydgate's style and -verse are often of exquisite beauty, that he was -a poet of fine genius, that his descriptions of -nature almost rival Chaucer's, that his powers -of pathos are of a high order, that, at his best, -he is one of the most musical of poets. We -have not space to illustrate what must be -obvious to any one who has not gone to encyclopædias -and handbooks for his knowledge of -this poet's writings, but who is acquainted with -the original. It will not be disputed that Gray -and Warton were competent judges of these -matters, and their verdict must be substituted -for what we have not space to prove and -illustrate. "I do not pretend," Gray says, "to -set Lydgate on a level with his master Chaucer, -but he certainly comes the nearest to him of -any contemporary writer that I am acquainted -with. His choice of expression and the smoothness -of his verse far surpass both Gower and -Occleve." Of one passage in Lydgate, Gray has -observed that "it has touched the very heart -strings of compassion with so masterly a hand -as to merit a place among the greatest poets."<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> -Warton also notices his "perspicuous and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99" href="#Page_99">[99]</a></span> -musical numbers," and "the harmony, strength, -and dignity" of his verses.<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -<p>Turn where we will we are confronted with -blunders. Take the account given of Shakespeare. -He began his metre, we are told, with -the lumbering "fourteeners." He did, so far -as is known, nothing of the kind. Again: "It -is only by guesses that anything is dated before -the <i>Comedy of Errors</i> at the extreme end of -1594." In answer to this it may be sufficient -to say that <i>Venus and Adonis</i> was published -in 1593, that the first part of <i>Henry VI.</i> was -acted on 3rd March, 1592, that <i>Titus Andronicus</i> -was acted on 25th January, 1594, and -that <i>Lucrece</i> was entered on the Stationers' -books 9th May, 1594. This is on a par with the -assertion, on page 315, that Shakespeare was traditionally -born on 24th April! On page 320 we -are told that <i>Measure for Measure</i> belongs to the -first group of Shakespeare's plays, to the series -beginning with <i>Love's Labour's Lost</i> and culminating -with the <i>Midsummer Night's Dream</i>. It<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100" href="#Page_100">[100]</a></span> -is only fair to say that the Professor places a -note of interrogation after it in a bracket, but -that it should have been placed there, even -tentatively, shows an ignorance of the very -rudiments of Shakespearian criticism which is -nothing short of astounding. Take, again, the -account given of Burke. Our readers will probably -think us jesting when we tell them that -Professor Saintsbury gravely informs us that -Burke supported the American Revolution. Is -the Professor unacquainted with the two finest -speeches which have ever been delivered in any -language since Cicero? Can he possibly be -ignorant that Burke, so far from supporting -that revolution, did all in his power to prevent -it? The whole account of Burke, it may be -added, teems with inaccuracies. The American -Revolution was not brought about under a -Tory administration. What brought that -revolution about was Charles Townshend's tax, -and that tax was imposed under a Whig administration, -as every well-informed Board-school lad -would know. Burke did not lose his seat at -Bristol owing to his support of Roman Catholic -claims. If Professor Saintsbury had turned to -one of the finest of Burke's minor speeches—the -speech addressed to the electors of Bristol—he -would have seen that Burke's support of the -Roman Catholic claims was only one, and that -not the most important, of the causes which cost -him his seat. Similar ignorance is displayed in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101" href="#Page_101">[101]</a></span> -the remark (p. 629) that "Burke joined, and -indeed headed, the crusade against Warren -Hastings, in 1788." The prosecution of Warren -Hastings was undertaken on Burke's sole initiative, -not in 1788, but in 1785. A few lines -onwards we are told that the series of Burke's -writings on the French Revolution "began with -the <i>Reflections</i> in 1790, and was continued in the -<i>Letter to a Noble Lord</i>, <a name="Correct8" id="Correct8">1790."</a> <i>A Letter to a Noble -Lord</i> had nothing to do with the French Revolution, -except collaterally as it affected Burke's -public conduct, and appeared, not in 1790, but -in 1795.</p> - -<p>It seems impossible to open this book anywhere -without alighting on some blunder, or on some -inaccuracy. Speaking (p. 277) of Willoughby's -well-known <i>Avisa</i>, the Professor observes that -nothing is known of Willoughby or of <i>Avisa</i>. -If the Professor had known anything about the -work, he would have known that <i>Avisa</i> is simply -an anagram made up of the initial letters of -<i>Amans</i>, <i>vxor</i>, <i>inviolata semper amanda</i>, and that -nothing is known of Avisa for the simple reason -that nothing is known of the site of More's Utopia. -On page 360 we are told that Phineas Fletcher's -<i>Piscatory Eclogues</i>, which are, of course, confounded -with his <i>Sicelides</i>, are a masque; on page -624, but this is perhaps a printer's error, that -Robertson wrote a history of Charles I. On -page 482, John Pomfret, the author of one of -the most popular poems of the eighteenth century,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102" href="#Page_102">[102]</a></span> -is called Thomas. On page 550, Pope's -<i>Moral Essays</i> are described as <i>An Epistle to -Lord Burlington</i>, presumably because the last -of them, the fourth, is addressed to that nobleman. -On page 587 we are told that Mickle died -in London: he died at Forest Hill, near Oxford. -On page 556 we are informed that Prior was -part author of a parody of the "Hind and -Panther," and that he was "imprisoned for -some years." The work referred to is wrongly -described, as it only contained parodies of certain -passages in Dryden's poem, and he was in confinement -less than two years. On page 358, -Brutus, the legendary founder of Britain, is -actually described as the son of Æneas. If Professor -Saintsbury were as familiar as he affects -to be with Geoffrey of Monmouth, with Layamon -and with the early metrical romances, he would -have known that Brutus is fabled to have been -the son of Sylvius, the son of Ascanius, and, consequently, -the great-grandson of Æneas. Many -of the Professor's critical remarks can only be -explained on the supposition that he assumes -that his readers will not take the trouble to -verify his references or question his dogmas. -We will give one or two instances. On page -468, speaking of seventeenth-century prose, he -says, with reference to Milton: "The close of the -<i>Apology</i> itself is a very little, though only a very -little, inferior to the <i>Hydriotaphia</i>." By the -<i>Apology</i> he can only mean the <i>Apology for Smectymnuus</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103" href="#Page_103">[103]</a></span> -for the defence of the English -people is in Latin. Now, will our readers credit -that one of the flattest, clumsiest and most -commonplace passages in Milton's prose writings, -as any one may see who turns to it, is -pronounced "only a little inferior" to one of -the most majestically eloquent passages in our -prose literature. That our readers may know -what Professor Saintsbury's notions of eloquence -are, we will transcribe the passage:</p> - -<blockquote><p>"Thus ye have heard, readers, how many shifts and wiles -the prelates have invented to save their ill-got booty. And if it -be true, as in Scripture it is foretold, that pride and covetousness -are the sure marks of those false prophets which are to -come, then boldly conclude these to be as great seducers as -any of the latter times. For between this and the judgment day -do not look for any arch deceivers who, in spite of reformation, -will use more craft or less shame to defend their love of -the world and their ambition than these prelates have done. -And if ye think that soundness of reason or what force of -argument so ever shall bring them to an ingenuous silence, -ye think that which shall never be. But if ye take that -course which Erasmus was wont to say Luther took against -the pope and monks: if ye denounce war against their -riches and their bellies, ye shall soon discern that turban of -pride which they wear upon their heads to be no helmet of -salvation, but the mere metal and hornwork of papal jurisdiction; -and that they have also this gift, like a certain kind -of some that are possessed, to have their voice in their bellies, -which, being well drained and taken down, their great oracle, -which is only there, will soon be dumb, and the divine -right of episcopacy forthwith expiring will put us no more -to trouble with tedious antiquities and disputes."</p></blockquote> - -<p>And this is "a very little, only a very little, -inferior," to the "Hydriotaphia"!<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104" href="#Page_104">[104]</a></span></p> - -<p>On page 652, Swift's style, that perfection of -simple, unadorned <i>sermo pedestris</i>—is described -as marked by "volcanic magnificence." On -page 300 Hooker is described as "having an -unnecessary fear of vivid and vernacular expression." -Vivid and vernacular expression is, -next to its stateliness, the distinguishing characteristic -of Hooker's style. It would be interesting -to know what is meant by the remark -on page 445 that Barrow's style is "less -severe than South's." Another example of the -same thing is the assertion on page 517 that -Joseph Glanville is one of "the chief exponents -of the gorgeous style in the seventeenth -century." Very 'gorgeous' the style -of the <i>Vanity of Dogmatizing</i>, of its later -edition the <i>Scepsis Scientifica</i>, of the <i>Sadducismus -Triumphatus</i>, of the <i>Lux Orientalis</i>, and of -the Essays!</p> - -<p>Indeed, the Professor's critical dicta are as -amazing as his facts. We have only space for -one or two samples. Cowley's <i>Anacreontics</i> are -"not very far below Milton"(!) Dr. Donne was -"the most gifted man of letters next to Shakespeare." -Where Bacon, where Ben Jonson, -where Milton are to stand is not indicated. -Akenside's stilted and frigid <i>Odes</i> "fall not so -far short of Collins." We wonder what Mr. -Saintsbury's criterion of poetry can be. But we -forget, with that criterion he has furnished us. -On page 732, speaking of "a story about a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105" href="#Page_105">[105]</a></span> -hearer who knew no English, but knew Tennyson -to be a poet by the hearing," he adds that -"the story is probable and valuable, or rather -invaluable, for it points to the best if not the -only criterion of poetry." And this is a critic! -We would exhort the Professor to ponder well -Pope's lines:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"But most by numbers judge a poet's song,</div> -<div class="i2" style="letter-spacing:3em;">*****</div> -<div class="i0">In the bright muse, tho' thousand charms conspire,</div> -<div class="i0">Her voice is all these tuneful fools admire,</div> -<div class="i0">Who haunt Parnassus but to please their ear."</div></div></div> - -<p>On page 734 we are told Browning's <i>James -Lee</i>—the Professor probably means <i>James Lee's -Wife</i>—is amongst "the greatest poems of the -century." On Wordsworth's line, judged not in -relation to its context, but as a single verse—"Our -birth is but a sleep and a forgetting"—we -have the following as commentary: "Even -Shakespeare, even Shelley have little more of the -echoing detonation, the auroral light of true -poetry"; very "echoing," very "detonating"—the -rhythm of "Our birth is but a sleep and a -forgetting." Mr. Saintsbury's notions of what -constitutes detonation and auroral light in -poetry appear to resemble his notions of what -constitutes eloquence in prose. Nothing, we may -add in passing, is more amusing in this volume -than Mr. Saintsbury's cool assumption of equality -as a critical authority with such a critic as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106" href="#Page_106">[106]</a></span> -Matthew Arnold, whom he sometimes patronises, -sometimes corrects, and sometimes assails. The -Professor does not show to advantage on these -occasions, and he leaves us with the impression -that if "Mr. Arnold's criticism is piecemeal, -arbitrary, fantastic, and insane," the criticism -which appears, where it is not mere nonsense, -to take its touchstones, its standards, and its -canons from those of the average Philistine is, -after all, a very poor substitute. But enough -of Mr. Saintsbury's "criticism," which is, almost -uniformly, as absurd in what it praises as in -what it censures.</p> - -<p>The style, or, to borrow an expression from -Swift, what the poverty of our language compels -us to call the style, in which this book is -written, is on a par with its criticism. We will -give a few examples. "It is a proof of the -greatness of Dryden that he knew Milton for -a poet; it is a proof of the smallness (and -mighty as he was on some sides, on others he -was very small) of Milton that (if he really did -so) he denied poetry to Dryden."<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> "What the -<i>Voyage and Travaile</i> really is, is this—it is, so -far as we know, and even beyond our knowledge -in all probability and likelihood, the first -considerable example of prose in English dealing -neither with the beaten track of theology -and philosophy, nor with the, even in the -Middle Ages, restricted field of history and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107" href="#Page_107">[107]</a></span> -home topography, but expatiating freely on -unguarded plains and on untrodden hills, sometimes -dropping into actual prose romance and -always treating its subject as the poets had -treated theirs in <i>Brut</i> and <i>Mort d'Arthur</i>, in -<i>Troy-book</i> and <i>Alexandreid</i>, as a mere canvas -on which to embroider flowers of fancy."<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> -Again, "With Anglo-Saxon history he deals -slightly, and despite his ardent English patriotism—his -book opens with a vigorous panegyric -of England, the first of a series extending to -the present day (from which an anthology <i>De -Laudibus Angliæ</i> might be made)—he deals -very harshly with Harold Godwinson."<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> "He -had a fit of stiff Odes in the Gray and Collins -manner." "<i>The Hind and Panther</i> (the greatest -poem ever written in the <a name="Correct9" id="Correct9">teeth of its subject)". -"His voluminous</a> Latin works have been -<i>tackled</i> by a special Wyclif Society." These -are a few of the gems in which every chapter -abounds.</p> - -<p>Of Professor Saintsbury's indifference to exactness -and accuracy in details and facts we -need go no further for illustrations than to his -dates. Such things cannot be regarded as trifles -in a book designed to be a book of reference. -We will give a few instances. We are informed -on page 238 that Ascham's <i>Schoolmaster</i> was -published in 1568; it was published, as its title-page -shows, in 1570. Hume's <i>Dissertations</i> were<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108" href="#Page_108">[108]</a></span> -first published, not in 1762, but in 1757. Bale's -flight to Germany was not in 1547, when such a -step would have been unnecessary, but in 1540. -Pecock was, we are told, translated to Chichester -in 1550, exactly ninety years after his death! -As if to perplex the readers of this book, two -series of dates are given; we have the dates in -the narrative and the dates in the index, and no -attempt is made to reconcile the discrepancies. -Accordingly we find in the narrative that -Caxton was probably born in 1415—in the index -that he was born in 1422; in the narrative that -Latimer, Fisher, Gascoign and Atterbury were -born respectively in 1489, in 1465, about 1537 -and in 1672—in the index that they were born -respectively in 1485, 1459, 1525 and 1662; in -the narrative Gay was born in 1688—in the -index he was born in 1685. In the narrative -Collins dies in 1756, and Mrs. Browning is born -in 1806—in the index Collins dies in 1759, and -Mrs. Browning is born in 1809. The narrative -tells us that Aubrey was born in 1626, and John -Dyer <i>circa</i> 1688—in the index that Aubrey was -born in 1624 and Dyer <i>circa</i> 1700. In the index -Mark Pattison dies in 1884—in the narrative he -dies in 1889. In Professor Saintsbury's eyes -such indifference to accuracy may be venial: in -our opinion it is nothing less than scandalous. -It is assuredly most unfair to those who will -naturally expect to find in a book of reference -trustworthy information.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109" href="#Page_109">[109]</a></span></p> - -<p>We must now conclude, though we have very -far from exhausted the list of errors and misstatements, -of absurdities in criticism and -absurdities in theory, which we have noted. -Bacon has observed that the best part of beauty -is that which a picture cannot express. It may -be said, with equal truth, of a bad book, that -what is worst in it is precisely that which it is -most difficult to submit to tangible tests. In -other words, it lies not so much in its errors -and inaccuracies, which, after all, may be mere -trifles and excrescences, but it lies in its tone -and colour, its flavour, its accent. Professor -Saintsbury appears to be constitutionally incapable -of distinguishing vulgarity and coarseness -from liveliness and vigour. So far from -having any pretension to the finer qualities of -the critic, he seems to take a boisterous pride in -exhibiting his grossness.</p> - -<p>If our review of this book shall seem unduly -harsh, we are sorry, but a more exasperating -writer than Professor Saintsbury, with his indifference -to all that should be dear to a scholar, -the mingled coarseness, triviality and dogmatism -of his tone, the audacious nonsense of his generalisations, -and the offensive vulgarity of his -diction and style—a very well of English defiled—we -have never had the misfortune to meet -with. Turn where we will in this work, to the -opinions expressed in it, to the sentiments, to the -verdicts, to the style, the note is the same,—the -note of the <i>Das Gemeine</i>.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> Page 37.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a></p> -<div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Eá lâ drihtenes þrym! eá lâ duguða helm!</div> -<div class="i0">eá lâ meotodes miht! eá lâ middaneard!</div> -<div class="i0">eá lâ däg leóhta! eá lâ dreám godes!</div> -<div class="i0">eá lâ engla þreát! eá lâ upheofon!</div> -<div class="i0">eá lâ þät ic eam ealles leás êcan dreámes,</div> -<div class="i0">þät ic mid handum ne mäg heofon geræcan</div> -<div class="i0">ne mid eágum ne môt up lôcian</div> -<div class="i0">ne hûru mid eárum ne sceal æfre gehêran</div> -<div class="i0">þære byrhtestan bêman stefne.</div> -<div class="i6">—<i>Satan.</i> edit. Grein, 164-172.</div></div></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> <i>Some Remarks on Lydgate.</i> Gray, Aldine Ed. v. 292-321.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> That Lydgate's verse should occasionally be rough and -halting is partly to be attributed to the wretched state in -which his text has come down to us from the copyists, and -partly to the arbitrary way in which he varies the accent. -His heroic couplets in the <i>Storie of Thebes</i> are certainly -very unmusical. For the whole question of his versification -see Dr. Schick, Introduction to his edition of <i>The Temple of -Glas</i>, pp. liv.-lxiii., and Schipper, <i>Altenglische Metrik</i>, 492-500. -But neither of these scholars does justice to the exquisite -music of his verse at its best.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> Page 474.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> Page 150.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> Page 63.</p></div> -</div> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110" href="#Page_110">[110]</a></span></p> -<h2><a name="OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_II" id="OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_II"></a>OUR LITERARY GUIDES</h2> - -<h3>II. A SHORT HISTORY OF MODERN ENGLISH LITERATURE<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a></h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> <i>A Short History of Modern English Literature.</i> By -Edmund Gosse. London, 1898.</p></div> - - -<p>The author of this work has plainly not -pondered the advice of Horace, "Sumite -materiam vestris, qui scribitis, æquam viribus." -His ambitious purpose is "to give the reader, -whether familiar with books or not, a feeling of -the evolution of English Literature in the primary -sense of the term," and he adds that "to do this -without relation to particular authors and particular -works seems to me impossible." This -may be conceded; for, a feeling of the evolution -of English or of any other literature, without -reference to particular authors and particular -books, would be analogous to the capacity for -feeling without anything to feel. But, unfortunately, -those of Mr. Gosse's readers who wish -to have the feeling to which he refers will -merely find the conditions without which, as he -so justly observes, the said feeling is impossible.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111" href="#Page_111">[111]</a></span> -In other words, references, in the form of loose -and desultory gossip, to particular authors and -particular works chronologically arranged, are -all that represent the "evolution" of which he -is so anxious "to give a feeling."</p> - -<p>Described simply, the work is an ordinary -manual of English Literature in which, with -Mr. Humphry Ward's <i>English Poets</i>, Sir Henry -Craik's <i>English Prose Writers</i>, Chambers' <i>Cyclopædia -of English Literature</i>, the <i>Dictionary of -National Biography</i>, and the like before him, -the writer tells again the not unfamiliar story -of the course of our Literature from Chaucer -to the present time. But Mr. Gosse is no -mere compiler, and brings to his task certain -qualifications of his own, a vague and inaccurate -but extensive knowledge of our seventeenth, -eighteenth and nineteenth century Belles -Lettres; and here, as a rule, he can acquit himself -creditably. Though far from a sound, he -is a sympathetic critic; he has an agreeable -but somewhat affected style, and can gossip -pleasantly and plausibly about subjects which -are within the range indicated. But at this -point, as is painfully apparent, his qualifications -for being an historian and critic of English -Literature end. The moment he steps out of -this area he is at the mercy of his handbooks; -so completely at their mercy that he does not -even know how to use them. And it is here -that Mr. Gosse becomes so irritating, partly because<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112" href="#Page_112">[112]</a></span> -of the sheer audacity with which mere -inferences are substituted for facts and simple -assumptions for deduced generalizations, and -partly because of the habitual employment of -phraseology so vague and indeterminate that -it is difficult to submit what it conveys to positive -test. These are serious charges to bring -against any writer; and if they cannot be abundantly -substantiated, a still more serious charge -may justly be urged against the accuser.</p> - -<p>To turn to the work. On page 85 Mr. Gosse -favours us with the following account of the -<i>Faerie Queene</i>: "A certain grandeur which sustains -the three great Cantos of Truth, Temperance, -and Chastity fades away as we proceed.... -The structure of it is loose and incoherent -when we compare it with the epic grandeur -of the masterpieces of Ariosto and Tasso." It -would be difficult to match this; every word -which is not a blunder is an absurdity. Where -are "the three great Cantos"? Can Mr. Gosse -possibly be ignorant that the poem is divided -into books, each book containing twelve Cantos? -Assuming, however, that he has confounded -books with Cantos, where is the great book -dealing with 'Truth'? As he places it before -'Temperance,' we presume that he means the -first book and that he has confounded 'Truth' -with 'Holiness.' This is pretty well, to begin -with. Where, we next ask in amazement, -is the 'grandeur' which sustains the prolix -farrago of the third book, and which 'fades<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113" href="#Page_113">[113]</a></span> -away' as we proceed to the only book which -almost rivals the first and second, the fifth, -and the sublimest portion of the whole work, -the superb Cantos which represent all that -remains of the seventh? What, we gasp, is -the meaning of the 'epic grandeur' of Ariosto? -and "the loose and incoherent structure" of the -<i>Faerie Queene</i> when compared with that of the -<i>Orlando Furioso</i>? Could any poem be more -loose and incoherent in structure than the -<i>Orlando</i>, or any term be less appropriate to -its tone and style than 'grandeur'? On page -80 he actually tells us that Fox's well-known -<i>Book of Martyrs</i> was written in Latin and translated -by John Day, and that it is John Day's -translation of the Latin original which represents -that work, confounding Fox's <i>Commentarii -Rerum in Ecclesiâ gestarum</i>, etc., printed -at Basil with the <i>Acts and Monuments of the -Church</i>, and making John Day, the publisher of -it, the translator of it into English! And this is -his account of one of the most celebrated works -in our language. Of Swift's <i>Sentiments of a -Church of England Man</i>, we have the following -account: "That such a tract as the <i>Sentiments -of a Church of England Man</i>, with its gusts of -irony, its white heat of preposterous moderation, -led on towards Junius is obvious." This is an -excellent example of the confidence which may -be placed in Mr. Gosse's assertions. Of this -pamphlet, it may be sufficient to say that there<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114" href="#Page_114">[114]</a></span> -is not a single touch of irony or satire in it; that -it stands almost alone among Swift's tracts for -its perfectly temperate and logical tone; it is a -calm appeal to pure reason. There is the same -audacity of assertion in classing Feltham's -<i>Resolves</i> with Hall's and Overbury's Character -Sketches, and Earle's <i>Microcosmogonie</i> as "a -typical example" of "a curious school of comic -or ironic portraiture, partly ethical and partly -dramatic." In 1625, we are told that Bacon -completed the <i>Sylva Sylvarum</i>. If Mr. Gosse -knew anything of Bacon's philosophical writings, -he would have known that the <i>Sylva Sylvarum</i> -never was and never could have been completed, -for it was in itself a fragment—a mere collection -of materials to be incorporated in the <i>Phœnomena -Universi</i>, a work which was to have been six -times larger than Pliny's <i>Natural History</i>. In -giving an account of Tillotson, he speaks of -"the serene and insinuating periods" of the elegant -latitudinarian who "was assiduous in saying -what he had to say in the most graceful and -intelligible manner possible." A more perfect -description of the very opposite of Tillotson's -style could hardly be given. Those who are -acquainted with Fuller's writings will be equally -surprised to find him classed with Jeremy -Taylor and Henry More, and to learn that his -style is 'florid and involved,' distinguished by -its 'long-windedness' and 'exuberance.' Has Mr. -Gosse no apprehension of his readers turning to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115" href="#Page_115">[115]</a></span> -the originals and testing his statements? We -have another of these bold assertions in the -account of Lydgate, derived, we suspect, from -a hasty generalization from a remark made -about him in Mr. Ward's <i>British Poets</i>. "Lydgate," -says Mr. Gosse, "had a most defective -ear; his verses are not to be scanned. His -ear was bad and tuneless." Any one who has -read Lydgate knows that, if we except his -heroic couplets, a more musical poet is not to -be found in the fifteenth century, or, indeed, -in our language; the softness and smoothness -of his verse, wherever he writes in stanzas, -as he generally does, is indeed his chief characteristic. -These remarks are minor illustrations -of an accomplishment in which Mr. Gosse -has no rival.</p> - -<p>The Euphuists of the sixteenth century drew, -for purposes of simile and illustration, on a -fabulous natural history which assumed the existence -of certain animals, herbs, and minerals, -and of certain properties and qualities possessed -by them. This gave great point and picturesqueness -to their style, and though it was certainly -misleading and occasionally perplexing -to those who went to them for natural history, -it had a most charming and imposing effect. -Mr. Gosse seems to have imported a similar -fiction into criticism. Of this we have a most -amusing illustration on page 155. Speaking<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116" href="#Page_116">[116]</a></span> -of Herrick Mr. Gosse remarks, "In the midst -of these extravagances, like Meleager winding -his <i>pure white violets</i>"—the Italics are ours—"into -the <i>gaudy garland of late Greek Euphuism</i>, -we find Robert Herrick." Meleager's -Anthology is not extant, but the dedication -is, and from that dedication we know exactly -from what poets it was compiled. It ranged -from about <span class="smcap">B.C.</span> 700 till towards the close of -the Alexandrian Age, for, with the exception -of Antipater of Sidon, it is very doubtful -whether he inserted any epigrams by his contemporaries, -but he admitted a hundred and -thirty-one of his own. In other words his -collection comprised epigrams composed by the -masters preceding the Alexandrian Age from -Archilochus downwards, and by those who, -during that age and afterwards, cultivated -with scrupulous care the simplicity and purity -of the early models. Indeed, the poets represented -in his Anthology are, with one exception, -the artists of Greek epigram in its -purest, simplest, and chastest form. That one -exception is himself. In him are first apparent -the <i>dulcia vitia</i> of the Decadence; he -is full of dainty subtleties, he is almost more -Oriental than Greek, his style is luscious, elaborate -and florid. Such, then, was the composition -of "the gaudy garland of late Greek -Euphuism," and such the nature of the "pure<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117" href="#Page_117">[117]</a></span> -white violets" wound into it by Meleager. It -is amusing to trace Mr. Gosse's rodomontade -to its source. In the well-known dedication -to which we have referred, Meleager prettily -compares the various poets, from whose works -he selects, to flowers, speaking modestly of -his own contributions as "early white violets." -To critics like Mr. Gosse the rest is easy. -Meleager, he no doubt argued, was an excellent -poet; he belonged to a late age: 'Euphuism'—a -delightfully vague term, is likely -to characterise a late age; a poet who compares -his verses to white violets had evidently -a taste for simplicity, and presumably, therefore, -was no Euphuist; a gaudy garland is an -excellent set off for pure white violets. And -so, to the great perplexity of scholars, but to -the great satisfaction of those who enjoy a -pretty sentence, Meleager will continue "to -wind his pure white violets into the gaudy -garland of late Greek Euphuism."</p> - -<p>We have a similar illustration of the same -thing in Mr. Gosse's account of Shaftesbury. -We are told that he "was perhaps the greatest -literary force between Dryden and Swift"; -that "he deserves remembrance as the first -who really broke down the barrier which excluded -England from taking her proper place -in the civilization of literary Europe"; that "he -set an example for the kind of prose which was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118" href="#Page_118">[118]</a></span> -to mark the central years of the century"; -that "his style glitters and rings, and ... -yet so curious that one marvels that it should -have fallen completely into neglect"; that -"he was the first Englishman who developed -theories of formal virtue, who attempted to -harmonize the beautiful with the true and -the good"; that the modern attitude of mind -seems to meet us first in the graceful cosmopolitan -writings of Shaftesbury; that "without -a Shaftesbury there would hardly have been a -Ruskin or a Pater." Such amazing nonsense -almost confounds refutation by its sheer absurdity.</p> - -<p>With regard to the first statement, it may -be sufficient to say that between the period -of Dryden's literary activity and the publication -of Swift's <i>Battle of the Books</i> and <i>Tale -of a Tub</i> were flourishing Hobbes, Izaak Walton, -Bunyan, Temple, and Locke; that between -the publication of the <i>Tale of a Tub</i> and of -Shaftesbury's collected writings were flourishing -Addison, Steele, De Foe, Arbuthnot, Berkeley. -With regard to the second statement, it would -be interesting to know how a writer who had -been preceded by Bacon, Hobbes and Locke, -could be described as a writer who had been the -first "to break down the barrier which excluded -England from taking her proper place in the -civilization of literary Europe." The truth is, -that Shaftesbury exercised no influence at all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119" href="#Page_119">[119]</a></span> -on Continental Literature until long after our -Literature had generally become influential in -France. Equally absurd and baseless is the -remark that he "set an example of the kind -of prose that was to mark the central years -of the century." Whose prose was affected by -him? Bolingbroke's? or Fielding's? or Richardson's? -or Middleton's? or Johnson's? or Goldsmith's? -or Hume's? or Hawkesworth's? or -Sterne's? or Smollett's? or Chesterfield's? that of -the writers in the <i>Monthly Review</i>? or in the -<i>Adventurer</i>? or in the <i>World</i>? or in the <i>Connoisseur</i>? -To say of Shaftesbury's style that "it glitters -and rings," is to say what betrays utter -ignorance of its characteristics. As a rule, it is -diffuse, involved, and cumbrous, affected, but with -an affectation which sedulously aims at the very -opposite effects of "glittering and ringing." -When he is eloquent, as in the <i>Moralists</i>, he imitates -the style of Plato; his vice is florid verbosity; -it may be doubted whether a single sentence -could be found to which Mr. Gosse's description -would be applicable. If, it may be added, his style -had "fallen completely into neglect," it is somewhat -surprising that "he should set an example -for the kind of prose which was to mark the central -years of the century." When we are told -that he was "the first Englishman who attempted -to harmonize the beautiful with the true and the -good," we ask in amazement whether Mr. Gosse -has ever inspected the <i>Hymns</i> of Spenser and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120" href="#Page_120">[120]</a></span> -the writings of the Cambridge Platonists; and -when he tells us that without a Shaftesbury -there would hardly have been a Ruskin or a -Pater, we would suggest to him that both -Ruskin and Pater were perhaps not ignorant of -the Platonic Dialogues. In the account given -of Spenser, a poem is attributed to him which -he never wrote. "In one of his early pieces, -<i>The Oak and The Briar</i>, went far," etc., the oak -and the briar is simply an episode in the second -eclogue of the <i>Shepherd's Calendar</i>. Mr. Gosse, -probably finding it quoted in some book of selections, -has jumped to the conclusion that it is a -separate poem. Of Mr. Gosse's qualifications for -dealing with Spenser, we have, by the way, an -excellent example in the following remark: -"Spenser, although he boasted of his classical -acquirements, was singularly little affected by -Greek or even Latin ideas." Spenser's <i>Hymns</i> in -honour of Love and in Honour of Beauty are -simply saturated with Platonism, being indeed -directly derived from the <i>Phædrus</i> and the -<i>Symposium</i>, numberless passages from which -are interwoven with the poems. The whole -scheme of the <i>Faerie Queene</i> was suggested by, -and based on, Aristotle's <i>Ethics</i> with elaborate -particularity, Arthur, in his relation to the -several knights, corresponding to the virtue -<ins title="megalopsychia">μεγαλοψυχια</ins> in its relation to the other virtues. -The conclusion of the tenth canto of the first -book is simply an allegorical presentation of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121" href="#Page_121">[121]</a></span> -relation of the <ins title="bios theôrêtikos">βιος θεωρητικος</ins> to practical life. -The "Castle of Medina" in the second book is a -minutely technical exposition of the Aristotelian -doctrine of the mean, modified by the Platonic -theory of morals: the three mothers being the -<ins title="logistikê">λογιστικη</ins>, the <ins title="epithymêtikê">επιθυμητικη</ins>, and <ins title="thymêtikê">θυμητικη</ins>, the three -daughters, Elissa, Perissa, and Medina, being -respectively the Aristotelian <ins title="elleipsis">ελλειψις</ins>, the -<ins title="hyperbolê">ὑπερβολη</ins> and the <ins title="mesotês">μεσοτης</ins>. In fact, the whole -passage is simply an allegory of the Aristotelian -doctrine of the mean. The whole of the ninth -canto of the second book is founded on the famous -passage in the <i>Timæus</i> describing the anatomy of -man. In truth the poem teems with references -to Plato and Aristotle, and with passages imitated -from the Greek poets, as every scholar knows. -And this is a poet "singularly little affected by -Greek ideas!"</p> - -<p>The same astonishing ignorance is displayed -in a remark about Milton. We are told that -in his youth he was "slightly subjected to influence -from Spenser." If Mr. Gosse had any -adequate acquaintance with Milton and Spenser, -he would have known that Spenser was to -Milton almost what Homer was to Virgil, that -Spenser's influence simply pervades his poems, -not his youthful poems only, but <i>Paradise -Lost</i> and even <i>Paradise Regained</i>. On page 194 -we find this sentence: "From 1660 onwards -... what France originally, and then England, -chose was the <i>imitatio veterum</i>, the Literature<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122" href="#Page_122">[122]</a></span> -in prose and verse which seemed most closely -to copy the models of Latin style. Aristotle -and Horace were taken, not merely as patterns, -but as arbiters." It would be very interesting to -know what English author took Aristotle as a -pattern for style. Is Mr. Gosse acquainted with -the characteristics of Aristotle's style? Should -he ever become so, he will probably have some -sense of the immeasurable absurdity of asserting -that our prose writers from 1660 onwards took -that style for their model. On a par with this is -the assertion that up to 1605 Bacon had mainly -issued his works in "Ciceronian Latin." Is -Mr. Gosse aware of the meaning of "Ciceronian -Latin"? Very "Ciceronian" indeed is Bacon's -Latinity, and particularly that of the <i>Meditationes -Sacræ</i>, the only work published in Latin -by Bacon up to 1605! It is scarcely necessary -to say, in passing, that such works as Bacon -had published up to 1605 were, with the one -exception referred to, all in English. Nothing, -it may be added, is so annoying in this -book as its slushy dilettantism. Mr. Gosse -appears to be incapable of accuracy and precision. -Thus he tells us that Chaucer's expedition -to Italy in 1372 was "the first of several -Italian expeditions." Chaucer, so far as is -known, visited Italy, after this, exactly once. -Again, he tells us that the <i>Complaint of Mars</i> -and the <i>Parliament of Fowls</i> are interesting as -showing that Chaucer had completely abandoned<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123" href="#Page_123">[123]</a></span> -his imitation of French models. Chaucer wrote -several poems in the pure French style, and -based on French models, after the date of these -poems. Such would be the Rondel <i>Merciless -Beauty</i> suggested by Williamme d'Amiens, the -<i>Compleynt of Venus</i>, partly adapted and partly -translated from three Ballades by Sir Otes de -Graunson, and the <i>Compleynt to his Empty -Purse</i>, modelled on a Ballade by Eustache Deschamps, -while French influence continued to -modify his work throughout. On page 238 we -are told that Thomson revived the Spenserian -stanza; it had been revived by Pope, Prior, -Shenstone, and Akenside. On page 151 we -are informed that the first instalment of Clarendon's -History remained unprinted till 1752, -and the rest of it till 1759. If Mr. Gosse knew -anything about one of the most remarkable -controversies of the eighteenth century, he -would have known that the greater part of -it was printed and published between 1702 and -1704, and frequently reprinted between 1704 -and 1731.</p> - -<p>There is not a chapter in the book which -does not teem with errors. Trissino's <i>Sofonisba</i> -was not the only work in which blank verse -had attained any prominence in Italy about -1515; it had been employed in works equally -prominent, by Rucellai in his <i>Rosmunda</i>, and -in his <i>Oreste</i>, as well as in his didactic poem -<i>L'Api</i>, and by Alamanni in his <i>Antigone</i>, all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124" href="#Page_124">[124]</a></span> -of which were composed within a few years -of that date. On page 120 we are told that -Davies was the first to employ, on a long flight, -the heroic quatrain; it had been employed by -Spenser in a poem extending to nearly a -thousand lines. Nor was Surrey's essay in -<i>terza rima</i> "the earliest in the language." -Chaucer made the same experiment, though a -little irregularly, in the <i>Compleynt to his Lady</i>. -We are told on page 79 that Gascoigne was -"the first translator of Greek tragedy." Gascoigne -never translated a line from the Greek. -His <i>Jocasta</i>, to which presumably the reference -is made, is simply an adaptation of Ludovico -Dolce's <i>Giocasta</i>. On page 25 we are informed -that "Gower's French verse has mainly disappeared." -Gower is not known to have written -anything in French except the <i>Ballades</i> -and the <i>Speculum Meditantis</i>, both of which -are extant, as it is inexcusable in any historian -of English Literature not to know. -The account given on page 25 of the <i>Confessio -Amantis</i> shows that Mr. Gosse is very imperfectly -acquainted with what he so fluently -criticises, or he would have been aware that -the seventh book is purely episodical and has -nothing whatever to do with "The lover's -symptoms and experience." In the account -of Pope we are informed that "Boileau discouraged -love poetry and Pope did not seriously<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125" href="#Page_125">[125]</a></span> -attempt it." Pope is the author of the most -famous love poem in the eighteenth century, -<i>Eloisa to Abelard</i>, to say nothing of the <i>Elegy -to an Unfortunate Lady</i>, of the beautiful -hymn to Love in the second chorus in the -tragedy of <i>Brutus</i>, and the exquisite fragment -supposed to have been addressed to Lady Mary -Wortley Montagu. "The satires of Pope," he -continues, "would not have been written but for -those of his French predecessor." Can Mr. Gosse -possibly be ignorant that the satires of Pope -are modelled on the Satires and Epistles of -Horace, that they owe absolutely nothing to -Boileau, not even the hint for applying Roman -satire to modern times, as he had precedents -in his own countrymen Dryden and Rochester?</p> - -<p>Mr. Gosse's criticism is often very amusing, -as here, speaking of Gibbon: "Perhaps he -leaned on the strength of his style too much, -and <i>sacrificed the abstract to the concrete</i>." Of all -historians who have ever lived, Gibbon is the -most "abstract" and has most sacrificed the -"concrete" to the "abstract," as every student -of history knows. On a par with this is the -prodigious statement (p. 291) that there is "an -absence of emotional imagination" in Burke! -That excellent man, Mr. Pecksniff, was, we are -told, in the habit of using any word that -occurred to him as having a fine sound and -rounding a sentence well, without much care -for its meaning; "and this," says his biographer<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126" href="#Page_126">[126]</a></span> -"he did so boldly and in such an imposing -manner that he would sometimes stagger the -wisest people and make them gasp again." -This is precisely Mr. Gosse's method. About -the propriety of his epithets and statements, so -long as they sound well, he never troubles himself; -sometimes they are so vague as to mean -anything, as often they have no meaning at all, -as here: "His [that is Shelley's] style, carefully -considered, is seen to rest on a basis built about -1760, from which it is every moment springing -and sparkling, like a fountain, in columns of -ebullient lyricism." Could pure nonsense go -further? We have another illustration of the -same audacity of absurd assertion on page 260. -We are there informed—Mr. Gosse is speaking -of our prose literature about the centre of the -eighteenth century—that "Philosophy by this -time had become detached from <i>belles lettres</i>; -it was now quite indifferent to those who practised -it, whether their sentences were harmonious -or no.... Philosophy in fact quitted literature." -If there was any period in our prose -literature when philosophy was in the closest -alliance with belles lettres, and was most -studious of the graces of style, it was between -about 1750 and 1771. In those years appeared -Hutcheson's <i>System of Moral Philosophy</i>, Adam -Smith's <i>Theory of Moral Sentiments</i>, one of -the most eloquent philosophical treatises ever -written, Burke's <i>Treatise on the Sublime and -Beautiful</i>, Reid's <i>Inquiry into the Human Mind</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127" href="#Page_127">[127]</a></span> -Tucker's <i>Light of Nature Pursued</i>, Beattie's -<i>Essay on Truth</i>, to say nothing of Hume's -<i>Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals</i>, -his <i>Political Discourses</i>, and his <i>Natural History -of Religion</i>, all of them works pre-eminently -distinguished by the graces of style, while so -far from philosophy quitting belles lettres, it -was during these years that the foundations of -philosophical criticism were laid by Burke, -Harris, Hurd, Kames, and others. Mr. Gosse -appears to have forgotten that he had himself -told us (p. 205) that Shaftesbury's style set the -example of the prose which was to mark the -central years of the century! Thus again Burton's -<i>Anatomy of Melancholy</i> is "an entertaining -neurotic compendium"; Bacon's <i>Essays</i> are -"often mere notations ... enlarged in -many cases merely to receive the impressions -of a Machiavellian ingenuity." Shelley's <i>Triumph -of Life</i> is "a noble but vague gnomic poem, in -which Petrarch's Trionfi are summed up and -sometimes excelled." Keats' "great odes are -Titanic and Titianic." On page 284 we are informed -that for fifteen years after the close of -1800 "poetry may be said to have been stationary -in England." When we remember that within -these years appeared the best of Wordsworth's -poems, the best of Coleridge's, the best of Scott's, -the best of Crabbe's, the first two cantos of -<i>Childe Harold</i>, the best of Campbell's, the best<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128" href="#Page_128">[128]</a></span> -of Moore's, and of Southey's—we wonder what -can be meant, till we read on to find that it was -"on the contrary extremely active." But "its -activity took the form of the gradual acceptance -of the new romantic ideas, the slow expulsion -of the old classic taste, and the multiplication -of examples of what had once for all been -supremely accomplished in the hollows of the -Quantocks." In other words, its activity took the -form of its activity, and its activity led to its -becoming stationary. Mr. Gosse is sometimes -solemnly oracular, as here: "It is a sentimental -error to suppose that the winds of God blow -only through the green tree; it is sometimes -the dry tree which is peculiarly favourable to -their passage." It is not sometimes, we submit, -but always that the dry tree will be most propitious -to their passage. But we like Mr. Gosse -best when he is eloquent, as here: "In the -chapel of Milton's brain, entirely devoted though -it was to a Biblical form of worship, there were -flutes and trumpets to accompany one vast -commanding organ." No wonder poor Milton -suffered, as we know he did suffer, from -insomnia!</p> - -<p>The statement that "so miserable is the -poverty of the first half of the seventeenth -century, when we have mentioned Pecock and -Capgrave, there is no other prose writer to be -named," is bad enough. But to sum up Pecock's -work with the remark, "the matter is paradoxical<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129" href="#Page_129">[129]</a></span> -and casuistical reasoning on controversial -points, in which he secures the sympathy neither -of the new thought nor the old," is to demonstrate -that Mr. Gosse knows nothing whatever -about it. The <i>Repressor</i> is in many important -respects one of the most remarkable works in our -early prose Literature. It would be interesting -to know what is the meaning of the following: -"The masterpiece of Chillingworth stands almost -alone in a sort of underwood of Theophrastian -character sketches." Does Mr. Gosse suppose -that English prose Literature in and about 1637 -is represented by Hall's <i>Characters of Vices and -Virtues</i>, by Sir Thomas Overbury's <i>Characters</i>, -and by Earle's <i>Microcosmographie</i>, which appeared -respectively, not in and about 1637, but -in 1608, in 1614, and in 1628? If this was the -underwood in which Chillingworth's work stood, -it stood also in a dense forest represented by -some of the most celebrated prose writings of -the seventeenth century, such as the greater -part of the writings of Bacon and of Raleigh, -the <i>Anatomy of Melancholy</i>, Selden's <i>Titles of -Honour</i> and <i>Mare Clausum</i>, Lord Herbert of -Cherbury's <i>De Veritate</i>, Feltham's <i>Resolves</i>, the -best of Hall's writings, Purchas' <i>Pilgrims</i>, Barclay's -<i>Argenis</i>, the Histories of Speed, Stowe, -Hayward, and Raleigh, Heylin's <i>Microcosmus</i>, -Prynne's <i>Histrio-Mastix</i>, and the famous sermons -of Lancelot Andrewes, all of which appeared -between 1608 and 1637. These are the sort of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130" href="#Page_130">[130]</a></span> -remarks in which Mr. Gosse habitually indulges. -We have another example in the following: -"Shelley's attitude to style is in the main retrograde," -a generalization based on the fact -that he was no admirer of "the arabesque of -the cockney school." But were Shelley's chief -contemporaries admirers of the arabesque of -the cockney school, or were they affected by it? -Was Wordsworth, was Coleridge, or Southey, -or Byron, or Crabbe, or Campbell, or Landor?—a -question which Mr. Gosse probably never -stopped to ask himself. On a par with this is -the absurd assertion that "English poetry was -born again during the autumn months of 1797." -The appearance of the <i>Lyrical Ballads</i> did not -make, but mark, an era in our poetry. The -revolution of which they were the expression -had been maturing, as surely but distinctly as -the social and political revolution marked by -the assembly of the States-General ten years -before. There was hardly a note struck in the -<i>Lyrical Ballads</i> which had not been struck in -our poetry between 1740 and the date of their -appearance.</p> - -<p>To call this compilation a <i>History of Modern -English Literature</i> is ludicrous. Mr. Gosse has -no conception even of the eras into which our -Literature naturally falls, or of the movements -which in each of those eras defined themselves. -Nothing could be more misleading and inadequate -than the accounts given of the historians, theologians,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131" href="#Page_131">[131]</a></span> -philosophers, and critics, many of whom—nay, -whole schools of whom—are not noticed -at all. Sidney's epoch-marking little treatise is -dismissed in four unmeaning lines as "an urbane -and eloquent essay, which labours under but one -disadvantage, namely, that when it was composed -in 1581 there was scarcely any poesy in -England to be defended. This was posthumously -printed in 1595." Ben Jonson's not less -remarkable <i>Discoveries</i> are not even mentioned. -How writers like Bacon, Hooker, Hobbes, Locke, -and Berkeley fare we have not space to illustrate. -Mr. Gosse, indeed, judging by his excursions -into the realms of theology and philosophy, -has certainly been wise to assign more -space to <i>The Flower and the Leaf</i> than is assigned -to Hobbes, Barrow, Butler, and Paley put -together. We have by no means exhausted the -list of blunders and absurdities to be found in -this book; but we have, we fear, exhausted the -patience of our readers, and we must bring our -examination of it to a close.</p> - -<p>The melancholy thing about all this is the -perfect impunity with which such works as -these can be given to the public. We have -not the smallest doubt that this book has been -extolled to the skies in reviews which have not -detected a single error in it, and which have -accepted its generalizations and its criticisms -with unquestioning credulity; and we have as -little doubt that those scholars who have discerned<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132" href="#Page_132">[132]</a></span> -its defects and absurdities have chosen, -from motives possibly of kindness, possibly of -prudence, and possibly in mere contempt, to -maintain silence about them. Had it appeared -twenty years ago, it would instantly have been -exposed and exploded, indeed no writer would -have dared to insult serious readers by such a -publication. What every reader has a right to -demand from those who take upon themselves -to instruct him are sincerity, industry, and competence; -and what no critic has a right to condone -is ostentatious indifference on the part of -an author to the responsibilities incurred by him -in undertaking to teach the public.</p> - -<p>The sooner Mr. Gosse, and writers like Mr. -Gosse, come to understand that, however ingeniously -expressed, reckless generalizations, -random assertions and the specious semblance -of knowledge, erudition, and authority may -pass current for a time, but are certain at last -to be detected and exposed, the better for themselves -and the better for their readers. If, too, -they wish justice to be done to the accomplishments -which they really possess, they will do -well to remember what is implied in the proverb -<i>Ne sutor ultra crepidam</i>, and what the Germans -mean by <span class="smcap">Vermessenheit</span>.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133" href="#Page_133">[133]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="LOG-ROLLING_AND_EDUCATION" id="LOG-ROLLING_AND_EDUCATION"></a>LOG-ROLLING AND EDUCATION</h2> - - -<p>We see no objection to Mutual Admiration -Societies; they are institutions which -afford much pleasure, and can, as a rule, do -little harm. If vanity be a foible, it is a foible -well worth cherishing, and will be treated -tenderly even by a philosopher. For, of all the -illusions which give a zest to life, the illusions -created by this flattering passion are the most -delightful and inspiring. They are so easily -evoked; they respond with such impartial obsequiousness -to the call of the humblest magician. -He has but to speak the word—and they -are made; to command—and they are created. -A becomes what B and C pronounce him to -be, and what A and C have done for B, that -will B and A do in turn for C. It is a delicious -occupation, no doubt, a feast for each, in -which no crude surfeit reigns, where, in Bacon's -phrase, satisfaction and appetite are perpetually -interchangeable; it is like the herbage in the -Paradise of the Spanish poet, "quanto mas se<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134" href="#Page_134">[134]</a></span> -goza mas renace,"—the more we enjoy it the -more it grows. It is an old game—"Vetus -fabula per novos histriones":—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"'Twas, 'Sir, your law,' and 'Sir, your eloquence,'</div> -<div class="i0">'Yours Cowper's manner and yours Talbot's sense';</div> -<div class="i0">Thus we dispose of all poetic merit:</div> -<div class="i0">Yours Milton's genius and mine Homer's spirit.</div> -<div class="i0">Walk with respect behind, while we at ease</div> -<div class="i0">Weave laurel crowns and take what name we please.</div> -<div class="i0">'My dear Tibullus!' if that will not do,</div> -<div class="i0">Let me be Horace, and be Ovid you."</div></div></div> - -<p>And there is this advantage. If a sufficient -number of magicians can, or will, combine, these -illusions may not only serve each magician for -life, but become, for a time, simply indistinguishable -from realities. Now, as we said before, we -see no great harm in this. It is, to say the least, -a very amiable and brotherly employment; and -were it quite disinterested and honest, it would -be closely allied with that virtue which St. Paul -exalts above all virtues. But everything has or -ought to have its limits. When Boswell attempted -to defend certain Methodists who had -been expelled from the University of Oxford, -Johnson retorted that the University was perfectly -right—"They were examined, and found -to be mighty ignorant fellows." "But," said -Boswell, "was it not hard to expel them? for I -am told they were good beings." "I believe," -replied the sage, "that they might be good<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135" href="#Page_135">[135]</a></span> -beings, but they were not fit to be in the -University of Oxford. A cow is a very good -animal in the field, but we turn her out of a -garden."</p> - -<p>To our certain knowledge many of those who -owe their reputation to the art to which we -are referring are good beings, and we have -little doubt that most of those who are least -scrupulous in practising it are good beings also. -Indeed it may be conceded at once that there -is always a strong presumption that members -of Mutual Admiration Societies belong to this -class. On the reciprocity of essentially Christian -virtues their very existence depends. Whatever -may be thought of their heads, their hearts are -pretty sure to be in the right place. They may, -it is true, act more in the spirit of the precept -that we should do unto others as we would -they should do unto us than in that of the precept -which pronounces that it is more blessed -to give than to receive. This, however, is a trifle—one -of those distinctions without differences -which are so common in Christian ethics. But -for ourselves we must, as we have said before, -discriminate. To the cow in the field we have -no objection; it is of the cow in the garden that -we complain.</p> - -<p>To drop metaphor: there are certain spheres -of literary activity in which the circulation of -mutual puffery by this clique or by that clique<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136" href="#Page_136">[136]</a></span> -can do comparatively little harm to any one or -to anything. There are some subjects on which -every reader is not only perfectly competent to -form his own judgment, but is pretty certain to -do so. He may amuse himself by seeing what -the critics have to say, and he may be induced -by them in the first instance to turn to the book -which is in question, but he is practically unaffected -by any opinions unless they happen to -coincide with his own. Such is the case with -books of travel, with novels, and, as a rule, with -poetry. Here the arts of the log-roller are as -harmless as the frolics of whales with tubs. No -one takes what he sees seriously except those -who are engaged in the pastime. If Mr. A cannot -give the general public what it appreciates, -nothing that Mr. B can say will cajole that -public into believing that it has what it has not. -Mr. C and Mr. D may vociferate, till they are -hoarse, that "Mr. E is the subtlest and most -discriminating critic that the English-speaking -world has ever known"; but if Mr. E's eulogies -of Mr. C's verses and of Mr. D's novels are not -corroborated by the general reader's independent -judgment, the fame of Messrs. C and D will -not extend beyond their clique. If in poetry or -prose fiction trash succeeds, as it undoubtedly -does, it succeeds not because of the skill with -which it has been puffed, though this may be a -factor in its success, but because it hits the popular<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137" href="#Page_137">[137]</a></span> -taste. The public is seldom deceived except -when it wishes to be deceived. Log-rolling has -much to answer for: it loads our bookstalls -with nonsense and rubbish, it impedes the production -of sound literature, it degrades the -standard of taste, it degrades the standard of -aim and attainment, and indirectly it is in every -way mischievous to literature. But we very -much question whether in the case of publications -which appeal directly to general readers, -and are within the scope of their judgments, -the fortune of a book is in any way affected -by the arts of the log-roller. Amusement -mingled with impatience is probably the prevailing -sentiment when Mr. C and Mr. D are -loud in each other's praises. We remember the -amœbæan strains of Hayley and Miss Seward -in Porson's epigram:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><i>Miss Seward</i>: Tuneful poet, Britain's glory;</div> -<div class="i6">Mr. Hayley, that is you.</div> -<br /> -<div class="i0"><i>Mr. Hayley</i>: Ma'am, you carry all before you;</div> -<div class="i6">Trust me, Lichfield Swan, you do.</div> -<br /> -<br /> -<div class="i0"><i>Miss Seward</i>: Ode, didactic, epic, sonnet;</div> -<div class="i6">Mr. Hayley, you're divine.</div> -<br /> -<div class="i0"><i>Mr. Hayley</i>: Ma'am, I'll take my oath upon it,</div> -<div class="i6">You yourself are all the nine.</div></div></div> - -<p>Or, in a less good-natured mood, we may perhaps -recall with a certain satisfaction Pope's -cruel but pathetic picture of the minor log-rollers -of his day:<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138" href="#Page_138">[138]</a></span>—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Next plunged a feeble but a desperate pack,</div> -<div class="i0">With each a sickly brother at his back.</div> -<div class="i0">Sons of a day! just buoyant on the flood,</div> -<div class="i0">Then numbered with the puppies in the mud.</div></div></div> - -<p>But there are certain subjects and certain -spheres in which the arts of the log-roller, if -equally contemptible, are not quite so harmless.</p> - -<p>During the last fifteen years the Press has -been teeming with books designed to circulate -among readers who are seriously interested in -<i>belles lettres</i> and criticism. Some of them have -appeared as volumes in a series, some as independent -monographs and manuals, and some in -the humbler forms of editorial introductions -and notes. Among them may be found works -of really distinguished scholars, and works in -every way worthy of such scholars; and it is no -doubt works like these which have given credit -and authority generally to publications of this -kind. The popularity of these productions has -been extraordinary, and their manufacture has -become one of the most lucrative of hackney -employments. Nor is this all. Their professed -purpose is the dissemination of serious instruction, -is to become text-books in literary history -and in literary criticism; and, as text-books on -those subjects, they have made their way, or -are making their way, not merely into our public -libraries, but also into the libraries of nearly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139" href="#Page_139">[139]</a></span> -every educational institute in England. Indeed -it would not be too much to say that if, among -general readers, about eighty in every hundred -derive almost all they know about English -literature, both historically and critically, from -these volumes, in our schools and colleges, -the average number of those whose studies -are and ought to be independent of them is -yearly diminishing. It is of these text-books -and of the responsibilities incurred by those -who produce and circulate them that we wish -to speak.</p> - -<p>We have already commented on the distinction -which must be drawn between what is best -and what is inferior in the publications to which -we have been referring; and, in truth, the difference -is one not of degree but in kind. As our -desire is, in Swift's phrase, to lash the vice but -spare the name, we shall not specify the works -which we have selected as typical of log-rolling -in relation to education. Till we saw them we -had no conception of the lengths to which this -sort of thing has run. Ostensibly the works -before us are critical and biographical monographs -designed to become text-books for -students of English literature; they may be -more correctly described as complete epitomes -of the art of puffery. The writers begin by -assuming that the objects of their ludicrous -adulation—who are, like themselves, contributors<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140" href="#Page_140">[140]</a></span> -of the average order to current periodicals, -and the authors of monographs similar to their -own—are by general consent critics of classical -authority. The most deferential references are -made to them in almost every page. Now it is -"Goethe and Mr. So-and-so have observed," or -"Coleridge has remarked, but Mr. So-and-so is -inclined to think," etc. Sometimes it assumes -the form of a sort of awful reverence, as "Mr. -So-and-so is a little uncertain, but surely he -more than hints," or "Mr. So-and-so, as we all -know, was once of opinion, though he has recently -found reason to alter," etc. We saw not -long ago in the notes to a certain edition of a -classical author: "Socrates and Mr. X—— <i>of -Trinity</i> have observed," etc. Occasionally this -homage expresses itself—and this is more serious—in -the form of long extracts from Mr. So-and-so's -writings. Nothing is more common in -works like these than to find critics and writers -of classical authority either completely ignored, -or, if cited at all, cited only in the connection -which we have indicated. That the gentlemen -who are the subjects of this grotesque flattery -either have paid or will pay their friends in -kind may, of course, be taken for granted. -Thus one factitious reputation builds up another, -and one bad book ushers in twenty which are -worse.</p> - -<p>Macaulay has an amusing passage in which he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141" href="#Page_141">[141]</a></span> -has collected the names of those who, according -to Horace Walpole, were "the first writers" in -England in 1753. It might have been expected -that Hume, Fielding, Dr. Johnson, Richardson, -Smollett, Collins, and Gray would at least have -had a place among them. Not at all. They were -Lord Bath, Mr. W. Whithed, Sir Charles Williams, -Mr. Soame Jenyngs, Mr. Cambridge, and -Mr. Coventry; in other words, a clique of politicians -and men of fashion of the very titles of -whose writings even a reader tolerably well -read in the literature of those times might excusably -be ignorant. We are not exaggerating -when we say that this system of strenuous and -well-directed mutual puffery is, in our own -time, leading to similarly perverted conceptions -about the relative position of those who owe -their celebrity to these ignoble arts and those -on whose fame Time's test has set its seal, not -merely on the part of the general public, but on -the part of those who are responsible for the -books introduced into schools and educational -institutes. We will give an illustration.</p> - -<p>At a meeting held not long ago, for the purpose -of prescribing books for a Reading Society, -the choice lay between some of Johnson's -Lives, Select Essays by Sainte Beuve, and Select -Essays by Matthew Arnold on the one hand, -and on the other certain books typical of the -literature of which we have been speaking.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142" href="#Page_142">[142]</a></span> -The debate which ensued was very amusing. -A member of the committee, a gentleman of -conservative temper, strongly urged the claims -of Johnson, Sainte Beuve, and Arnold, on the -ground that it was the duty of the Society to -encourage the study of what was excellent and -of classical quality, especially in criticism; that -it was not merely the information contained in -a book which had to be considered, but the -style, the tone, the touch; that the monographs -proposed as an alternative could scarcely -be regarded as of the first order, either in expression -or in matter, for he had observed, -though he had only glanced at them, several -solecisms in grammar and several inaccuracies -of statement; and he concluded by adding that -other writings of these particular authors with -which he happened to be more familiar had not -prejudiced him in their favour. Upon that, -another member of the council, who had been -busily conning the Press notices inserted in the -monographs in question, pleaded their claim -to preference. "Dr. Johnson," he remarked, -"was no doubt a great man in his day, but his -day had long been over; no one read him now. -Sainte Beuve and Matthew Arnold might be -classical and all that, but they were not up to -date." He could not talk as an expert on -literary matters, and therefore he would not -contradict what the former speaker had said,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143" href="#Page_143">[143]</a></span> -"but there could be no doubt that Messrs. So-and-so," -the authors of the monographs in question, -"were very big men—bigger men, I should -think (glancing at the Press notices in his hand), -than Sainte Beuve and Matthew Arnold. At -any rate, everybody has heard of them; and," -he continued, "listen to this." He then proceeded -to read out some of the notices, adding -that it was difficult, if he might say so without -offence, to reconcile what his friend, the preceding -speaker, had said with what was said in -these notices. He was a little staggered—for, -though a simple, he was a shrewd man—when -the very remarkable similarity between Mr. A's -eulogies of Mr. B and Mr. B's eulogies of Mr. A -was pointed out to him, and when, in reference -to anonymous testimony, he was reminded that -one voice may have many echoes. It was -generally felt, more especially as Mr. A or -Mr. B had, we believe, more than one acquaintance -among the committee, that the debate -was taking rather an embarrassing turn. The -question was then put to the vote, and the -monographs were carried by a majority of -three to one.</p> - -<p>What occurred at this meeting is occurring -every day, variously modified, wherever the -choice of books is in question, whether in public -libraries or in educational institutions. A literature, -the sole credentials of which are derived<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144" href="#Page_144">[144]</a></span> -from those who produce and circulate it, is -gradually superseding that of our classics. We -seem in truth to be losing all sense of the -essential distinction between the writings of -the average man of letters and those of the -masters.</p> - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145" href="#Page_145">[145]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_III" id="OUR_LITERARY_GUIDES_PART_III"></a>OUR LITERARY GUIDES</h2> - -<h3>III. BOOKS WORTH READING<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> <i>Books Worth Reading.</i> A Plea for the Best and an -Essay towards Selection, with Short Introductions. By -Frank W. Raffety, London.</p></div> - - -<p>Were it not for its melancholy significance, -this would be one of the most amusing -books which it has ever been our fortune to -meet with. Of Mr. Frank W. Raffety we have -not the honour to know anything, except what -we have gathered from this little volume and -from its title-page. But he must be a singularly -interesting gentleman. His enthusiasm for -books, his portentous ignorance of them; his -strenuous desire to improve the popular taste -by pleading for the best, his instinctive tendency -to make in all cases for the worst; his sublime -intolerance of everything in literature which -falls short of excellence, his more than sublime -indifference to the commonest rules of grammar -and syntax in expressing that intolerance; the -<i>naïveté</i>, the frankness, the recklessness with -which he displays his incompetence for the task -which he has undertaken—in these qualifications<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146" href="#Page_146">[146]</a></span> -and accomplishments Mr. Raffety is not perhaps -alone, but he has certainly no superior.</p> - -<p>Mr. Raffety aspires to guide his readers -through the chief literatures of the world. -Now the task of a reviewer, who has a conscience, -is not always a cheerful one, and we -confess that, when we had generally surveyed -Mr. Raffety's work, we resolved to amuse ourselves -by trying to discover of which of the -literatures, to which Mr. Raffety constitutes -himself a guide, Mr. Raffety is probably most -ignorant. It is a nice point. Let our readers -judge. We will begin with Mr. Raffety and the -Classics. Of Theognis, the most voluminous of -the Greek Gnomic poets, it is said that "only -a few sentences"—Mr. Raffety is presumably -under the impression that Theognis wrote in -prose—"quoted in the works of Plato and others -survive." "The Greek Anthology," we are -astounded to learn, "is by Lord Neaves" and -"is one of the best volumes in the A.C.E.R. -series." What Mr. Raffety no doubt means is, -that Lord Neaves is the author of a monograph -on the Greek anthology, as he certainly was. -With regard to Herodotus, Mr. Raffety has -evidently got some information not generally -accessible. His <i>History</i>, we are told, "is a great -prose epic.... The second book is of the -most interest. In other works are the histories -of Crœsus, Cyrus," etc. It would be interesting -to know what other works besides his <i>History</i><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147" href="#Page_147">[147]</a></span> -Herodotus has left. Of the <i>Prometheus Bound</i> -of Æschylus Mr. Raffety gives the following -interesting account. It contains, he says, "the -story of Prometheus and his defiance of Jupiter, -who condemned him to be bound to a rock, -where he died rather than yield." We exhort -Mr. Raffety, before his work passes into a second -edition, to consult his Classical Dictionary.</p> - -<p>Of the translations recommended by Mr. -Raffety we should very much like to get a -sight of the translation of Pindar by Calverley, -of the joint translation of the same classic by -Messrs. E. Myers and A. Lang, and of the joint -translation of Thucydides "by Jowett and Rev. -H. Dale, 2 vols." Of Herodotus, of Æschylus, -of Sophocles, of Pindar, of Polybius, of Demosthenes, -what are, by general consent, esteemed -the best translations are not so much as mentioned. -Latin literature fares even worse in -the hands of our guide. Mr. Raffety appears -to know no more about Catullus than that he -was a writer of epigrams. Such trifles as the -<i>Attis</i>, the <i>Peleus and Thetis</i>, the Julia and -Manlius marriage song, the <i>Coma Berenices</i>, the -love lyrics and threnodies he does not condescend -to notice. In "guiding" his readers to -translations of Lucretius and Juvenal, Munro's -version of the first in prose and Gifford's version -of the second in verse—which Conington pronounced -to be the best version of any Roman -classic in our language—are not so much as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148" href="#Page_148">[148]</a></span> -referred to. Nor, again, in the case of Plautus -and Terence, are the excellent versions of Thornton -and Coleman noticed. Tacitus, who is oddly -described as "the foremost man of the day," -an estimate which might have pleased but -which would certainly have surprised him, -chronicled, we are told, "the foundation of the -Christian religion." Mr. Raffety's assurance on -this point will probably disappoint inquisitive -readers. Equally surprising are the portions of -the work dealing with the modern literatures. -In the course of these we learn that "the <i>Nibelungen -Lied</i> is the oldest drama in Europe"; -that the <i>Areopagitica</i> and the <i>Defence of the -People of England</i> are Milton's best prose writings—Mr. -Raffety apparently not being aware -that the second work is in Latin, and that if -he means the first <i>Defence</i>, it is anything but -one of the best of Milton's writings. We are -also informed that Dryden was most valuable -as a translator from the Greek and Latin; -Dryden's versions from the Greek begin and -end with paraphrases of four Idylls of Theocritus, -the first book of the <i>Iliad</i> and the parting -of Hector and Andromache from the sixth, and -are notoriously the very worst things he ever -did.</p> - -<p>Sometimes Mr. Raffety fairly takes our breath -away, as when he informs us that Gray's tomb -can be seen in the little churchyard of Stoke Pogis -"with the <i>Elegy</i> written upon it." Can Mr.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149" href="#Page_149">[149]</a></span> -Raffety be acquainted with the length of the -<i>Elegy</i> and with the proportions of a tombstone? -Chaucer, we are informed, wrote some -poems in Italian. We should very much like to -see them, and so probably would Professor Skeat, -for they appear to have escaped the notice of -all Chaucer's editors. Swift's <i>Tale of a Tub</i> -was written, we are told, "against the teaching -of Hobbes!"</p> - -<p>It is indeed impossible to open this book anywhere -without alighting on some most discreditable -blunder or absurdity. Thus we are informed -that Macaulay's essay on Burleigh treats of the -time of James I.—Burleigh, as we need hardly -say, dying nearly five years before James came -to the throne, and Macaulay's essay having no -reference at all to James I.'s time. "There is," -says Mr. Raffety, "no more stirring lyric than -<i>The Cotter's Saturday Night</i>," a remark which -shows that Mr. Raffety does not know what a -lyric poem is. But to look for blunders in Mr. -Raffety's pages would be to look for leaves in -a summer forest. His critical remarks and biographical -notes are truly delightful. We wish -we had space to quote some of them. Of their -general quality the following profound remark -is a fair specimen:—"Dante requires study, and -an endeavour after appreciation." Mr. Raffety -is always anxious to conduct his readers by -short cuts and to save them trouble. Macaulay's -<i>Essays</i>, for example, should be read before his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150" href="#Page_150">[150]</a></span> -<i>History</i>; "they will be more easily tackled," -he says, "than the <i>History</i> in the first instance." -But on the subject of Gibbon Mr. -Raffety is adamant, being fully of the late Professor -Freeman's opinion—"Whatever else is -read, Gibbon must be read." How Gibbon is to -be read, or why Gibbon is to be read, or in what -edition he should be read, Mr. Raffety does not -explain.</p> - -<p>Now, what possible end can be served by -books like these, except to misguide and misinform? -Here is a writer, who certainly leaves -us with the impression that he cannot read the -Greek and Latin classics in the original, setting -up as a director of classical study, and pronouncing -<i>ex cathedrâ</i> on the merits of translations -of these classics. His knowledge of the -modern literature is, as is abundantly manifest, -though we have neither space nor patience to -illustrate, equally insufficient and unsubstantial, -and yet he undertakes to initiate and guide the -inexperienced in these studies. This book is -presented to the public in a most attractive -form, being excellently printed on excellent -paper, and will naturally be taken seriously by -those to whom it appeals. It is for this reason -that we also have felt it our duty to take it -seriously. And, as we believe that every bad -book stands in the way of a good one, we can -promise Mr. Raffety, and writers like Mr. Raffety, -that we shall continue to take them seriously.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151" href="#Page_151">[151]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="THE_NEW_CRITICISM" id="THE_NEW_CRITICISM"> -</a>THE NEW CRITICISM<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> <i>Retrospective Reviews.</i> A Literary Log. By Richard -Le Gallienne. 2 vols.</p></div> - - -<p>Nearly two thousand years ago Horace -observed that, though every calling presupposed -some qualification in those who followed -it, and a man who knew nothing of -marine affairs would not undertake to manage -a ship, or a man who knew nothing of drugs to -compound prescriptions, yet everybody fancied -himself competent to commence poet. Qualified -or unqualified, at it we all go, he complains, and -scribble verses. But times have changed, and -those who in Horace's day were the pests of -poetry, with which they could amuse themselves -without mischief, have now become the pests -of another kind of literature in which their -diversions are not quite so harmless. Where -the poetaster once stood the criticaster now -stands. The transformation of the one pest -into the other, where they do not, as they often -do, become both, is easily accounted for, and as -Dr. Johnson has so excellently explained it, we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152" href="#Page_152">[152]</a></span> -cannot do better than transcribe his words. -"Criticism," says the Doctor, "is a study by -which men grow important and formidable at -a very small expense. The power of invention -has been conferred by nature upon few, and the -labour of learning those sciences which may by -mere labour be attained is too great to be willingly -endured; but every man can exert such -judgment as he has upon the works of others, -and he whom nature has made weak and idleness -keeps ignorant may yet support his vanity by -the name of critic." But criticasters and their -patrons have improved on this—for "he whom -nature has made weak and idleness keeps ignorant" -may, in our time, not merely support his -vanity, but support himself.</p> - -<p>Till we inspected the volumes before us, we -had really no conception of the pass to which -things have now come in so-called criticism. -The writer sits in judgment on most of the -authors who have, during recent years, been -before the public. He passes sentence not -merely on current novelists, poets, and essayists, -but on some of our classics, and on books like -the late Mr. Pater's <i>Lectures on Plato and -Platonism</i> and Dr. Wharton's edition of <i>Sappho</i>. -To any acquaintance with the principles of -criticism, to any conception of criticism in -relation to principles, to any learning, to any -scholarship, to any knowledge of the history of -literature and of the masterpieces of literature,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153" href="#Page_153">[153]</a></span> -either in our own language or in other languages, -he has not the smallest pretension. Nor -does he allow this to be gathered simply from -the work itself, where it is, needless to say, -abundantly apparent, but with a <i>naïveté</i> and -impudence which are at once ludicrous and exasperating -he glories in his ignorance. Literature -and its interpretation are to him what the -Bible and its interpretation were to the ranting -sectaries of Dryden's satire. In its explanation -knowledge and learning were folly, nothing was -needed but "grace."</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"No measure ta'en from knowledge, all from grace,</div> -<div class="i0">Study and pains were now no more their care,</div> -<div class="i0">Texts were explained by fasting and by prayer."</div></div></div> - -<p>So to our critic knowledge and learning are of -equal unimportance—nay, equally contemptible—and -all that is needed to take the measure of -Plato and Wordsworth is, in his own words, -"the capacity for appreciation." With this very -slender outfit he sits down to the work of criticism, -to enlighten the world <i>de omni scibili</i> in -literature, from the lyrics of <i>Sappho</i>, "the singer, -a single petal of whose rose is more than the -whole rose-garden of later women singers," to -"the statesmanlike reach and grasp" of Mr. E. -Gosse's essays.</p> - -<p>To discuss seriously the opinions or impressions -of a writer of this kind would be as absurd -as to attempt to fight gnats with a sword, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154" href="#Page_154">[154]</a></span> -we shall merely content ourselves with transcribing, -without comment, a few of the aphorisms -with which these volumes are studded. "Criticism -is the art of praise." "Shakespeare is the -greatest English poet, not because he created -Hamlet and Lear, but because he could write -that speech about Perdita's flowers and Claudio's -speech on death in <i>Measure for Measure</i>." -"The perfection of prose is the essay, of poetry -the lyric, and the most beautiful book is that -which contains the most beautiful words." These -specimens will probably suffice. Mr. Le Gallienne -is also of opinion that "culture is mainly -a matter of temperament"—that "a man is -born cultured," that mere education and study -are to such a one not simply superfluities, but -impertinences. "What matters it," he eloquently -asks, "that one does not remember or -even has never read great writers? Our one -concern is to possess an organization open to -great and refined impressions." A paltry scholar, -for example, may be able to construe Sappho, -but it is only "an organization open to great -and refined impressions" which can discern (in -a crib) "the pathos of eternity in some twenty -words" of "this passionate singer of Lesbos." -Plato may be studied by poor pedants, but to an -organization of this kind the binding of a volume -is sufficient enlightenment; "to merely hold in -the hand and turn over its pages is a counsel in -style," for do not "the temperate beauty, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155" href="#Page_155">[155]</a></span> -dry beauty beloved of Plato, find expression in -the sweet and stately volume itself" [he is "reviewing" -the late Mr. Pater's lectures on Plato], -"with its smooth night-blue binding, its rose-leaf -yellow pages, its soft and yet grave type"? -The value of Mr. Le Gallienne's judgments, of -his praise, and of his censure, which, ludicrous -to relate, are quoted by some publishers as -recommendations, or "opinions of the press," -may be estimated by these dicta, and by this -theory of a critical education.</p> - -<p>Macaulay somewhere speaks of a certain nondescript -broth which, in some Continental inns, -was kept constantly boiling, and copiously poured, -without distinction, on every dish as it came up -to table. The writer of these essays appears, -metaphorically speaking, to be provided with a -similar abomination. Whatever be his theme, -poem, essay, novel, picture, he contrives to serve -it up with the same condiment, a sickly and -nauseous compound of preciosity and sentimentalism.</p> - -<p>The melancholy thing about all this is the -profound unconsciousness on the part of the -author of these volumes that he is exciting -ridicule; that he is, in Shakespeare's phrase, -making himself a motley to the view. But -there are considerations more melancholy still. -We should not have noticed these volumes had -they not been representative and typical of a -school of so-called critics which is becoming<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156" href="#Page_156">[156]</a></span> -more and more prominent. Incredible as it -may seem, there are certain sections of literary -society and of the general public which take -Mr. Le Gallienne and his dicta quite seriously, -and to which the prodigious nonsense in these -volumes does not present itself as absurdity, but -as the articles of a creed. These essays have, -moreover, appeared in publications the names of -some of which carry authority. It is, therefore, -high time that some stand should be made, some -protest entered against writings which cannot -fail to corrupt popular taste and to degrade the -standard of popular literature. Of one thing -we are very certain, that no self-respecting -literary journal which undertook to review -these volumes could allow them to pass without -denunciation.</p> - -<p>Of Mr. Le Gallienne we know nothing personally. -He is, if we are rightly informed, still -a young man, and we would in all kindness -exhort him to turn the abilities which he undoubtedly -possesses to better account. There is -much in these essays which shows that he was -intended for something better than to further the -decadence. If, instead of sneering at scholars, -affecting to despise learning and study, indulging -in silly paradoxes, tinsel epigrams, and absurd -generalisations, he would read and think, and -endeavour to do justice to himself and to his -opportunities, he might, we make no doubt, -obtain an honourable reputation. There is much<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157" href="#Page_157">[157]</a></span> -which is attractive in his work, and in the -personality reflected in it. He is not a charlatan, -for though he is ignorant, he is honest. -Genial and sympathetic, he has much real -critical insight, and, in going through his -volumes, we have noted many remarks which -were both sound and fine. At its best his style -is excellent,—clear, lively, and engaging. Let -him cease to play the buffoon, which can only -end in his gaining the applause of mere fools -and the contempt of every one else.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158" href="#Page_158">[158]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="THE_GENTLE_ART_OF_SELF-ADVERTISEMENT" id="THE_GENTLE_ART_OF_SELF-ADVERTISEMENT"> -</a>THE GENTLE ART OF SELF-ADVERTISEMENT</h2> - - -<p>The illustrious Barnum once observed that, -if a man's capital consisted of a shilling, -one penny of that shilling should be spent in -purchasing something, and the remaining eleven-pence -should be invested in advertising what was -purchased. There was, perhaps, a touch of exaggeration -in that great man's remark, but it -was founded on a profound knowledge both of -human nature and of the world. Intrinsically -nothing is valuable; things are what we make -or imagine them. Even the diamond, as a costly -commodity, exists on suffrage. If a man cannot -persuade his fellow-creatures that he has genius, -talent, learning, "'twere all alike as if he had -them not." What Persius asks with a sneer, -"Scire tuum nihil est, nisi te scire hoc sciat -alter?"—is your knowledge nothing, unless some -one else know that you are knowing?—a wiser -man would ask in all seriousness. Shakespeare -was never nearer the truth than when he -wrote—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159" href="#Page_159">[159]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i3">"No man is the lord of anything,</div> -<div class="i0">Though in and of him there be much consisting,</div> -<div class="i0">Till he communicates his parts to others;</div> -<div class="i0">Nor doth he of himself know them for aught,</div> -<div class="i0">Till he behold them formed in the applause</div> -<div class="i0">Where they are extended."</div></div></div> - -<p>And never was a man more mistaken than -the old preacher who said to his congregation, -"If you have a talent in your napkin, you -should take care not to hide it; but if you have -no talent, but only a napkin, you should not so -flourish your napkin as to create the impression -that it is full of talents." Why, this is just what -nine men in ten who court fame have to do. -Nature is kind, but seldom profuse. If she -really endows a man with what, if trumpeted, -would make him famous, the odds are she -couples with her gifts pride, modesty, or self-respect, -which, to say the least, heavily handicap -him in the race for reputation. When she does -not endow with the reality, she compensates by -bestowing the power of acquiring the credit for -it. She is, as a rule, much too thrifty to heap -on the same man the keen pleasures of genuine -enthusiasm and the sweets of popular applause. -An impartial mother, she loves all her children, -and divides her favours equally between shams -and true men. This Churchill marks in his -brutal way; speaking of a certain contemporary, -he describes him as endowed with</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"That low cunning which in fools supplies,</div> -<div class="i0">And amply too, the place of being wise,</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160" href="#Page_160">[160]</a></span> -<div class="i0">Which Nature, kind, indulgent parent, gave</div> -<div class="i0">To qualify the blockhead for a knave."</div></div></div> - -<p>But our business is not with knaves and blockheads, -but with "gentler cattle," and the quotation -demands an apology.</p> - -<p>The importance of the art of self-advertisement, -as must be abundantly clear from the -preceding remarks, can scarcely be overestimated. -Though it is perhaps still in its infancy, -its progress during the last few years has been -most encouraging. The old coarse methods so -familiar to us in the past, and still successfully -practised in the present—we mean mutual admiration -cliques, log-rolling, and what is vulgarly -known as "pulling the strings"—have -been greatly improved upon and refined. Bentley's -famous remark when, explaining how it -was that he took to commentating, he said, -that as he despaired of standing on his own -legs in the Temple of Fame, he got on to the -shoulders of the Ancients, appears to have -suggested one of the most ingenious of modern -expedients. This consists of "getting up" a -memorial to some distinguished man—a statue, -it may be, or modest bust. Some labour, some -ability, and some learning are involved in the -more cumbrous device of Bentley. But here -all is simple and very easy. You are on the -shoulders of your great man at a bound, and -stand side by side with him in a trice. There -is nothing which redounds to his credit which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161" href="#Page_161">[161]</a></span> -does not redound to your own. As the Red -Indian is under the impression that in possessing -himself of a scalp he possesses himself of -the virtues belonging to the former owner of -the scalp, so this tribute of enthusiastic admiration -quietly assumes, without trouble, all that -enthusiastic admiration naturally implies. Is -the object of your homage a poet, a critic, a -scholar, the very fact that you pay him homage -is, in itself, testimony of your own right to one -or other of these honourable titles. If, moreover -it should happen that you know very little -about the writings of the author whom you have -elected to honour, this is of no consequence; for -of all the disguises which ignorance can assume, -"enthusiasm" is the most effective. Nor are -these the only advantages of this particular -method of getting reputation. The collection of -subscriptions and the formation of a committee -bring you into contact, or may, if judiciously -managed, bring you into contact with all your -distinguished contemporaries; and we know -what the proverb says—"Noscitur a sociis"—a -man is what his companions are.</p> - -<p>But nothing is more effectual, for purposes of -self-advertisement, than a device which has lately -been practised with signal success. This consists -of scraping up an acquaintance with some person, -whose name is not unknown to the public,—even -a second-rate novelist will do—and waiting -till he dies. As there is a tide in the affairs<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162" href="#Page_162">[162]</a></span> -of men, so, as we all know, there is a moment -at the demise of literary men when the voracity -of public curiosity knows neither distinction nor -satiety. This is the moment for the self-advertiser -to nick; this is the time for him to float, -with his defunct friend, on the lips of men. He -will find readers for anything he may choose to -print—that letter with its exquisite compliments, -that conversation in which his poor -attainments were so generously over-estimated, -or the importance of his slight literary services -so much exaggerated. Of course, the value of -such advertisements will be in proportion to the -eminence of the subject of the reminiscences—and -happy, thrice happy, those who were able to -turn men like Darwin, Tennyson, and Browning -to this account; their reputation may be regarded -as made. But it is not always necessary -to wait till great men die, though it is an experiment -too bold and perilous for most aspirants -to make this sort of capital out of them -while they are still alive. Still <i>audentes fortuna -juvat</i>, and it has been done. A certain minor -poet published in an American magazine, not -many years ago, an article entitled "A Day with -Lord Tennyson," in which he represented the -Laureate as turning the conversation on his -(the minor bard's) poetry. We are told how the -great man, after fervently reiterating a stanza -of that minor bard which pleased him, requested -his son to take it down in writing; how that son,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163" href="#Page_163">[163]</a></span> -though the day was cold and blowy, took it -down; how Tennyson grasped, at parting, his -brother poet's hand, and begged in transport -that he would "come again and come often." -He came, we believe, no more. But what of -that? He had accomplished a feat so simple -and yet so original that it may fairly be questioned -whether what Mr. Burnum used to call -his masterpiece was in any way comparable to -it. To interview a great man, even on an assumption -of equality, is, as we all know, a comparatively -easy matter, but to turn the conversation -of the great man into a seasonable puff -of yourself requires a combination of qualities -not often united in a single person. The worst -of feats like these is that they must have a tendency -to make great men a little shy of encouraging -the acquaintance of those to whom -they can be so useful. But simplicity, as Thucydides -remarks, is one of the chief ingredients of -greatness, and it is a quality very difficult to -wear out.</p> - -<p>If Tennyson's interviewer has ever had a rival -in the important art which has been discussed—for -the benefit of youthful ambition—in this -article, we are inclined to think that that rival -was the Rev. Aris Willmott. This now almost -forgotten writer was a very voluminous author -both in verse and prose; but his merits were -not appreciated by an ungrateful public so much -as they ought to have been. He resorted, therefore,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164" href="#Page_164">[164]</a></span> -to the following exquisitely ingenious device. -He published a handsome volume, which -is now before us, entitled <i>Gems from English -Literature</i>, thus arranged: Bacon, Rev. Aris -Willmott, Jeremy Taylor, Rev. Aris Willmott, -Barrow, Rev. Aris Willmott, sandwiching himself -regularly through the prose classics, and in -the same way through the poets—Shakespeare, -Rev. Aris Willmott, Milton, Rev. Aris, etc. As -birthday books, press notices, interviews at -home, portraits of distinguished authors in their -studies, and the like are getting a little stale, -we cordially recommend this rev. gentleman's -expedient—it may be judiciously modified—to -the notice of all who are unable to distinguish -fame from notoriety.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165" href="#Page_165">[165]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="R_L_STEVENSONS_LETTERS" id="R_L_STEVENSONS_LETTERS"> -</a>R. L. STEVENSON'S LETTERS<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> <i>The Letters of Robert Louis Stevenson to his Family and -Friends.</i> Selected and Edited with Notes and Introduction -by Sidney Colvin. 2 vols.</p></div> - - -<p>The late Robert Louis Stevenson is a writer -who has every title to commiseration, and -the appearance of the volumes before us may be -said to mark the climax of his misfortunes. -Diseased and sickly from his birth, with his life -frequently hanging on a thread, he probably -never knew the sensation of perfect health. -During the impressionable years of early youth -his surroundings appear to have been most uncongenial; -he was forced into a profession for -which he had no taste and no aptitude. In -constant straits for money, at times he was -miserably poor; his apprenticeship to letters -was long and arduous, for he was not one of -Nature's favourites, and attained what he did -attain by unsparing and severe labour. His -wandering and restless life, bringing him as it -did into contact with all phases of humanity and -with all parts of the world, was of course in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166" href="#Page_166">[166]</a></span> -many respects favourable to his work, but it -had at the same time serious disadvantages. It -gave him little time for reflection; it imported -a certain feverishness into his energy, and -rendered that concentration and steadiness, -without which no really great work can be -accomplished, impossible. That in these circumstances -Stevenson should have produced so -much, and so much which is of a high order -of merit, is most creditable to him, and not a -little surprising. "He stands," says his friend -Professor Colvin, "as the writer who in the last -quarter of the nineteenth century has handled -with the most of freshness and inspiriting power -the widest range of established literary forms—the -moral, critical and personal essay, travels -sentimental and other, parables and tales of -mystery, boys' stories of adventure, memoirs; -nor let lyrical and meditative verse both English -and Scottish, and especially nursery verse, a -new vein for genius to work in, be forgotten." -With some reservation this may be conceded, -and this is as far as eulogy can legitimately be -stretched.</p> - -<p>But, unhappily, some of Stevenson's admirers -have made themselves and their idol ridiculous, -by raising him to a position his claims to which -are preposterous. If he be measured with his -contemporaries the comparison will generally -be in his favour—he certainly did best what -hundreds can do well. His essays have distinction<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167" href="#Page_167">[167]</a></span> -and excellence; his novels, travels, and -short tales, though scarcely entitled to the praise -of originality, as they strike no new notes and -are mere variants of the work of Scott, Kingston, -Ballantyne, De Quincey and Poe, bear the -impress of genius as distinguished from mere -talent, and reflect a very charming personality; -his verse, too, is pleasing and skilful. But when -we are told that he will stand the third in a trio -with Burns and Scott, and when we have to listen -to serious appeals to Edinburgh to raise a statue -to him beside the author of <i>Marmion</i> and the -Waverley Novels, all who truly appreciate his -work may well tremble for the reaction which is -certain to succeed such extravagant overestimation. -The truth is that poor Stevenson, himself -one of the simplest, sincerest and most modest -of men, got involved with a clique who may be -described as manufacturers of factitious reputations,—the -circulators of a false currency in -criticism. In these days of appeals to the masses -it is as easy to write up the sort of works which -are addressed to them—popular essays, tales and -novels—as it is to write up the commodities of -quack doctors and the shares of bogus companies. -The production of popular literature is -now a trade, and in some cases this kind of -puffery is the work of deliberate fraud, originating -from various motives. In many cases it -simply springs from ignorance and critical incompetence, -current criticism being, to a considerable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168" href="#Page_168">[168]</a></span> -extent, in the hands of very young men -who, having neither the requisite knowledge nor -the proper training, are unable to judge a writer -comparatively. In other cases it is to be attributed -to good nature and the tendency in the -genial appreciation of real merit to indulge in -extravagant expression. But the result is the -same. A reputation, so grotesquely out of proportion -to what is really merited that sober -people are inclined to suspect that all is imposture, -is gradually inflated. Eulogy kindles -eulogy; hyperbole is heaped on hyperbole; a -ludicrous importance is attached to every trifle -which falls, or which ever has fallen, from this -Press-created Fetish. While he is alive he is -encouraged, or rather importuned, to force his -power of production to keep pace with the -demand for everything bearing his signature; -when he is dead the very refuse of his study -finds eager publishers.</p> - -<p>This kind of thing has obviously many advantages, -which are by no means confined to -the object of the idolatry itself. In the first -place it means business; it is the creation of a -goose which can lay golden eggs, and it is, in -the second place, a creation which reflects no -little glory on the creators. Is it nothing -to be the satellites of so radiant a luminary? -When the familiar correspondence of the great -man is printed, will not what he was pleased<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169" href="#Page_169">[169]</a></span> -to say, with all the friendly license of private -intercourse, in the way of compliment and -eulogy, be proclaimed from the house-tops?</p> - -<p>All this is exactly what has happened in the -case of poor Stevenson. No man ever took -more justly his own measure, or would have -been more annoyed at the preposterous eulogies -of which he has been made the subject, -on the part of interested or ill-judging friends. -We wonder what he would himself have said, -could he have seen the letters before us described, -as they were described in one of the -current Reviews, as "the most exhaustive and -distinguished literary correspondence which -England has ever seen." We entirely absolve -Professor Colvin from any suspicion of being -actuated by unworthy motives in publishing -them. It is abundantly clear that he has not -published them to puff himself, that his labour -has been a labour of love, and that he believed -himself to be piously fulfilling a duty -to his friend. But they ought never to have -been given to the world. More than two-thirds -have nothing whatever to justify their -appearance in print, and merely show, what -will surprise those who knew Stevenson by his -literary writings, how vapid, vulgar and commonplace -he could be. In their slangy familiarity -and careless spontaneity they remind us -of Byron's, but what a contrast do these trivial<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170" href="#Page_170">[170]</a></span> -and too often insipid tattlings present to Byron's -brilliance and point, his wit, his piquancy, his -insight into life and men! Only here and there, -in a touch of description, or in a casual reflection, -do we find anything to distinguish them -from the myriads of letters which are interchanged -between young men every day in the -year. Their one attraction lies in the glimpses -they reveal of Stevenson's own charming personality, -his kindliness, his sympathy, his great -modesty, his manliness, his transparent truthfulness -and honesty. It is amusing to watch him -with one of his correspondents who was evidently -endeavouring to establish a mutual exchange -of flattery. The urbane skill with which this -gentleman's persistently fulsome compliments -are either fenced or waived aside, the ironical -delicacy with which, when a return is extorted, -they are repaid, in a measure strictly adjusted to -desert and yet certain not to disappoint expectant -vanity, are quite exquisite. "The suns -go swiftly out," he writes to him, referring to -the death of Tennyson and Browning and -others, "and I see no suns to follow, nothing -but a universal twilight of the demi-divinities, -with parties like you and me beating on toy -drums, and playing on penny whistles about -glow-worms." The indignant letter to the <i>New -York Tribune</i>, in defence of James Payn, who -had been accused of plagiarising from one of -Stevenson's fictions, well deserves placing on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171" href="#Page_171">[171]</a></span> -permanent record, as an illustration of his -chivalrous loyalty to his friends.</p> - -<p>We are sorry, we repeat, that these letters -have been given to the world. So far as -Stevenson's reputation is concerned they can -only detract from it. When they illustrate him -on his best side they merely emphasise what -his works illustrate so abundantly that further -illustration is a mere work of supererogation. -When they present him, as for the most part -they do, in dishabille, they exhibit him very -greatly to his disadvantage. If Professor Colvin -had printed about one-third of them, and retained -his excellent elucidatory introductions, -which form practically a biography of Stevenson, -he would have produced a work for which all -admirers of that most pleasing writer would -have thanked him. As it is, he has been guilty, -in our opinion, of a grave error of judgment.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172" href="#Page_172">[172]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="LITERARY_ICONOCLASM" id="LITERARY_ICONOCLASM"> -</a>LITERARY ICONOCLASM<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> -</h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> <i>The Authorship of the Kingis Quair.</i> A New Criticism -by J. T. T. Brown.</p></div> - - -<p>Among the worthies of the fifteenth century -there is no more interesting and picturesque -figure than the Poet-King of Scotland, -James I. Long before the poem on which his -fame rests was given to the world, tradition had -assigned him a high place among native makers, -and his countrymen had been proud to add to -the names of Dunbar and Douglas, of Henryson -and Lyndsay, the name of the best of their -kings. Great was their joy, therefore, when, in -1783, William Tytler gave public proof that the -good King's title to the laurel was no mere title -by courtesy, but that he had been the author of -a poem which could fairly be regarded as one of -the gems of Scottish literature. There cannot, -in truth, be two opinions about the <i>Kingis -Quair</i>. It is a poem of singular charm and -beauty, and, though it is modelled closely on -certain of Chaucer's minor poems, and is in -other respects largely indebted to them, it is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173" href="#Page_173">[173]</a></span> -no servile imitation; it bears the impress of -original genius, not so much in details and incident -as in tone, colour, and touch; it is a -brilliant and most memorable achievement, and -Rossetti hardly exaggerates when he describes -it as</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"More sweet than ever a poet's heart</div> -<div class="i0">Gave yet to the English tongue."</div></div></div> - -<p>For more than a hundred years it has been the -delight of all who care for the poetry of the -past, and the story it tells, and tells so pathetically, -is now among the "consecrated legends" -which every one cherishes. "The best poet -among kings, and the best king among poets," -the name of the author of the <i>Kingis Quair</i> -heads the list of royal authors. The stanza -which he employed, though invented or adopted -by Chaucer, takes its title from the King, and -"the rime royal" will be in perpetual evidence -of his services to poetry, as the University of St. -Andrews will be of his services to learning and -education. No generation has passed, from Sir -Walter Scott to Mrs. Browning, and from Mrs. -Browning to Gabriel Rossetti, which has not -been lavish of honour and homage to him.</p> - -<p>But, it seems, we have all been under a delusion. -Our simple ancestors believed that James -was the author of <i>Peebles to the Play</i> and -<i>Christ's Kirk on the Green</i>; but <i>Peebles to -the Play</i> and <i>Christ's Kirk on the Green</i> -"are now"—Mr. J. T. T. Brown is speaking—"relegated<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174" href="#Page_174">[174]</a></span> -to the anonymous poetry of the -sixteenth century, inexorably deposed by the -internal evidence"; and Mr. Brown aspires to -send the <i>Kingis Quair</i> the same way. His -fell purpose is "to deprive James of his singing -garment, and reduce him to the humbler rank -of a King of Scots." There is something almost -terrible in the exultation with which Mr. Brown -assumes that—the King's claim to every other -poem attributed to him having been completely -demolished—it only remains to deprive him of -the <i>Kingis Quair</i>, to make his poetical bankruptcy -complete. And to the demolition of the King's -claim to the "Quair" Mr. Brown ruthlessly proceeds. -Now we have no intention of entering -into the question of the authenticity of the -minor poems to which Mr. Brown refers; but -we shall certainly break a lance with this -destructive critic in defence of James's claim -to the <i>Kingis Quair</i>.</p> - -<p>Mr. Brown contends, first, that there is no -satisfactory external evidence in favour of the -King's authorship of the poem; and, secondly, -that the internal evidence is almost conclusive -against him. What are the facts? In the Bodleian -Library is a MS. the date of which is uncertain, -but it cannot be assigned to an earlier -period than 1488. This MS. contains certain -poems of Chaucer, Hoccleve, Lydgate, and others, -together with the <i>Kingis Quair</i>. Of the <i>Kingis -Quair</i> it is, so far as is known, the only MS., and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175" href="#Page_175">[175]</a></span> -to it alone we owe the preservation of the poem. -Both title and colophon assign the work to -James I., the words being: "Heireefter followis -the quair Maid be King James of Scotland ye -first, callit ye Kingis quair, and Maid quhen his -Ma. wes in Ingland," the colophon running, -"Explicit, &c., &c., quod Jacobus primus scotorum -rex Illustrissimus." This is surely precise -enough; but Mr. Brown insists that the -statement carries very little weight, being no -more than the <i>ipse dixit</i> of not merely an -irresponsible, but of an unusually reckless copyist. -The recklessness of this copyist Mr. Brown -deduces from the fact that, of ten poems attributed -to Chaucer in the same MS., five undoubtedly -do not belong to him. On this we -shall only remark that it would be interesting -to know whether these poems have been attributed -to Chaucer in other MSS. In any case, -Mr. Brown must surely know that it is a very -different thing for a copyist to miss-assign a -few short poems and to make a statement so -explicit as the statement here made with regard -to the <i>Kingis Quair</i>. He must either -have been guilty of deliberate fraud—and -what right have we to assume this?—or he -must have been misled, an hypothesis which is -equally unwarrantable, unless it be adequately -supported. And how does Mr. Brown proceed -to support it? He contends that we have no -satisfactory evidence from other sources that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176" href="#Page_176">[176]</a></span> -James was the author of the poem. Walter -Bower, the one contemporary historian, though -he gives in his <i>Scotichronicon</i> an elaborate account -of the King's accomplishments, is silent, -Mr. Brown triumphantly observes, about his -poetry. This may be conceded. But Weldon is -equally silent about the poetry of James VI., -and Buchanan about the poetry of Mary. And -what says the next historian, John Major? "In -the vernacular"—we give the passage in Mr. -Brown's own version—"he was a most skilful -composer.... He wrote a clever little -book about the Queen before he took her to -wife and while he was a prisoner," a plain -reference to the <i>Kingis Quair</i>. Testimony to -his poetical ability is also given by Hector Boyes -in his <i>History of Scotland</i>, "In linguâ vernaculâ -tam ornata faciebat carmina, ut poetam natum -credidisses." So say John Bellenden, John Leslie, -and George Buchanan. Of these witnesses -Mr. Brown coolly observes that they carry little -or no weight, because they only echo each other -and Major. Major, Mr. Brown insists, is "the -sole authority for the ascription to James of the -vernacular poems." Certainly fame in the face -of such critics as Mr. Brown is held on a very -precarious tenure. Dunbar, in his <i>Lament of -the Makaris</i>, enumerates, continues our critic, -twenty-one Scottish poets, but passes James -over in silence, therefore James's title to being -a poet was unknown to him. Possibly; but<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177" href="#Page_177">[177]</a></span> -that Dunbar's list was not meant to be exhaustive -is proved by the fact that he makes -no mention of a poet, and of a considerable poet, -who must have been well known to him, Thomas -of Ercildoune. Nothing can be more misleading -than deductions like these. Ovid has given us -an elaborate catalogue of the poets of his time, -but makes no mention of Manilius. Heywood -and Taylor have given elaborate catalogues of -the contemporary Elizabethan dramatists and -make no mention of Cyril Tourneur. Addison -has given us an account of the principal English -poets, and makes no mention of Shakespeare. If -Dante's and Chaucer's acquaintance with their -distinguished brethren is to be estimated by -those whom they noticed, it must have been far -more limited than we know it, by other evidence, -to have been. Lyndsay, again, is cited as testimony -of ignorance of James's title to rank -among poets; but in the list, in which he is silent -about James, he is silent about poets so famous -as Barbour, Blind Harry, Wyntown, Kennedy, -and Douglas.</p> - -<p>Mr. Brown next proceeds to the question of -internal evidence. He cannot understand how -it could come to pass, that a Scotchman, who left -his native country when he was under twelve -years of age, and who was educated by English -tutors in England, should, after eighteen years -of exile, employ "the Lowland Scottish dialect." -This is surely not very difficult to explain.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178" href="#Page_178">[178]</a></span> -Nothing so much endears his country to a man -as exile, and nothing is more cherished by a -patriot than his native language. Ten years' -exile among the Getæ did not corrupt the Latinity -of Ovid, and more than twenty years' exile -did not impair the purity of Thucydides' Attic. -The King may have had English tutors, but -Wyntown distinctly tells us that he was allowed -to retain, as his companions, four of his -countrymen. When he served in France he had -a Scottish bodyguard. The document in the -King's own handwriting, printed by Chalmers, -proves that in 1412 he was conversant with the -Lowland dialect. In all probability, therefore, -he carefully cherished his native language. The -consensus of tradition places it beyond all doubt -that he composed poetry in the vernacular, and -as he wrote the <i>Kingis Quair</i> when he knew -that he was about to return to Scotland as its -king, it was surely the most natural thing in the -world that he should compose a poem which told -the story of himself and his young bride, whom -he was introducing to his subjects as their queen, -in the language of the country. But, says Mr. -Brown, it is the Lowland dialect, with inflexions -peculiar to Midland English, with many -Chaucerian inflections engrafted on it. And -what more natural? The Midland dialect was -the dialect of his English teachers. The poems -of Chaucer he probably had by heart.</p> - -<p>Mr. Brown's object in all this is to relegate<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179" href="#Page_179">[179]</a></span> -the <i>Kingis Quair</i> to that group of poems -which are represented by the <i>Romaunt of the -Rose</i>, <i>The Court of Love</i>, and <i>Lancelot of the Lak</i>, -which appeared late in the fifteenth century, -and in which all these peculiarities are very -pronounced. Into philological details we have -not space to enter, but this we will say. We -will admit that <i>ane</i> before a consonant, the -past participle in <i>yt</i> or <i>it</i>, the pronouns <i>thaire</i> -and <i>thame</i>, the plural form <i>quhilkis</i>, the employment -of the verb <i>to do</i> in the emphatic conjugation -and the like, are peculiarities which belong -to a period not earlier than about 1440, and -that all these peculiarities are to be found in -the poem. But, we contend that these are just -as likely to be due to the transcriber as they -are to the author. Nothing was so common -with copyists as to import into their texts -the peculiarities of their own dialects, indeed it -was habitual with them. Thus Hampole's <i>Pricke -of Conscience</i> was greatly altered by southern -scribes. Thus, in the Bannatyne MS., Chaucer's -minor poems were similarly altered by northern -scribes. It is, in truth, the very height of rashness -to dispute the genuineness of an original, in consequence -of the presence of peculiarities which -might quite well have been imported into it by -a copyist. The resemblances between this poem -and the <i>Court of Love</i> are, we admit, not -likely to have been mere coincidences, and we -are quite ready to admit that the <i>Court of Love</i><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180" href="#Page_180">[180]</a></span> -in the form in which we have it now, must be -assigned to a much later date, more than a -century later, than the date (1423) assigned to -the <i>Kingis Quair</i>. But this is certain—that -many, and very many, of the resemblances -between the two poems are to be attributed -to the fact that the writers were saturated -with the influence of Chaucer, and delighted -in imitating and recalling his poetry. If, -again, it be assumed that one poem was the -exemplar of the other, this is indisputable, that -the <i>Court of Love</i> was modelled on the <i>Kingis -Quair</i>, and not the <i>Kingis Quair</i> on the <i>Court -of Love</i>. For, setting aside peculiarities which -may be assigned to transcribers, there can be -little doubt that the <i>Court of Love</i> belongs to -the sixteenth century at the very earliest, -while Mr. Brown himself admits that the MS. -of the <i>Kingis Quair</i> may be approximately -fixed at 1488.</p> - -<p>Nothing can be more unsatisfactory than Mr. -Brown's attempt to show that the poem breaks -down in autobiographical details, and that it -derives these details from Wyntown's <i>Chronicle</i>. -James does not mention the exact year in which -he was taken prisoner. He tells us that he -commenced his voyage when the sun had begun -to drive his course upward in the sign of Aries, -that is, on or about the 12th of March—and that -he had not far passed the state of innocence, -"bot nere about the nowmer of zeris thre"—in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181" href="#Page_181">[181]</a></span> -other words, that he was about ten years of age. -Hereupon Mr. Brown, assuming that Wyntown -gives the date of the King's birth correctly, proceeds -to point out that the King was not at this -time "about ten," but that he was about eleven -and a half; and then asks triumphantly whether -James would have been likely to forget his own -age. Again, he contends that the King's capture -could not have taken place in March, because it -is highly probable that at the end of February, -or at the beginning of March, the King was in -the Tower. For the fact that he was in the -Tower at that date there is not an iota of proof, -or even of tolerably satisfactory presumptive -evidence. How the author of the <i>Kingis -Quair</i> could have been indebted to Wyntown's -<i>Chronicle</i> for the autobiographical details it is, -indeed, difficult to see. The poem gives March -as the date of the capture; the <i>Chronicle</i> gives -April. According to the poem, the King's age -at the time of his capture was about ten; -according to the <i>Chronicle</i>, about eleven and a -half. The <i>Chronicle</i> gives the year of the capture; -the poem does not. The <i>Chronicle</i> gives -details not to be found in the poem; the poem -details not to be found in the <i>Chronicle</i>. Mr. -Brown has no authority whatever for asserting -that Book IX. chap. xxv. of the <i>Chronicle</i> was -certainly written years before James returned -to Scotland. All we know about the <i>Chronicle</i> -is that it was finished between the 3rd of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182" href="#Page_182">[182]</a></span> -September, 1420, and the return of James in -April, 1424.</p> - -<p>Mr. Brown must forgive us for expressing -regret that he should have wasted so much time -and learning, in attempting to support a paradox -which can only serve to perplex and mislead. -Scholars, especially in these days, would -do well to remember, that nothing can justify -destructive criticism but a conscientious desire, -on the part of those who apply it, to correct -error and to discover truth. And they would -also do well to ponder over Bacon's weighty -words: "Like as many substances in Nature -which are solid do putrify and corrupt into -worms, so it is the property of good and sound -knowledge to putrify and dissolve into a number -of subtle, idle, unwholesome, and, as I may -term them, vermiculate questions, which have -indeed a kind of quickness and life of spirit, but -no soundness of matter nor goodness of substance."</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183" href="#Page_183">[183]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="WILLIAM_DUNBAR" id="WILLIAM_DUNBAR"> -</a>WILLIAM DUNBAR<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> <i>William Dunbar.</i> By Oliphant Smeaton. Edinburgh: -Oliphant.</p></div> - - -<p>Boswell tells us that he once offered to -teach Dr. Johnson the Scotch dialect, that -the sage might enjoy the beauties of a certain -Scotch pastoral poem, and received for his reply, -"No, sir; I will not learn it. You shall retain -your superiority by my not knowing it." It -would not be true to say that Dr. Johnson's -indifference to the Scotch language and to -Scotch poetry has been shared by all cultivated -Englishmen, but it has certainly been shared by -a very large majority in every generation. The -superb merit of many of the Scotch ballads, the -lyrics of Burns and the novels of Scott have -practically done little to diminish this majority -and to induce English readers to acquire the -knowledge which Dr. Johnson disdained. Nine -Englishmen out of ten read Burns, either with -an eye uneasily fishing the glossary at the bottom -of the page, or <i>ad sensum</i>, that is, in contented -ignorance of about three words in every nine.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184" href="#Page_184">[184]</a></span> -And this is, perhaps, all that can reasonably be -expected of the Southerner. Life is short; the -world of Scotch drink, Scotch religion and -Scotch manners is not, as Matthew Arnold observed, -a lovely one, and the time which such -an accomplishment would require would be far -more profitably spent in acquiring, say, the -language of Dante and Ariosto, or even the -language of the <i>Romancero General</i> and of Cervantes. -A modern reader may stumble, with -more or less intelligence, through a poem of -Burns, catching the general sense, enjoying -the lilt, and even appreciating the niceties of -rhythm. But this is not the case with the Scotch -of the fifteenth century—the golden age of the -vernacular poetry, the age when poets were -writing thus:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Catyvis, wrechis, and ockeraris,</div> -<div class="i0">Hud-pykis, hurdaris, and gadderaris,</div> -<div class="i1">All with that warlo went;</div> -<div class="i0">Out of thair throttis thay schot on udder</div> -<div class="i0">Hett moltin gold, me thocht, a fudder</div> -<div class="i1">As fyre-flawcht, maist fervent,</div> -<div class="i0">Ay as thay tumit them of schot,</div> -<div class="i0">Feyndis fild thame new up to the thrott</div> -<div class="i1">With gold of allkin prent."</div></div></div> - -<p>The usual consequences have been the result -of this ignorance. The Scotch have had it all -their own way in estimating the merits of -their vernacular classics, <a name="Correct10" id="Correct10">and the few outsiders, -whether</a> English or German, who have made -the Scotch language and literature a special<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185" href="#Page_185">[185]</a></span> -subject of study, have very naturally not been -willing to underestimate the value of what it -has cost them labour to acquire, and so have -supported the exaggerated estimates of the -Scotch themselves. What Voltaire so absurdly -said of Dante, that his reputation was safe because -no intelligent people read him, is literally -true of such poets as Henryson, Douglas, and -Dunbar. We simply take them on trust, and, -as with most other things which are taken on -trust, we seldom trouble ourselves about the -titles and guarantees. It may be accepted as -an uncontrolled truth that the world is always -right, and very exactly right, in the long -run. That mysterious tribunal which, resolved -into the individuals which compose it, seems -resolved into every conceivable source of ignorance, -error, and folly, is ultimately infallible. -There are no mismeasurements in the reputation -of authors with whom readers of every -class have been familiar for a hundred years. -But, in the case of minor writers who appeal -only to a minority, critical literature is the -record of the most preposterous estimates. The -history of the building up of these pseudo-reputations -is generally the same in all cases. -First we have the <i>obiter dictum</i> of some famous -man whose opinion naturally carries authority, -uttered, it may be, carelessly in conversation, -or committed, without deliberation, to paper, in -a letter or occasional trifle. Then comes some<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186" href="#Page_186">[186]</a></span> -little man, who takes up in deadly seriousness -what the great man has said, and out comes, -it may be, an essay or article. This wakes -up some dreary pedant, who follows with an -"edition" or "Study," which naturally elicits -from some kindred spirit a sympathetic review. -Thus the ball is set rolling, or, to change the -figure, bray swells bray, echo answers to echo, -and the thing is done. Meanwhile, all that is -of real interest and importance in the author -thus resuscitated is lost sight of; in advocating -his factitious claims to attention his real claims -are ignored. For the true point of view is -substituted a false, and the whole focus of -criticism, so to speak, is deranged. The first -requisite in estimating the work and relative -position of a particular author is the last thing -which these enthusiasts seem to consider, that -is, the application of standards and touchstones -derived not simply from the study of the author -himself, but from acquaintance with the principles -of criticism, and with what is excellent -in universal literature.</p> - -<p>All this has been illustrated in the case of the -poet who is the subject of the volume before -us. As Mr. Ruskin has pronounced <i>Aurora -Leigh</i> to be the greatest poem of this century, -so Sir Walter Scott, who has, by the way, -been singularly unjust to Lydgate and Hawes, -pronounced Dunbar to be "a poet unrivalled -by any that Scotland has ever produced." a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187" href="#Page_187">[187]</a></span> -reckless judgment which he could never have -expressed deliberately. Ellis followed suit, and -in Ellis' notice Dunbar is "the greatest poet -Scotland has produced." These judgments have, -in effect, been reverberated by successive writers -and editors. In due time, some fourteen years -ago, appeared the inevitable German monograph, -"William Dunbar: sein Leben und seine -Gedichte," by Dr. J. Schipper, to whom Mr. -Oliphant Smeaton appropriately and reverently -inscribes the present monograph.</p> - -<p>In Mr. Oliphant Smeaton's work Dunbar -assumes the proportions which might be expected—he -is a "mighty genius." "The peer, -if not in a few qualities, the superior of Chaucer -and Spenser. By the indefeasible passport -of the supreme genius he has an indisputable -title to the apostolic succession of British poetry -to that place between Chaucer and Spenser, -that place which can only be claimed by one -whose genius was co-ordinate with theirs." As -probably eight out of every ten of Mr. Smeaton's -readers will know nothing more of Dunbar than -what Mr. Smeaton chooses to tell them, and as -we, considering the space at our disposal, cannot -refute him by a detailed examination of -Dunbar's works, it is fortunate that he has -given us a succinct illustration of the value of -his critical judgment. The following are four -typical stanzas of a poem which Mr. Smeaton -ranks with Milton's <i>Lycidas</i> and Shelley's<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188" href="#Page_188">[188]</a></span> -<i>Adonais</i>; we give them as Mr. Smeaton gives -them, modernised:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"I that in health was and gladness</div> -<div class="i0">Am troubled now with great sickness.</div> -<div class="i0">Enfeebled with infirmity,</div> -<div class="i4"><i>Timor mortis conturbat me.</i></div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"Our pleasure here is all vain glory,</div> -<div class="i0">This false world is but transitory,</div> -<div class="i0">The flesh is brittle, the fiend is slee,</div> -<div class="i4"><i>Timor mortis conturbat me.</i></div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"The state of man doth change and vary,</div> -<div class="i0">Now sound, now sick, now blyth, now sary</div> -<div class="i0">Now dancing merry, now like to dee,</div> -<div class="i4"><i>Timor mortis conturbat me.</i></div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"No state on earth here stands sicker,</div> -<div class="i0">As with the wind waves the wicker,</div> -<div class="i0">So waves this world's vanity,</div> -<div class="i4"><i>Timor mortis conturbat me.</i>"</div></div></div> - -<p>As the following is pronounced to be one of -the finest stanzas Dunbar ever penned, it is -interesting as illustrating what is, in Mr. Smeaton's -opinion, the best work of this rival of -Chaucer and Spenser:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Have mercy, love, have mercy, lady bright;</div> -<div class="i0">What have I wrought against your womankeid,</div> -<div class="i0">That you should murder me a sackless wight,</div> -<div class="i0">Trespassing on you nor in word nor deed?</div> -<div class="i0">That ye consent thereto, O God forbid;</div> -<div class="i0">Leave cruelty and save your man for shame,</div> -<div class="i0">Or through the world quite losëd is your name."</div></div></div> - -<p>It may be added that what are by far the finest<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189" href="#Page_189">[189]</a></span> -passages in Dunbar's poems are passed unnoticed -and unquoted by Mr. Smeaton. Indeed, his -acquaintance with Dunbar, or, at all events, his -taste in selection, is exactly on a par with that -of Ned Softley's with Waller. "As that admirable -writer has the best and worst verses among -our English poets, Ned," says Addison, "has got -all the bad ones by heart, which he repeats -upon occasion to show his reading." Should -Mr. Smeaton ever meet his idol in Hades, we -would in all kindness advise him to avoid an -encounter; let him remember that the fulsome -eulogy is his own, but that the verses quoted -are the poet's. Attempted murder—so the irate -shade might argue—is less serious than compulsory -suicide.</p> - -<p>Dunbar was undoubtedly a man of genius, -but a reference to the poets who immediately -preceded him will make large deductions from -the praises lavished on him by his eulogists. -He struck no new notes. <i>The Thistle and the -Rose</i> and <i>The Golden Terge</i> are mere echoes of -Chaucer and Lydgate, and, in some degree, of -the author of <i>The King's Quair</i>, and are indeed -full of plagiarisms from them. <i>The Dance of -the Seven Deadly Sins</i> is probably little more -than a faithful description of a popular mummery. -His moral and religious poems had their -prototypes, even in Scotland, in such poets as -Johnston and Henryson. His most remarkable -characteristic is his versatility, which ranges<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190" href="#Page_190">[190]</a></span> -from the composition of such poems as <i>The -Merle and the Nightingale</i> to the <i>Twa Maryit -Wemen and the Wedo</i>, from such lyrics as the -<i>Meditation in Winter</i> to such lyrics as the <i>Plea -for Pity</i>. Mr. Smeaton calls him "a giant in -an age of pigmies." The author or authoress of -<i>The Flower and the Leaf</i> was infinitely superior -to him in point of style, Henryson was infinitely -superior to him in originality, and Gavin Douglas -at least his equal in power of expression and -in description.</p> - -<p>Let us do Dunbar the justice which Mr. -Smeaton has not done him, and take him at -his very best. Here is part of a picture of a -May morning,—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"For mirth of May, wyth skippis and wyth hoppis</div> -<div class="i0">The birdis sang upon the tender croppis,</div> -<div class="i1">With curiouse notis, as Venus Chapell clerkis.</div> -<div class="i0">The rosis yong, new spreding of their knoppis,</div> -<div class="i0">War powderit brycht with hevinly beriall droppis;</div> -<div class="i1">Throu bemes rede, birnyng as ruby sperkis,</div> -<div class="i1">The skyes rang for schoutyng of the larkis."</div></div></div> - -<p>This is brilliant and picturesque rhetoric -touched into poetry by the "Venus Chapell -clerkis," and the magical note in the last line; -so too the touch in <i>The Golden Terge</i>, likening -the faery ship to "blossom upon the spray." -But in his allegorical poem he is too fond of -the "quainte enamalit termes," and his verse -has a certain metallic ring. It will be admitted, -we suppose, that the best of his moral poems<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191" href="#Page_191">[191]</a></span> -would be <i>The Merle and the Nightingale</i> and -"Be Merrie Man"; but the utmost which can -be said for them is, that the philosophy is excellent -and its expression adequate; that is, -that they have little to distinguish them from -hundreds of other poems of the same class.</p> - -<p>In speaking of Dunbar's satires, Mr. Smeaton -indulges himself in the following nonsense, -"From the genial, jesting, and ironical incongruities -of Horace and Persius we are introduced -at once into the bitter, vitriolic scourgings -of Juvenal," and in the following rhodomontade, -telling us that they unite "the natural directness -of Hall, the subtle depth of Donne, the -delicate humour of Breton, the sturdy vigour -of Dryden, the scalding, vitriolic bitterness of -Swift, the pungency of Churchill, the rural -smack of Gay, united to an approach at least -to the artistic perfection of Pope." Stuff like -this and indiscriminate eulogy are, no doubt, -much easier to produce than an estimate of a -writer's historical position and importance. Of -the relation of Dunbar to his predecessors and -contemporaries in England and Scotland, of his -prototypes and models in French and Provençal -literature, of the influence which he undoubtedly -exercised on subsequent poetry, and especially -on Spenser, Mr. Smeaton has nothing to say. -It never seems to occur to him that his hero, -like every one else, must have had his limitations, -that "the many-sidedness of that genius<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192" href="#Page_192">[192]</a></span> -which has a ring"—the metaphors are not ours, -but Mr. Smeaton's—"almost Shakespearian, -about it," could hardly have been distinguished -by uniformity of excellence; that "that painter -of contemporary manners, who had all the -vividness of a Callot, united to the broad -humour of a Teniers and the minute touch of -a Meissonier," who "reflected in his verse the -most delicate <i>nuances</i>, as well as the most -startling colours of the age wherein he lived," -must have had degrees in success.</p> - -<p>We have singled out this volume for special -notice, not because of any intrinsic title it -possesses to serious attention, but because it is -typical of a species of literature which is rapidly -becoming one of the pests of our time. While -every encouragement should be given to sober, -judicious, and competent reviews of our older -writers, every discouragement should be given, -out of respect to the dead, as well as in the -interests of the living, to such books as the -present. For they are as mischievous as they -are ridiculous. They misinform; they mislead; -they corrupt, or tend to corrupt, taste. After -laying down a volume like this we feel, and -we expect Dunbar would have felt, that there -is something much more formidable than the -old horror, "the candid friend," even that indicated -by Tacitus—<i>pessimum inimicorum genus—laudantes</i>.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193" href="#Page_193">[193]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="A_GALLOP_THROUGH_ENGLISH_LITERATURE" id="A_GALLOP_THROUGH_ENGLISH_LITERATURE"> -</a>A GALLOP THROUGH ENGLISH LITERATURE<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> -<i>A Literary History of the English People from the -Origins to the Renaissance.</i> By J. J. Jusserand.</p></div> - - -<p>There is a breeziness and hilarity, a gay -irresponsibility and abandon, about M. -Jusserand which is perfectly delightful. He is -the very Autolycus of History and Criticism. -What more sober students, who have some conscience -to trouble them, are "toiling all their -lives to find" appears to be his as a sort of -natural right. The fertility of his genius is -such, that it seems to blossom spontaneously -into erudition. Like the lilies he toils not, but -unlike the lilies he spins, and very pretty -gossamer too. It is impossible to take him -seriously.</p> - -<p>The truth is that M. Jusserand belongs to a -class of writers which, thanks to indulgent -publishers, a more indulgent public, and most -indulgent reviewers, is just now greatly in the -ascendant. "Encyclopædical heads," who took -all knowledge for their province, probably died<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194" href="#Page_194">[194]</a></span> -with Bacon, but encyclopædical heads who take -all Literature or all History for their province -appear to be as common as the "excellence" -which, in opposition to Matthew Arnold's opinion, -the American lady maintained was so -abundant on both sides of the Atlantic. These -are the gentlemen who complacently sit down -"to edit the Literatures of the world," or "to -trace the development of the human race, from -its picturesque cradle in the valleys of Central -Asia, to its infinite ramifications in our own -day"—within "the moderate compass of an -octavo volume."</p> - -<p>M. Jusserand's first feat is to dispose of some -six centuries in ninety-three pages, in a narrative -which simply tells over again, though certainly -after a more jaunty fashion, what Ten -Brink, Henry Morley, and others have told much -more seriously, and, we may add, much more -effectively. The Norman Conquest and an account -of the Anglo-Norman literature occupy -about a hundred and ten pages, while some -eighty pages more, dealing with the fusion of -the races and the gradual evolution of the English -people and language, bring us to Chaucer. -It might have been expected that M. Jusserand -would have justified his survey of a period so -often reviewed before, either by tracing, with -more fulness and precision than his predecessors, -the successive stages in the development of -our nationality and its expression in literature,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195" href="#Page_195">[195]</a></span> -or by adding to our knowledge of the characteristics -and peculiarities of the literature itself. -He has done neither. He has, on the contrary, -obscured the first by the constant introduction -of irrelevant matter, and he has apparently no -notion of the relative importance of the authors -on whose works he dilates or touches. Thus -Richard Rolle of Hampole fills more space than -Layamon, whose work is despatched in a page! -Thus two lines in a note suffice for the <i>Ormulum</i>, -two lines for Mannyng's <i>Handlyng of Synne</i>, a -singularly interesting and significant work, ten -lines for Robert of Gloucester, who is rather -perplexingly described as "a distant ancestor of -Gibbon and Macaulay," while four pages are -accorded to <i>Tristan</i> and five to the <i>Roman du -Renart</i>. How the Latin Chroniclers fare may -be judged from the fact that a little more than -a page serves for Geoffrey of Monmouth, a line -for Ordericus Vitalis, and two for Giraldus -Cambrensis. In the chapter on Chaucer M. -Jusserand does more justice to his subject, and -it is to be regretted for his own sake that he -has not confined himself to such essays. He is -never safe except when he is on the beaten -path. Nothing could be more inadequate than -the section on Gower. It certainly indicates -that M. Jusserand is not very familiar with -the <i>Confessio Amantis</i>. Not one word is said -about the remarkable prologue, and to dismiss -such a work in less than three pages, observing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196" href="#Page_196">[196]</a></span> -that "it contains a hundred and twelve short -stories, two or three of which are very well -told, one, the adventure of Florent, being, perhaps, -related even better than in Chaucer," is -not quite what we should expect in a work purporting -to narrate the "literary history of the -English people." M. Jusserand has not even -taken the trouble to keep pace with modern -investigation in his subject, but actually tells -us that Gower's <i>Speculum Meditantis</i> is lost! -If Gower's writings are not of much intrinsic -value, they are of immense importance from -an historical point of view. John de Trevisa, a -most important name in the history of English -prose, is despatched in eight lines of mere bibliographical -information, without a word being said -about his great services to our literature, and -without any reference being made either to the -remarkable preface to his great work, or to his -version of the Dialogue attributed to Occam.</p> - -<p>The only satisfactory chapter in the book is -the chapter dealing with Langland and his -works; but it is certainly surprising that no -account should be given of the very remarkable -anonymous poem entitled <i>Piers Ploughman's -Crede</i>. Again, whole departments of literature, -such as the Metrical Romances, the Laies, Fabliaux, -early lyrics and ballads, are most inadequately -treated, some of the most memorable -and typical being not even specified. Surely -Minot was not a man to be dismissed, with a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197" href="#Page_197">[197]</a></span> -flippant joke, in half a page, or <i>King Horn</i> and -<i>Havelok</i> poems to be relegated to passing reference -in a note.</p> - -<p>But it is in dealing with the literature of the -fifteenth century that M. Jusserand's superficiality -and, to put it plainly, incompetence for his -ambitious task become most deplorably apparent. -In treating the earlier periods he had -trustworthy guides even in common manuals, -and he could not go far wrong in accepting -their generalizations and statements. Books -easily attainable, and indeed in everybody's -hands, could enable him to dance airily through -the Anglo-Saxon literature and through the -period between Layamon and Chaucer. No -one can now very well go wrong in Chaucer -and his contemporaries, who has at his side -some half-dozen works which any library can -supply. But it is otherwise with the literature -of the fifteenth century. Here, as every one -who happens to have paid particular attention -to it knows, popular manuals and histories are -most misleading guides. Deterred, no doubt, -by the prolixity of the poetry and by the comparatively -uninteresting nature of the prose -literature, modern historians and critics have -contented themselves with accepting the verdicts -of Warton and his followers, who probably -had as little patience as themselves; and -so a kind of conventional estimate has been -formed, which appears and reappears in every<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198" href="#Page_198">[198]</a></span> -manual and handbook. We turned, therefore, -with much curiosity to this portion of M. Jusserand's -work. We had, we own, our suspicions -about his first-hand knowledge of the literature -through which he glided so easily in the earlier -portions of his book, and here, we thought, -would be the crucial test of his pretension to -original scholarship. Would he do voluminous -Lydgate the justice which, as the specialist -knows, has so long been withheld from him? -Would he point out the strong human interest -of Hoccleve; the great historical interest of -Hardyng; the power and beauty of the ballads; -or, if he included Hawes within the century, -would he show what a singularly interesting -poem, intrinsically and historically, the <i>Pastime -of Pleasure</i> really is? If, again, he included -the Scotch poets, how would he deal with the -problems presented by Huchown? Would he -accord the proper tribute to the genius of Dunbar; -would he estimate what poetry owes respectively -to James I., Henry the Minstrel, -Robert Henryson, and Gavin Douglas? In our -prose literature, would he comment on the great -importance of Pecock's memorable work, of -Fortescue's two treatises, of the <i>Paston Letters</i>, -of Caxton's various publications? How would -he deal with the one "classical" work of the -century, Malory's <i>Morte d'Arthur</i>?</p> - -<p>Now, of Lydgate, "to enumerate whose -pieces," says Warton, "would be to write the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199" href="#Page_199">[199]</a></span> -catalogue of a little library," it is not too much -to say that he was one of the most richly gifted -of our old poets, that as a descriptive poet he -stands almost on the level of Chaucer, that his -pictures of Nature are among the gems of their -kind, that his pathos is often exquisite, "touching," -as Gray said of him, "the very heartstrings -of compassion with so masterly a hand -as to merit a place among the greatest of -poets." His humour is often delightful, and his -pictures of contemporary life, such as his <i>London -Lickpenny</i> and his <i>Prologue to the Storie of -Thebes</i>, are as vivid as Chaucer's. In versatility -he has no rival among his predecessors and -contemporaries. Gray notices that, at times, -he approaches sublimity. His style often is -beautiful,—fluent, copious, and at its best eminently -musical. The influence which he exercised -on subsequent English and Scotch -literature would alone entitle him to a prominent -position in any history of English poetry. -But the handbooks think otherwise, and he -occupies just three pages in M. Jusserand's -work, the only estimate of his work being -confined to the assertion that "he was a worthy -man if ever there was one, industrious and -prolific," etc., and the only criticism is the remark -that his "prosody was rather lax." And -this is how poor Lydgate fares at our historian's -hands. To Hoccleve are assigned just -one page and a few lines. Hardyng figures only<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200" href="#Page_200">[200]</a></span> -in the bibliography at the bottom of a page. -The ballads are despatched in fifteen lines. -Hawes' <i>Pastime of Pleasure</i>, memorable alike -both for the preciseness with which it marks the -transition from the poetry of mediævalism to -that of the Renaissance, for its probable influence -on Spenser, and for its intrinsic charm, its -pathos, its picturesqueness, and its sweet and -plaintive music, is curtly dismissed, as the handbooks -dismiss it, as "an allegory of unendurable -dulness." If M. Jusserand would throw aside -the manuals and turn to the original, he would -probably see reason to modify his verdict. Our -author's breathless gallop through the Scotch -poets, to whom he allots nine pages, can only -be regarded with silent astonishment by readers -who happen to known anything about those -most remarkable men. Huchown is not so -much as mentioned. The amazing nonsense -which he writes in summing up Dunbar, we -will transcribe, <i>ut ex uno discas omnia</i>:</p> - -<blockquote><p>"Dunbar, with never-flagging spirit, attempts every style.... -His flowers are too flowery, his odours too fragrant; -by moments it is no longer a delight, but almost a pain. It -is not sufficient that his birds should sing; they must sing -among perfumes, and these perfumes are coloured."</p></blockquote> - -<p>Has M. Jusserand ever read <i>The Dance of the -Seven Deadly Sins</i>, <i>The Twa Maryit Wemen and -the Wedo</i>, and the minor poems of Dunbar? If -he has, would he pronounce that these "flowers" -are "too flowery"—these "odours" "too fragrant,"<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201" href="#Page_201">[201]</a></span> -or would he feel the absurdity of generalizing -on ludicrously insufficient knowledge? His -verdicts on the other Scotch poets are marked -by the same superficiality, and we regret to add -flippancy. To class Henryson among poets -whose style is "florid" and whose roses are -"splendid but too full-blown" is to show that -M. Jusserand knows as little about him as he -seems to know about Dunbar. In all Henryson's -poems there are only three short passages -which could by any possibility be described as -florid. The prose of the fifteenth century fares -even worse at his hands. Capgrave is mentioned -only in the bibliography! Of the interest -and importance of Pecock, historically -and intrinsically, he appears to have no conception; -on the real significance of the <i>Repressor</i> -he never even touches, and how indeed could -he in the less than one page which is assigned -to one of the most remarkable writers in the -fifteenth century? A page suffices for the <i>Paston -Letters</i>, and four lines for Malory's <i>Morte -d'Arthur</i>!</p> - -<p>Now we would ask M. Jusserand, in all seriousness, -what possible end can be served by a book -of this kind, except the encouragement of everything -that is detestable to the real scholar: -superficiality, want of thoroughness, and false -assumption, and what is more, the public dissemination -of error, and of crude and misleading -judgments. Such a work as the present, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202" href="#Page_202">[202]</a></span> -soundness and trustworthiness of which ninety-nine -readers in every hundred must necessarily -take for granted, can only be justified when it -proceeds from one who is a master of his immense -subject, from one whose generalizations -are based on amply sufficient knowledge, whose -suppressions and omissions spring neither from -carelessness nor from ignorance, but from discrimination, -and in whose statements and judgments -implicit reliance can be placed. To none -of these qualifications has M. Jusserand the -smallest pretension.</p> - -<p>We have no wish to seem discourteous to M. -Jusserand or to say anything which can cause -him annoyance, but it is no more than simple -duty in any critic with a becoming sense of -responsibility to discountenance in every way -the production of such books as these. They -are not only mischievous in themselves, but they -form precedents for books which are more mischievous -still. We like M. Jusserand's enthusiasm, -but we would exhort him to reduce the -flatulent dimensions, which his ambition has -here so unhappily assumed, to that more tempered -ambition which gave us the monographs -on Piers Ploughman and on the Tudor novelists.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203" href="#Page_203">[203]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="DE_QUINCEY_AND_HIS_FRIENDS" id="DE_QUINCEY_AND_HIS_FRIENDS"> -</a>DE QUINCEY AND HIS FRIENDS<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> <i>Personal Recollections, Souvenirs, and Anecdotes of -Thomas De Quincey and his Friends and Associates.</i> -Written and collected by James Hogg.</p></div> - - -<p>To a thoughtful reader there is, perhaps, -no sadder spectacle than those sixteen -volumes which represent all that remains to -us of Thomas De Quincey. What superb -powers, what noble and manifold gifts, what -capacity for invaluable and imperishable achievements -had Nature lavished on this extraordinary -man! Metaphysics might for all time -have been a debtor to that vigorous, acute, -and subtle intellect, at once so speculative and -logical, so inquisitive and discriminating. Æsthetic -criticism might have found in him a -second Lessing, and literary criticism a superior -Sainte-Beuve. For, in addition to all that would -have enabled him to excel in abstract thought, -he had—and in ample measure—the qualities -which make men consummate critics: rare power -of analysis, the nicest perception, sensibility,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204" href="#Page_204">[204]</a></span> -sympathy, good taste, good sense, immense -erudition. He might have contributed masterpieces -to Theology, to History, to Economic -Science. But they know not his name. He has -set his seal on nothing but on English style. -About a hundred and fifty articles contributed -to magazines and encyclopædias, some of them -of a high order of literary merit, many of them -simply worthless, the majority of them containing -what is inferior so disproportionately in -excess of what is valuable that they may be -likened to dustbins, with jewels here and there -glittering among the rubbish;—this is what represents -him. It is as a master of style, by virtue -of what he accomplished as a rhetorician and -prose poet only, that he will live. But this, comparatively -scanty as it is, is of pre-eminent, of -unique value, and will suffice to secure him a -place for ever among the classics of English prose. -He has also another claim, if not to our reverence, -at least to our curious attention and interest,—and -that attention and interest he can -scarcely fail to excite in every generation,—his -autobiographical writings give us a picture, and -that with fascinating power, of one of the most -extraordinary personalities on record.</p> - -<p>Indiscriminating admiration is among the most -pleasing traits of youth, but in men of mature -years it loses its attractiveness. When it is no -longer the effervescence of juvenile enthusiasm -for which all make allowance, it becomes, like<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205" href="#Page_205">[205]</a></span> -the levities of boyhood affected in middle life, -merely vapid folly. In relation to its object it -not only defeats its own ends, but is apt to make -recipient and donor alike ridiculous. Nor is this -all. By some curious law of association which -we cannot pretend to explain, its almost inevitable -ally is dulness, and dulness of a peculiarly -wearisome and exasperating kind. During the -last few years these peculiarities have become so -alarmingly epidemic that it really seems high -time to form, on the principle of Mr. Morris's -Society for the Preservation of Ancient Monuments, -a Society for the Preservation of Literary -Reputations. When those "of whom to be dispraised -were no small praise" take to eulogy and -editing, an unhappy Classic may well look to his -true friends. It is nothing less than appalling to -behold the mountains of rubbish now gradually -accumulating over the work—the real work—of -such poets as Wordsworth, Shelley, and Keats; -rubbish of their own, rescued with cruel industry -from the oblivion to which they would themselves -have consigned it, rubbish of their commentators -and editors, dulness and inanity unutterable. -"What, sir," asked an Eton boy of -Foote, "was the best thing you ever said?" -"Well," was the reply, "I once saw a chimney-sweep -on a high prancing, high-mettled horse. -'There,' said I, 'goes <a name="Correct11" id="Correct11">Warburton on Shakespeare.'"</a> -But it is not in the Warburtons, not in the -chimney-sweepers, that the mischief lies; it is in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206" href="#Page_206">[206]</a></span> -those who may be called the scavengers and -sextons of literature, in those who, utterly unable -to discern between what is precious and -what is worthless in a man's work, thrust all, -without distinction, into prominence, and thus -not only enable an author to "write himself -down," but, by their indiscriminating eulogies, -assist him in his suicide. The subtlest form, -indeed, which detraction can assume is over-praise, -for a man is thus forced to give the lie to -his own reputation.</p> - -<p>No one, perhaps, has suffered so much from -ill-judging admirers as De Quincey. If ever an -author needed a judicious adviser, when preparing -his works for publication in a permanent -form, and a judicious editor, when the time had -come for that final edition on which his title to -future fame should rest, it was the English -opium-eater. But, unhappily, he had no such -adviser in his lifetime, and he has had no such -editor since. He consequently reprinted much -which ought never to have been reprinted at all, -and he omitted to reprint some things which -would have done honour to him. His besetting -faults, even in his vigour, were loquacity and -silliness, a habit of "drawing out the thread of -his verbosity finer than the staple of his argument"—a -tendency to peddle and dawdle, as well -as to indulge in a sort of pleasantry, so attenuated -as to border closely on inanity. As he -grew older these habits became more confirmed.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207" href="#Page_207">[207]</a></span> -His puerility and garrulousness in his later writings -are often intolerable. But this was not the -worst. In revising some of his earlier papers, -and particularly the <i>Confessions</i>, he not only -imported into them tiresome irrelevancies and -superfluities, but, in emending, ruined the glorious -passages on which his fame as a rhetorician -and prose poet rests; such has been the fate, -among others, of the exquisite description of the -powers of opium,—the superb passage beginning, -"The town of L.. represented the earth with -its sorrows and its graves,"<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> and of the dreams in -the second part of the <i>Confessions</i>, particularly -of the sublime one beginning, "The dream commenced -with a music."<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> - -<p>Mr. James Hogg tells us that his design in -publishing the present volume was that he -might "place a stone upon the cairn of the -man" who had treated him "with an almost -paternal tenderness." We sincerely sympathize -with Mr. Hogg's pious intention, but we submit -that the truest kindness which he, or any other -admirer of De Quincey could do him, would be -not to augment but to lighten the cairn which -indiscreet admirers are so industriously piling -over him. To change the figure, the best service -which could be rendered to De Quincey would -be to relieve him of his superfluous baggage, not<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208" href="#Page_208">[208]</a></span> -to add to it. His fame would stand much higher, -if his sixteen volumes were vigorously weeded; -if the sweepings and refuse of his study, so injudiciously -given to the world by Dr. Japp and -Mr. Hogg, were given instead to the flames; and -if reminiscents and biographers would only leave -him to tell, in his own fashion, his own story, -especially as it is one of those stories the interest -of which depends purely on the telling. We -have already expressed our sympathy with Mr. -Hogg's pious intention. It only remains for us -to express our regret that Mr. Hogg's piety -should have taken the form of the most barefaced -piece of book-making which we ever remember -to have met with. Addison, if we are -not mistaken, somewhere describes a man to -whom a single volume afforded all the amusement -and variety of a whole library, for, by the -time he had arrived at the middle, he had completely -forgotten the beginning, and when he -arrived at the end, he had completely forgotten -the whole. Mr. Hogg appears to proceed on the -assumption that it is pretty much the same with -the public and its memory, that its capacity for -amusement is permanent, but that its recollection -of what has amused it is so treacherous, that -repetition will be sure to have all the attraction -of novelty. This is, no doubt, unhappily true. -But it is a truth which no critic has a right to -concede.</p> - -<p>All that is of interest in this volume is little<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209" href="#Page_209">[209]</a></span> -more than the literal reproduction, in another -shape, of material embodied in a Life of De -Quincey, published by Dr. Alexander Japp, under -the pseudonym of H. A. Page, in 1877. Its exact -composition is as follows. Eliminating the preface -and the index, the book consists of 359 -pages. Of these, seventy consist of a dreary -<i>réchauffé</i> by Dr. Japp himself of his own Life of -De Quincey, and of the additional information -contained in his edition of the Posthumous -Works. Next comes a series of reminiscences, -extracted from Dr. Japp's Life, from Dr. Garnett's -edition of the <i>Confessions</i>, from the <i>Quarterly -Review</i>, and from other sources all equally -accessible. Then Mr. Hogg himself opens fire -with <i>Days and Nights with De Quincey</i>. An -essay—"On the supposed Scriptural Expression -for Eternity"—excellently illustrating De Quincey -in his senility, is reprinted, with awe-struck -admiration, from the American edition of his -works.</p> - -<p>For the purpose, presumably, of adding to the -bulk of the book, Moir's ballad, <i>De Quincey's -Revenge</i>, is included, though its sole connection -with De Quincey is, that it deals with a -legend concerning the possible ancestors of a -possible branch of his possible family. Then we -have one of Mr. Shadworth Hodgson LL.D.'s -<i>Outcast Essays</i>, "On the genius of De Quincey," -the reason for the hospitable entertainment of -the outcast being by no means apparent. Among<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210" href="#Page_210">[210]</a></span> -other dreary trifles is a reprint of a Latin theme, -one of De Quincey's college exercises. As Mr. -Hogg has chosen to reprint and translate this, it -would have been as well to print and translate -it correctly. "Quæ ansibus obstant" should, of -course, have been "ausibus," and "oculi perstringuntur" -cannot possibly mean "are spellbound," -but "are dazzled."</p> - -<p>The republication of these pieces was, we -repeat, a great mistake, another lamentable illustration -of the cruel wrong which officious -and ill-judging admirers may inflict on a writer's -reputation. Talleyrand once observed that, a -wise man would be safer with a foolish than -with a clever wife, for a foolish wife could -only compromise herself, but a clever wife -might compromise her husband. Substituting -'unambitious' for 'foolish' and 'ambitious' for -'clever,' we are very much inclined to apply -the same remark to a great writer and his -friends. It requires a Johnson to support a -Boswell, and a Goethe to support an Eckermann.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> See Works. Black's Edit., Vol. I. p. 212, compared with -original Edit., pp. 113-114.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> <i>Id.</i>, p. 272 and original Edit., pp. 177-178.</p></div> -</div> - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211" href="#Page_211">[211]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="LEES_LIFE_OF_SHAKESPEARE" id="LEES_LIFE_OF_SHAKESPEARE"> -</a>LEE'S <i>LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE</i><a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> -<i>A Life of Shakespeare.</i> By Sidney Lee.</p></div> - - -<p>It is a pleasure to turn from the slovenly and -perfunctory work, from the plausible charlatanry -and pretentious incompetence which it has -so often been our unwelcome duty to expose in -these columns, to such a volume as the volume -before us. It is books like these which retrieve -the honour of English scholarship. A wide -range of general knowledge, immense special -knowledge, scrupulous accuracy, both in the -investigation and presentation of facts, the -sound judgment, the tact, the insight which in -labyrinths of chaotic traditions and conflicting -testimony can discern the clue to probability and -truth—these are the qualifications indispensable -to a successful biographer of Shakespeare. And -these are the qualifications which Mr. Lee possesses, -in larger measure than have been possessed -by any one who has essayed the task -which he has here undertaken. A ranker and -more tangled jungle than that presented by the -traditions, the apocrypha, the theories, the conjectures -which have gradually accumulated<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212" href="#Page_212">[212]</a></span> -round the memory of Shakespeare since the -time of Rowe, could scarcely be conceived. In -this jungle some, like Charles Knight, have -altogether lost themselves; others, like Joseph -Hunter, have struck out vigorously into wrong -tracks, and floundered into quagmires. Halliwell -Phillipps, sure-footed and wary though he was, -certainly had not the clue to it. But Mr. Lee, -who can plainly say with Comus,—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"I know each lane, and <a name="Correct12" id="Correct12">every alley green,</a></div> -<div class="i0">Dingle or bushy dell of this wild wood,</div> -<div class="i0">And every bosky bourne from side to side,</div> -<div class="i0">My daily walks and ancient neighbourhood,"</div></div></div> - -<p>has thridded it, and taught others to thrid -it, as no one else has done. And he will -have his reward. He has produced what deserves -to be, and what will probably become, -the standard life of our great national poet.</p> - -<p>Mr. Lee's book is substantially a reproduction -of his article on Shakespeare, contributed to the -<i>Dictionary of National Biography</i>, the high -merits of which have long been recognised by -scholars; and he has certainly done well to -make that article popularly accessible by reprinting -it in a separate form. But the present -volume is not a mere reproduction of his contribution -to the Dictionary; it is much more. -He has here filled out what he could there -sketch only in outline; what he could there -state only as results and conclusions, he here -illustrates and justifies by corroboration and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213" href="#Page_213">[213]</a></span> -proof. He has, moreover, both in the text and -in the appendices, brought together a great -mass of interesting and pertinent collateral -matter which the scope of the Dictionary necessarily -precluded.</p> - -<p>More than a century ago George Steevens -wrote: "All that can be known with any degree -of certainty about Shakespeare is that he was -born at Stratford-on-Avon, married and had -children there, went to London, where he commenced -actor, wrote poems and plays, returned -to Stratford, made his will, died, and was buried -there." And, if we set aside probable inferences, -this is all we do know of any importance about -his life. His pedigree cannot certainly be traced -beyond his father. Nothing is known of the -place of his education—that he was educated at -the Stratford Grammar School is pure assumption. -His life between his birth and the publication -of <i>Venus and Adonis</i> in 1593, is an -absolute blank. It is at least doubtful whether -the supposed allusion to him in Greene's <i>Groat's -Worth of Wit</i>, and in Chettle's <i>Kind Heart's -Dream</i> have any reference to him at all; it is -still more doubtful whether the William Shakespeare -of Adrian Quiney's letter, or of the Rogers -and Addenbroke summonses, or the William -Shakespeare who was assessed for property in -St. Helens, Bishopsgate, was the poet. We -know practically nothing of his life in London, -or of the date of his arrival in London; we are<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214" href="#Page_214">[214]</a></span> -ignorant of the date of his return to Stratford, -of his happiness or unhappiness in married life, -of his habits, of his last days, of the cause of his -death. Not a sentence that fell from his lips -has been authentically recorded. At least one-half -of the alleged facts of his biography is as -purely apocryphal as the life of Homer attributed -to Herodotus.</p> - -<p>But probability, as Bishop Butler says, is the -guide of life, and on the basis of probability -may be raised, it must be owned, a fairly satisfactory -biography. Mr. Lee has not been able -to contribute any new facts to Shakespeare's -life, which is certainly not his fault; but he -has given us a recapitulation, as lucid as it is -exhaustive, of all that the industry of successive -generations of memorialists from Ben Jonson -to Halliwell Phillipps has succeeded in accumulating, -and he has been as judicious in what -he has rejected as in what he has adopted. -From the curse of the typical Shakespearian -biographer—we mean the statement of mere inference -and hypothesis as fact—he is absolutely -free. He has done excellent service in giving, -if not finishing, at least swashing blows to the -monstrous fictions of the theorists on the sonnets, -particularly to the Fitton-Pembroke mare's nest, -fictions which have been gradually generating a -Shakespeare, as purely apocryphal as the Roland -of the song or the Apollonius of Philostratus.</p> - -<p>Mr. Lee's most remarkable contribution to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215" href="#Page_215">[215]</a></span> -speculative Shakespearian criticism, in which, -we are glad to say, he does not often indulge, is -his contention that the W. H. of the dedication -to the sonnets was William Hall, a small piratical -stationer. It is never wise to speak positively -on what must necessarily be, till certain -evidence is obtainable, a matter of speculation. -But we are very much inclined to think that Mr. -Lee's contention has at least something in its -favour. Our readers will remember that one of -the chief points in the enigma of the sonnets is -the dedication, and it runs thus: "To the onlie -begetter of these ensuing Sonnets, Mr. W. H., all -happiness and that eternitie promised by our -ever-living poet wisheth the well-wishing adventurer -in setting forth. T. T." It has generally -been assumed that the "W. H." is the youth who -is the hero of the first group of sonnets, and the -poet's friend, and he has commonly been identified -either with William Herbert, third Earl of -Pembroke, or with Henry Wriothesley, third Earl -of Southampton. The difficulties in the way of -either hypothesis—and on each hypothesis not -Babels merely, but cities of Babels have been -raised—are to an unprejudiced mind insurmountable. -Mr. Lee maintains with plausible -ingenuity, but not, we think, conclusively, that -there is no proof that the youth of the sonnets -was named "Will" at all. His analysis of the -"Will" sonnets is a masterpiece of subtle ingenuity, -and well deserves careful attention.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216" href="#Page_216">[216]</a></span> -He then proceeds to adopt the theory that the -word "begetter" is not to be taken in the sense -of "inspirer," but simply as "procurer" or -"obtainer" of the sonnets for T. T., <i>i.e.</i>, the -publisher, Thomas Thorpe. In other words, that -Thorpe dedicated the sonnets to W. H., in return -for W. H. having piratically obtained them for -him. This is at least doubtful. In the first -place it may reasonably be questioned whether -"begetter" could have the meaning which is here -assigned to it; the passages quoted from <i>Hamlet</i> -("acquire and beget a temperance") and from -Dekker's <i>Satiro-mastix</i>, "I have some cousins -german at Court shall beget you the reversion -of the Master of the King's Revels," are anything -but conclusive. Still, Thorpe, who is by no -means remarkable for the purity of his English, -may have used it in the sense which Mr. Lee's -theory requires.</p> - -<p>Shakespeare's sonnets, as is well known, -were circulating among his friends in manuscript, -and Mr. Lee has discovered that one -William Hall was well known as an Autolycus -among publishers, and had already edited, under -the initials W. H., a collection of poems left -by the Jesuit poet, Southwell—in other words -had already done for the publisher, George Eld, -what it is assumed that he now did for Thomas -Thorpe. Mr. Lee's theory is, it must be admitted, -plausible, and few would hesitate to pronounce -it far more probable than the theory which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217" href="#Page_217">[217]</a></span> -would identify the enigmatical initials with -the names of Pembroke or Southampton.</p> - -<p>The chapters dealing with the sonnets are, in -our opinion the most valuable contribution which -has ever been made to this important province -of Shakespearian study, and it may be said of -Mr. Lee, as Porson said of Bentley, that we may -learn more from him when he is wrong than -from many others when they are right. His -contention is, and it is supported with exhaustive -erudition, that these poems are, in the main, -a concession to the fashion, then so much in -vogue, of sonnet writing; that their themes are -the conventional themes treated in those compositions; -that some of them were dedicated to -Southampton, that some may be autobiographical, -but that they are wholly miscellaneous, -and tell no consecutive story, as so many critics -have erroneously assumed. We cannot accept -all Mr. Lee's theories and conclusions, but one -thing is certain, that they are supported with -infinitely more skill and learning than any other -theories which have been broached on this hopelessly -baffling problem.</p> - -<p>We will conclude by noticing what seem to us -slight blemishes in this admirable work. There -is nothing to warrant the assertion on p. 158 that -most of Shakespeare's sonnets were produced in -1594, which is to cut the knot of a most difficult -question. Indeed, with respect to the whole -question of the sonnets, Mr. Lee is, we venture<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218" href="#Page_218">[218]</a></span> -to submit, a little too dogmatic. It is a question -which no one can settle as positively as Mr. Lee -seems to settle it. There is surely no good, or even -plausible reason for doubting the authenticity of -<i>Titus Andronicus</i>, whatever innumerable Shakespearian -critics may say, external and internal -evidence alike being almost conclusive for its -genuineness. There is nothing to warrant the -supposition that Shakespeare was on bad terms -with his wife. The famous bequest in his Will -was probably a delicate compliment, and we are -surprised that Mr. Lee should not have noticed -this. Among the testimonies to Shakespeare -in the seventeenth century, Mr. Lee should -have recorded that of Archbishop Sharp, who, -according to Speaker Onslow, used to say "that -the Bible and Shakespeare had made him Archbishop -of York."</p> - -<p>Mr. Lee must also forgive us for adding that, -in this work at least, æsthetic criticism is not -his strong point, and he would have done well -to keep it within even narrower bounds than he -has done. Many of those who would be the first -to admire his erudition and the other scholarly -qualities which are so conspicuous in every -chapter of his book, will, we fear, take exception -to much of his criticism, especially in relation to -the sonnets. It is too positive; it is unsympathetic; -it is too mechanical. But our debt to Mr. -Lee is so great, that we feel almost ashamed to -make any deductions in our tribute of gratitude.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219" href="#Page_219">[219]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="SHAKESPEARES_SONNETS" id="SHAKESPEARES_SONNETS"> -</a>SHAKESPEARE'S SONNETS<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> -<i>The Mystery of Shakespeare's Sonnets: an attempted -Elucidation.</i> By Cuming Walters. <i>Testimony of the -Sonnets as to the Authorship of the Shakespearian Plays -and Poems.</i> By Jesse Johnson. <i>Shakespeare's Sonnets -Reconsidered and in part Re-arranged, with Introductory -Chapters, Notes and a Reprint of the Original 1609 Edition.</i> -By Samuel Butler.</p></div> - - -<p>There goes a story that an ingenuous youth, -who had the privilege of an introduction -to Lord Beaconsfield, resolved to make the best of -the occasion, by extracting, if possible, from that -astute political sage the secret of success in life. -It might take the form, he thought, of a little -practical advice. For that advice, explaining -the object with which it was asked, he accordingly -applied. "Yes," said Lord Beaconsfield, -"I think I can give you some advice which may -possibly be of use to you. Never trouble yourself -about The Man in the Iron Mask, and never -get into a discussion about the authorship of the -Letters of Junius." In all seriousness we think -it is high time that the "closure" should be<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220" href="#Page_220">[220]</a></span> -applied to a debate on another "mystery" of -which every one must be tired to death, except -perhaps those who contribute to it. If some progress -could be made towards the solution of the -Mystery of Shakespeare's Sonnets, if there was -the faintest indication of any dawn on the darkness, -even the wearied reviewer would be patient. -But the thing remains exactly where it was, -before this appalling literary epidemic set in. -During the last three or four years scarcely a -month has passed without its "monograph," -many of these treatises, mere replicas of their -predecessors, differing only in degrees of stupidity -and uselessness. Mr. Cuming Walters' volume, -sensible enough and intelligent, we quite concede, -simply thrashes the straw. It professes to -be an original contribution to the question. There -is not a view or theory in it, which is not now -a platitude to every one who has had the patience -to follow this controversy. It analyses the -Sonnets; they have been analysed hundreds of -times. It asks who was W. H.; it answers the -question as it has been answered <i>usque ad -nauseam</i>. It discusses the dark lady, and lands -us in the same shifting quagmire of opinion in -which Mr. Tyler and his coadjutors and opponents -have been floundering for the last four years. -It assumes, it rejects, it questions, it suggests, -what has been assumed, rejected, questioned, -and suggested over and over again. Indeed, it -may now be said with literal truth that, unless<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221" href="#Page_221">[221]</a></span> -some fresh discovery is made, nothing new, -whether in the way of absurdity or sense, can -be advanced on this subject. But books are -multiplied with such rapidity and in such prodigious -numbers in these days, that they thrive, -like cannibals, on one another. The last comer -is simply its forgotten predecessor in disguise.</p> - -<p>But platitude is the very last charge that can -be brought against Mr. Jesse Johnson's contribution -to the curiosities of Shakespearian criticism. -The theory advanced here is, that Shakespeare -never wrote the Sonnets at all, that he was quite -unequal to their composition, that the author of -them "was probably fifty, perhaps sixty, and -that he was besides a man of genius, which -Shakespeare certainly was not. I would not," -says Mr. Jesse Johnson, "deny to Shakespeare -great talent. His success in and with theatres -certainly forbids us to do so. That he had a -bent or a talent for rhyming or for poetry, an -early and persistent tradition and the inscription -over his grave indicate. And otherwise -there could hardly have been attributed to him -so many plays, besides those written by the -author of the Sonnets." Shakespeare may have -been equal to trifles like <i>Hamlet</i> or <i>Lear</i>—for -Mr. Jesse Johnson would be the last to dispute -the claim made for Shakespeare as a hard-working -playwright clearing his twenty-five -thousand dollars a year (Mr. Jesse Johnson is -calculating his income according to the present<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222" href="#Page_222">[222]</a></span> -time)—but "to Shakespeare working as an actor, -adapter or perhaps author came a very great -poet, one who outclassed all the writers of that -day, and it is the poetry of that great unknown -which, flowing into Shakespeare's work, comprises -all or nearly all of it which the world treasures -or cares to remember." If we told Mr. Jesse -Johnson, and all who resemble Mr. Jesse Johnson, -the truth about their productions, we are quite -certain of one thing—but the one thing of which -we are certain it would, perhaps, be good taste in -us to leave unsaid.</p> - -<p>Of a very different order is Mr. Samuel -Butler's <i>Shakespeare's Sonnets Reconsidered</i>. -This is the work of a scholar, but of a scholar -mounted on a hobby-horse of unusually vigorous -mettle. Mr. Butler begins with a tremendous -onslaught on the theories of the Southamptonites, -the Herbertists and the anti-autobiographical -party; and in this part of his work he has certainly -much to say which is both pertinent and plausible, -nay, in our opinion, convincing. But he is -less successful in construction than in demolition. -His own contention is, that the Sonnets are -undoubtedly autobiographical, and very derogatory -to Shakespeare's moral character. He is -satisfied that "Mr. W. H." was the youth who -inspired them, not the youth who simply -collected, or procured them, and gave them to -Thorpe, but that this youth was neither the -Earl of Southampton nor the Earl of Pembroke,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223" href="#Page_223">[223]</a></span> -nor, indeed, any one of superior social rank to -the poet, though this has always been assumed. -Adopting the theory of Tyrwhitt and Malone -that the key to the youth's name is to be found -in the seventh line of the twentieth sonnet,—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"A man in hew all <i>Hewes</i> in his controlling."</div></div></div> - -<p>and deducing, with them, from Sonnets cxxxv., -cxxxvi. and cxliii. that the youth's Christian -name was William, Mr. Butler believes, as they -did, that the youth's name was William Hughes, -or Hewes; and Mr. Butler is inclined to identify -him, though he speaks, of course, by no means -confidently, with a William Hughes, who served -as steward in the <i>Vanguard</i>, <i>Swiftsure</i> and -<i>Dreadnought</i>, and who died in March, 1636-7. -Mr. Butler supports his theories with hypotheses -which an impartial judge of evidence will find -it difficult to concede. In the face of Sonnets -xxxvi., xxxvii. and cxxiv. the contention that -the youth was not in a superior social station to -the poet cannot be maintained with any confidence. -There are still graver difficulties in the -way of supposing that the Sonnets were written -between January, 1585-6 and December, 1588. -That they could be the work of a young man -between his twenty-first and his twenty-fourth -year, and have preceded by some four years -the composition of <i>Venus and Adonis</i> and the -<i>Rape of Lucrece</i>, is simply incredible; but it is a -question which cannot be argued, for we have<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224" href="#Page_224">[224]</a></span> -nothing but mere hypothesis to go upon. Mr. -Butler's arrangement and interpretation of the -Sonnets are, moreover, purely fanciful. When -Mr. Butler would have us believe that some of -the Sonnets in the second group, from cxxvii. -to clii., are addressed to and concern not the -woman, but the youth, he asks us to accept a -theory which is not only revolting, but which -sets all probability at defiance. Similarly absurd, -he must forgive us for saying, is his grotesquely -repulsive interpretation of Sonnet xxxiv. Nor -is there anything to justify the interpretation -placed on Sonnets xxxiii. and xxxiv. or the collocation -of cxxi. All that can be said for Mr. -Butler's exceedingly ingenious and admirably -argued theory is, that it supports a view of the -question which, if it admits of no positive confutation, -produces no conviction. No theory, -based on an arbitrary arrangement of these -poems and on positive deductions drawn, or -rather strained, from most ambiguous evidence -and from pure hypotheses, can possibly be satisfactory.</p> - -<p>The problem presented in these Sonnets is -undoubtedly the most fascinating problem in -all literature, and it is as exasperating as it -is fascinating. It appears to be so simple, it -seems constantly to be on the verge of its -solution, and yet the moment we get beyond a -certain point in inquiry, the more complex its -apparent simplicity is discovered to be, the more<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225" href="#Page_225">[225]</a></span> -hopeless all prospect of explaining the enigma. -Take the difficulty of assuming, what seems -to be obvious, that they are autobiographical. -Here we have the poet, and that poet Shakespeare, -admitting the world into the innermost -secrets of his life, taking his contemporaries, -without the least reserve, into his confidence, -inviting and assisting them to the study of his -own morbid anatomy, and, in a word, stripping -himself bare with all the shameless abandon of -Jean Jacques and of Casanova. Everything -that we know of Shakespeare seems to discountenance -the probability of his having any -such intention. No anecdote, with the smallest -pretence to authenticity, couples his name with -scandal. The theory which identifies him with -the W. S. of Willobie's <i>Avisa</i> has no real basis -to rest on, and without corroboration is -absolutely inadmissible as evidence. Whatever -Shakespeare's private life may have been, it -is quite clear that he carefully regarded the -decencies, and would have been the last man in -the world to pose publicly in the character presented -to us in the Sonnets. If the poems are -autobiographical, we can only conclude that -they were published without his consent, and -even to his great annoyance. This may certainly -have been the case, and is indeed often -assumed to have been so. But even then it -is, to say the least, curious, that there should -have been no tradition about the extraordinary<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226" href="#Page_226">[226]</a></span> -story which they tell, especially considering the -distinction of the <i>dramatis personæ</i>. Assuming -that the youth, who is their hero, was a real -person, he must, judging from Sonnets xxxvi., -xxxvii. and cxxiv., have been conspicuous in the -society of that time; assuming the rival poet to -be a real person, he must have been equally conspicuous -in another sphere, while Shakespeare -himself, at the time the Sonnets were published, -was the most distinguished poet and playwright -in London. It is, therefore, extraordinary that -all traces of an affair in which persons of so -much eminence were involved, and which would -have furnished scandal-mongers with the topics -in which such gossips most delight, should have -entirely disappeared. We must either conclude -that posterity has been very unfortunate in the -loss of records which would have thrown light -on the matter, or that Shakespeare's contemporaries -knew nothing of the facts, and contented -themselves with the poetry; or, lastly, that -what we may call the fable of the Sonnets, the -drama in which W. H., "the dark lady," and the -rival poet play their parts, is as fictitious as the -plot of <i>The Midsummer Night's Dream</i> or <i>The -Tempest</i>.</p> - -<p>It is not our intention to support any of the -numerous theories which pretend to give us the -key to these Sonnets, still less to propose any -new one, but simply to show that the enigma -presented by them is as insoluble as ever, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227" href="#Page_227">[227]</a></span> -that all attempts to throw light on it have -served to effect nothing more than to make -darkness visible and confusion worse confounded. -Let us briefly review the facts. In 1609, Thomas -Thorpe, a well-known Elizabethan bookseller, -published a small quarto volume, entitled <i>Shakespeare's -Sonnets</i>, having apparently not obtained -them from the poet himself, and to this volume -was prefixed the following dedication:—"To -the onlie begetter of these ensuing Sonnets, Mr. -W. H., all happiness and that eternitie promised -by our ever-living poet wisheth the well-wishing -adventurer in setting forth. T. T." Here begins -and ends all that is certainly known about -W. H. and his relation to these poems. No one -knows who he was; no one knows what is -exactly meant by the word "begetter," whether -it is to be taken in the sense of inspirer, whether -that is to say W. H. is the youth celebrated -in the Sonnets—"the master-mistress" of the -poet's passion, or whether it simply means the -person who got or procured the poems for -Thorpe,—in which case the identification of the -initials is of no consequence, unless we are -to suppose that the youth who inspired them -presented them to Thorpe. Mr. Sidney Lee, in -his very able paper in the <i>Fortnightly Review</i> for -February, 1898, and in his Life of Shakespeare, -argues that there is no proof that the youth -of the Sonnets was named "Will," though -this has always been assumed to be the case.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228" href="#Page_228">[228]</a></span> -The evidence on which the point must be -argued will be found in the puns on "Will" -in Sonnets cxxxiv.-vi. and cxliii. It seems to -us, we must own, that the balance of probability, -though not certainly in favour of the -affirmative, decidedly inclines towards it. -Granting then,—for it is, after all, only an -hypothesis,—that the initials W. H. are those of -the youth celebrated in the Sonnets, to whom -are they to be assigned? The youth, whoever he -was, is represented as being in a social position -superior to that of the poet; he has apparently -rank and title; he has wealth; he is young and -eminently handsome, his beauty being of a -delicate, effeminate cast; he is highly cultivated -and accomplished; he is on terms of the closest -intimacy with the poet, by whom he is passionately -beloved; he lives a free, loose life, and he -intrigues with his friend's mistress.</p> - -<p>Passing by all preposterous theories about -William Harte, William Hughes, William Himself -and the like, we come to the two names -which seem worth serious consideration, William -Herbert, third Earl of Pembroke, and Henry -Wriothesly, third Earl of Southampton. The -Pembroke theory, with Mr. Thomas Tyler's -corollary identifying the "dark lady" with -Mary Fitton, has been adopted by Dr. Brandes -in his work on Shakespeare just published. But -the difficulties in the way of accepting it are -insuperable. They have been admirably discussed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229" href="#Page_229">[229]</a></span> -by Mr. Sidney Lee in the article to which -we have referred. In the first place, while -Shakespeare must have been on terms of more -than brotherly intimacy with the youth of the -Sonnets, there is no evidence at all that he had -ever been in any other relation with the Earl -than in the ordinary one of servant and patron. -The words of Heminge and Condell, in the dedication -of the first folio to Pembroke and his -brother, merely state that they had both of -them "prosequted" him with favour; in other -words, been to him what they had been to -many other dramatists and men of letters; and -that is the only evidence of any connection -between Shakespeare and Pembroke. Tradition -was certainly silent about any relations between -them, for Aubrey, as Mr. Lee has pointed out, -though he has collected much information about -both, says nothing about their acquaintanceship, -though he mentions Pembroke's connection -with Massinger, and Southampton's with -Shakespeare. But Thorpe's dedication is conclusive -against Pembroke. In 1609, Pembroke, -who had succeeded to the title on the death of -his father in January, 1601, was Lord Chamberlain, -a Knight of the Garter, and one of the -most distinguished noblemen in England. Is -it credible that Thorpe would address him as -Mr. W. H., more especially as in the other -works which he inscribed to him,—and he -inscribed several,—he is careful to give him all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230" href="#Page_230">[230]</a></span> -his titles, and to address him with the most -fulsome servility? Again, Pembroke, as Mr. -Lee points out, was never a "Mister" at all. As -the eldest son of an earl, he was designated by -courtesy Lord Herbert, and as Lord Herbert he -is always spoken of in contemporary records. -The appellation "Mr." was not, as Mr. Lee -observes, used loosely, as it is now, and could -never have been applied to any nobleman, -whether holding his title by right or by courtesy. -Whatever allowance may be made for a poet's -passion and fancy, some weight must be attached -to the insistence made in the Sonnets on the -youth's delicate and effeminate beauty. It is -true that we have no portraits of Pembroke -before he arrived at middle age, but those -portraits justify us in concluding that he -could never, at any time, have been distinguished -by beauty of the type indicated in the -poems.</p> - -<p>Against all this the advocates of the Pembroke -theory have nothing to place but conjectures, a -series of insignificant coincidences and the -assumption that the woman in the Sonnets is to -be identified with the woman who bore Herbert -a child, Mary Fitton. The publication of Sonnet -xliv. by Jaggard, in 1599, shows that the intrigue -between the youth and the dark lady, which is -the central event of the Sonnets, was already, -and had probably been for some time, in full -career, while there is no evidence that Pembroke<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231" href="#Page_231">[231]</a></span> -was involved with Mary Fitton before -the summer of 1600. But what finally disposes -of this theory is the testimony afforded by -Lady Newdigate-Newdegate's recently published -<i>Gossip from a Muniment Room</i>. Indispensable -requisites in the lady of the Sonnets are, -that she should be dark, a "black beauty" with -"eyes raven black," with hair which resembles -"black wires," and that she should be a married -woman; but the portraits—and there are two of -them—of Mary Fitton, show that she had a fair -complexion, with brown hair and grey eyes; and -she remained unmarried, until long after her -connection with Pembroke had ceased.</p> - -<p>The theory which identifies W. H. with the -Earl of Southampton is slightly more plausible, -but the difficulties in the way of accepting it are, -in truth, equally insuperable. This theory has -at least one great point in its favour. Shakespeare -was acquainted, and it may be inferred -intimately acquainted, with Southampton, as -the dedications of <i>Venus and Adonis</i> and the -<i>Rape of Lucrece</i> indicate. Of his affection and -respect for this nobleman he has left an expression -almost as remarkable as the language of the -sonnets. "The love I dedicate to your lordship -is without end.... What I have done is yours; -what I have to do is yours: being part in all I -have devoted yours. Were my worth greater, -my duty would show greater." This bears a -singularly close resemblance to Sonnet xxvi.,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232" href="#Page_232">[232]</a></span>—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Lord of my love, to whom in vassalage</div> -<div class="i0">Thy merit hath my duty strongly knit,</div> -<div class="i0">To thee I send this written embassage</div> -<div class="i0">To witness duty, not to show my wit,</div> -<div class="i0">Duty so great, which wit so poor as mine</div> -<div class="i0">May make seem bare, in wanting words to show it."</div></div></div> - -<p>And there is much in the Sonnets which can be -made to coincide with what we know of Southampton. -But, as we push inquiry, difficulties of -all kinds begin to swarm in on us. The first is, -as in the case of Pembroke, with the dedication. -To say nothing of the fact that "W. H." is not -"H. W."—the possibility of the appellation of -"Mr." being applied to one who had been an -Earl since 1581, and who had twice been addressed -in dedications by his full titles, and that -by Shakespeare himself, is a wholly inadmissible -hypothesis. To argue that this was merely "a -blind," is simply to beg the question. If the -Sonnets were addressed to Southampton, they -must have been written between 1593 and 1598. -In 1593 Southampton was in his twenty-first -year, in 1598 in his twenty-sixth; Shakespeare, -respectively, in his thirty-first and thirty-fifth -year. Now, what is especially emphasized in the -sonnets is the youthfulness of the young man to -whom they are dedicated, and the advanced -age of the poet. In Sonnet cviii. the youth is -addressed as "a sweet boy," in cxxvi. as "a -lovely boy," in liv. as "a beauteous and lovely -youth"; in xcv. his "budding name" is referred<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233" href="#Page_233">[233]</a></span> -to, while the poet speaks of himself as "old," as -"beaten and chopped with tanned antiquity," as -being "with Time's injurious hand crushed and -o'erworn." And so, as has been more than once -pointed out, we have this anomaly—a man of -thirty-four describing himself as a thing of -"tanned antiquity" in writing to "a sweet and -lovely boy" of twenty-five. No one could have -been less like the effeminate youth of the Sonnets -than Southampton. All we know about -him, including his portraits, indicates that he -was eminently masculine and manly. Again, it -is matter of history that he greatly distinguished -himself on the Azores expedition in -1597, acquitting himself with so much gallantry -that, during the voyage, he was knighted by -Essex. To this expedition, which must have -involved one of those absences of which we hear -so much in the Sonnets, to this exploit and this -honour, which afforded so much opportunity for -peculiarly acceptable compliment, Shakespeare -makes no reference at all. There is nothing to -indicate that the youth of the Sonnets had -gained any military or political distinction, had -taken any part in public life, or had ever been -absent from England. To assume with Mr. Lee -that the Sonnets were written in or before 1594, -and therefore before Southampton had become -distinguished, is to involve ourselves in inextricable -difficulties. Even Mr. Lee admits that -Sonnet cvii. must have reference to the death<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234" href="#Page_234">[234]</a></span> -of Elizabeth in 1603. With regard to the -supposed references to Southampton's relations -with Elizabeth Vernon, no certain, or, to speak -more accurately, no even plausible inferences -can be drawn in any particular: all that they -can be reduced to are degrees of improbability.</p> - -<p>If, again, we accept the theory of Tyrwhitt and -Malone, supported by Mr. Butler, and suppose -that W. H. was some obscure person, we are -proceeding on mere hypothesis, and a hypothesis -seriously shaken by the plain meaning expressed -in Sonnets xxxvi., xxxvii., and cxxiv.</p> - -<p>The enigma of these Sonnets is, we repeat, as -insoluble now as it was when inquiry was first -directed to them. Whether they are to be regarded -as autobiographical, as dramatic studies, -as a mixture of both, as a collection of miscellaneous -poems, as written to order for others, -as mere exercises in the sonnet-cycle, or as all -of these things, is alike uncertain. Our knowledge -of the time of their composition begins -and ends with the facts, that some of them -were, presumably, in circulation in or before -1598, that two of them had certainly been composed -in or before 1599, and that all of them -had been written by 1609. The rest is mere -conjecture; and on mere conjecture and mere -hypothesis is based every attempt to solve -their mystery. If certainty about them can -ever be arrived at, it can only be attained by -evidence of which, as yet, we have not even an<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235" href="#Page_235">[235]</a></span> -inkling. The probability is, that it was Shakespeare's -intention, or rather Thorpe's intention, -to baffle curiosity, and, except in the judgment -of fanatics, he has certainly succeeded in doing -so.</p> - -<p>For our own part we are very much inclined -to suspect, that they owed their origin to the -fashion of composing sonnet-cycles, that those -cycles suggested their themes and gave them -the ply; that the beautiful youth, the rival poet, -and the dark lady are pure fictions of the -imagination; and that these poems are autobiographical -only in the sense in which <i>Venus and -Adonis</i>, the <i>Rape of Lucrece</i>, <i>Romeo and Juliet</i> -and <i>Othello</i> are autobiographical.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236" href="#Page_236">[236]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="LANDSCAPE_IN_POETRY" id="LANDSCAPE_IN_POETRY"> -</a>LANDSCAPE IN POETRY<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> <i>Landscape in Poetry from Homer to Tennyson.</i> By -Francis T. Palgrave.</p></div> - - -<p>It would be scarcely possible for a critic of -Mr. Palgrave's taste and learning to produce -a treatise on any aspect of poetry, which would -not be full of interest and instruction, and the -present volume is a contribution, and in some -respects a memorable contribution, to a particularly -attractive subject of critical inquiry. -Its purpose is to trace the history of descriptive -poetry in its relation, that is to say, to natural -objects and more particularly to landscape, by -illustrating its characteristics at different periods, -and among different nations. Beginning with -the Homeric poems, Mr. Palgrave reviews successively -the "landscape" of the Greeks, the -Romans, the Hebrews, the mediæval Italians, -the Celts, the Anglo-Saxons, and of our own -poets, from the predecessors of Chaucer to Lord -Tennyson. That a work, covering an area so -immense, should be far less satisfactory in some -portions than in others is no more than what<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237" href="#Page_237">[237]</a></span> -might be expected, and Mr. Palgrave would -probably be himself the first to admit that, except -when he is dealing with the classical poetry -of Hellas, of ancient and mediæval Italy, and of -our own country, his treatise has no pretension -to adequacy. Even within these bounds there -is much which is irrelevant, and much which is -surprisingly defective. Where, as in a subject -like this, the material at the author's disposal is -necessarily so superabundant, surely the utmost -care should have been taken both to keep within -the limits of the theme proposed, and to select -the most pertinent and typical illustrations. -But when Mr. Palgrave illustrates "Homeric -landscape" by the simile describing the heifers -frisking about the drove of cows in the fold-yard, -and the "Sophoclean landscape" by the -simile of the blast-impelled wave rolling up the -shingle, he lays himself open to the imputation -of drawing at random on his commonplace -book. Indeed, the pleasure with which lovers -of classical poetry will read this book cannot -fail to be mingled with the liveliest surprise and -disappointment. Take the Homeric poems. If -a reader, tolerably well versed in the <i>Iliad</i> and -<i>Odyssey</i>, were asked for illustrations of the -power with which natural phenomena are described, -to what would he turn? Certainly not -to Mr. Palgrave's meagre and trivial examples, -three of which alone have any title to pertinence. -He would turn to the winter landscape<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238" href="#Page_238">[238]</a></span> -in <i>Iliad</i>, xii. 278-286, to the lifting of the cloud -from the landscape in <i>Iliad</i>, xvi. 296:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="hôs d' hot' aph' hypsêlês koryphês oreos megaloio">ὡς δ' ὁτ' αφ' ὑψηλης κορυφης ορεος μεγαλοιο</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="kinêsê pykinên nephelên steropêgereta Zeus,">κινηση πυκινην νεφελην στεροπηγερετα Ζευς,</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="ek t' ephanen pasai skopiai kai prôones akroi">εκ τ' εφανεν πασαι σκοπιαι και πρωονες ακροι</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="kai napai, ouranothen d' ar' hyperrhagê aspetos aithêr.">και ναπαι, ουρανοθεν δ' αρ' ὑπερῥαγη ασπετος αιθηρ.</ins></div></div></div> - -<blockquote><p>"As when Zeus, the gatherer of the lightning, moves a -thick cloud from the high head of some mighty mountain, -and all the cliffs and the jutting crags and the dells start -into light, and the immeasurable heaven breaks open to its -highest";</p></blockquote> - -<p>to the descent of the wind on the sea, <i>Ib.</i> xi. -305-308:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="hôs hopote Zephyros nephea styphelixê">ὡς ὁποτε Ζεφυρος νεφεα στυφελιξη</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="argestao Notoio, batheiê lailapi typtôn;">αργεσταο Νοτοιο, βαθειη λαιλαπι τυπτων;</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="pollon de trophi kyma kylindetai, hypsose d' achnê">πολλον δε τροφι κυμα κυλινδεται, ὑψοσε δ' αχνη</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="skidnatai ex anemoio polyplanktoio iôês.">σκιδναται εξ ανεμοιο πολυπλαγκτοιο ιωης.</ins></div></div></div> - -<blockquote><p>"As when the west wind buffets the cloudlets of the -brightening south wind, lashing them with furious squall, -and the big wave swells up and rolls along, and the spray is -scattered on high by the blast of the careering gale";</p></blockquote> - -<p>or to the pictures of the billow-buffeted headland, -and the wave bursting on the ship in <i>Iliad</i>, xv. -618-628; or to the storm-cloud coming over the -sea in <i>Iliad</i>, iv. 277; or to the descent of the -wind on the standing corn, <i>Iliad</i>, ii. 147. He -would point, above all, to the description of -Calypso's grotto, in <i>Odyssey</i>, v. 63-74; to that -of the harbour of Phorcys, in <i>Odyssey</i>, xiii. -97-112; to the fountain in the grove, xvii. -205-211. Mr. Palgrave comments justly on -Homer's minute observation of nature; but he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239" href="#Page_239">[239]</a></span> -only gives one illustration, where it is noticed in -<i>Odyssey</i>, vi. 94, that the sea, in beating on the -coast, "washed the pebbles clean." He might -have added with propriety many others: as -the "earth blackening behind the plough," in -<i>Iliad</i>, xviii. 548; the bats in the cave, <i>Odyssey</i>, -xxiv. 5-8; the birds escaping from the vultures, -<i>Iliad</i>, xxii. 304, 305; the wasps "wriggling as -far as the middle," <ins title="sphêkes meson aioloi">σφηκες μεσον αιολοι</ins>, <i>Iliad</i>, -xii. 167; the dogs and the lions, <i>Iliad</i>, xviii. -585, 586.</p> - -<p>Mr. Palgrave observes that Homer "was not -only familiar with the sea, but loved it with a -love somewhat unusual in poets." We venture -to submit that there is not a line in Homer -indicating that he "loved" the sea, except for -poetical purposes; like most of the Greeks he -probably dreaded it; his real feeling towards -it is no doubt indicated in his own words:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="ou gar egô ge ti phêmi kakôteron allo thalassês">ου γαρ εγω γε τι φημι κακωτερον αλλο θαλασσης</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="andra ge suncheuai.">ανδρα γε συγχευαι.</ins></div></div></div> - -<p>—nothing crushes a man's spirit more than -the sea. Mr. Palgrave justly points out that -Hesiod's rude prosaic style and matter are not -congenial to the poetic landscape, yet it is only -fair to Hesiod to say, that his poetry is not without -vivid touches of natural description, as the -winter scene in <i>Works and Days</i>, 504 sqq., and -his description of the beginning of spring, -565-569, show. Professor Palgrave next glances<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240" href="#Page_240">[240]</a></span> -at the treatment of nature in the lyric poets, -and very properly cites the lovely fragment of -Alcman:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i8"><ins title="bale dê bale kêrylos eiên">βαλε δη βαλε κηρυλος ειην</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="hos t' epi kymatos anthos ham' alkyonessi potêtai,">ὁς τ' επι κυματος ανθος ἁμ' αλκυονεσσι ποτηται,</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="nêleges êtor echôn, haliporphyros eiaros ornis,—">ηλεγες ητορ εχων, ἁλιπορφυρος ειαρος ορνις,—</ins></div></div></div> - -<p>but in translating it makes a truly extraordinary -blunder.</p> - -<blockquote><p>"Would I were the kingfisher, as he flies, with his mates -<i>in his feeble age</i>, between wind and water."</p></blockquote> - -<p><ins title="nêleges êtor">νηλεγες ητορ</ins> meaning, as we need hardly say, -"reckless heart"; it is exactly Byron's, "With -all her <i>reckless</i> birds upon the wing." In -the quotations from Sappho, Ibycus, and -Pindar, Mr. Palgrave has been judicious and -happy, but surely he ought to have found place -for the lovely flower cradle of Iamus in the sixth -Olympic Ode, and for the moonlight evening -in the third Olympian,—only seven words, but -what a picture!—while, in the popular poetry, -the omission of the Swallow Song is inexplicable.<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> -Nor can we forgive him the omission -of the magnificent simile of the spring wind -clearing away the clouds, in the thirteenth of -the fragments attributed to Solon.</p> - -<p>But it is in dealing with the Greek dramatists -that Mr. Palgrave is most defective in illustration. -It is not to the opening of the <i>Prometheus</i>, or to -the conclusion, or, indeed, to any of the passages<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241" href="#Page_241">[241]</a></span> -from this poet which Mr. Palgrave cites, that -we must turn for Æschylean landscape, or for -illustration of this poet's power of natural description. -It is to his brief picture—his pictures -of scenery, though singularly vivid, are always -brief—of the airy seat "against which the -watery clouds drift into snow,"</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="lissas aigilips aprosdeiktos oiophrôn kremas">λισσας αιγιλιψ απροσδεικτος οιοφρων κρεμας</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="gypias petra">γυπιας πετρα</ins> (<i>Supplices</i>, 772-3),</div></div></div> - -<p>where almost every word is a perfect picture, -literally beggaring mere translation; it is to his -description, so magical in its rhythm, of the -mid-day sea slumbering in summer calm (<i>Agamemnon</i>, -548-50),</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="ê thalpos, eute pontos en mesêmbrinais">η θαλπος, ευτε ποντος εν μεσημβριναις</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="koitais akymôn nênemois eudoi pesôn,">κοιταις ακυμων νηνεμοις ευδοι πεσων,</ins></div></div></div> - -<p>to his picture of the keen brisk wind, clearing -the clouds away, to bring into relief against the -sky the dark masses of waves tossing on the horizon -(<i>Agamemnon</i>, 1152-54), to his world-famous</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i8"><ins title="pontiôn kymatôn">ποντιων κυματων</ins></div> -<div class="i4"><ins title="anêrithmon gelasma.">ανηριθμον γελασμα.</ins></div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"The multitudinous laughter of the ocean waves."</div> -<div class="i10">—<i>Prometheus</i>, 89-90.</div></div></div> - -<p>Mr. Palgrave has, of course, cited with reference -to Sophocles the great chorus in the <i>Œdipus -Coloneus</i>, but he has omitted to notice that, if -Sophocles has not elsewhere given us so elaborate -a piece of natural description, innumerable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242" href="#Page_242">[242]</a></span> -touches in the dramas, and more particularly in -the fragments, show that he observed nature -almost as minutely as Shakespeare. Nothing -could be more vivid than the touches of description -in the <i>Philoctetes</i>. From Euripides Mr. Palgrave -cites nothing, observing that he rarely goes -beyond somewhat conventional phrases. Surely -Mr. Palgrave must have forgotten the magnificent -description of Parnassus, as seen from the -plain, in the <i>Phœnissæ</i>, the glorious description -of a moonlight night, as represented on the -tapestry, in the <i>Ion</i>, the vivid touches of natural -description in the <i>Bacchæ</i>, that of the meadow -in the <i>Hippolytus</i>, and the chorus about Athens -in the <i>Medea</i>, to say nothing of the charming -rural picture in the fragments of the <i>Phaeton</i>.<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> -To say of Aristophanes that, in his treatment of -nature, he rarely goes beyond somewhat common -phrases, is to say what is refuted, not merely in -the chorus referred to by Mr. Palgrave, but in -the <i>Frogs</i> and in the <i>Birds</i>. He stands next to -Homer in his keen sensibility to the charm of -nature. Shelley himself might have written -the choruses referred to. In dealing with the -Alexandrian poets Mr. Palgrave passes over -Apollonius Rhodius and Callimachus entirely, -and yet the fine picture of Delos given by Callimachus -in the Hymn to Delos is one of the -gems of ancient description, and Apollonius -Rhodius abounds with the most graphic and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_243" id="Page_243" href="#Page_243">[243]</a></span> -charming delineations of scenery and natural -objects. What a beautiful description of early -morning is this!—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="êmos d' ouranothen charopê hypolampetai êôs">ημος δ' ουρανοθεν χαροπη ὑπολαμπεται ηως</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="ek peratês aniousa, diaglaussousi d' atarpoi,">εκ περατης ανιουσα, διαγλαυσσουσι δ' αταρποι,</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="kai pedia drosoenta phaeinê lampetai aiglê.">και πεδια δροσοεντα φαεινη λαμπεται αιγλη.</ins></div> -<div class="i11"><i>Argon.</i> i. 1280-1283.</div></div></div> - -<blockquote><p>"What time from heaven the bright glad morn coming up -from the East begins to shine, and path and road are all -agleam, and the dew-bespangled plains are flashing with the -radiant light."</p></blockquote> - -<p>How vivid too, and with the vividness of modern -poetry, are his descriptions of the cave of Hades -and its neighbourhood (ii. 729-750), and the -Great Syrtis (iv. 1230-1245)! In his selections -from the Greek Anthology Mr. Palgrave is much -happier; but here again he has many omissions, -and among them the most remarkable illustration -of Greek nature-painting to be found in -that collection—namely, Meleager's idyll giving -an elaborate description of a spring day, which -might have been written by Thomson (<i>Pal. -Anthology</i>, ix. 363). It may be observed in -passing that <ins title="ouresiphoita krina">ουρεσιφοιτα κρινα</ins> (<i>Pal. Anth.</i>, v. 144) -can hardly mean "lilies that wander over the -hills," but lilies "that haunt the hills," and that -<ins title="xouthai melissai">ξουθαι μελισσαι</ins> in Theocritus, vii. 142, probably -means "buzzing" bees, not "tawny."</p> - -<p>In dealing with the Roman poets Mr. Palgrave -is, with one exception, most unsatisfactory. -From the poets preceding Lucretius, amply as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_244" id="Page_244" href="#Page_244">[244]</a></span> -the fragments would serve his purpose, he gives -only one illustration. We should have expected -the vivid picture given by Accius in his <i>Œnomaus</i> -of the early morning:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Forte ante Auroram, radiorum ardentum indicem,</div> -<div class="i0">Cum e somno in segetem agrestis cornutos cient,</div> -<div class="i0">Ut rorulentas terras ferro rufidas</div> -<div class="i0">Proscindant, glebasque arvo ex molli exsuscitent."</div></div></div> - -<blockquote><p>"Perchance before the dawn that heralds the burning rays, -what time rustics bring forth the oxen from their sleep into -the cornfields, to break up the red dew-spangled soil with the -ploughshare, and turn up the clods from the soft soil";</p></blockquote> - -<p>or the wonderfully graphic description of a -sudden storm at sea, in the fragments of the -<i>Dulorestes</i> of Pacuvius:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i1">"Profectione læti piscium lasciviam</div> -<div class="i0">Intuentur, nec tuendi capere satietas potest.</div> -<div class="i0">Interea prope jam occidente sole inhorrescit mare,</div> -<div class="i0">Tenebræ conduplicantur, noctisque et nimbum occæcat nigror,</div> -<div class="i0">Flamma inter nubes coruscat, cælum tonitru contremit,</div> -<div class="i0">Grando mixta imbri largifico subita præcipitans cadit,</div> -<div class="i0">Undique omnes venti erumpunt, sævi existunt turbines,</div> -<div class="i0">Fervit æstu pelagus."</div></div></div> - -<blockquote><p>"Glad at heart when they set out they gaze at the sporting -fish, and are never weary of looking at them. Meanwhile, -hard upon sunset, the sea ruffles, darkness gathers thick, the -blackness of the storm-clouded night hides everything, flame -flashes between the clouds, heaven shakes with thunder, -hail, mingled with streaming rain, dashes suddenly down, -from every quarter all the winds tear forth, wild whirlwinds -rise, the sea boils with the seething waters."</p></blockquote> - -<p>With Lucretius, indeed, he deals fully, and this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_245" id="Page_245" href="#Page_245">[245]</a></span> -portion of his work leaves little to be desired. -But a reference to the lines to Sirmio and one -illustration from the <i>Peleus and Thetis</i> exhaust -his examples from Catullus. We should have -expected the picture of the stream leaping from -the mossy rock into the valley beneath, in the -Epistle to Manlius, of the morning chasing -away the shadows in the <i>Attis</i>, and the lovely -flower pictures in the Epithalamia. In dealing -with Virgil most of Mr. Palgrave's citations -are practically irrelevant; scarcely any of the -passages which best illustrate Virgil's power -of landscape painting being even referred to. -"The <i>Æneid</i>," says Mr. Palgrave, "may be -briefly dismissed. Natural description can -have but little place in an epic." And yet -what are the passages to which any one, who -wishes to illustrate the charm and power of -Virgil's pictures of scenery, would naturally -turn? Surely to these: the description of the -rocky recess which sheltered Æneas's ships -(<i>Æneid</i>, i. 159-168), a picture worthy of Salvator; -the picture of Ætna (iii. 570-582), which -rivals the picture of it given by Pindar, a picture -praised so justly by Mr. Palgrave himself; the -description of a calm night (iv. 522-527); the -wave-buffeted, gull-haunted rock (v. 124-128); -and, above all, the scenery at the mouth of the -Tiber, bathed in the rays of the morning sun, -a picture unexcelled even by Tennyson. Nor -even in the <i>Georgics</i> is any reference made to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_246" id="Page_246" href="#Page_246">[246]</a></span> -the superb description of a storm in harvest -time (i. 216-334), or to the magnificent winter -piece (iii. 349-370).</p> - -<p>The remarks about the indifference of Propertius -to natural scenery are most unjust. -What a charming picture is this!—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i1">"Grata domus Nymphis humida Thyniasin,</div> -<div class="i0">Quam supra nullæ pendebant debita curæ</div> -<div class="i1">Roscida desertis poma sub arboribus;</div> -<div class="i0">Et circum irriguo surgebant lilia prato</div> -<div class="i1">Candida purpureis mixta papaveribus."</div> -<div class="i10"><i>El.</i>, I. xx. 35-39.</div></div></div> - -<p>It may be conceded that Ovid is conventional -and commonplace in his treatment of nature; but -why is Valerius Flaccus, with his bold, vivid -touches, left unnoticed? Why does one citation -suffice for the many exquisite cameos which -ought to have been given from Statius? Another -inexplicable omission in Mr. Palgrave's work is -the poem entitled <i>Rosæ</i>, attributed to Ausonius—a -lovely poem, infinitely more beautiful -than the epigram quoted by Mr. Palgrave from -the Latin Anthology, and rivalling the fragment -given by him from Tiberianus. Most readers -would agree with him in his estimate of Claudian, -but he might have added the fine description of -Olympus in the <i>De Consulatu Theodori</i>, 200-210:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i6">"Ut altus Olympi</div> -<div class="i0">Vertex, qui spatio ventos hiemesque relinquit,</div> -<div class="i0">Perpetuum nullâ temeratus nube serenum</div> -<div class="i0">Celsior exsurgit pluviis, auditque ruentes</div> -<div class="i0">Sub pedibus nimbos, et rauca tonitrua calcat;"</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_247" id="Page_247" href="#Page_247">[247]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<p>which Goldsmith, by the way, has borrowed and -paraphrased in the <i>Deserted Village</i>, together with -its sublime application:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">As some tall cliff that lifts its awful form</div> -<div class="i0">Swells from the vale and midway leaves the storm,</div> -<div class="i0">Though round its breast the rolling clouds are spread,</div> -<div class="i0">Eternal sunshine settles round its head.</div></div></div> - -<p>Space does not serve to follow Mr. Palgrave -through his chapters on Italian, Celtic, and Anglo-Saxon -poetry, in all of which his omissions are -as remarkable as his citations; so we must content -ourselves with making a few remarks on -his treatment of the English poets. It is pleasing -to see that, guided by Gray, he has done justice -to Lydgate, but he has not noticed the distinguishing -peculiarity of this poet in his description, -his extraordinary sensitive appreciation of -colour.</p> - -<p>Among the Scotch poets of the fifteenth century -a prominent place should have been given -to Henryson who is not even mentioned. Mr. -Palgrave hurries over the Elizabethan poets -with too much expedition, and the poets of the -eighteenth century fare even worse. Great injustice -is done to Thomson. Why did not Mr. -Palgrave, instead of citing what he calls Thomson's -"cold" tropical landscape, for the purpose -of contrasting it unfavourably with Tennyson's -picture in <i>Enoch Arden</i>, give us instead the -Summer morning<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_248" id="Page_248" href="#Page_248">[248]</a></span>—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"At first faint gleaming in the dappled East</div> -<div class="i0">... Young day pours in apace,</div> -<div class="i0">And opens all the lawny prospect wide,</div> -<div class="i0">The dripping rock, the mountain's misty tops</div> -<div class="i0">Swell on the sight, and brighten with the dawn,</div> -<div class="i0">Blue through the dusk the smoking currents shine,"</div></div></div> - -<p>or</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i3">"The clouds that pass,</div> -<div class="i0">For ever flushing round a summer sky";</div></div></div> - -<p>or the rainbow in the <i>Lines to the Memory of -Sir Isaac Newton</i>? Dyer may be somewhat -prosaic, but he is not a poet to be despatched in -a treatise on descriptive poetry, without citation, -in a few contemptuous lines: how vivid is his -picture of a calm in the tropics!—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"The dewy feather, on the cordage hung,</div> -<div class="i0">Moves not; the flat sea shines, like yellow gold</div> -<div class="i0">Fused in the fire";</div></div></div> - -<p>or his</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">"Rocks in ever-wild</div> -<div class="i0">Posture of falling";</div></div></div> - -<p>or the charming landscape in <i>Grongar Hill</i> with -such touches as these:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"The windy summit wild and high</div> -<div class="i0">Roughly rushing on the sky";</div></div></div> - -<p>or</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Rushing from the woods the spires</div> -<div class="i0">Seem from hence ascending fires."</div></div></div> - -<p>As Wordsworth said, "Dyer's beauties are innumerable -and of a high order." It is very surprising -that nothing should have been said<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_249" id="Page_249" href="#Page_249">[249]</a></span> -about Shenstone and the Wartons, about Scott of -Amwell, Jago, Crowe and Bowles, all of whom are, -in various ways, remarkable as descriptive poets. -And certainly Mr. Palgrave does scant justice to -Cowper; his touch may be prosaic, but he always -had his eye on the object, and his landscape -lives. Surely, by the way, Mr. Palgrave is mistaken -in supposing that Shelley apparently -understood Alastor to mean a "wanderer"; he -understood it, as the preface shows, to mean, -what it means so often in Greek, "one under the -spell of an avenging deity."</p> - -<p>Here we must break off. Mr. Palgrave's is an -important work, and it is the duty, therefore, of -a critic to review it seriously, in the hope that, -should it reach a second edition, which may be -confidently anticipated, Mr. Palgrave may be -disposed to do a little more justice to his most -interesting subject.</p> - -<blockquote><p>Since this article was written Mr. Palgrave's lamented -death has unhappily rendered all hope of what was anticipated -in the last paragraph, vain. But the review has been -reprinted, and with some additions, in the hope that it may -not be unacceptable as a contribution, however slight and -imperfect, to a subject of great interest to lovers of poetry.</p></blockquote> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> See Bergk, Poet. Lyr. <i>Carm.</i> Pop. xxix.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> Nauck, <i>Trag. Græc. Frag.</i>, p. 473.</p></div> -</div> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_250" id="Page_250" href="#Page_250">[250]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="AN_APPRECIATION_OF_PROFESSOR_PALGRAVE" id="AN_APPRECIATION_OF_PROFESSOR_PALGRAVE"> -</a>AN APPRECIATION OF PROFESSOR PALGRAVE</h2> - - -<p>A familiar figure in literary circles, a fine -critic, a graceful and scholarly minor -poet, and one whose name will long be held in -affectionate remembrance by lovers of English -poetry, has passed away in the person of Francis -Turner Palgrave. It would be absurd to place -him beside Matthew Arnold—to whose genius, to -whose characteristic accomplishments, to whose -authority and influence, he had no pretension. -And yet it may be questioned whether, after -Arnold, any other critic of our time contributed -so much to educate public taste where, in this -country, it most needs such education. If, as a -nurse of poets and in poetic achievement, England -stands second to no nation in Europe, in no -nation in the world has the standard of popular -taste been so low, has the insensibility to what -is excellent, and the perverse preference of what -is mediocre to what is of the first order, been so -signally, so deplorably, conspicuous. The generation -which produced Wordsworth preferred -Moore, and no less a person than the author -of <i>Vanity Fair</i> wrote:—"Old daddy Wordsworth<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_251" id="Page_251" href="#Page_251">[251]</a></span> -may bless his stars if he ever gets high -enough in Heaven to black Tommy Moore's -boots." While the readers of Keats might have -been numbered on his fingers, Robert Montgomery's -<i>Satan</i> and <i>Omnipresence of the Deity</i> -were going through their twelfth editions. -During many years, for ten readers of Browning's -poems there were a hundred thousand -for Martin Tupper's <i>Proverbial Philosophy</i>, while -the popularity of Mrs. Browning was as a wan -shadow to the meridian splendour of Eliza -Cook. Whoever will turn to the criticism of -current reviews and magazines forty years ago -will have no difficulty in understanding the -diathesis described by Matthew Arnold as "on -the side of beauty and taste, vulgarity; on the -side of morality and feeling, coarseness; on the -side of mind and spirit, unintelligence." Whoever -will turn to nine out of the ten Anthologies, -most in vogue before 1861, will understand, -that the same instinct which in the Dark -Ages led man to prefer Sedulius and Avitus to -Catullus and Horace, Statius to Virgil, and -Hroswitha to Terence, led these editors to analogous -selections.</p> - -<p>Making every allowance for the co-operation -of other causes, it would hardly be an exaggeration -to say that the appearance of the <i>Golden -Treasury of Songs and Lyrics</i> in 1861 initiated -an era in popular taste. It remains now incomparably -the best selection of its kind in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_252" id="Page_252" href="#Page_252">[252]</a></span> -existence. Its <a name="Correct13" id="Correct13">distinctive feature is the characteristic</a> -which differentiates it from all the anthologies -which preceded or have followed it. It was -to include nothing which was not first-rate; -there was to be no compromise with the second-rate; -if its gems varied, as gems do in value, -each was to be of the first water. With patient -and scrupulous diligence, the whole body of -English poetry, from Surrey to Wordsworth, was -explored and sifted. After due rejections, each -piece in the residue was considered, weighed, -tested. And here Mr. Palgrave had assistance, -more invaluable than any other anthologist in -the world has had—that of the illustrious poet -to whom the volume was dedicated. It may be -safely said of Tennyson that nature and culture -had qualified him for being as great a critic as -he was a poet. His taste was probably infallible; -his touchstones and standards were derived not -merely from the masters who had taught him -his own art, but from a wonderfully catholic and -sympathetic communion with all that was best -in every sphere of influential artistic activity. -The consequence is, that a book like the <i>Golden -Treasury</i>, especially when taken in conjunction -with the notes, which form an admirable commentary -on the text, may be said to lay something -more than the foundation of a sound -critical education. What the <i>Golden Treasury</i> -is to readers of a maturer age the <i>Children's -Treasury</i> is to younger readers. It is a great<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_253" id="Page_253" href="#Page_253">[253]</a></span> -pity that such inferior works as many which we -could name are allowed, in our schools, to supplant -such a work as Palgrave's. The same exquisite -taste and nice discernment mark his other -anthologies, his selections from Herrick, and -Tennyson, and, though perhaps in a less degree, -his <i>Treasury of English Sacred Poetry</i>, and -his recently published supplement to the <i>Golden -Treasury</i>. It is probably impossible to over-estimate -the salutary influence which these -works have exercised.</p> - -<p>There is no arguing on matters of taste, and -exception might easily be taken, sometimes, to his -dicta as a critic. But this at least must be conceded -by everybody, that in the best and most -comprehensive sense of the term he was a man -of classical temper, taste, and culture, and that -he had all the insight and discernment, all the -instincts and sympathies, which are the result of -such qualifications. He had no taint of vulgarity, -of charlatanism, of insincerity. He never talked -or wrote the cant of the cliques or of the multitude. -He understood and clung to what was -excellent; he had no toleration for what was -common and second rate; he was not of the -crowd. He belonged to the same type of men -as Matthew Arnold and William Cory, a type -peculiar to our old Universities before things -took the turn which they are taking now. It -will be long before we shall have such critics -again, and their loss is incalculable.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_254" id="Page_254" href="#Page_254">[254]</a></span></p> - -<p>As a scholar Palgrave was rather elegant -than profound or exact, and, to judge from a -series of lectures delivered by him as Professor -of Poetry at Oxford, on <i>Landscape in Classical -Poetry</i>, and afterwards published in a work -which is here reviewed, his acquaintance with -the Greek and Roman poets was, if scholarly -and sympathetic, somewhat superficial. But he -was getting old, and perhaps he had lost his -memory or his notes. As a poet he was the -author of four volumes, the earliest, published -in 1864, entitled <i>Idylls and Songs</i>, and the -latest, published in 1892, <i>Amenophis; and other -Poems</i>. But his most ambitious effort appeared -in 1882, <i>Visions of England</i>, written with the -laudable purpose of stirring up in the young -the spirit of patriotism. His poetry may be -described, not inaptly, in the sentence in which -Dr. Johnson sums up the characteristics of -Addison's verses:—"Polished and pure, the -production of a mind too judicious to commit -faults, but not sufficiently vigorous to attain -excellence." Perhaps they served their end in -procuring for him the honourable appointment -which he filled competently for ten years—that -of the Professorship of Poetry at Oxford. It -may be said of him as was said of Southey, he -was a good man and not a bad poet, or of -Agricola, <i>decentior quam sublimior fuit</i>. But -as a critic of Belles Lettres he was excellent.</p> - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_255" id="Page_255" href="#Page_255">[255]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="ANCIENT_GREEK_AND_MODERN_LIFE" id="ANCIENT_GREEK_AND_MODERN_LIFE"> -</a>ANCIENT GREEK AND MODERN LIFE<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a></h2> - - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a> <i>Some Aspects of the Greek Genius.</i> By S. H. Butcher, -Litt. D., LL.D. London.</p></div> - - -<p>That a second edition of Professor Butcher's -essays on <i>Some Aspects of the Greek Genius</i> -should have been called for so soon is assuredly -a very significant fact. And it is significant in -more ways than one. It not only goes far to -refute Lord Coleridge's theory that Greek has -lost its hold on modern life, but it furnishes one -of the many proofs, which we have recently had, -that people are beginning to understand what is -now to be expected from classical scholars, if -classical scholars are to hold their own in the -world of to-day, and that scholars are, in their -turn, aware that they no longer constitute an -esoteric guild for esoteric studies. The task of -the purely philological labourer has been accomplished. -During more than four centuries, succeeding -schools of literal critics have been toiling -to furnish mankind with the means of unlocking -the treasures of classical Greece. Till within<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_256" id="Page_256" href="#Page_256">[256]</a></span> -comparatively recent times, the power of reading -the Greek classics with accuracy and ease -was an accomplishment beyond the reach of any -but specialists. Unless a student was prepared -to grapple with the difficulties of unsettled and -often unintelligible texts, to make his own grammar—nay, -his own dictionary—to choose between -conflicting and contradictory interpretations, -and, in a word, to possess all that now -would be required in a classical editor, it would -be impossible for him to read, with any comfort, -a chorus of Æschylus or Sophocles, an ode of -Pindar, or a speech in Thucydides. But now all -these difficulties have vanished. Excellent lexicons, -grammars, commentaries, and translations, -with settled texts, and editions of the principal -Greek classics so satisfactory that practically -they leave nothing to be desired, have rendered -what was once the monopoly of mere scholars -common property. The power of reading Greek -with accuracy and comfort is now, indeed, within -the reach of any person of average intelligence -and industry.</p> - -<p>But prescription and tradition are tenacious of -their privileges. Greek has so long been regarded -as the inheritance of philologists, that -they are not prepared to resign what was once -their exclusive possession, without a struggle. It -is useless to point out to them that, if Greek is -to maintain its place in modern education, it can -only maintain it by virtue of its connection<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_257" id="Page_257" href="#Page_257">[257]</a></span> -with the humanities, by virtue of its intrinsic -value as the expression of genius and art, -and of its historical value as the key to the -development and characteristics of the classics -of the modern world; by virtue, in fine, of its -relation to life, and its relation to History and -Criticism. The revival, indeed, of the <i>trivium</i> -and <i>quadrivium</i> of the Middle Ages would not -be an absurder anachronism than it is to draw -no distinction between the functions and aims of -classical scholarship, when it was, necessarily, -confined to philologists and specialists, and its -functions and aims at the present day. It has -been the obstinate determination on the part of -academic bodies not to recognise this distinction, -but to preserve Greek as the monopoly of those -who approach it only on the side of philological -specialism, which has led to its complete dissociation -in our scholastic system from what -constitutes its chief, almost its sole title to preservation. -At Cambridge, for example, it has -been expressly excluded from the only School in -which the study of Literature has been organized, -and an attempt to substitute Modern -Languages in its place—for a degree in arts—was -only defeated by the intervention of non-resident -members of the University. At Oxford -a scheme for a "School of Literature," in which -Greek was to have no place, might, not long ago -have been carried, and the casting vote of the -proctor alone saved the University from this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_258" id="Page_258" href="#Page_258">[258]</a></span> -disgrace, and Greek from a crushing blow.<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> But, -fortunately for the cause of Greek, there is every -indication that a reaction, too strong for academic -bodies to resist, is setting in. Scholars are -beginning to see that what Socrates did for Philosophy -must now be done for Greek, if Greek is -to hold its own. Thus, it has preserved, and no -doubt may preserve, its esoteric side; but that -which constitutes its chief, its real importance—which -justifies its retention in modern education—is -not what appeals, and can only appeal, in -each generation, to a small circle of "specialists"—its -philological interest, but what appeals to -liberal intelligence, to men as men, to the poet, -to the philosopher, to the orator, to the critic. -To this end, to what may be described as the -vitalization of Greek, all the labours of the -late Professor Jowett were directed; and by -his means Plato, Thucydides, and Aristotle are -brought into influential relation with modern -life. What he effected for them Professor Jebb -has effected for Sophocles, and not only has this -unrivalled Greek scholar placed within the reach -of any person of average intelligence all that is -necessary for the elucidation of the language, -art, and philosophy of the Shakespeare of the -Athenian stage, but he has not disdained to furnish -a popular manual of Homeric study, and a -popular elementary guide-book to Greek literature.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_259" id="Page_259" href="#Page_259">[259]</a></span> -Professor Lewis Campbell has laboured -in the same field and in the same cause. Great -also have been the services rendered to the -popularization of Greek by Mr. Andrew Lang, -Mr. Ernest Myers, Mr. Walter Leaf, and many -other distinguished scholars, all of whom have -shown, both by their published works and as -lecturers, that the masterpieces of ancient Greece -may become as intelligible and influential in the -world of to-day as they were more than two -thousand years ago.</p> - -<p>We welcome with joy the advent of Professor -Butcher among these prophets. Few names -stand higher than his in the roll of modern -scholars, and assuredly few modern scholars -possess, in so large a measure, the power of -applying scholarship to the purposes of liberal -criticism and exegesis. He has written a delightful -book, in a pleasant style, full of learning, -suggestive, stimulating, a book which no student -of Greek literature can lay down without a -hearty feeling of gratitude to the author. Porson -said of Bentley that more might be learned from -his work when he was in error than from the -work of a rival scholar when he was in the -right. We shall not presume to accuse Professor -Butcher of error, but we are bound to say that -there is much in his book which appears to us -very questionable, and much also from which we -entirely dissent.</p> - -<p>Professor Butcher discusses, for example, at<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_260" id="Page_260" href="#Page_260">[260]</a></span> -great length, the leading characteristics of the -Greek temper, but, in drawing his conclusions, -he has not sufficiently distinguished between -what was more or less accidental and what -was essentially peculiar. The fact is that nothing -is so easy as generalisations of this kind, -if the deduction of half truth be our aim; and -nothing so difficult if whole truth, or truth which -may be accepted without reserve, is to be the -result. The most mobile, plastic, Protean people -who have ever lived, their activity, within the -strict limits of classical literature, extended over -about six centuries, and, if we protract it to -the point included in Professor Butcher's illustrations, -to more than nine centuries. Of their -literature, though we appear to have the best -of it, not a third part has survived. By an adroit -use of illustration, it is, therefore, easy to predicate -anything of them. Go to serious epic, to -serious as distinguished from passionate lyric, -to tragedy, to threnody, and they were, if you -please, the gravest people on earth's face; go -to Aristophanes and to the poets of the Old -Comedy, and they were the merriest; go to the -Ionic Elegists and to the fragments of the New -Comedy, and they were the saddest and most -cynical; go to Thucydides, Plato, and Aristotle, -and they were, like Dante's sages, <i>ni tristi -ni lieti</i>. We do not quarrel with Professor -Butcher's general position in his Essay on the -melancholy of the Greeks, or question that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_261" id="Page_261" href="#Page_261">[261]</a></span> -there existed in certain moods a profound -melancholy and dissatisfaction with life in the -Greek temper. But of what intelligent and -reflective people or individual who have ever -existed is this not equally true? Where we -do quarrel with Professor Butcher is on the -following point, the point on which he chiefly -rests in proving that the Greeks were pre-eminently -distinguished by pessimistic melancholy—an -assertion that we deny <i>in toto</i>. He -tells us that, with one notable exception, to which -he subsequently adds three others, the Greeks -regarded hope not as a solace and support in -life, but as a snare and a delusion, not as a -power to cling to, but as an influence fraught with -mischief. Nothing surely can be more erroneous. -The wisest people who have ever lived are not -likely to have confounded baseless and flighty -desires or aspirations with what is implied in -hope, though Professor Butcher has done so in -the illustrations advanced by him in support of -his theory. All through Greek literature, from -Hesiod to Theocritus—not to go further—the -importance and wisdom of cherishing hope, as -one of the chief supports of life, are emphatically -dwelt on. Professor Butcher has surely misrepresented—certainly -Æschylus and the Greeks -generally did not interpret it in the sense in -which he has done—the fable of Pandora's chest. -It was not "as part of the deadly gift of the -goddess" that hope was there; it was as the one<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_262" id="Page_262" href="#Page_262">[262]</a></span> -blessing amid the crowd of ills. "As long as a -man lives," says Theognis, "let him wait on -hope.... Let him pray to the gods; and to -Hope let him sacrifice first and last" (1143-1146). -Pindar, if he warns man against baseless, -wild, or extravagant expectation, is emphatic -on the wisdom of cherishing hope. It is -"the sweet nurse of the heart in old age," "the -chief helmsman of man's versatile will." (<i>Fragment</i>, -233.) "A man should cherish good hope." -(<i>Isth.</i>, vii. 15.) "It is the wing on which soaring -manhood is supported." (Pythian, viii. 93.) -"The wise," says Euripides, "must cherish -hope." (<i>Frag. of Ino.</i>) Again: "Prudent hope -must be your stay in misfortune." (<i>Id.</i>) Life, -he says in the <i>Troades</i> (628), is preferable to -death, in that it has hopes. A sentiment repeated -by Euripides again in the <i>Hercules -Furens</i> (105-6): "That man is the bravest who -trusts to hope under all circumstances; to be -without hope is the part of a coward." So -Menander: "Hold before yourself the shield of -good hope." (<i>Incert. Frag.</i> xlvii.) The passages -quoted by Professor Butcher from Thucydides -are not to the point. It would have -been much more to the point had he quoted -the passage in which Pericles eulogizes those -who "committed to hope the uncertainty of -success" (II. 42), or the passage (I. 70) in -which the superiority of the Athenians to the -Lacedæmonians in civil and military efficiency<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_263" id="Page_263" href="#Page_263">[263]</a></span> -is largely attributed to their reliance on hope. -Again, what, according to Cephalus, in the -<i>Republic</i>, is the chief solace of old age?—"The -abiding presence of sweet hope." But it -would be easy to multiply indefinitely from the -Greek classics what Professor Butcher calls -"rare examples of hope in the happier aspect."</p> - -<p>The most important chapters in Professor -Butcher's work—indeed they occupy nearly one -half of it—are those dealing with Aristotle's -theory of fine art and poetry. On no subject -in criticism have there been so many misconceptions -current and influential even among -scholars, originating for the most part from mistranslations -and misunderstandings of the treatise -in which they find their chief embodiment—the -<i>Poetics</i>. This has unfortunately come down -to us in a very imperfect and corrupt state, and, -what is more unfortunate still, it became a classic -in criticism long before it was properly understood. -Thus, in the clause in the famous definition -of tragedy, where Aristotle describes it as <ins title="di' eleou kai phobou perainousa tên tôn toioutôn -pathêmatôn katharsin">δι' ελεου -και φοβου περαινουσα την των τοιουτων παθηματων -καθαρσιν</ins>, "through pity and fear effecting the purgation -of these emotions," the French and English -critics of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, -ignoring the words <ins title="tôn toioutôn">των τοιουτων</ins>, have -totally misinterpreted the passage, and given it -a meaning which was not only not intended by -Aristotle, but which has falsified his whole -theory of the scope and functions of tragedy.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_264" id="Page_264" href="#Page_264">[264]</a></span> -An unsound text, the insertion of <ins title="alla">αλλα</ins> before -the clause, sent Lessing on a wrong track. From -the misinterpretation of another passage in the -treatise (V. 4) has been deduced the famous -doctrine of the Unities. The mistranslation of -<ins title="spoudaios">σπουδαιος</ins> in the definition of Tragedy, and of -the same word in the comparison between -Poetry and History, has led to misconceptions -on other points. The scholars who did most -in England to place the study of this treatise -on a sound footing were Twining and Tyrwhitt. -In the present century it has received exhaustive -illustration from Saint-Hilaire, Stahr, Susemihl, -Vahlen, Teichmüller, Ueberweg, Reinkens, Jacob -Bernays, and others; while such works as E. -Müller's <i>Geschichte der Theorie der Kunst bei den -Alten</i> have thrown general light on the question -of Greek æsthetics. That Professor Butcher has -not been able to advance anything new in these -essays is very creditable to him, for the simple -reason that, as all that is worth saying has been -said, his sole resource, had he attempted to be -original, would have been paradox and sophistry. -With regard to the question of the <i>Katharsis</i>, -it will probably be, for all time, a case of "quot -homines tot sententiæ"; and we have certainly -no intention of accompanying Professor Butcher -into this labyrinth. We entirely agree with -him and Bernays that the passage in the <i>Politics</i> -(V. viii. 7) settles conclusively at least one part -of the meaning, but we differ from Bernays,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_265" id="Page_265" href="#Page_265">[265]</a></span> -in contending that the "lustratio" is included, -and from Professor Butcher, in contending that -the "lustratio" is not effected merely by the relief. -Professor Butcher seems here indeed to be -a little confused, or at all events confusing. He -first explains "katharsis" as "a purging away of -the emotions of pity and fear," and then explains -it as "a purifying of them"; but it is neither -easy to understand how "purging away" is -"purifying," nor why we should "purify" what -we "purge away." Surely it is better—but we -speak with all submission—to take the word -in two different meanings, the one signifying -the immediate effect of tragedy in its direct -appeal to the passions referred to, the other -not to its immediate, but to its ulterior and -total effect in educating the passions thus excited.</p> - -<p>Professor Butcher, who appears to belong to -the Pater School, dwells with great complacency -on the fact that Aristotle "attempted to separate -the function of æsthetics from that of -morals," that "he made the end of art reside -in a pleasurable emotion," that he says "nothing -of any moral aim in poetry," and that though -he often takes exception to Euripides as an artist, -"he attaches no blame to him for the immoral -tendency in some of his dramas," so severely -censured by Aristophanes. If Professor Butcher -implies, as he seems to imply by this, that -Aristotle would lend any countenance to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_266" id="Page_266" href="#Page_266">[266]</a></span> -modern art-for-art's-sake doctrine, and proceeded -on the assumption that there was no -necessary connection between æsthetics and -morals, he does Aristotle very great injustice, -and is refuted by the <i>Poetics</i> themselves. In -the fifth chapter Aristotle lays stress on the -fact that tragedy is, like epic, a representation -of "superior or morally good characters" -(<ins title="mimêsis spoudaiôn">μιμησις σπουδαιων</ins>)—that the characters are to -be good (<ins title="chrêsta">χρηστα</ins>). In the twenty-fifth chapter -he says that nothing can excuse the exhibition -of moral depravity (<ins title="mochthêria">μοχθηρια</ins>), unless it be one -of the things implicit in the plot; and that -among the most serious objections which can be -brought against a drama is that it is likely to -do moral harm (<ins title="blabera">βλαβερα</ins>). In the thirteenth -chapter he shows,—and on moral grounds,—why -the protagonist in a tragedy should not be a -perfectly good man or a perfectly bad man. -Indeed, the very definition of tragedy refutes -Professor Butcher's statement. It may be said, -no doubt, that Aristotle maintains that the end -of poetry is pleasure, but it must be "the proper -pleasure," and in the proper pleasure moral -satisfaction is implied.<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> It is only by a quibble -that Professor Butcher's theory can be supported, -and it is a pity to quibble on subjects which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_267" id="Page_267" href="#Page_267">[267]</a></span> -may be so mischievously misunderstood. Aristotle -was, we suspect, very much nearer to -Ben Jonson and Milton than to Mr. Pater in his -conception of the functions and scope of poetry.</p> - -<p>In the interesting essay on Sophocles there -are two statements which appear to us very -questionable. It is surely not true to say that -Sophocles was "the first of the Greeks who has -clearly realized that suffering is not always -penal." Who could have expressed this truth -more forcibly than Æschylus? To say nothing -of the well-known passage in the <i>Agamemnon</i>, -167-171:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="Zêna ...">Ζηνα ...</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="ton phronein brotous hodôsanta, ton pathei mathos">τον φρονειν βροτους ὁδωσαντα, τον παθει μαθος</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="thenta kyriôs echein.">θεντα κυριως εχειν.</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="stazei d' en th' hypnô pro kardias">σταζει δ' εν θ' ὑπνω προ καρδιας</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="mnêsipêmôn ponos, kai par' akontas êlthe sôphronein,—">μνησιπημων πονος, και παρ' ακοντας ηλθε σωφρονειν,—</ins></div></div></div> - -<p>the doctrine of which is repeated in 241-2 of -the same play, and in other passages in his -dramas, notably in <i>Choephoroe</i>, 950-955, and in -<i>Eumenides</i>, 495, <ins title="sympherei sôphronein hypo stenei">συμφερει σωφρονειν ὑπο στενει</ins>. -The fact that suffering and calamity have resulted -in blessing is emphasized as strongly in -the concluding drama of the Orestean Trilogy, -the <i>Eumenides</i>, as it is in the <i>Œdipus Coloneus</i>. -Again, when Professor Butcher says that "in -Sophocles the divine righteousness asserts itself -not in the award of happiness or misery to the -individual, but in the providential wisdom which -assigns to each individual his place and function<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_268" id="Page_268" href="#Page_268">[268]</a></span> -in a universal moral order," he says what it is -very difficult to understand. Surely in the case -of each one of the protagonists in Sophocles, -to employ the word in its non-technical sense, -their deserts are very exactly meted out. Antigone -deliberately courts her fate by setting the -law at defiance, though she knew what the -penalty was, and falls, but has her compensation -in the applause of her own conscience and "in -the faith that looks through death." Ajax -paid the penalty, as the poet emphasizes, for -brutality and impious insolence; Œdipus suffers -for his impetuosity and intemperance, but, his -punishment exceeding the offence, the balance -is adjusted for him in final triumph over the -sons who had wronged him, in procuring -blessings for his protector, in the peace of the -soul, and in a glorious death. Clytemnestra -and Ægisthus well deserve their fate, as, in -addition to committing their crime, they continue -ostentatiously to glory in it. In the -<i>Trachiniæ</i> Hercules is punished for a base -and cowardly murder, followed by an act of -cruel and indiscriminate vengeance, retribution -coming on him through the sister of the man -thus murdered, and the daughter of the prince -on whom this iniquitous vengeance had been -wreaked, as Deianeira, but for Iole, would not -have sent the poisoned tunic. Sophocles has -even altered the legend to emphasize the guilt -of Hercules. The <i>Philoctetes</i>, indeed, is the only<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_269" id="Page_269" href="#Page_269">[269]</a></span> -play which lends any support to Professor Butcher's -statement. Here the gods undoubtedly -condemn a man to a life of torture that their -designs, irrespective of the individual, may be -fulfilled, and that Troy may not fall before the -appointed time; but how fully, how nobly is he -compensated! It seems to us that the award -of happiness and misery to the individual, in -accordance with desert, is as conspicuous in the -ethics of Sophocles as it is in the ethics of -Shakespeare. And it is the more conspicuous, -when we remember the hampering conditions -under which Sophocles had to work, the limitations -conventionally imposed on the treatment -of the legends.</p> - -<p>We wish we had space to comment on Professor -Butcher's admirable, though somewhat -defective, chapter on the dawn of Romanticism -in Greek poetry, but we must forbear, and -repeat our thanks to him for a book full of -interest and instruction, not the least of its -charms being the lively and graceful style in -which it is written.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> This blow has, since these words were written, been -inflicted. See <i>supra</i> pp. 45-75.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> So he says, <i>Poet.</i>, xxvi., of epic and tragedy, that each -ought not to produce any chance pleasure, but the pleasure -proper to it (<ins title="dei gar ou tên tychousan hêdonên poiein autas alla tên eirêmenên">δει γαρ ου την τυχουσαν ἡδονην ποιειν αυτας αλλα την -ειρημενην</ins>, <i>i.e.</i> <ins title="oikeian">οικειαν</ins>).</p></div> -</div> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_270" id="Page_270" href="#Page_270">[270]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="THE_PRINCIPLES_OF_CRITICISM" id="THE_PRINCIPLES_OF_CRITICISM"> -</a>THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICISM<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> <i>The Principles of Criticism. An Introduction to the -Study of Literature.</i> By W. Basil Worsfold. London: -Allen.</p></div> - - -<p>Bishop Warburton said that there were -two things which every man thought himself -competent to do, to manage a small farm -and to drive a whisky. Had Warburton lived -in our time, he would probably have added a -third—to set up for a critic. What the author -of the best critical treatise in the Greek language -pronounced to be the final fruit of long experience, -culture, and study, directed and illumined -by certain natural qualifications, has now come -to be represented by the idle and irresponsible -gossip of any one who can gossip agreeably. -Agreeable gossip and good criticism are, as -Sainte-Beuve and others have shown, far -from being incompatible, the misfortune is that -they should be confounded; but confounded -they are, and the confusion is the curse of -current literature. We have recently observed, -with concern, that the rubbish which used<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_271" id="Page_271" href="#Page_271">[271]</a></span> -formerly to be shot into novels and poems is -now being shot into criticism, and that there -appears to be a growing impression that the -accomplishments which qualify young men for -spinning cobwebs in fiction and manufacturing -versicles can, with a little management, serve -to set them up as critics. There is not much -more difficulty in forming an opinion about a -book than there is in reading it, and as criticism -in the hands of these fribbles becomes little -more than the dithyrambic expression of that -opinion, the profession of criticism is one in -which it is delightfully easy to graduate. It -requires neither learning nor knowledge, neither -culture nor discipline. It is neither science nor -art; it is the gift of nature, a sort of "lyric -inspiration." With principles, with touchstones, -with standards, it has nothing whatever to do. -Its business is to declaim, to coin phrases, to -juggle with fancies and to say "good things."</p> - -<p>A writer, therefore, who tries to recall criticism -to a sense of its responsibilities and true -functions deserves all sympathy and encouragement. -It is refreshing to turn from the sort of -thing to which we have referred to such a work -as Mr. Worsfold has given us. His design is -"to present an account of the main principles -of literary criticism," which he professes to trace -from Plato to Matthew Arnold. Mr. Worsfold's -thesis simply stated is that criticism—and he -deals with criticism chiefly in its application to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_272" id="Page_272" href="#Page_272">[272]</a></span> -poetry—has passed successively through five -stages. With the Greeks it concerned itself -principally with form. "The first question it -asked with them was not, as with us, What is -the thought? but What is the form?" By Addison—for -here Mr. Worsfold makes a prodigious -leap over some twenty centuries—it was furnished -with a new test, and it asked, How does -a given poem affect the imagination? By Lessing -a return was made to the formal criticism -of the ancients, but he adopted also Addison's -criterion, and added definiteness to it. Victor -Cousin followed in 1818 with his lectures, entitled, -<i>Du Vrai, du Beau, et du Bien</i>, and -enlarged the boundaries of the science by a -complete theory of beauty and art, developed -mainly out of Plato. Lastly came Matthew -Arnold, who extended the realm still further, by -the addition of certain other important touchstones -of poetic excellence. At the present time -a gradual limitation of the scope of its rules, -and a gradual extension of the scope of its -principles, are the tendencies most discernible -in criticism. "An enlightened criticism no -longer aims at directing the artist by formulating -rules which, if they were valid, would -only tend to obliterate the distinction between -the fine and the technical arts. It allows him -to work by whatever methods he may choose, -and it is content to estimate his merit not by -reference to his method but by reference to his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_273" id="Page_273" href="#Page_273">[273]</a></span> -achievement, as measured by principles of -universal validity."</p> - -<p>All this is exceedingly ingenious, and has in it -a measure of truth, but, like most generalisations -on vast and complicated subjects, it is more -plausible than sound. The stages in the progress -of criticism are not so sharply defined as -Mr. Worsfold would have us believe. If Greek -criticism were represented only by Plato and the -extant works of Aristotle, English by Addison -and Matthew Arnold, German by Lessing, and -French by Victor Cousin, what Mr. Worsfold -postulates might, after a manner, pass muster. -But by far the greater portion of Greek criticism -has perished; it exists only in fragments, and to -the most important and remarkable work on -this subject which has come down to us from -antiquity, the <i>Treatise on the Sublime</i>, Mr. Worsfold -does not even refer. If he had done so, and -had he considered what is scattered fragmentarily -through the Greek writers, or may be -gathered from the titles of treatises which are -lost, he would have seen that much which he -supposes to mark development in criticism has -long been old. Innumerable passages in the -minor Greek critics, in Plutarch and in the -Scholia, especially if we add what is to be found -in Roman writers, derived no doubt from Greek -sources, amply warrant doubt whether, after all, -it is not with criticism as it is, to use Goethe's -expression, with wit, "Alles Gescheidte ist schon<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_274" id="Page_274" href="#Page_274">[274]</a></span> -gedacht worden, man muss nur versuchen, es -noch einmal zu denken." At all events, it is a -great mistake to suppose that Greek criticism, in -its application to poetry, is represented by Plato -and Aristotle. It would be almost as absurd to -go to Plato for typical Greek criticism on poetry -as it would be to go to Henry More or the -Puritan Divines for typical English criticism. -He approached it only as such a philosopher -would be likely to approach it. He regarded -art and letters generally simply as means of -educational discipline and culture, or as mere -playthings, of which the best to be expected -was harmless pleasure. He despised poetry not -only as an appeal, and a perturbing appeal, to -the senses and the passions, but as representing -the shadows of shadows. It may be pronounced -with confidence that, had he seriously applied -himself to literary and artistic criticism, he -would have been one of the subtlest and profoundest -critics who ever lived, and would probably -have anticipated, so far as principles are -concerned, all that Mr. Worsfold attributes to -Addison, to Lessing, and to Victor Cousin; but, -like our own Ruskin, he was wilful and fanatical.</p> - -<p>Still less is Greek criticism represented by -Aristotle. It is in the highest degree misleading -to generalize from such a work as the -<i>Poetics</i>. It is not merely a fragment, but a -fragment deformed by desperate corruption,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_275" id="Page_275" href="#Page_275">[275]</a></span> -hopeless interstices and contemptible interpolations. -If it confines itself, or in the main -confines itself, to formal criticism, it is simply -because it was designed to deal with that -particular department of criticism, not because -its author supposed that the chief question -which concerned criticism was form. Again, -if by form Mr. Worsfold understands, as he appears -to do, expression and structure, he very -much misrepresents the Treatise. Aristotle's -criterion of poetry is not its formal expression, -for he distinctly declares that it is not metre -which makes a poem, and even seems to maintain -that a poem may be composed without -metre. In Aristotle's definition and conception -of poetry as the concrete expression of the universal, -in his definition of the scope and functions -of tragedy, and in innumerable occasional -remarks we have the germs of much, and of -very much, which Mr. Worsfold would attribute -to the later developments of criticism.</p> - -<p>Aristotle, it is true, derived his canons from an -analysis of the masterpieces of Greek poetry, -but it is doing him great injustice to say, that he -would make all epics Homeric, and all plays Sophoclean, -and most erroneous to assume that modern -criticism commenced at this point. Aristotle -distinctly questions whether tragedy had as yet -perfected its proper types or not (<i>Poet.</i>, IV. 11), -and in discussing the proper length of tragedy -he makes a remark which shows that such a plot<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_276" id="Page_276" href="#Page_276">[276]</a></span> -as the plot of <i>Hamlet</i> or the plot of <i>Lear</i> would -have been quite compatible with his canons.<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> -The truth is that Mr. Worsfold has gone too -far; he has confounded the various aspects of -criticism with stages in its development. Aristotle -dealt mainly with form, because it was his -business to deal with form. Plato approached -poetry from a particular point of view, because -it was from that particular point of view that -it concerned him.</p> - -<p>Had Mr. Worsfold taken his stand in his review -of ancient criticism on the treatise attributed -to Longinus, he would have seen that what -he so strangely attributes to Addison and later -writers had long been anticipated. This remarkable -work which, since its translation into French -by Boileau in 1674, has had more influence on -criticism both in England and on the Continent -than any other work that could be named, would -alone show how much we owe to the Greeks. It -has analyzed and defined, for all time, the essential -virtues and the essential vices of diction and -style, and has traced them to their sources. It -has furnished us with infallible criteria in judging -rhetoric and poetry. Take its analysis of the -"grand style," which is described comprehensively<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_277" id="Page_277" href="#Page_277">[277]</a></span> -as <ins title="megalophrosynês apêchêma">μεγαλοφροσυνης απηχημα</ins>, "the echo of a great -soul"; it has, the Treatise tells us, five characteristics—richness -and grandeur of conception -(<ins title="to peri tas noêseis hadrepêbolon">το περι τας νοησεις ἁδρεπηβολον</ins>); vehement and -inspired passion (<ins title="to sphodron kai enthousiastikon pathos">το σφοδρον και ενθουσιαστικον -παθος</ins>), the due formation of figures, which are -twofold—first those of thought, and secondly -those of expression (<ins title="hê poia tôn schêmatôn plasis dissa de pou tauta, ta -men noêseôs, thatera de lexeôs">ἡ ποια των σχηματων πλασις -δισσα δε που ταυτα, τα μεν νοησεως, θατερα δε λεξεως</ins>); -noble diction (<ins title="hê gennaia, phrasis">ἡ γενναια, φρασις</ins>); dignified and -elevated composition (<ins title="hê en axiômati -kai diarsei synthesis">ἡ εν αξιωματι και διαρσει -συνθεσις</ins>). Nothing could be more masterly than -its detailed analysis of each of these qualities, -and of the pseudo forms which they assume, as -the result of stimulated enthusiasm. How admirable, -too, is its test of the sublime in the -seventh chapter; its criticism of Sappho, generalizing -what constitutes the charm and power of -lyric, in the tenth chapter; its analysis of the -eloquence of Demosthenes, again generalizing -the characteristics of oratory in perfection -(chap. xvii.); its demonstration of the inferiority -of correct mediocrity to the faulty -irregularities of inspired genius; its admirable -remarks about the relation of Art to Nature. -Like the <i>Poetics</i>, it has come down to us in a -very mutilated form, and has evidently been -interpolated by some inferior hand, which no -doubt accounts for the exasperating triviality of -some of the sections. Here, as elsewhere, we -have references to the many losses which Greek<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_278" id="Page_278" href="#Page_278">[278]</a></span> -criticism has sustained, the author referring to -treatises written by him on Xenophon, on -Composition, and on the Passions.</p> - -<p>It is impossible to give an adequate account of -the evolution of criticism without a very careful -survey of the chief contributors to criticism in -each generation, and such a survey Mr. Worsfold -has not attempted. To Latin criticism he never -even refers. And yet it has had great influence -on critical literature. The Romans, it is true, -contributed scarcely anything new to criticism, -except that which pertains to oratory. We -know enough of Varro, with whom Roman criticism -may be said to begin, to feel confident that -he could have had no pretension to the finer -qualities of the critic. Of the five treatises composed -by him, only one, the <ins title="peri charaktêrôn">περι χαρακτηρων</ins>, -appears to have been purely critical, and it -almost certainly drew largely on Greek sources. -Horace derived the material of the <i>Ars Poetica</i> -from a Greek writer, Neoptolemus of Parium. -Much of Quinctilian's criticism is demonstrably -a compilation from Greek writers. The best -critic of poetry among the Romans is undoubtedly -to be found in Petronius, occasional -and scanty though his remarks are. But of prose -literature Rome produced two really great critics—the -one was Cicero, the other was Tacitus. -The <i>Brutus</i> and the <i>Dialogus de Oratoribus</i> are -masterpieces, equal to anything which has come -down to us from the Greeks. One of the most<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_279" id="Page_279" href="#Page_279">[279]</a></span> -important critical principles ever enunciated we -owe to Cicero. He was the first to demonstrate -that the test of excellence in oratory lay, in its appealing -equally to the multitude and to the most -fastidious of connoisseurs. The most consummate -rhetorician which the world has ever seen, -he was at the same time a consummate critic of -his art. This department of criticism has, indeed, -for nearly two thousand years, been practically -his monopoly; it may be questioned whether -anything can be added, so far as the technique -of rhetoric is concerned, to what may be traced -to his writings. The interest of the <i>Dialogus de -Oratoribus</i> is largely historical, but never have -the causes which inspire and nourish, or depress -and starve, eloquence been more eloquently and -brilliantly explained. Nor must it be forgotten -that it was through the medium of the Latin -critics that Greek criticism became influential on -modern literature.</p> - -<p>Mr. Worsfold has very properly drawn attention -to the fine passage about poetry in the second -book of Bacon's <i>Advancement of Learning</i>, but -he says not a word about Sidney's remarkable -treatise, one of the most charming contributions -to the criticism of poetry which has ever been -made, or about the admirable remarks in Ben -Jonson's <i>Discoveries</i>. The interest of Elizabethan -criticism, as represented by these works—and -they are the only works on this subject of any -value produced during the Elizabethan period—lies<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_280" id="Page_280" href="#Page_280">[280]</a></span> -partly in its return to Aristotelian canons, -and partly in the importance which, in accordance -with the ancients, it attaches to the didactic -element in poetry. This is expressed very eloquently -in Ben Jonson's dedication of the <i>Fox</i>:—</p> - -<blockquote><p>"If men will impartially and not asquint look toward -the offices and function of a poet, they will easily conclude -to themselves the impossibility of a man's being the good -poet without being first the good man,—he that is able to inform -young men to all good discipline, inflame young men -to all good virtues, keep old men in their best and supreme -state, or, as they decline to childhood, recover them to their -first state, that comes forth the interpreter and arbiter of -nature, a teacher of things divine no less than human."</p></blockquote> - -<p>This was precisely Spenser's conception of -one of the chief functions of poetry. Thus the -Elizabethan critics, who were followed afterwards -by Milton, if they did not formally discuss -the relation of æsthetic to ethic, insisted on -their essential connection in the higher forms of -poetry. Even in the succeeding age, when poetry -lost all its high seriousness and much of its -moral dignity, criticism, if it did not always insist -on the application of this test, still retained -it. Dryden could write, "I am satisfied if verse -cause delight, for delight is the chief, if not the -only end, of poesy"; but in adding "instruction -can be admitted but in the second place, for -poesy only instructs as it delights," he half corrected -his former statement, and, indeed, simply -reverted to what Aristophanes, Ben Jonson, and -Milton would have been the first to admit.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_281" id="Page_281" href="#Page_281">[281]</a></span></p> - -<p>But to return to Mr. Worsfold. A very serious -defect in his work is his omission of all notice -of Boileau and Dryden, and of the critics contemporary -with them in France and England. -The consequence is, that much is attributed to -Addison which belongs to them, and Addison's -importance as a critic is much overrated. Again, -of the many memorable contributions to this -branch of literature in England, in France, in -Italy, and in Germany, which were made between -the appearance of the Abbé Dubos's <i>Réflexions -critiques sur la poésie et la peinture</i> in 1719, and -the lectures of Coleridge and Schlegel about 1812, -all that is said is represented by what is said of -Lessing. Though a long chapter is given to -Matthew Arnold, Matthew Arnold's master, -Sainte-Beuve, is, if we remember rightly, not -so much as named.</p> - -<p>Dr. Johnson divided critics into three classes—those -who know the rules and judge by them, -those who know no rules but judge entirely by -natural taste, those who know the rules but are -above them. This has been true in all ages, and -sufficiently disposes of Mr. Worsfold's hypothesis -about the stages through which criticism has -passed. All that can be said is, that at certain -times there has been a tendency, determined of -course by the character of the particular age, towards -the predominance of a particular critical -method and of particular points of view. Further -than this it would be perilous to go. It has<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_282" id="Page_282" href="#Page_282">[282]</a></span> -been the task of the present age to develop each -of these methods to the full, and the most -authoritative critics of the last twenty years -might easily be ranged under one of those -classes.</p> - -<p>The soundest and most valuable part of Mr. -Worsfold's book is the part dealing with the -criticism of the last few years. His chapter on -Matthew Arnold, in particular, is admirable, -and his remarks on the functions of criticism -at the present time, deduced as they have been -from Wordsworth, Arnold and Ruskin, are in -a high degree instructive and interesting. In -pointing out that criticism should not confine -itself merely to the investigation of technical -excellence, and to all that is implied in the -doctrine of Art for Art's sake, but should recognise -that there are limits beyond which the -artist should not exercise his technical skill, he -recalls us to principles which it is well that -criticism should not forget. We quite agree with -him that there is now an increasing tendency to -recognise these limits, and to lay most stress on -the interpretation of the ideal element in literature -and art. That is certainly the modern note. -We have expressed our reasons for dissenting -from Mr. Worsfold's historical view of the -evolution of criticism, but his book is full of -interest, and will amply repay the attention of -serious readers. It is a book which does not -deserve to be lost in the crowd.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> -<ins title="ho de kat' autên tên physin tou pragmatos horos,">ὁ δε κατ' αυτην την φυσιν του πραγματος ὁρος,</ins> -<ins title="aei men ho meizôn mechri tou syndêlos einai kalliôn esti kata to -megethos.">αει μεν ὁ μειζων μεχρι του συνδηλος ειναι καλλιων εστι κατα το μεγεθος.</ins> -<ins title="hôs de haplôs diorisantas eipein,">ὡς δε ἁπλως διορισαντας ειπειν,</ins> -<ins title="en hosô megethei kata to -eikos ê to anankaion ephexês gignomenôn symbainei eis eutychian ek -dystychias,">εν ὁσω μεγεθει κατα το εικος η το -αναγκαιον εφεξης γιγνομενων συμβαινει εις ευτυχιαν εκ δυστυχιας,</ins> -<ins title="ê ex eutychias eis dystychian metaballein,">η εξ ευτυχιας εις δυστυχιαν μεταβαλλειν,</ins> -<ins title="hikanos horos -estin tou megethous.">ἱκανος ὁρος εστιν του -μεγεθους.</ins> (<i>Poet.</i>, vii. 7.)</p></div> -</div> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_283" id="Page_283" href="#Page_283">[283]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="WOMEN_IN_GREEK_POETRY" id="WOMEN_IN_GREEK_POETRY"> -</a>WOMEN IN GREEK POETRY<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_39_39"><span class="label">[39]</span></a> <i>Antimachus of Colophon and the Position of Women in -Greek Poetry.</i> By E. F. M. Benecke.</p></div> - - -<p>The editor of this book cannot be congratulated -either on his competence or on -his discretion. To hurry into the world a work -which is not merely a fragment, but which cries -for revision, suppression, and correction in almost -every page, is a literary crime of the first magnitude, -and deserves the severest castigation. -Of the author of the work, who appears to have -been a young man of some attainments and of -much promise, we desire to speak with all -gentleness; we wholly absolve him from blame, -for we have no right to assume that he would -himself have given to the world what his editor -admits was <i>intra penetralia Vestæ</i>, and what we -hope and believe he would himself have committed -<i>emendaturis ignibus</i>, had he arrived at -years of discretion. But the dissemination of -error is no light thing, especially in relation to -subjects which are of great interest, and, from -an historical and literary point of view, of great<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_284" id="Page_284" href="#Page_284">[284]</a></span> -importance. When we think of the many amiable -and industrious tutors at Oxford and Cambridge -who, unless they are put on their guard, -will unsuspiciously fill their note-books with -the nonsense of this volume, and impart it, by -degrees, to the listening credulity of youth, we -feel we have no alternative but to perform a -plain, if painful, duty. We repeat, we absolve -the author from all blame; the sole culprit is -the editor.</p> - -<p>That Solomon was the author of the <i>Iliad</i>, -Poggio the author of the <i>Annals</i> of Tacitus, -and Bacon the author of Shakespeare's plays, -are hypotheses scarcely less monstrously absurd -than the thesis propounded in this volume. Mr. -Benecke's main contentions are "that a pure -love between man and woman seemed to the -early Greeks" (that is, to those who lived -before the latter end of the Peloponnesian War) -a sheer impossibility; that "in extant Greek -poetry there is no trace of romantic love poetry -addressed to women prior to the time of Asclepiades -and Philetas"; that "in the works of -these writers this element suddenly appears -not in the nature of an experiment but as a -leading motive"; that the appearance of this -element was due to the influence of Antimachus, -"who was the first man who had -the courage to say that a woman was worth -loving, and who may thus be regarded as the -originator of the romantic element in literature."<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_285" id="Page_285" href="#Page_285">[285]</a></span> -As we have not space to refute this -nonsense in detail, we will give some examples -of the way in which it is supported. First come -misrepresentations and blunders. To emphasize -the degradation of women, passages in translation -are twisted and perverted almost beyond -recognition.</p> - -<p>Thus the couplet of Catullus—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Tunc te dilexi, non tantum ut vulgus amicam,</div> -<div class="i0">Sed pater ut natos diligit et generos"—</div></div></div> - -<p>is actually paraphrased "I loved you, not as -a man loves a woman, but as a man loves a -youth." The couplet in which Antigone says, -"If my husband died, I could get another, and -were I deprived of him too, I could be a mother -by another man"—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0"><ins title="posis men an moi, katthanontos, allos ên">ποσις μεν αν μοι, κατθανοντος, αλλος ην</ins></div> -<div class="i0"><ins title="kai pais ap' allou phôtos, ei toud' êmplakon—">και παις απ' αλλου φωτος, ει τουδ' ημπλακον—</ins></div></div></div> - -<p>is translated "If my husband had died, I could -have married another, if he had failed to get me -children, I could have committed adultery." The -"main motive of the Iliad," we are informed, -(p. 76), "is the love of Achilles for Patroclus." -The interest of the <i>Ajax</i> "is meant to centre -on Teucer, the <i>amasius</i> of the dead Ajax." That -the <i>Alcestis</i> may not be pressed into the service -of those who would maintain that the Greeks -knew how to respect women, the key to it is to -be found "in the relation existing between Admetus -and Apollo"(!) The revolting coarseness<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_286" id="Page_286" href="#Page_286">[286]</a></span> -and flippant vulgarity which mark the book, and, -which do very little credit to Oxford training, are -illustrated by the remarks employed to disparage -these types of womanhood which the writer well -knows would refute his theory. Thus of Nausicaa, -"she is always regarded as a charming -type of woman; but, after all, how one naturally -thinks of her is (<i>sic</i>) as a charming type of -washerwoman"; of Penelope, "she longs for -the return of her husband, no doubt; but what -really grieves her about the suitors is not their -suggestions as to his death, but the quantity of -pork they eat." On a par with this sort of thing -is the remark about a play of Sophocles, which, -by the way, is not extant, that "it merely drew -the usual picture of the gods playing shove-halfpenny -with human souls" (p. 47); or flippant -vulgarity like the following—Admetus expresses -"his deep regret that he cannot accompany -Alcestis, as Charon does not issue -return tickets." If this is the humour of young -Oxford, the progress of which we hear so much -has been purchased at a heavy price.</p> - -<p>But to continue. On page 27 we are confronted -with the astounding statement that "it -is in Anacreon that we find for the first time -love-poetry addressed to a woman." Why, Hermesianax -(15, 16) distinctly states that Musæus -wrote love-poetry to his wife or mistress, -Antiope, and that Hesiod wrote many poems -in honour of his love, Eoia (<i>Id.</i> 22-24).<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_287" id="Page_287" href="#Page_287">[287]</a></span> -Alcæus notoriously wrote love-poems to Sappho, -as we need go no further than the first book -of Aristotle's <i>Rhetoric</i> to know; both Alcman, -the lover of Egido and Megalostrate, and, probably -Ibycus also wrote love-poetry to women. -It is mere special pleading to contend that Mimnermus -did not write poetry to the mistress of -his affections, to whom, according to Strabo, his -erotic poetry was addressed. Hermesianax distinctly -states that Mimnermus was passionately -in love with Nanno, and certainly implies that -his love-poetry was addressed to her (35-38). -It is true that two of the fragments of Archilochus -are ambiguous, but one is not; and, if we -may judge by a single line (Fr. 71), his love for -Neobule expressed itself in a manner indistinguishable -from Petrarch's vein—"Would -that I might touch Neobule's hand": <ins title="ei gar hôs emoi -genoito cheira Neoboulês thigein">ει γαρ ὡς -εμοι γενοιτο χειρα Νεοβουλης θιγειν</ins>. It is clear -that women had a prominent place in the -poetry of Stesichorus, and in his poem entitled -<i>Calyce</i> we seem to have had an anticipation of -the modern love romance. And yet, in spite of -all this, we are informed that the Greeks had no -love-poetry addressed to, or concerning women, -before Anacreon.</p> - -<p>The methods adopted for minimizing or disguising -the importance of women in the <i>Iliad</i> -and <i>Odyssey</i> are very amusing. "The Trojan -war was the work of a woman; but how very -little that woman appears in the <i>Iliad</i>." She<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_288" id="Page_288" href="#Page_288">[288]</a></span> -appears quite as frequently and imposingly as -the action admits, and she and Andromache are -painted as elaborately as any of the <i>dramatis -personæ</i> in the poem. Indeed, it would not be -too much to say that, with the exception of -Achilles and Agamemnon, they leave the deepest -impression on us. "A woman has been managing -the affairs of Odysseus for twenty years in an -exemplary fashion; but the hero of the <i>Odyssey</i> -on his return prefers to associate with the swineherd." -Comment is superfluous. Nothing could -be more striking than the prominence which is -given to women both in the <i>Iliad</i> and in the -<i>Odyssey</i>. To cite such writers as Simonides of -Amorgus, Phocylides and Theognis, as authorities -on the position of women, is as absurd, in Sancho -Panza's phrase, as to look for pears on an elm.</p> - -<p>The Greek Tragedies are treated after the -same fashion as the <i>Iliad</i> and the <i>Odyssey</i>. We -are told that the remarkable prominence given -in Sophocles's plays to the affection between -brother and sister affords conclusive proof that -the nature of modern love between man and -woman was unknown to him; and we are also -informed, that the relations between Electra and -Orestes, and Antigone and Polynices "are absolutely -those of modern lovers." It would be -difficult to say which is more absurd, the deduction -or the statement. What love could be -more loyal and more passionate than Hæmon's -love for Antigone? The prominence given by<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_289" id="Page_289" href="#Page_289">[289]</a></span> -Sophocles to the love between brother and sister -has its origin from the same cause as the very -small part played by lovers in the Greek tragedies -generally. In the first place, a poet who -took his plot from the fortunes of the houses -of Pelops or Laius could only work within the -limits of tradition; in the second place, love -romances, unless involving deep tragical issues -as in the <i>Trachiniæ</i>, the <i>Medea</i>, and the <i>Hippolytus</i>, -were totally incompatible with the Greek -idea of tragedy. But we must hurry to the grand -discovery made by the author of this volume.</p> - -<p>Somewhere about 405 <span class="smcap">B.C.</span> flourished Antimachus, -of Colophon, the author of a voluminous -epic, and of several other poems. He -had the misfortune to lose his wife Lyde, and, to -beguile his sorrow, he composed a long elegy in -her honour. Of the far-reaching consequences -of this act let our author speak. "When Antimachus -first sat down in his empty house at -Colophon to write an elegy to his dead wife, -consciously or unconsciously he was initiating -the greatest artistic revolution that the world -has ever seen." Asclepiades and Philetas followed -him as imitators, and the thing was done. -Woman was at last "connected with 'romance.'" -Our author admits the difficulty of supposing -that "any one man could invent and popularize -an entirely new emotion"; but suggests that if -we regard it as "simply due to the readjustment -of an already existing emotion," that is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_290" id="Page_290" href="#Page_290">[290]</a></span> -<ins title="paiderastia">παιδεραστια</ins>, such a supposition is "no longer -absurd." It is not only absurd but monstrous.</p> - -<p>The truth almost certainly is, that the love -between man and woman in ancient Greece differed -very little from the love between man and -woman as it exists now. Marriage was, it is -true, purely a matter of business; most wives -aspired to nothing more than the management -of the nursery and the household, and most -women being without education, and living in -seclusion, could scarcely associate, intellectually -at least, on equal terms with their husbands or -lovers. But this proves nothing more than -<i>mariages de convenance</i>, and love based on the -fascination exercised by sensuous attraction -prove now. Then, as in our own time, there -were marriages and marriages, liaisons and liaisons. -The story which Plutarch tells of Callias -(<i>Cimon.</i> iv.) shows that marriage was often based -on love. The pictures given of Hector and Andromache -in the <i>Iliad</i>, of Alcinous and Arete, of -Ulysses and Penelope, of Menelaus and Helen in -the <i>Odyssey</i>, the charming account of Ischomachus -and his young wife in the <i>Œconomics</i> -of Xenophon, the noble and pathetic story of -Pantheia and Abradatas in the <i>Cyropædeia</i>, -the story which, in his life of Agis,<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> Plutarch -tells of Chilonis, and, in the <i>Morals</i>, of Camma,<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> -and innumerable other legends, traditions, and -anecdotes, prove that women could inspire and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_291" id="Page_291" href="#Page_291">[291]</a></span> -return as pure and as chivalrous a love as any -of the heroines of chivalry. The poet who could -write about marriage as Homer does in the -Sixth Odyssey would have had little to learn -from modern refinement.<a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> The love which -Critobulus describes himself as having for -Amandra, in the <i>Symposium</i> of Xenophon, and -the remarks made by Socrates in that dialogue -embody the most exalted conceptions of the -passion of love between the sexes. The sentiments -of Plutarch on this subject are indistinguishable -from the most refined notions of the -modern world, as is abundantly illustrated in -the <i>Amatorius</i>, the <i>Conjugalia Præcepta</i>, and in -the remarks on marriage in the eighth chapter -of the Essay on Moral Virtue. If Ajax and -Hercules became brutes, Tecmessa and Deianeira -were not the only women who have discovered -that men are, too often, May when they woo, and -December when they wed. It is ridiculous to -suppose that a people whose popular poetry -could present such types of womanhood as Arete, -Antigone, Alcestis, Deianeira, Electra, Macaria, -Iphigenia, Evadne, and Polyxena, who could -boast such poetesses as Sappho, Erinna, Corinna, -Myrtis, and Damophila, and whose society was -graced by such women as Aspasia, Diotima, -Gnathæna, Herpyllis, Metaneira, and Leontium, -should have given expression to passion, sentiment, -and romance only in <ins title="paidikoi -hymnoi">παιδικοι ὑμνοι</ins>.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_292" id="Page_292" href="#Page_292">[292]</a></span></p> - -<p>What the author of this book, and what others -who are fond of generalizing about the Greeks, -forget, is, that of a once vast and voluminous -literature we have only fragments. That portion -of their poetry which would have thrown light -on the subject here discussed has perished. -It is certain, for example, that of their lyric -poetry a very large portion was erotic, of that -portion exactly one poem has survived in its -entirety, while a few hundred scattered lines, -torn from their context, represent the rest that -has come down to us. We know, again, that in -some hundreds of their dramas, in the Middle -and New Comedy that is to say, the plots turned -on love—of these dramas not a single one is -preserved. But the reflection of some twenty -of them in Terence and Plautus, and several -scattered fragments, clearly indicate, that the -passion between the sexes involved as much -sentiment and romance as it does in our Elizabethan -dramatists. In what respect do Charinus -and Pamphilus in the <i>Andria</i> and Antipho in -the <i>Phormio</i>—mere replicas, of course, of Greek -originals—differ from modern lovers? What -could be more romantic than the love story -which formed the plot of the <i>Phasma</i> of Menander? -It is fair to our author to say that he -fully admits this, in the only tolerably satisfactory -part of his book, the chapter on Women in -Greek Comedy. The great blot on Greek life, -to which Mr. Benecke gives so much prominence,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_293" id="Page_293" href="#Page_293">[293]</a></span> -has probably had far too much importance attached -to it, partly, perhaps, owing to its accentuation -in the writings of Plato, and partly -owing to that rage for scandalous tittle-tattle, -so unhappily characteristic of ancient anecdote-mongers -from Ion to Athenæus.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_40_40"><span class="label">[40]</span></a> Agis, xvii., xviii.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_41_41"><span class="label">[41]</span></a> De Mulierum Virtutibus.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_42_42"><span class="label">[42]</span></a> See particularly lines 180-185.</p></div> -</div> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_294" id="Page_294" href="#Page_294">[294]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="MR_STEPHEN_PHILLIPS_POEMS" id="MR_STEPHEN_PHILLIPS_POEMS"> -</a>MR. STEPHEN PHILLIPS' POEMS<a name="FNanchor_43_43" id="FNanchor_43_43"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_43_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_43_43" id="Footnote_43_43"></a><a href="#FNanchor_43_43"><span class="label">[43]</span></a> <i>Poems.</i> By Stephen Phillips. London and New York -John Lane.</p></div> - - -<p>The accent here is unmistakable, it is the -accent of a new and a true poet. Mr. -Phillips gives us no mere variations on familiar -melodies, no clever copies of classical archetypes, -and what is more, he has not employed any -illegitimate means of attracting attention and -giving distinction to his work. An audacious -choice of subjects, the adoption of the stones -which the builders have rejected, and, it may be -added, disdained, has, when coupled with elaborate -affectations and eccentricities of treatment -and style, often enabled mediocrity to pass, temporarily -at least, for genius, and the specious -counterfeit of originality for the thing itself. -But these poems are marked by simplicity, sincerity, -spontaneity. If a discordant note is -sometimes struck, here in an over-strained conceit, -and there in an incongruous touch of preciosity -or false sentiment, this is but an accident; -in essentials all is genuine. Nature and passion -affect to be speaking, and nature and passion -really speak. A poet, of whom this may be said -with truth, has passed the line which divides<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_295" id="Page_295" href="#Page_295">[295]</a></span> -talent from genius, the true singer from the -accomplished artist or imitator. He has taken -his place, wherever that place may be, among -authentic poets. To that high honour the present -volume undoubtedly entitles Mr. Phillips. -It would now, perhaps, be premature to say more -than "Ingens omen habet magni clarique triumphi," -but we may predict with confidence that, -if fate is kind and his muse is true to him, he -has a distinguished future before him. It may -be safely said that no poet has made his <i>début</i> -with a volume which is at once of such extraordinary -merit and so rich in promise.</p> - -<p>Mr. Phillips is not a poet who has "one plain -passage of few notes." He strikes many chords, -and strikes them often with thrilling power. The -awful story narrated in <i>The Wife</i> is conceived and -embodied with really Dantesque intensity and -vividness; it has the master's suggestive reservation, -smiting phrase, and clairvoyant picture -wording, as "in the red shawl <i>sacredly</i> she -burned," "smiled at him with her lips, not with -her eyes"; while "Mother and child that food -together ate" is, in pregnancy of tragic suggestiveness, -almost worthy to stand with the "poscia, -più che il dolor, poté il digiuno." Equally distinguished, -though on another plane of interest, -is <i>The woman with the dead Soul</i>, the soul which -could once "wonder, laugh, and weep," but over -which the days began to fall "dismally, as rain -on ocean blear," till—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_296" id="Page_296" href="#Page_296">[296]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">"Existence lean, in sky dead grey</div> -<div class="i0">Withholding steadily, starved it away."</div></div></div> - -<p>If the pathos in these poems is almost "too deep -for tears," it is gentler in the second and third -of the lyrics, which are as exquisite as they -are affecting. The idea in the lines <i>To Milton -Blind</i>, is worthy of Milton's own sublime conceit, -that the darkness which had fallen on his eyes -was but the shadow of God's protecting wings. -The whole poem, indeed, is a beautiful paraphrase -of the noble passage in the <i>Second Defence -of the People of England</i>: "For the Divine law"—we -give it in the English translation—"not -only shields me from injury, but almost renders -me too sacred to attack, not indeed so much from -the privation of my sight as from the overshadowing -of those heavenly wings which seem -to have occasioned this obscurity; and which, -when occasioned, he is wont to illuminate with -an interior light more precious and more pure."</p> - -<p>In <i>The Lily</i>, which is a little obscure—a fault -against which Mr. Phillips would do well to -guard, for he frequently offends in this respect—we -have the note of Petrarch, but Petrarch -would not have ended the poem so flatly. -Tennyson is recalled, too nearly perhaps, in "By -the Sea," but it is a poem of great charm and -beauty. <i>The New De Profundis</i> is, unhappily, -the key to Mr. Phillips' characteristic mood; it -reminds us of the curse imposed on the worldling -in Browning's <i>Easter Day</i>, before he has learned -the use of life and doubt.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_297" id="Page_297" href="#Page_297">[297]</a></span></p> - -<p>Mr. Phillips' two most ambitious poems are -<i>Christ in Hades</i> and <i>Marpessa</i>. In <i>Christ in -Hades</i> he fails, as Mrs. Browning failed in <i>The -Drama of Exile</i>. He attempts a theme—a stupendous -theme—to which his genius is not equal, -and which could only have been adequately -treated by such poets as Dante and Milton, in the -maturity of their powers. It has neither basis -nor superstructure. It is what the Greeks would -call "meteoric" as distinguished from "sublime." -It is a weird, wild, and chaotic dream; and yet -for all this its appeal to the heart and the imagination -is piercing and direct. Like Tennyson, -Mr. Phillips has the art of unfolding the full -significance of a few suggestive words in a great -classic; and nothing could be more effective than -the use to which he has applied the famous lines -which Homer places in the mouth of Achilles. -Poetry has few things more pathetic than -Homer's picture of Hades and the dead, and that -pathos Mr. Phillips has given us in quintessence, -as few would question after reading the lines -which describe Persephone yearning for her -return to the spring-illumined world, the speech -of the Athenian ghost, and the woman's address -to Christ. If the world depicted has something -of Horace's artistic monster, or, to change the -image, something of the anarchy of dreams in -its composition, the vividness and picturesqueness -with which particular figures and scenes are -flashed into light and definition is extraordinarily<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_298" id="Page_298" href="#Page_298">[298]</a></span> -impressive. It is so with the central figure, -Christ; it is so with Prometheus; and the contrast -between these martyrs for man has both -pathos and grandeur.</p> - -<p>There is more originality, more power in -<i>Christ in Hades</i> than in <i>Marpessa</i>, but <i>Marpessa</i> -has more balance, more sanity, more -of the stuff out of which good and abiding -poetry is made, than its predecessor. The one -savours of the spasmodic school, the productions -of which have rarely been found to have the -principle of life, however rich they may have -been in promise; the other is a return to a -school in which most of those who have gained -permanent fame have studied. And we are -glad to find a young poet there.</p> - -<p>But it would be doing Mr. Phillips great injustice -not to note that, though he has had many -predecessors in the semi-classical, semi-romantic -re-treatment of the Greek myths, notably Keats -in <i>Hyperion</i>, Wordsworth in <i>Dion</i> and <i>Laodamia</i>, -Landor in his <i>Hellenics</i>, and Tennyson in <i>Ænone</i> -and <i>Tithonus</i>, he has treated his theme with -a distinction which is all his own, and has -impressed on it an intense individuality. In -comparison with these masters he may be -<i>pauper</i>, but he is <i>pauper in suo ære</i>.</p> - -<p>It would be easy to point to faults in Mr. -Phillips' work. His sense of rhythm, even allowing -for what are plainly deliberate experiments -in discord, seems often curiously defective. How<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_299" id="Page_299" href="#Page_299">[299]</a></span> -stiff and limping, for example, is the following:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i10">"O pity us,</div> -<div class="i0">For I would ask of thee only to look</div> -<div class="i0">Upon the wonderful sunlight and to smell</div> -<div class="i0">Earth in the rain. Is not the labourer</div> -<div class="i0">Returning heavy through the August sheaves</div> -<div class="i0">Against the setting sun, who gladly smells</div> -<div class="i0">His supper from the opening door—is he</div> -<div class="i0">Not happier than these melancholy kings?</div> -<div class="i0">How good it is to live, even at the worst!</div> -<div class="i0">God was so lavish to us once, but here</div> -<div class="i0">He hath repented, jealous of His beams."</div></div></div> - -<p>Lines, again, like "Pierced her, and odour full of -arrows was," "Realizes all the uncoloured dawn," -"Yet followed a riddled memorable flag," are, -no doubt, extreme instances, but they are typical -of many bad lines. Occasionally he falls flat on -some harsh prosaic phrase, like "beautiful indolence -<i>was on our brains</i>." Nor is he always -happy in his attempts at novelty in phraseology, -as in his employment of the words "liable," -"inaccurate," "pungent"; and these faults in -rhythm and diction are the more remarkable, as -the really subtle mastery over rhythmic expression -which he exhibits at times, and his singularly -felicitous epithets, turns, and phrases are -among his most striking gifts. Take a few out -of very many: "A bleak magnificence of endless -hope," "That common trivial face, of endless -needs," "The mystic river, floating wan," "And -the moist evening fallow, richly dark," "That -palest rose sweet on the night of life." How noble -is the rhythm and imagery of the following:—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_300" id="Page_300" href="#Page_300">[300]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i10">"All the dead</div> -<div class="i0">The melancholy attraction of Jesus felt:</div> -<div class="i0">And millions, like a sea, wave upon wave,</div> -<div class="i0">Heaved dreaming to that moonlight face, or ran</div> -<div class="i0">In wonderful long ripples, sorrow-charmed.</div> -<div class="i0">Toward him, in faded purple, pacing came</div> -<div class="i0">Dead emperors, and sad, unflattered kings;</div> -<div class="i0">Unlucky captains, listless armies led:</div> -<div class="i0">Poets with music frozen on their lips</div> -<div class="i0">Toward the pale brilliance sighed."</div></div></div> - -<p>And it would be easy to multiply illustrations -from <i>Marpessa</i> and <i>By the Sea</i>. Occasionally -there is a certain incongruity between the form -and the matter. A poem so essentially, so -intensely realistic as <i>The Wife</i> should not have -such quaintnesses as "palèd in her thought." -Nor should we have</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"The constable, with lifted hand,</div> -<div class="i0">Conducting the orchestral Strand";</div></div></div> - -<p>nor should a railway station be described as a -"moonèd terminus." Nothing is so disenchanting -as affectation.</p> - -<p>One cannot but add that these poems, welcome -as they are, would have been more welcome still, -had they been less profoundly melancholy. -Their monotonous sadness, the persistency with -which they dwell on all those grim and melancholy -realities which poetry should help us to -forget, or cheer us in enduring, is not merely -their leading, but their pervading characteristic. -This note will, we hope, change. Leopardi is -immortal, and could not be spared; but one -Leopardi is enough for a single century.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_301" id="Page_301" href="#Page_301">[301]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="THE_ILLUSTRIOUS_OBSCURE" id="THE_ILLUSTRIOUS_OBSCURE"> -</a>THE ILLUSTRIOUS OBSCURE<a name="FNanchor_44_44" id="FNanchor_44_44"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_44_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_44_44" id="Footnote_44_44"></a><a href="#FNanchor_44_44"><span class="label">[44]</span></a> <i>West Country Poets: Their Lives and Works, etc.</i> -Illustrated with Portraits. By W. H. Kearley Wright, -F.R.H.S. London: Elliot Stock. 1896.</p></div> - - -<p>Some nineteen hundred years ago Horace -observed that there was one thing which -neither gods, nor men, nor bookstalls would tolerate -in a poet—and that was mediocrity. The -verdict of gods, men, and the bookstalls is probably -still what it was then; but to such tribunals -the rhymesters of our time can afford to be -quite indifferent. Paper and printing are cheap; -small poets and small critics are now so numerous -that they form a world, and a populous -world, in themselves; and, well understanding -the truth of the old proverb, "Concordiâ, parvæ -res crescunt," they mutually manufacture the -wreaths with which they crown each other's -modest vanity. There are hundreds of "poets" -and "critics" of whom the great world knows -nothing, who are thus enabled, in their little day, -to taste all the sweets of fame, and "walk with -inward glory crown'd." To wage serious war<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_302" id="Page_302" href="#Page_302">[302]</a></span> -against such a tribe as this would be as absurd -as to break butterflies upon a wheel; but -we really think it high time that some protest -should be made against the indefinite multiplication -of the rubbish for which these people and -their patrons are responsible, and still more -against its importation into what purports to be -a contribution to serious literature. As long as -these geniuses confine themselves to their proper -sphere, the poets' corners of provincial newspapers, -we have nothing to say. But it becomes -quite another matter when the skill of an ingenious -projector enables—we are really sorry to -have to speak so harshly—a rabble of poetasters -to figure side by side with poets of classical -fame, and to appear in all the dignity of contributors -to a national anthology. Yet such is -the design of this volume, which was, it seems, -published by subscription, the subscribers being -for the most part the various candidates for -poetical fame, who have obligingly sent their -portraits and their biographies for insertion in -Mr. Kearley Wright's "monumental work." As -Mr. Kearley Wright's collection begins with the -fifteenth century, and includes the really eminent -poets who happen to have been born in the -West of England, many of his worthies are -naturally <i>apud plures</i>, but the majority, in whose -honour the anthology appears to have been compiled, -adorn the living. And very gratifying it -must be for these gentlemen, and for Mr.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_303" id="Page_303" href="#Page_303">[303]</a></span> -Kearley Wright himself—for he also has a -niche—to find themselves side by side with Sir -Walter Raleigh, Herrick, Gay, and Coleridge.</p> - -<p>Mr. Kearley Wright's "company of makers" -is certainly a motley one. First comes among -his living bards an inspired porter at the Teignmouth -railway station, who asks in rapture,—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Along the glitt'ring streets of gold,</div> -<div class="i1">Amid the brilliant glare,</div> -<div class="i0">Shall we God's banner there unfold,</div> -<div class="i1">His righteous helmet wear?"</div></div></div> - -<p>At no great distance follows, with a portrait -looking intensely intellectual, "the manager of -the Bristol and South Wales Railway Waggon -Company, Limited," whose poems are described -as "lacking here and there logical sequence and -literary method," but "evincing undoubtedly -a great poetical disposition and philosophical -drift." The two poems which illustrate this -poet's genius afford very little proof either of -"a great poetical disposition" or of "a philosophical -drift," but painfully conclusive proof that -much more is lacking than "logical sequence and -literary method," the lack of which may certainly -be conceded as well. Next comes Mr. Jonas -Coaker, "the landlord of the Warren House Inn," -whose verses "disclose a poetic spirit, and, had -he possessed the advantages of education, would -doubtless have attracted some attention." Mr. -Coaker is in the main autobiographical.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_304" id="Page_304" href="#Page_304">[304]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"I drew my breath first on the moor,</div> -<div class="i1">There my forefathers dwelled;</div> -<div class="i0">Its hills and dales I've traversed o'er,</div> -<div class="i1">Its desert parts beheld.</div> -<div class="i1" style="letter-spacing:2em;">*****</div> -<div class="i0">It's oft envelop'd in a fog,</div> -<div class="i1">Because it's up so high."</div></div></div> - -<p>And Mr. Coaker continues in the same strain -further than we care to transcribe. Then we -have Mr. John Goodwin, "formerly a coach-guard, -who sung of the days when there was -such a thing, if we may so phrase it, as the -poetry of locomotion." In his poetry, we are -told, "there is a genuine ring," as here, for -example:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"I mind the time, when I was guard,</div> -<div class="i1">The lord, the duke, or squire</div> -<div class="i0">Would travel by the old stage-coach,</div> -<div class="i1">Or post-chaise they would hire."</div></div></div> - -<p>Mr. Charles Chorley, who is, we are informed, -submanager of the Truro Savings Bank, in verses -which are presumably a parody of Sir William -Jones' <i>Imitation of Alcæus</i>, inquires, not without -a certain propriety, "What constitutes a mine?" -On a par with all these are the verses of the -bard who "in summer hawked gooseberries and -in winter shoelaces," and those of the "uneducated -journeyman woolcomber."</p> - -<p>Now, we need hardly say that the humble -vocations of these poets are neither derogatory -to them nor in any way detrimental to merit<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_305" id="Page_305" href="#Page_305">[305]</a></span> -where merit exists; but there is no merit whatever -in the poems assigned to them in this -volume; they are simply such poems as hawkers, -woolcombers, railway porters, and submanagers -of provincial banks—"who pen a stanza when -they should engross"—might be expected to -write. The same may be said of almost every -copy of verses, produced by amateurs, to be found -in this collection. We have scarcely noticed a -single poem which rises above mediocrity; a -very large proportion are below even a mediocre -standard—they are simply rubbish. In one poet -only, among those whose names were not before -known to us, do we discern genius, and that is -in Mr. John Dryden Hosken, whose poem, entitled -<i>My Masters</i>, is really excellent.</p> - -<p>The editor of this anthology is plainly incompetent, -both in point of taste and critical discernment, -and in point of knowledge, for the task -which he has undertaken. The first is proved by -the extracts which he has selected from the works -of well-known poets. Coleridge, for example, -is represented by two comparatively inferior -poems, <i>The Devil's Thoughts</i> and <i>Fancy in Nubibus</i>; -Thomas Carew, by two short poems, one -of which is probably the worst he ever wrote; -Herrick, by two of his very worst; Praed, by two -of the feeblest and least characteristic of his -poems; Walcot, by mere trash. It is quite possible -that their less illustrious brethren may -have suffered from the deplorable inability of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_306" id="Page_306" href="#Page_306">[306]</a></span> -this editor to discern between what is good and -what is bad. Certainly Capern, who was a poet -with a touch of genius, suffers, for the lyric -given is very far indeed from representing or -illustrating his best or even his characteristic -work. In giving an account of Alexander Barclay, -who, by the way, is called Andrew in the -Preface, Mr. Wright says nothing about his -most important poems—his Eclogues. If Eustace -Budgell is included among the poets, why -are not his poems specified and represented? -Of Aaron Hill it is observed that "neither his -reputation as a poet nor his connexion with the -county of Devon is sufficient to warrant more -than a mere notice of his name." Aaron Hill -was the author of more than one poem of conspicuous -merit. The verses attributed on page -488 to Sir William Yonge were written by Lady -Mary Wortley Montagu. But these are trifles. -What we wish to protest against is the foisting -of such volumes as these on our libraries; and -it is appalling to learn that it is the intention of -Mr. Kearley Wright, if he is sufficiently encouraged -by subscribers, to follow this with another -similar collection. If poets like these wish to -gratify their vanity, let them not gratify it to -the detriment of serious literature; for, if the -few can discriminate, the many cannot, and the -multiplication of works like these must infallibly -tend to lower the standard of current literature, -by furthering the disastrous "cult of the average<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_307" id="Page_307" href="#Page_307">[307]</a></span> -man." In our opinion criticism can have no -more imperative duty than to discountenance -and discourage in every way such projectors as -Mr. Kearley Wright and such poets as those for -whose merits he and critics like him stand sponsors.</p> - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_308" id="Page_308" href="#Page_308">[308]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="VIRGIL_IN_ENGLISH_HEXAMETERS" id="VIRGIL_IN_ENGLISH_HEXAMETERS"> -</a>VIRGIL IN ENGLISH HEXAMETERS<a name="FNanchor_45_45" id="FNanchor_45_45"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_45_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a></h2> - - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_45_45" id="Footnote_45_45"></a><a href="#FNanchor_45_45"><span class="label">[45]</span></a> <i>The Eclogues of Virgil.</i> Translated into English -Hexameter Verse by the Right Hon. Sir George Osborne -Morgan, Bart., Q.C., M.P. London.</p></div> - - -<p>Sir George Osborne Morgan has -served his generation in much more important -capacities than those of a scholar and a -translator of Virgil, and had this little work, -therefore, been less meritorious than it is, no -critic with a sense of the becoming would deal -harshly with it. But it challenges and deserves -serious consideration, not only as an attempt to -solve a problem of singular interest to students -of classical poetry, but as a somewhat ambitious -contribution to the literature of translation. -Sir Osborne Morgan is, however, mistaken in -supposing that in translating Virgil into his -own metre he "has undertaken a task which -has never been attempted before." In 1583 -Richard Stanihurst published a translation of -the first four books of the <i>Æneid</i> in English -hexameters; and, if Sir Osborne will turn to -Webbe's <i>Discourse of English Poetrie</i>, published -as early as 1586, he will find versions in English<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_309" id="Page_309" href="#Page_309">[309]</a></span> -hexameters of the First and Second Eclogues, -while Abraham Fraunce, in a curious volume, -entitled <i>The Countess of Pembroke's Ivy Church</i>, -which appeared in 1591, has, among the other -hexameters in the collection, given a version of -the Second Eclogue in this measure. But Sir -Osborne Morgan has been more immediately -anticipated in his experiment. In 1838 Dr. -James Blundell published anonymously, under -the title of <i>Hexametrical Experiments</i>, versions -in hexameters of the First, Fourth, Sixth, and -Tenth Eclogues, and to this translation he prefixed -an elaborate preface, vindicating the employment -of the hexameter in English, and explaining -its mechanism to the unlearned. Indeed, -Blundell arrived at the same conclusion as Sir -Osborne Morgan, that the proper medium for an -English translation of hexametrical poems in -Greek and Latin is the English hexameter. We -may, however, hasten to add that Sir Osborne -has little to fear from a comparison with his -predecessors, who have, indeed, done their best -to refute by example their own theory. It may -be observed, in passing, that the translations of -Virgil into rhymed decasyllabic verse are far -more numerous than Sir Osborne Morgan seems -to suppose. He is, he says, acquainted only -with two—the version by Dryden and Joseph -Warton—not seeming to be aware that Warton -translated only the <i>Georgics</i> and <i>Eclogues</i>, -printing Pitt's version of the <i>Æneid</i>. The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_310" id="Page_310" href="#Page_310">[310]</a></span> -whole of Virgil was translated into this -measure by John Ogilvie between 1649-50, and -by the Earl of Lauderdale about 1716, while -versions of the <i>Æneid</i>, the <i>Georgics</i>, and the -<i>Eclogues</i>, in the same metre, have abounded in -every era of our literature, from Gawain -Douglas's translation of the <i>Æneid</i> printed in -1553, to Archdeacon Wrangham's version of the -<i>Eclogues</i> in 1830.</p> - -<p>It is no reproach to Sir Osborne Morgan that, -in the occupations of a busy political life, his -scholarship should have become a little rusty, -but it is a pity that he should so often have -allowed himself to be caught tripping, when a -little timely counsel in the correction of his -proof sheets might have prevented this. In -the First Eclogue the line</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Non insueta graves temptabunt pabula fetas"</div></div></div> - -<p>is translated</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Here no unwonted herb shall tempt the travailing cattle."</div></div></div> - -<p>What it really means is, no change of fodder, -no fodder which is strange to them, shall -"infect" or "try" the pregnant cattle, -"insueta" being used in exactly the same sense -as in Eclogue V. 56, "<i>insuetum</i> miratur limen -Olympi," and "temptare" as it is used in Georg. -III. 441, and commonly in classical Latin. It is, -to say the least, questionable whether in the -couplet—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_311" id="Page_311" href="#Page_311">[311]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Pauperis et tuguri congestum cæspite culmen,</div> -<div class="i0">Post aliquot, mea regna videns, mirabor aristas?"—</div></div></div> - -<p>the last line can mean</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Gaze on the straggling corn, the remains of what once was my kingdom."</div></div></div> - -<p>"Aristas" is much more likely to be a metonymy -for "messes," <i>i.e.</i> "annos," like <ins title="arotou">αροτου</ins> in -Sophocles' <i>Trachiniæ</i>, 69, <ins title="ton -men parelthont' aroton">τον μεν παρελθοντ' -αροτον</ins>, a confirmative illustration which seems -to have escaped the commentators; but it is -difficult to say, and Sir Osborne has, it must be -owned, excellent authority for his interpretation. -In Eclogue III. the somewhat difficult -passage</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i8">"pocula ponam</div> -<div class="i0">Fagina....</div> -<div class="i0">Lenta quibus torno facili superaddita vitis</div> -<div class="i0">Diffusos hedera vestit pallente corymbos"—</div></div></div> - -<p><i>i.e.</i> "where the limber vine wreathed round -them by the deft graving tool is twined with -pale ivy's spreading clusters,"—is translated:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Over whose side the vine by a touch of the graving tool added</div> -<div class="i0">Mantles its clustering grapes in the paler leaves of the ivy."</div></div></div> - -<p>This is quite wrong. "Corymbos" cannot possibly -mean clusters of grapes, but clusters of ivy -berries, "hederâ pallente" being substituted, -after Virgil's manner, for "hederæ pallentis." -In Eclogue IV. 24 there is no reason for -supposing that the "fallax herba veneni" is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_312" id="Page_312" href="#Page_312">[312]</a></span> -hemlock; it is much more likely to be aconite. -In line 45 "sandyx" should be translated not -"purple" but "crimson," vague as the colour -indicated by "purple" is. In Eclogue V.</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i4">"Si quos aut Phyllidis ignes,</div> -<div class="i0">Aut Alconis habes laudes, aut jurgia Codri"</div></div></div> - -<p>is not</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Phyllis's fiery loves you would sing or the quarrels of Codrus,"</div></div></div> - -<p>but "your passion for Phyllis, your invectives -against Codrus," "ignes" being used far more -becomingly for a man's love than for a woman's. -So, again, "pro purpureo narcisso" cannot -mean what nature never saw, "purple daffodil," -but the white narcissus. In Eclogue VIII. -"Sophocleo tua carmina digna cothurno" is -turned by what is obviously a <i>lapsus calami</i>, -"worthy of Sophocles' sock." A scholar like -Sir Osborne Morgan does not need reminding -that the "sock" is a metonymy for Comedy, as -Milton anglicizes it in <i>L'Allegro</i>, "if Jonson's -learned sock be on." In the exquisite passage -in Eclogue VIII. 41—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Jam fragiles poteram ab terrâ contingere ramos"—</div></div></div> - -<p>to translate "fragiles" as "frail" is to miss the -whole point of the epithet. What Virgil means -is, "I could just reach the branches from the -ground and <i>break them off</i>"; if it is to be translated -by one epithet, it must be "brittle." -Again in the Ninth Eclogue the words<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_313" id="Page_313" href="#Page_313">[313]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i6">"quâ se subducere colles</div> -<div class="i0"><i>Incipiunt</i>, mollique jugum demittere clivo,"</div></div></div> - -<p>do not mean "where the hills with gentle -depression steal away into the plain," but the -very opposite: <i>i.e.</i> "Where the hills begin to -draw themselves up from the plain," the ascent -being contemplated from below. In Eclogue -IX., in turning the couplet</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Nam neque adhuc Vario videor, nec dicere Cinnâ</div> -<div class="i0">Digna, sed argutos inter strepere anser olores,"</div></div></div> - -<p>the translator has no authority for turning the -last verse into "a cackling goose in a chorus of -cygnets," for there is no tradition that cygnets -sang, and goose should have been printed with a -capital letter to preserve the pun, the allusion -being to a poetaster named Anser. Unfortunately -for the English translator, our literature -can boast no counterpart to "Anser" <i>totidem -literis</i>, but Goose printed with a capital is near -enough to preserve, or suggest the sarcasm. -There is another slip in Eclogue X.: "Ferulas" -is not "wands of willow" but "fennel."</p> - -<p>Occasionally a touch is introduced which is -neither authorized by the original, nor true to -nature. There is nothing, for instance to -warrant, in Eclogue I. 56, the epithet "odorous" -as applied to the willow, nor does "salictum" -mean a "willow" but a "willow-bed or plantation." -To translate "ubi tempus erit" by -"when the hour shall have struck" reminds -us of Shakespeare's famous anachronism in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_314" id="Page_314" href="#Page_314">[314]</a></span> -<i>Julius Cæsar</i> and is as surprising in the work -of a scholar as the lengthening of the penultimate -in arbutus, "Sweet is the shower to the -blade, To the newly weaned kid the arbutus." -As a rule, the translator turns difficult passages -very skilfully, but this is not the case with -the couplet which concludes the "Pollio":—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Incipe, parve puer: cui non risere parentes</div> -<div class="i0">Nec deus hunc mensâ, dea nec dignata cubili est";</div></div></div> - -<p>that is, the "babe on whom the parent never -smiled, no god ever deemed worthy of his board, -no goddess of her bed"—in other words, he can -never enjoy the rewards of a hero like Hercules; -but there is neither sense nor skill, and -something very like a serious grammatical -error, in</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i4">"Who knows not the smile of a parent,</div> -<div class="i0">Neither the board of a god nor the bed of a goddess is worthy."</div></div></div> - -<p>But to turn from comparative trifles. No -one who reads this version of the <i>Eclogues</i> can -doubt that Sir Osborne Morgan has proved his -point, that the English hexameter, when skilfully -used, is the measure best adapted for -reproducing Virgil's music in English. The -following passage (<i>Ec.</i> VII. 45-48) is happily -turned; let us place the original beside the -translation:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Muscosi fontes et somno mollior herba,</div> -<div class="i0">Et quæ vos rarâ viridis tegit arbutus umbrâ,</div> -<div class="i0">Solstitium pecori defendite: jam venit æstas</div> -<div class="i0">Torrida, jam læto turgent in palmite gemmæ."</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_315" id="Page_315" href="#Page_315">[315]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Moss-grown fountains and sward more soft than the softest of slumbers,</div> -<div class="i0">Arbutus tree that flings over both its flickering shadows,</div> -<div class="i0">Shelter my flock from the sun. Already the summer is on us,</div> -<div class="i0">Summer that scorches up all! See the bud on the glad vine is swelling."</div></div></div> - -<p>Again (<i>Ec.</i> X. 41-48):—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Serta mihi Phyllis legeret, cantaret Amyntas:</div> -<div class="i0">Hic gelidi fontes, hic mollia prata, Lycori,</div> -<div class="i0">Hic nemus: hic ipso tecum consumerer ævo.</div> -<div class="i0">Nunc insanus amor duri me Martis in armis</div> -<div class="i0">Tela inter media atque adversos detinet hostes:</div> -<div class="i0">Tu procul a patriâ—nec sit mihi credere tantum!—</div> -<div class="i0">Alpinas, ah dura, nives et frigora Rheni</div> -<div class="i0">Me sine sola vides."</div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Phyllis would gather me flowers and Amyntas a melody chant me;</div> -<div class="i0">Cool is the fountain's wave and soft is the meadow, Lycoris;</div> -<div class="i0">Shady the grove! Here with thee I would die of old age in the greenwood.</div> -<div class="i0">Mad is the lust of war, that now in the heart of the battle</div> -<div class="i0">Chains me where darts fall fast, and the charge of the foemen is fiercest,</div> -<div class="i0">Far, far away from your home—Oh, would that I might not believe it—</div> -<div class="i0">Lost amid Alpine snows or the frozen desolate Rhineland,</div> -<div class="i0">Lonely without me you wander."</div></div></div> - -<p>Many other felicitous passages might be -quoted; indeed, there is no Eclogue without -them; but the translator is not sure-footed, -and, if he occasionally illustrates the hexameter -in its excellence, he illustrates, unhappily too<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_316" id="Page_316" href="#Page_316">[316]</a></span> -often, some of its worst defects. Two qualities -are indispensable to the success of this measure -in English. Our language, unlike the classical -languages, being accentual and not quantitative, -if the long syllable is not represented where the -stress naturally falls, and the short syllables -where it does not fall, the effect is sometimes -grotesque, sometimes distressing, and always -unsatisfactory. Nothing, for example, could -be worse in their various ways than the -following:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Wept when you saw they were given the lad, and had you not managed."</div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"Let not the frozen air harm you."</div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"Scatter the sand with his hind hoofs."</div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"The pliant growth of the osier."</div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"Worthy of Sophocles' sock, trumpet-tongued through the Universe echo."</div> -<br /> -<div class="i0">"Own'd it himself, and yet he would not deliver it to me."</div></div></div> - -<p>A very nice ear, too, is required to adjust the -collocation of words in which either vowels or -consonants predominate, and the relative position -of monosyllabic and polysyllabic words, -the predominance of the former in our -language increasing enormously the difficulty. -No measure, moreover, so easily runs into -intolerable monotony—a monotony which -Clough sought to avoid by overweighting his -verses with spondees, and which Longfellow -illustrates by the cloying predominance of the -dactylic movement. Sir Osborne Morgan tells -us that he took Kingsley as his model.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_317" id="Page_317" href="#Page_317">[317]</a></span> -Kingsley's hexameters are respectable, but they -have no distinction, and he had certainly not a -good ear. Longfellow's are far better, and are -sometimes exquisitely felicitous, as in a couplet -like the following, which, with the exception of -one word, is flawless:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Men whose lives glided on like the rivers that water the woodlands,</div> -<div class="i0">Darken'd by shadows of earth, but reflecting an image of Heaven."</div></div></div> - -<p>Probably the best hexameters which have been -composed in English are those in William -Watson's <i>Hymn to the Sea</i> and those in which -Hawtry translated Iliad III. 234-244, and the -parting of Hector and Andromache in the -Sixth Iliad, models—these versions—not merely -of translation, but of hexametrical structure. -There are, however, certain magical effects, -particularly in the Virgilian hexameter, produced -by an exquisite but audacious tact in -the employment of licences, which can never -be reproduced in English.</p> - -<p>Such would be—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Nam neque Parnassi vobis juga, nam neque Pindi</div> -<div class="i0">Ulla moram fecere, neque Aonie Aganippe.</div> -<div class="i0">Illum etiam lauri, etiam flevere myricæ;</div> -<div class="i0">Pinifer illum etiam solâ sub rupe jacentem</div> -<div class="i0">Mænalus et gelidi fleverunt saxa Lycæi."</div></div></div> - -<p>Milton, and Milton alone among Englishmen, -had the secret of this music, but he elicited -it from another instrument.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_318" id="Page_318" href="#Page_318">[318]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="THE_LATEST_EDITION_OF_THOMSON" id="THE_LATEST_EDITION_OF_THOMSON"> -</a>THE LATEST EDITION OF THOMSON<a name="FNanchor_46_46" id="FNanchor_46_46"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_46_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_46_46" id="Footnote_46_46"></a><a href="#FNanchor_46_46"><span class="label">[46]</span></a> <i>The Poetical Works of James Thomson.</i> A New -Edition, with Memoir and Critical Appendices, by the Rev. -D. C. Tovey. 2 vols. London.</p></div> - - -<p>"Jacob Thomson, ein vergessener Dichter -des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts"—a forgotten -poet of the eighteenth century—such is -the title of a recent monograph on the author -of <i>The Seasons</i> by Dr. G. Schmeding. Dr. G. -Schmeding is, however, so obliging as to pronounce -that, in his opinion, this ought not to be -Thomson's fate; that there remains in his work, -especially in <i>The Seasons</i> merit enough to -entitle him to be "enrolled among poets," and -to find appreciation, at all events in schools and -reading societies. Dr. Schmeding may rest -assured that Thomson's fame is quite safe. It -has no doubt suffered, as that of all the poets -of the eighteenth century has suffered, by the -great revolution which has, in the course of the -last ninety years, passed over literary tastes and -fashions. But during the present century there -have been no less than twenty editions of his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_319" id="Page_319" href="#Page_319">[319]</a></span> -poems, to say nothing of separate editions of <i>The -Seasons</i>; while his works, or portions of them, -have been translated into German, Italian, modern -Greek, and Russian. Only two years ago M. Léon -Morel, in his <i>J. Thomson, sa vie et ses œuvres</i>, published -an elaborate and admirable monograph -on this "forgotten poet." And now Mr. Tovey, -who, we are glad to see, has been appointed -Clarke Lecturer at Cambridge, has given us a -new biography of him and a new edition of his -works, making, if we are not mistaken, the thirty-second -memoir of him and the twenty-first -edition of his works which have appeared since -the beginning of the century. This is pretty -well for a forgotten poet!</p> - -<p>Mr. Tovey's name is a sufficient guarantee for -accurate and scholarly work. But it might -naturally be asked, what is there to justify another -edition of this poet, when so many editions -are already in the field and so easily accessible? -We have little difficulty in answering this question. -The special features of Mr. Tovey's edition -are as important as they are interesting. In the -first place, he has given us a much fuller biography -than has hitherto appeared in English; -in the second place, he has thrown much interesting -light on the political bearing of Thomson's -dramas; and, in the third place, he has given, -what no other editor of Thomson has given, a -full collation of Thomson's own MS. corrections, -preserved in Mitford's copy, now deposited in the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_320" id="Page_320" href="#Page_320">[320]</a></span> -British Museum. The critical notes have cost -him, he says, and we can quite believe it, much -time and labour, and in his preface he half apologizes -for what may seem "a ridiculous travesty -of more important labours." There was no -necessity for such an apology: he observes justly -that he has "not spent more pains on Thomson's -text than so many of our scholars bestow upon -some Greek and Latin poets whose intrinsic -merit is no greater than Thomson's."</p> - -<p>To serious readers these critical notes will -constitute the most valuable part of Mr. Tovey's -labours; they are, in truth, the speciality of this -particular edition, and will make it indispensable -to all students of this most interesting -poet. And now Mr. Tovey will, we trust, forgive -us if, with due deference, we point out -what seem to us to be defects in his work. -The first thing that might have been expected -from so learned and careful an editor of -Thomson was an adequate discussion of the -great problem of the authorship of <i>Rule Britannia</i>, -and the second an exposure of one of -the most extraordinary "mare's-nests" to be -found in English literature. But nothing, we -regret to say, can be more perfunctory and -inadequate than the two notes in which the -first question is hurried over with references -to <i>Notes and Queries</i>, and nothing more irritating -than the confusion worse confounded -in which Mr. Tovey leaves the second. We<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_321" id="Page_321" href="#Page_321">[321]</a></span> -shall therefore make no apology for entering -somewhat at length into <a name="Correct14" id="Correct14">both these questions.</a></p> - -<p>And first for the authorship of <i>Rule Britannia</i>. -The facts are these. In 1740 Thomson and -Mallet wrote, in conjunction, a masque entitled -<i>Alfred</i>, which, on 1st August in that year, was -represented before the Prince and Princess of -Wales at Clifden. It was in two acts, and -it contained six lyrics, the last being <i>Rule -Britannia</i>, which is entitled an "Ode," the -music being by Dr. Arne. In 1745 Arne turned -the piece into an opera, and also into "a -musical drama." By this time the lyric had -become very popular, but there is no evidence -to show that it had been definitely attributed to -either of the coadjutors. In 1748 Thomson died. -In 1751 Mallet re-issued <i>Alfred</i>, but in another -form. It was entirely remodelled, and almost -entirely re-written, and, in an advertisement prefixed -to the work, he says: "According to the -present arrangement of the fable I was obliged -to reject a great deal of what I had written in -the other: neither could I retain, of my friend's -part, more than three or four speeches, and a part -of one song." Now, of the parts retained from -the former work, there were the first three -stanzas of <i>Rule Britannia</i>, the three others being -excised, and their place supplied by three stanzas -written by Lord Bolingbroke. If Mallet is to be -believed, then, "part of one song" must refer, -either to a song in the third scene of the second<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_322" id="Page_322" href="#Page_322">[322]</a></span> -act, beginning "From those eternal regions -bright," or to <i>Rule Britannia</i>, for these are the -only lyrics in which portions of the lyrics in the -former edition are retained. <i>Rule Britannia</i> is, -it is true, entitled "An Ode" in the former edition, -and the other lyric "A Song," so that Mallet -would certainly seem to imply that what he -had retained of his friend's work was the portion -of the song referred to, and not <i>Rule Britannia</i>. -But, as Mallet was notoriously a man who could -not be believed on oath, and was an adept in -all those bad arts by which little men filch honours -which do not belong to them, if he is to be -allowed to have any title to the honour of composing -this lyric, it ought to rest on something -better than the ambiguity between the word -"Ode" and the word "Song."</p> - -<p>There is no evidence that, while both were -alive, either Thomson or Mallet claimed the -authorship; but this is certain, it was printed at -Edinburgh, during Mallet's lifetime, in the second -edition of a well-known song book, entitled <i>The -Charmer</i>, with Thomson's initials appended to -it. It is certain that Mallet had friends in -Edinburgh, and it is equally certain that neither -he nor any of his friends raised any objection to -its ascription to Thomson. In 1743, in 1759, and -in 1762 Mallet published collections of poems, -but in none of these collections does he lay claim -to <i>Rule Britannia</i>, and, though it was printed in -song-books in 1749, 1750, and 1761, it is in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_323" id="Page_323" href="#Page_323">[323]</a></span> -no case assigned to Mallet. None of his contemporaries, -so far as we know, attributed it to -him, and it is remarkable that, in a brief obituary -notice of him which appeared in the <i>Scots -Magazine</i> in 1765, he is spoken of as the author -of the famous ballad <i>William and Margaret</i>, but -not a word is said about <i>Rule Britannia</i>. A -further presumption in Thomson's favour is this: -in all probability Dr. Arne, who set it to music, -knew the authorship, and he survived both -Thomson and Mallet, dying in 1778. The song -had become very popular and celebrated, so that -if Mallet had desired to have the credit of -its composition, it is strange that he should -not have laid claim to it, had his claim been -a good one. But if his claim was not good, -he could hardly have ventured to claim the -authorship, as Dr. Arne would have been in his -way. It is quite possible that the ambiguity in -the advertisement to the recension of 1751 was -designed; it certainly left the question open, -and we cannot but think there is something -very suspicious in what follows the sentence in -Mallet's advertisement, where he speaks of his -having used so little of his friend's work. "I -mention this expressly," he adds, "that, whatever -faults are found in the present performance, -they may be charged, as they ought to be, -entirely to my account." A vainer and more -unscrupulous man than Mallet never existed; -and, while it is simply incredible that he should<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_324" id="Page_324" href="#Page_324">[324]</a></span> -not have claimed what would have constituted -his chief title to popularity as a poet, had he -been able to do so, it is in exact accordance with -his established character that he should, as he -did in the advertisement of 1751, have left himself -an opportunity of asserting that claim, should -those who were privy to the secret have predeceased -him, and thus enabled him to do so -with impunity.</p> - -<p>The internal evidence—and on this alone the -question must now be argued—seems to us conclusive -in Thomson's favour. The Ode is simply -a translation into lyrics of what finds embodiment -in Thomson's <i>Britannia</i>, in the fourth -and fifth parts of <i>Liberty</i>, and in his Verses to -the Prince of Wales. Coming to details, there -can be no doubt that the third stanza—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Still more majestic shalt thou rise,</div> -<div class="i1">More dreadful from each foreign stroke;</div> -<div class="i0">As the loud blast that tears the skies</div> -<div class="i1">Serves but to root thy native oak"—</div></div></div> - -<p>was suggested by Horace's</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Duris ut ilex tonsa bipennibus</div> -<div class="i0">Nigræ feraci frondis in Algido,</div> -<div class="i1">Per damna, per cædes, ab ipso</div> -<div class="i2">Ducit opes animumque ferro."</div></div></div> - -<p>Now, not only was Horace, as innumerable -imitations and reminiscences prove, one of -Thomson's favourite poets, but Thomson has, in -the third part of <i>Liberty</i> translated this very -passage:—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_325" id="Page_325" href="#Page_325">[325]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i10">"Like an oak,</div> -<div class="i0">Nurs'd on feracious Algidum, whose boughs</div> -<div class="i0">Still stronger shoot beneath the rigid axe</div> -<div class="i0">By loss, by slaughter, from the steel itself</div> -<div class="i0">E'en force and spirit drew."</div></div></div> - -<p>He has, elsewhere, two other reminiscences of -the same passage, once in the third part of -<i>Liberty</i>—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i6">"Every tempest sung</div> -<div class="i0">Innoxious by, or bade it firmer stand"—</div></div></div> - -<p>and once in <i>Sophonisba</i> (Act V. sc. ii.):—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i11">"Thy rooted worth</div> -<div class="i0">Has stood these wintry blasts, grown stronger by them."</div></div></div> - -<p>The epithet "azure" employed in the first -stanza is, with "cerulean" and "aerial," one of -the three commonest epithets in Thomson, the -three occurring at least twenty times in his -poetry. A somewhat cursory examination of -his works has enabled us to find that "azure" or -"azured" alone occurs ten times. "Generous," -too, in the Latin sense of the term, is another -of his favourite words, it being used no less -than sixteen times in <i>Britannia</i> and <i>Liberty</i> -alone. Another of his favourite allusions is to -England's "native oaks." Thus in <i>Britannia</i> -he speaks of—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i3">"Your oaks, peculiar harden'd, shoot</div> -<div class="i0">Strong into sturdy growth;"</div></div></div> - -<p>in the last part of <i>Liberty</i> we find "Let her own -naval oak be basely torn," and in the same part<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_326" id="Page_326" href="#Page_326">[326]</a></span> -of the poem he speaks of the "venerable oaks" -and "kindred floods." The epithet "manly" and -the phrase "the fair"—"manly hearts to guard -the fair"—are also peculiarly Thomsonian, being -repeatedly employed by him, the phrase "the -fair" occurring in his poetry at least six times, -if not oftener. "Flame," too, is another of his -favourite words.</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"All their attempts to bend thee down</div> -<div class="i0">Will but arouse," etc.,</div></div></div> - -<p>is exactly the sentiment in <i>Britannia</i>.</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i10">"Your hearts</div> -<div class="i0">Swell with a sudden courage, growing still</div> -<div class="i0">As danger grows."</div></div></div> - -<p>The stanza beginning "To thee belongs," etc., is -simply a lyrical paraphrase of the passage in -<i>Britannia</i> commencing "Oh first of human -blessings," and of a couplet in the last part of -<i>Liberty</i>:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"The winds and seas are <a name="Correct15" id="Correct15">Britain's wide domain;</a></div> -<div class="i0">And not a sail but by permission spreads."</div></div></div> - -<p>The couplet</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"All thine shall be the subject main,</div> -<div class="i0">And every shore it circles thine"</div></div></div> - -<p>is simply the echo of a couplet in the fifth part -of <i>Liberty</i>—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"All ocean is her own, and every land</div> -<div class="i0">To whom her ruling thunder ocean bears."</div></div></div> - -<p>The phrase "blessed isle," as applied to England,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_327" id="Page_327" href="#Page_327">[327]</a></span> -he employs three times in <i>Liberty</i>. Again, -the stanza in which <i>Rule Britannia</i> is written -is the stanza in which the majority of Thomson's -minor lyrics are written, and the rhythm and -cadence, not less than the tone, colour and -sentiment, are exactly his.</p> - -<p>Mallet was undoubtedly an accomplished man -and a respectable poet, as his ballad <i>William -and Margaret</i>, his <i>Edwin and Emma</i>, and his -<i>Birks of Invermay</i> sufficiently prove, but he has -written nothing tolerable in the vein of <i>Rule -Britannia</i>. Neatness, and tenderness bordering -on effeminacy, mark his characteristic lyrics, and, -if we except a few lines in his <i>Tyburn</i> and -the eight concluding lines in a poem entitled -<i>A Fragment</i>, there is no virility in his poetry -at all. Of the patriotism and ardent love of -liberty which pervade Thomson's poems, and -which glow so intensely in <i>Rule Britannia</i>, he -has absolutely nothing. Nor are there any -analogues or parallels in his poems to this lyric -either in form—for if we are not mistaken, he -has never employed the stanza in which it is -written—or in imagery, or phraseology. Like -Thomson, whom, in his narrative blank-verse -poems, he servilely imitates, he is fond of the -words "azure" and "aerial"; and the word -"azure" is the only verbal coincidence linking -the phraseology of his acknowledged poems -with the lyric in question. It may be added, -too, that a man who was capable of the jingling<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_328" id="Page_328" href="#Page_328">[328]</a></span> -rubbish of such a masque as <i>Britannia</i>, and -who had the execrable taste to substitute Bolingbroke's -stanzas for the stanzas which they supersede, -could hardly have been equal to the production -of this lyric. We believe, then, that there -can be no reasonable doubt that the honour of -composing <i>Rule Britannia</i> belongs to Thomson -the bard, and not to Mallet the fribble.</p> - -<p>But to return to Mr. Tovey and the "mare's-nest" -to which we have referred. This mare's-nest -is the assumption that Pope assisted -Thomson in revising <i>The Seasons</i>. Since Robert -Bell's edition this has come to be received as an -established fact, but we propose to show that -it rests on a hypothesis demonstrably baseless.</p> - -<p>There is, in the British Museum, an interleaved -copy of the first volume of the London edition -of Thomson's works, dated 1738, and the part of -the volume which contains <i>The Seasons</i> is -full of manuscript deletions, corrections, and -additions. These are in two handwritings, the one -being unmistakably the handwriting of Thomson, -the other beyond all question the handwriting -of some one else. Almost all these corrections -were inserted in the edition prepared for -the press in 1744, and now, consequently, form -part of the present text. The corrections in the -hand which is not the hand of Thomson are, in -many cases, of extraordinary merit, showing a -fineness of ear and delicacy of touch quite above -the reach of Thomson himself. We will give<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_329" id="Page_329" href="#Page_329">[329]</a></span> -two or three samples. Thomson had written -in <i>Autumn</i> 290 seqq.:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"With harvest shining all these fields are thine,</div> -<div class="i0">And if my rustics may presume so far,</div> -<div class="i0">Their master, too, who then indeed were blest</div> -<div class="i0">To make the daughter of Acasto so."</div></div></div> - -<p>The unknown corrector substitutes the present -reading:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"The fields, the master, all, my fair, are thine;</div> -<div class="i0">If to the various blessings which thy house</div> -<div class="i0">Has lavished on me thou wilt add that bliss,</div> -<div class="i0">That dearest bliss, the power of blessing thee!"</div></div></div> - -<p>The other is famous. Thomson had written:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Thoughtless of beauty, she was beauty's self,</div> -<div class="i0">Recluse among the woods, if City-dames</div> -<div class="i0">Will deign their faith. And thus she went compell'd</div> -<div class="i0">By strong necessity, with as serene</div> -<div class="i0">And pleased a look as patience can put on,</div> -<div class="i0">To glean Palemon's fields."</div></div></div> - -<p>For these vapid and dissonant verses is substituted -by the corrector, who very properly -retains the first verse, what is now the text:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Recluse amid the close embow'ring woods,</div> -<div class="i0">As in the hollow breast of Apennine,</div> -<div class="i0">Beneath the shelter of encircling hills,</div> -<div class="i0">A myrtle rises, far from human eyes,</div> -<div class="i0">And breathes its balmy fragrance o'er the wild.</div> -<div class="i0">So flourished blooming, and unseen by all,</div> -<div class="i0">The sweet Lavinia," etc.</div></div></div> - -<p>The transformation of a single line is often most -felicitous: thus in <i>Winter</i> the flat line<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_330" id="Page_330" href="#Page_330">[330]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Through the lone night that bids the waves arise"</div></div></div> - -<p>is grandly altered into</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Through the black night that sits immense around."</div></div></div> - -<p>Thus, in <i>Spring</i>, Thomson had merely written</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Whose aged oaks and venerable gloom</div> -<div class="i0">Invite the noisy rooks;"</div></div></div> - -<p>but his corrector alters and extends the passage -into</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">"Whose aged elms and venerable oaks</div> -<div class="i0">Invite the rooks, who high amid the boughs</div> -<div class="i0">In early spring their airy city build,</div> -<div class="i0">And caw with ceaseless clamour."</div></div></div> - -<p>Indeed, throughout <i>The Seasons</i> Thomson's -indebtedness to his corrector is incalculable; -many of the most felicitous touches are due to -him. Now, who was this corrector? Let Mr. -Tovey answer. "It has long been accepted as a -fact among scholars that Pope assisted Thomson -in the composition of <i>The Seasons</i>. Our original -authority is, we suppose, Warton." The truth is -that our original authority for this statement is -neither Warton nor any other writer of the -eighteenth century, but simply the conjecture of -Mitford—in other words, Mitford's mere assumption -that the handwriting of the corrector is the -handwriting of Pope; and, if we are not mistaken,—for -Mitford may have given earlier currency to -it in some other place—the conjecture appeared -for the first time in Mitford's edition of Gray, -published in 1814. In his copy of the volume,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_331" id="Page_331" href="#Page_331">[331]</a></span> -containing the MS. notes, he bolsters up his statement -by two assertions and references: "That -Pope saw some pieces of Thomson's in manuscript -is clear from a letter in Bowles's <i>Supplement</i>, -page 194" (an obvious misprint for 294). But -on turning to the references all that we find is—it -is in a letter dated February 1738/9—"I have -yet seen but three acts of Mr. Thomson's, but I -am told, and believe by what I have seen that -it excels in the pathetic"; the reference is -plainly to Thomson's tragedy, <i>Edward and Eleonora</i>. -Again, Mitford writes: "On Thomson's -submitting his poems to Pope" (see Warton's -edition, vol. viii., page 340), and again we get -no proof. All that Pope says is, "I am just -taken up"—he is writing to Aaron Hill under -date November 1732—"by Mr. Thomson in the -perusal of a new poem he has brought me;" -this new poem being almost certainly <i>Liberty</i>, -in the composition of which Thomson was then -engaged. So far from the tradition having -any countenance from Warton, it is as certain -as anything can be, that Warton knew nothing -about it. In his <i>Essay on Pope</i> he gives an -elaborate account of <i>The Seasons</i>, and he has -more than once referred to Pope and Thomson -together; but he says not a word, either in -this Essay or in his edition of Pope's Works, -about Pope having corrected Thomson's poetry. -If Pope assisted Thomson, to the extent indicated -in these corrections, such an incident,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_332" id="Page_332" href="#Page_332">[332]</a></span> -considering the fame of Thomson and the -fame of Pope, must have been known to -some at least of the innumerable editors, biographers, -and anecdotists between 1742 and -1814. It could hardly have escaped being recorded -by Murdoch, Mallet, or Warburton, by -Ruffhead, by Savage or Spence, by Theophilus -Cibber or Johnson. It is incredible that such -an interesting secret should have been kept -either by Thomson himself or by Pope. Again, -whoever the corrector was, he had a fine ear for -blank verse, and must indeed have been a master -of it. There is no proof that Pope ever wrote -in blank verse; indeed, we have the express -testimony of Lady Wortley Montagu that he -never attempted it, and his Shakespeare conclusively -proves that he had anything but a nice -ear for its rhythm. With all this collateral -evidence against the probability of the corrector -being Pope, we come to the evidence which -should settle the question, the evidence of handwriting. -There is no lack of material for forming -an opinion on this point. Pope's autograph -MSS. are abundant, illustrating his hand at every -period in his life. It is amazing to find Mitford -asserting that his friends Ellis and Combe, at the -British Museum, had no doubt about the hand -of the corrector being the hand of Pope. Mr. -Tovey candidly admits that, "if the best authorities -at the Museum many years ago were positive -that the handwriting was Pope's, their successors<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_333" id="Page_333" href="#Page_333">[333]</a></span> -at the present time are equally positive that it -is not." Such is the very decided opinion of Mr. -Warner; such, also, as Mr. Tovey acknowledges, -is the opinion of Professor Courthope, and such, -we venture to think, will be the opinion of every -one who will take the trouble to compare the -hands. Mr. Tovey himself is plainly very -uneasy, and indeed goes so far as to say that "it -has all along been perplexing to me how the -opinion that this was Pope's handwriting could -ever have been <i>confidently</i>" (the italics are his) -"entertained"; and yet in his notes he follows -Bell, and inserts these corrections with Pope's -initials.</p> - -<p>We search in vain among those who are -known to have been on friendly terms with -Thomson for a probable claimant. It could not, -as his other stupid revisions of Thomson's verses -sufficiently show, have been Lyttleton. Mallet's -blank verse is conclusive against his having had -any hand in the corrections. Collins and Hammond -are out of the question. It is just possible, -though hardly likely, that the corrector -was Armstrong. He was on very intimate -terms with Thomson. His own poem proves -that he could sometimes write excellent blank -verse, but the touch and rhythm of the corrections -are, it must be admitted, not the touch -and rhythm of Armstrong.</p> - -<p>What has long, therefore, been represented -and circulated as an undisputed fact—namely,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_334" id="Page_334" href="#Page_334">[334]</a></span> -that Pope assisted Thomson in the revision of -<i>The Seasons</i>—rests not, as all Thomson's -modern editors have supposed, on the traditions -of the eighteenth century, and on the testimony -of authenticated handwriting, but on a mere -assumption of Mitford. That the volume in -question really belonged to Thomson, and that -the corrections are originals, hardly admits of -doubt, though Mitford gives neither the pedigree -nor the history of this most interesting literary -relic. It is, of course, possible that the corrections -are Thomson's own, and that the differences in -the handwriting are attributable to the fact that -in some cases he was his own scribe, that in -others he employed an amanuensis; but the -intrinsic unlikeness of the corrections, made in -the strange hand, to his characteristic style -renders this improbable. In any case there -is nothing to warrant the assumption that the -corrector was Pope.</p> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_335" id="Page_335" href="#Page_335">[335]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="CATULLUS_AND_LESBIA" id="CATULLUS_AND_LESBIA"> -</a>CATULLUS AND LESBIA.<a name="FNanchor_47_47" id="FNanchor_47_47"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_47_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_47_47" id="Footnote_47_47"></a><a href="#FNanchor_47_47"><span class="label">[47]</span></a> <i>The Lesbia of Catullus.</i> Arranged and translated by -J. H. A. Tremenheere. London.</p></div> - - -<p>Perhaps the best thing in this world is -youth, and the poetry of Catullus is its -very incarnation. The "young Catullus" he was -to his contemporaries, and the young Catullus he -will be to the end of time. To turn over his -pages is to recall the days when all within and -all without conspire to make existence a perpetual -feast, when life's lord is pleasure, its end -enjoyment, its law impulse, before experience -and satiety have disillusioned and disgusted, and -we are still in Dante's phrase, "trattando l'ombre -come cosa salda." And the poet of youth had -the good fortune not to survive youth; of the -dregs and lees of the life he chose he had no -taste. While the cup which "but sparkles near -the brim" was still sparkling for him, death -dashed it from his lips. At thirty his tale was -told,—and a radiant figure, a sunny memory and -a golden volume were immortal.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_336" id="Page_336" href="#Page_336">[336]</a></span></p> - -<p>Revelling alike in the world of nature, and in -the world of man, at once simple and intense, at -once playful and pathetic, his poetry has a freshness -as of the morning, an abandon as of a child -at play. He has not, indeed, escaped the taint of -Alexandrinism any more than Burns escaped -the taint of the pseudo-classicism of the conventional -school of his day, but this is the only note -of falsetto discernible in what he has left us. It -is when we compare him with Horace, Propertius, -and Martial that his incomparable charm is most -felt. As a lyric poet, except when patriotic, -and when dealing with moral ideas, Horace is -as commonplace as he is insincere; he had no -passion; he had little pathos; he had not much -sentiment; he had no real feeling for nature, -he was little more than a consummate craftsman, -to adopt an expression from Scaliger "ex -alienis ingeniis poeta, ex suo tantum versificator." -In his Greek models he found not merely his form, -but his inspiration. Most of his love odes have -all the appearance of being mere studies in fancy. -When he attempts threnody he is as frigid as Cowley. -Whose heart was ever touched by the verses -to Virgil on the death of Quintilian, or by the -verses to Valgius on the death of his son? The -real Horace is the Horace of the Satires and -Epistles, and the real Horace had as little of -the temperament of a poet as La Fontaine and -Prior. Propertius had passion, and he had certainly -some feeling for nature, but he was an incurable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_337" id="Page_337" href="#Page_337">[337]</a></span> -pedant both in temper and in habit. -Martial applied the epigram, in elegiacs and in -hendecasyllabics, to the same purposes to which -it was applied by Catullus, with more brilliance -and finish, but he had not the power of informing -trifles with emotion and soul. What became -with Catullus the spontaneous expression of the -dominant mood, became in the hands of Martial -the mere <i>tour de force</i> of the ingenious wit. -Catullus is the most Greek of all the Roman -poets; Greek in the simplicity, chastity and propriety -of his style, in his exquisite responsiveness -to all that appeals to the senses and the emotions, -in his ardent and abounding vitality. But, in his -enthusiasm for nature, in the intensity of his -domestic affections, and in his occasional touches -of moral earnestness—and we have seldom to go -far for them—he was Roman. His sketches from -nature are delightful. What could be more -perfect than the following? Has even Tennyson -equalled it?—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Hic, qualis flatu placidum mare matutino</div> -<div class="i0">Horrificans Zephyrus proclivas incitat undas,</div> -<div class="i0">Aurorâ exoriente, vagi sub lumina solis;</div> -<div class="i0">Quæ tarde primum clementi flamine pulsæ</div> -<div class="i0">Procedunt, leviterque sonant plangore cachinni:</div> -<div class="i0">Post, vento crescente, magis magis increbescunt,</div> -<div class="i0">Purpureâque procul nantes a luce refulgent.</div></div></div> - -<blockquote><p>"As in early morning when Zephyr's breath, ruffling the -stilly sea, stirs it into slanting waves up against the glow of -the travelling sun; and at first, while the impelling breeze is -gentle, they move in slow procession, and the plash of their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_338" id="Page_338" href="#Page_338">[338]</a></span> -ripples is not loud; but then, as the breeze freshens, they -crowd faster and faster on, and far out at sea, as they float, -flash back the splendour of the crimsoning day in their front."</p></blockquote> - -<p>Or, again, in the epistle to Manlius—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Qualis in aerii <i>pellucens</i> vertice montis</div> -<div class="i1">Rivus <i>muscoso prosilit e lapide</i>.</div></div></div> - -<p>How vivid is the picture of the rising sun -and of early morning in the Attis, 39-41.</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">Ubi oris aurei sol radiantibus oculis</div> -<div class="i0">Lustravit æthera album, sola dura, mare ferum,</div> -<div class="i0">Pepulitque noctis umbras vegetis sonipedibus.</div></div></div> - -<p>In his "Asian Myrtle, in all the beauty of -its blossom-laden branches, which the Wood-Nymphs -feed with honey dew to be their -toy:"—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Floridis velut enitens</div> -<div class="i0">Myrtus Asia ramulis,</div> -<div class="i0">Quos Hamadryades Deæ</div> -<div class="i0">Ludicrum sibi roscido</div> -<div class="i0">Nutriunt humore.—</div></div></div> - -<p>—who does not recognise Matthew Arnold's -"natural magic"?</p> - -<p>Flowers he loved, as Shakespeare loved them. -What tenderness there is in the image of the love -that perished—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i9">Prati</div> -<div class="i0">Ultimi flos, prætereunte postquam</div> -<div class="i6">Tactus aratro est,</div> -<div class="i10">(xi. 19-21.)</div></div></div> - -<p>—in the beautiful simile, so often imitated in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_339" id="Page_339" href="#Page_339">[339]</a></span> -every language in Europe, where the unmarried -maiden is compared to the uncropped flower, lxii., -39-45; or where in the</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Alba parthenice,</div> -<div class="i0">Luteumve papaver,</div> -<div class="i4">(lxi. 194-5.)</div></div></div> - -<p>he sees the symbol of maidenhood; or where -Ariadne is compared to the myrtles on the banks -of the Eurotas, and to the "flowers of diverse -hues which the spring breezes evoke"; and, -again, the exquisite simile picturing the husband's -love binding fast the bride's thoughts, -as a tree is entwined in the clinging clasp of -the gadding ivy—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Mentem amore revinciens,</div> -<div class="i0">Ut tenax hedera huc et huc</div> -<div class="i3">Arborem implicat errans.</div></div></div> - -<p>Then we have the garland of Priapus with its -felicitous epithets (xix., xx.).</p> - -<p>It may be said of Catullus as Shelley said of -his Alastor—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i11">Every sight</div> -<div class="i0">And sound from the vast earth and ambient air</div> -<div class="i0">Sent to his heart their choicest impulses.</div></div></div> - -<p>What rapture inspires and informs the lines to -his yacht, and to Sirmio, as well as the <i>Jam ver -egelidos refert tepores</i>!</p> - -<p>As the author of the <i>Attis</i> Catullus stands -alone among poets. There was, so far as we -know, nothing like it before, and there has been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_340" id="Page_340" href="#Page_340">[340]</a></span> -nothing like it since. If it be a study from the -Greek, as it is generally supposed to be, it is very -difficult to conjecture at what period its original -could have been produced. There is nothing at -all resembling it which has come down from the -lyric period; its theme is not one which would -have been likely to attract the Attic poets. If -its model was the work of some Alexandrian, we -can only say that such a poem must have been -an even greater anomaly in that literature than -Smart's <i>Song to David</i> is to our own literature, in -the eighteenth century. It may, of course, be -urged that it is equally anomalous in Latin -poetry, and that, if resolved into its elements, it -has much more affinity with what may be traced -to Greek than to Roman sources. In its compound -epithets, and more particularly in the -singular use of "foro," so plainly substituted for -the Greek <ins title="agora">αγορα</ins> and its associations, it certainly -reads like a translation from the Greek; and -yet, in the total impression made by it, the -poem has not the air of a translation, but of an -original, and of an original struck out, in inspiration, -at white heat.</p> - -<p>Only by an extraordinary effort of imaginative -sympathy are we now able to realize to ourselves -the tragedy of the <i>Attis</i>, while its rushing galliambics -whirl us through the panorama of its swift-succeeding -pictures. But home to every heart -must come the poems which Catullus dedicates -to the memory of his brother, and the poem in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_341" id="Page_341" href="#Page_341">[341]</a></span> -which he tries to soothe Calvus for the death of -Quintilia.</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Multas per gentes, et multa per aequora vectus</div> -<div class="i1">Advenio has miseras, frater, ad inferias,</div> -<div class="i0">Ut te postremo donarem munere mortis,</div> -<div class="i1">Et mutum nequidquam alloquerer cinerem:</div> -<div class="i0">Quandoquidem fortuna mihi tete abstulit ipsum:</div> -<div class="i1">Heu miser indigne frater adempte mihi!</div> -<div class="i0">Nunc tamen interea prisco quæ more parentum</div> -<div class="i1">Tradita sunt tristi munere ad inferias,</div> -<div class="i0">Accipe, fraterno multum manantia fletu:</div> -<div class="i1">Atque in perpetuum, frater, ave atque vale.</div></div></div> - -<blockquote><p>"Many are the peoples, many the seas I have passed -through to be here, dear brother, at this, thine untimely -grave, that I might pay thee death's last tribute, and -greet,—how vainly,—the dust that has no response. For -well I know Fortune hath bereft me of thy living self—Ah! -hapless brother, cruelly torn from me! Yet here, see, be -the offerings which, from of old, the custom of our fathers -hath handed down as a sad oblation to the grave—take them—they -are streaming with a brother's tears. And now—for -evermore—brother, hail and farewell!"</p></blockquote> - -<p>Could pathos go further? How exquisite, too, -is the following:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Si quidquam mutis gratum acceptumque sepulcris</div> -<div class="i1">Accidere a nostro, Calve, dolore potest,</div> -<div class="i0">Quum desiderio veteres renovamus amores,</div> -<div class="i1">Atque olim amissas flemus amicitias:</div> -<div class="i0">Certe non tanto mors immatura dolori est</div> -<div class="i1">Quintiliæ, quantum gaudet amore tuo.<a name="FNanchor_48_48" id="FNanchor_48_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_48_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a></div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_342" id="Page_342" href="#Page_342">[342]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<p>Shakespeare merely unfolded what was included -here, when he wrote those haunting lines:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">When to the sessions of sweet silent thought</div> -<div class="i0">I summon up remembrance of things past,</div> -<div class="i0">I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought,</div> -<div class="i0">And with old woes new wail my dear time's waste</div> -<div class="i0">Then can I drown an eye, unus'd to flow,</div> -<div class="i0">For precious friends hid in death's dateless night,</div> -<div class="i0">And weep afresh love's long-since cancell'd woe,</div> -<div class="i0">And moan the expense of many a vanish'd sight.</div></div></div> - -<p>Never, too, has any poet given such pathetic -expression to a sorrow, which to the young is -even harder to bear than the loss inflicted by -death, the perfidy and treachery of friends. The -verses to Alphenus (xxx.), to the anonymous -friend in lxviii., and the epigram to Rufus (lxxvii.), -are indescribably touching. What infinite sadness -there is in:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Si tu oblitus es, at Dii meminerunt, meminit Fides,</div> -<div class="i0">Quæ te ut pæniteat postmodo facti faciet tui.</div></div></div> - -<p>What passion of grief in:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">Heu, heu, nostræ crudele venenum</div> -<div class="i0">Vitæ, heu, heu, nostræ pestis amicitiæ!</div></div></div> - -<p>But nothing that Catullus has left us equals in -fascinating interest, or exceeds in charm, the -poems inspired by the woman who was at once -the bliss and the curse of his life—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Lesbia nostra, Lesbia illa,</div> -<div class="i0">Illa Lesbia, quam Catullus unam</div> -<div class="i0">Plusquam se, atque suos amavit omnes.</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_343" id="Page_343" href="#Page_343">[343]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<p>Whether she is to be identified with the sister -of P. Clodius Pulcher, and the wife of Metellus -Celer, seems to us, in spite of the arguments of -Schwaber, Munro, Ellis, and Sellar, extremely -doubtful. It is a point which need not be discussed -here, and is, indeed, of little importance. -That she was a woman of superb and commanding -beauty, a false wife, a false mistress, and of -immeasurable profligacy, Catullus has himself told -us. There could only be one end to a passion of -which such a siren was the object; and, exquisite -as the poems are which precede the breaking of the -spell, it is in the poems recording the gradual process -of disenchantment, and the struggle between -the old love and the new loathing, that Catullus -touches us most. How piercing is the pathos of -such a poem as the <i>Si qua recordanti</i> (lxxvi.), or -the epigram in which he says that he loves and -loathes, but knows not why, only knows that it is -so, and that he is on the rack:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Odi et amo. Quare id faciam, fortasse requiris.</div> -<div class="i1">Nescio: sed fieri sentio et excrucior.</div></div></div> - -<p>Or where he says that, pest as she is, he cannot -curse a love who is dearer to him than both his -eyes:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Credis me potuisse meæ maledicere vitæ,</div> -<div class="i1">Ambobus mihi quæ carior est oculis?</div> -<div class="i0">Non potui, nec, si possem, tam perdite amarem.</div></div></div> - -<p>And he suffered the more, as he had lavished -on her the purest affections of his heart. His<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_344" id="Page_344" href="#Page_344">[344]</a></span> -love for her—such was his own expression—was -not simply that which men ordinarily feel for -their mistresses, but such as the father feels for -his sons and his sons-in-law:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Dilexi tum te, non tantum ut vulgus amicam,</div> -<div class="i1">Sed pater ut gnatos diligit et generos.</div></div></div> - -<p>But shameless as she is, and it is an impossibility -for her to be otherwise, he cannot abandon her. -Do what she will he is her slave. His mind, he -says, was so straitened by her frailty, so beggared -by its own devotion, that, even if she -became virtuous, he could not love her with -absolute goodwill, and if she stuck at nothing—drained -vice to its very dregs—he could not give -her up:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Huc est mens deducta tuâ, mea Lesbia, culpâ</div> -<div class="i1">Atque ita se officio perdidit ipsa suo,</div> -<div class="i0">Ut jam nec bene velle queam tibi, si optima fias,</div> -<div class="i1">Nec desistere amare, omnia si facias.</div></div></div> - -<p>He compares himself to a man labouring under -a cruel and incurable disease, a disease which -is paralysing his energy, and draining life of its -joy:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Me miserum adspicite, et si vitam puriter egi,</div> -<div class="i1">Eripite hanc pestem perniciemque mihi,</div> -<div class="i0">Quæ mihi subrepens imos, ut torpor, in artus</div> -<div class="i1">Expulit ex omni pectore lætitias.</div></div></div> - -<p>Nearly sixteen hundred years had to pass before -the world was to have any parallel to these -poems. And the parallel is certainly a remarkable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_345" id="Page_345" href="#Page_345">[345]</a></span> -one. In the "Dark Lady" of Shakespeare's -Sonnets, Lesbia lives again; in the lover of the -dark lady, Lesbia's victim. Once more a false -wife and a false mistress, not indeed beautiful, -but with powers of fascination so irresistible -that deformity itself becomes a charm, makes -havoc of a poet's peace. Once more a passion, -as degraded as it is degrading, sows feuds -among friends, and "infects with jealousy the -sweetness of affiance." Once more rises the -bitter cry of a soul, conscious of the unspeakable -degradation of a thraldom which it is agony to -endure, and from which it would be agony to be -emancipated. Compare for instance:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">My love is as a fever, longing still</div> -<div class="i0">For that which longer nurseth the disease,</div> -<div class="i0">Feeding on that which doth preserve the ill,</div> -<div class="i0">The uncertain sickly appetite to please.</div> -<div class="i2" style="letter-spacing: 2em">······</div> -<div class="i0">Past cure I am, now reason is past care,</div> -<div class="i0">And frantic mad with evermore unrest,</div> -<div class="i0">My thoughts and my discourse as madman's are,</div> -<div class="i12">(Sonnet cxlvii.)</div></div></div> - -<p>with Catullus, lxxvi.</p> - -<p>And:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Whence hast thou this becoming of things ill,</div> -<div class="i0">That in the very refuse of thy deeds</div> -<div class="i0">There is such strength and warrantise of skill,</div> -<div class="i0">That in my mind thy worst all best exceeds.</div> -<div class="i0">Who taught thee how to make me love thee more,</div> -<div class="i0">The more I hear and see just cause of hate?</div> -<div class="i12">(Sonnet cl.)</div></div></div> - -<p>with Catullus, lxxii., lxxiii., lxxv.; while Sonnet<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_346" id="Page_346" href="#Page_346">[346]</a></span> -cxxxvii. presents a ghastly parallel with Catullus, -lviii. Again, how exactly analogous is the adjuration -to Quintius in Epigram lxxxii., with -what finds expression in Sonnets xl.-xlii., and -Sonnet cxx. But it would be tedious as well as -superfluous to cite particular parallels where -the whole position—which may be summed up -in the two words of Catullus, "Odi et amo,"—is -identical.</p> - -<p>Not the least remarkable thing about Catullus -is his range and his versatility. It is truly extraordinary -that the same pen should have given us -such finished social portraits as "Suffenus iste" -(xxii.), "Ad Furium" (xxiii.), "In Egnatium" -(xxxix.); the perfection of such serious fooling as -we find in the "Lugete, O Veneres" (iii.), and, if -we may apply such an expression to the most -delicious love poem ever written, the "Acme and -Septimius" (xlv.); of such humorous fooling -as we find in the "Varus me meus ad suos -amores" (x.), the "O Colonia quæ cupis" (xvii.), -the "Adeste, hendecasyllabi," the "Oramus, si -forte non molestum" (lv.); such epic as we -have in the "Peleus and Thetis"; such triumphs -of richness, splendour, and grace as we have in -the three marriage poems; such a superb expression -of the highest imaginative power, penetrated -with passion and enthusiasm, as we have -in the <i>Attis</i>; such concentrated invective and -satire as mark some of the lampoons; such -mock heroic as we have in the <i>Coma Berenices</i>;<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_347" id="Page_347" href="#Page_347">[347]</a></span> -such piercing pathos as penetrates the autobiographical -poems, and the poems dedicated to -Lesbia.</p> - -<p>Catullus has been compared to Keats, but -the comparison is not a happy one. His -nearest analogy among modern poets is Burns. -Both were, in Tennyson's phrase, "dowered -with the love of love, the scorn of scorn," -and, in the poems of both, those passions find -the intensest expression. Both had an exquisite -sympathy with all that appeals, either -in nature or in humanity, to the senses and -the affections. Both were sensualists and -libertines without being effeminate, or without -being either depraved or hardened. In both, -indeed, an infinite tenderness is perhaps the -predominating feature. Both had humour, that -of Catullus being the more caustic, that of -Burns the more genial. Both were distinguished -by sincerity and simplicity; both waged war -with charlatanry and baseness. Burns had the -richer nature and was the greater as a man; -Catullus was the more accomplished artist.</p> - -<p>But it is time to turn to the book which has -recalled Catullus and Lesbia. Mr. Tremenheere -has, with great ingenuity, succeeded in concocting -by a process of elaborate dovetailing a very -pretty romance which he divides into nine -chapters, the first being "The Birth of Love," -the second, third and fourth, "Possession," -"Quarrels" and "Reconciliation," the fifth, sixth,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_348" id="Page_348" href="#Page_348">[348]</a></span> -and seventh, "Doubt," "A Brother's Death" and -"Unfaithfulness," the last two, "Avoidance" and -"The Death of Love." The chief objection to -this is that it is for the most part fanciful, and -is absolutely without warrant, either from tradition -or from probability. Many of the poems -pressed into the service of his narrative by Mr. -Tremenheere have nothing whatever to do with -Lesbia. Such would be xiii., "The invitation to -Fabullus," xiv., "The Acme and Septimius."</p> - -<p>The translations are very unequal. Of many -of them it may be said in Dogberry's phrase that -they "are tolerable and not to be endured," or to -borrow an expression from Byron "so middling -bad were better." Thus the powerful poem to -Gellius (xci.) is attenuated into:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">'Twas not that I esteem'd you were</div> -<div class="i0">As constant or incapable</div> -<div class="i0">Of vulgar baseness, but that she</div> -<div class="i0">For whom great love was wasting me,</div> -<div class="i0">The spice of incest lacked for you;</div> -<div class="i0">And though we were old friends, 'tis true,</div> -<div class="i0">That seem'd poor cause to my poor mind,</div> -<div class="i0">Not so to yours.</div></div></div> - -<p>Sometimes the versions are detestable. Nothing -could be worse than to turn:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Nulli illum pueri nullæ optavere puellæ</div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">No more is she glad to the eyes of a lad,</div> -<div class="i2">To the lasses a pride,—</div></div></div> - -<p>or</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Dulcis pueri ebrios ocellos</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_349" id="Page_349" href="#Page_349">[349]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<p>as</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Her minion's passion-sodden eyes,—</div></div></div> - -<p>which might do very well for a coarse phrase like -"In Venerem putres," but not for "Ebrios." But -sometimes the renderings are very felicitous. As -here:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Quid vis? quâlubet esse notus optas</div> -<div class="i0">Eris: quandoquidem meos amores</div> -<div class="i0">Cum longâ voluisti amare pœnâ.</div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Cost what it may, you'll win renown!</div> -<div class="i0">You shall, such longing you exhibit</div> -<div class="i0">Both for my mistress—and a gibbet!</div></div></div> - -<p>And the following is happy:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Nullum amans vere, sed identidem omnium</div> -<div class="i9">Ilia rumpens.</div> -<div class="i0">Nec meum respectet, ut ante, amorem</div> -<div class="i0">Qui illius culpâ cecidit; velut prati</div> -<div class="i0">Ultimi flos, prætereunte postquam</div> -<div class="i9">Tactus aratro est.</div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Ah, shameless, loveless lust, sweet, seek no more</div> -<div class="i0">To win love back, by thine own fault it fell,</div> -<div class="i0">In the far corner of the field though hid,</div> -<div class="i0">Touch'd by the plough at last,—the flower is dead.</div></div></div> - -<p>The following also is neat and skilful, but how -inferior to the almost terrible impressiveness of -the original:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">O Di si vostrûm est misereri, aut si quibus unquam</div> -<div class="i1">Extremâ jam ipsâ in morte tulistis opem.</div> -<div class="i0">Me miserum adspicite, et si vitam puriter egi,</div> -<div class="i1">Eripite hanc pestem perniciemque mihi,</div> -<div class="i0">Quæ mihi subrepens imos, ut torpor, in artus</div> -<div class="i1">Expulit ex omni pectore lætitias.</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_350" id="Page_350" href="#Page_350">[350]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Oh God! if Thine be pity, and if Thou</div> -<div class="i0">E'en in the jaws of death ere now,</div> -<div class="i0">Hast wrought salvation—look on me;</div> -<div class="i0">And if my life seem fair to Thee</div> -<div class="i0">O tear this plague, this curse away,</div> -<div class="i0">Which gaining on me day by day,</div> -<div class="i0">A creeping slow paralysis,</div> -<div class="i0">Hath driven away all happiness.</div></div></div> - -<p>Six love stories stand out conspicuous in the -records of poetry—those which find expression -in the <i>Elegies</i> of Propertius, in the <i>Sonnets and -Canzoni</i> of Dante and Petrarch, in the <i>Sonnets</i> -of Camoens, in the <i>Astrophel and Stella</i> of Sidney, -in the <i>Sonnets</i> of Shakespeare. But never -has passion, never has pathos, thrilled in intenser -or more piercing utterance than in the poems -which that fatal "Clytemnestra quadrantaria"—to -employ the phrase which may actually have -been applied to her—inspired, and in which the -rapture and loathing and despair of Catullus -found a voice.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_48_48" id="Footnote_48_48"></a><a href="#FNanchor_48_48"><span class="label">[48]</span></a> "If the silent dead can feel any pleasure, or solace -from our sorrow, Calvus, when, in wistful regret, we -recall past loves, and weep for the friendships severed long -ago, then be sure that Quintilia's grief for her early death is -not so great as the joy she feels in knowing your love for -her."</p></div> -</div> - - - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_351" id="Page_351" href="#Page_351">[351]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="THE_RELIGION_OF_SHAKESPEARE" id="THE_RELIGION_OF_SHAKESPEARE"> -</a>THE RELIGION OF SHAKESPEARE<a name="FNanchor_49_49" id="FNanchor_49_49"></a> -<a href="#Footnote_49_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a></h2> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_49_49" id="Footnote_49_49"></a><a href="#FNanchor_49_49"><span class="label">[49]</span></a> <i>The Religion of Shakespeare.</i> Chiefly from the writings -of the late Mr. Richard Simpson. By Henry Sebastian -Bowden. London.</p></div> - - -<p>This book, which is partly a compilation -from the uncollected writings of the late -Richard Simpson and partly the composition of -Father Bowden himself, is an attempt to show -that Shakespeare was a Roman Catholic. It -contains much interesting information; it is -well written, and we have read it with pleasure. -With much which we find in it we entirely -concur and are in full sympathy. We take -Shakespeare quite as seriously as Father Bowden -does. We believe that the greatest of -dramatic poets is also one of the greatest of -moral teachers, that his theology and ethics -deserve the most careful study, and that they -have, too frequently, been either neglected or -misinterpreted. We agree with Father Bowden -that nothing could be sounder and more persistently -emphasised than the ethical element in -this poet's dramas; that his ethics are, in the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_352" id="Page_352" href="#Page_352">[352]</a></span> -main, the ethics of Christianity, and that so far -from Shakespeare being simply an agnostic and -having no religion at all, as Birch and others -have contended, he is, if not formally, at least in -essence, as religious as Æschylus and Sophocles.</p> - -<p>And now Father Bowden must forgive us if -we are unable to go further with him. We -have no prejudice against Roman Catholicism, -or against any of the creeds in which religious -faith and reverence have found expression,—"Tros -Rutulusve fuat nullo discrimine agetur." -Our sole wish is, if possible, to get at the truth. -It is of comparatively little consequence now -to what form of religion Shakespeare belonged, -but it would be at least interesting, if it could -be shown that any particular sect could legitimately -claim him.</p> - -<p>In discussing this question we must bear -in mind that in Shakespeare's time, as in -the time of the ancients, religion had two -aspects, its private and its public. In its public -aspect it was a part of the machinery of the -state, an essential portion of the political fabric. -Till the Reformation there had been practically -no schism and no difficulty. After the Reformation -a most perplexing problem presented itself. -Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, in -a long and terrible conflict, struggled for the -mastery. At the accession of Elizabeth the -victory had been won, so far as England was -concerned, by Protestantism, and Protestantism<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_353" id="Page_353" href="#Page_353">[353]</a></span> -was the accepted religion of the nation. As -such, it was the duty of every loyal citizen to -uphold it; it became with the throne one of the -two pillars on which the fabric of the state -rested. Roman Catholicism became identified -with the political rivals and enemies of England. -Protestantism became identified with her lovers -and upholders. Thus the Church and the -Throne became indissoluble, at once the symbols, -centres, and securities of political harmony -and union. This accounts for the attitude of -Hooker, Spenser, Shakespeare and Bacon -towards Episcopalian Protestantism on the one -hand, and towards Puritanism on the other. -About Shakespeare's political opinions there -can be no doubt at all, for, if we except the -Comedies, he preaches them emphatically in -almost every drama which he has left us. -They were those of an uncompromising and -intolerant Royalist, in whose eyes the only -security for all that is dear to the patriot lay -in implicit obedience to the will of the sovereign, -and in upholding a system to which that will -was law. That he should, therefore, have had -any sympathy with the Roman Catholics is, on -<i>a priori</i> grounds, exceedingly improbable. We -turn to his Dramas, and what do we find? It -would be no exaggeration to say, that there is -not a line in them which indicates that he -regarded the Roman Catholics with favour. -On the contrary, they abound in points directed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_354" id="Page_354" href="#Page_354">[354]</a></span> -against them. Thus he twice goes out of his -way, once in <i>Henry V.</i><a name="FNanchor_50_50" id="FNanchor_50_50"></a><a href="#Footnote_50_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> and once in <i>All's Well -that Ends Well</i>, to observe that "miracles have -ceased." There is a bitter sneer at them in -the reference to the sanctimonious pirate and -the commandments, in <i>Measure for Measure</i>.<a name="FNanchor_51_51" id="FNanchor_51_51"></a><a href="#Footnote_51_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> -There can be little doubt that the words in -the porter's speech in <i>Macbeth</i>, "here's an equivocator -that could swear in both the scales -against either scale, who committed treason -enough for God's sake, yet could not equivocate -to Heaven," have sarcastic reference to the -doctrine of equivocation avowed by Garnett and -popularly associated with the Jesuits; while -the remark about the fitness of "the nun's lip -to the friar's mouth"<a name="FNanchor_52_52" id="FNanchor_52_52"></a><a href="#Footnote_52_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> in <i>All's Well that Ends -Well</i> is another concession to Protestant prejudice.</p> - -<p>In <i>King John</i> such a speech as the following -may be dramatic, but who can doubt that it -expressed the poet's own sentiments?—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Tell him this tale; and from the mouth of England</div> -<div class="i0">Add thus much more,—that no Italian priest</div> -<div class="i0">Shall tithe or toll in our dominions;</div> -<div class="i0">But, as we under Heaven are supreme head,</div> -<div class="i0">So, under Him, that great supremacy,</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_355" id="Page_355" href="#Page_355">[355]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Where we do reign, we will alone uphold,</div> -<div class="i0">Without the assistance of a mortal hand:</div> -<div class="i0">So tell the Pope; all reverence set apart</div> -<div class="i0">To him, and his usurp'd authority.</div></div></div> - -<p><i>King John</i> is, indeed, simply the manifesto of -Protestantism against papal aggression. What -could be more contemptible than the character -of Pandulph and the part which he plays? Is it -credible that Shakespeare could have had any -sympathy with a religion whose minister is one -whom he represents as saying:</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Meritorious shall that hand be called,</div> -<div class="i0">Canonized, and worshipped as a saint,</div> -<div class="i0">That takes away by any secret course</div> -<div class="i0">Thy hateful life.</div></div></div> - -<p>In <i>Henry VIII.</i>, again, we have an elaborate -eulogy of the Reformation, Cranmer being presented -in the most favourable light, Gardiner -in the most unfavourable, while Wolsey is -almost as detestable as Pandulph.</p> - -<p>It is really pitiable to see the shifts to which -the authors of this book are reduced to make -out their theory. They have even pressed into -its service Jordan's palpable and long-exploded -forgery of John Shakespeare's Will, and the -fact that John Shakespeare's name is found on -a list of Recusants, when it is, in that very list, -expressly stated that he had absented himself -from church, simply from fear of process for -debt. Passages in the dramas are similarly -perverted. Shakespeare's hostility to the Protestants<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_356" id="Page_356" href="#Page_356">[356]</a></span> -induced him, we are told, to pour -contempt on Oldcastle by depicting him as Falstaff. -His delineation of Malvolio, and his -frequent sneers at the Puritans, are attributed -to the same motive. The famous lines in -<i>Hamlet</i>, placed in the mouth of the Ghost, are -cited to prove his belief in purgatory; the -comical penances imposed on Biron and his -friends in <i>Love's Labour Lost</i> to prove his -belief in penance. When in <i>Lear</i> it is said of -Cordelia that:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i9">She shook</div> -<div class="i0">The holy water from her heavenly eyes.</div></div></div> - -<p>we are to see another indication of Shakespeare's -religion as "they have a Catholic ring about -them." Sentiments which are common to all -sects of Christians are regarded as peculiar to -Roman Catholicism; mere dramatic utterances -are forced into illustrations of supposed personal -convictions. What is habitually and systematically -ignored is, that Shakespeare, being a -dramatic poet, must necessarily make his -characters express themselves dramatically, and -that, as he was depicting times preceding the -Reformation, his sentiments and expressions -very naturally took the colour of the world in -which his characters moved. The wonder is not -that this should have occurred, but that Shakespeare -should, in spite of the gross anachronism -of such a process, have so <i>Protestantized</i> pre-Reformation -times. We are quite willing to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_357" id="Page_357" href="#Page_357">[357]</a></span> -concede to Father Bowden that there is enough -to warrant us in assuming that Shakespeare did -not regard the Puritans with favour. But his -dislike to them arose not from the fact that -they were Protestants, but that they were not -orthodox Protestants. He was opposed to -them for the same reasons that Elizabeth and -James, Hooker and Bacon were opposed to -them. Their hostility to his profession, their -sanctimonious cant, and the surly asceticism of -their lives, no doubt contributed to his prejudice -against them.</p> - -<p>Nor are we in any way justified in concluding -that Shakespeare accepted the teaching of the -Church of Rome in spiritual matters. Nothing -could be more unwarranted than what is -assumed by Father Bowden in the following -passage. He is speaking of Shakespeare's attitude -in relation to death. "'Ripeness is all'; -and he shows us in all his penitents how that -ripeness is secured, sin forgiven, and heaven -won on the lines of Catholic dogma and by the -Sacraments of the Church."</p> - -<p>What are the facts? Shakespeare's reticence -about a future state, and what may await man, -in the form of reward and punishment hereafter, -is one of his most striking characteristics. -Neither Cordelia nor Desdemona, neither Constance -nor Imogen in their darkest hours -expresses any confidence in the final mercy and -justice of Heaven. Othello, falling by a fate as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_358" id="Page_358" href="#Page_358">[358]</a></span> -terrible as it was undeserved, dies without a -syllable of hope. "The rest is silence" are the -ominous words with which Hamlet takes leave -of life. When Gloucester believes himself to be -standing on the brink of death, in the farewell -which he takes of the world he has no anticipation -of any other; all he contemplates is "to -shake patiently his great affliction off." So die -Lear, Hotspur, Romeo, Antony, Eros, Enobarbus, -Macbeth, Beaufort, Mercutio, Laertes. So -die Brutus, Coriolanus, King John. In the -Duke's speech in <i>Measure for Measure</i>, where -he is preparing Claudio to meet death, death is -merely contemplated as an escape from the -pains and discomforts of life. Macbeth would -'jump' the world to come if he could escape -punishment in this. Prospero suggests no hope -of any waking from the "rounding sleep." -Even Isabella, dedicated as she was to religion, -in fortifying Claudio against his fate draws no -weapon from the armoury of faith. It is just -the same in the dirge in Cymbeline, in the -soliloquy of Posthumus, in the consolations -addressed by the gaoler to Posthumus.<a name="FNanchor_53_53" id="FNanchor_53_53"></a><a href="#Footnote_53_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_359" id="Page_359" href="#Page_359">[359]</a></span></p> - -<p>The last passage is perhaps more remarkable -than any, because it shows the utter ambiguity -of the directest expression which the poet has -left on the subject.</p> - -<blockquote><p><i>Gaol.</i>—Look you, sir, you know not which way you go.</p> - -<p><i>Post.</i>—Yes, indeed do I, fellow.</p> - -<p><i>Gaol.</i>—Your death has eyes in 's head then; I have not -seen him so pictured: you must either be directed -by some that take upon them to know, or take -upon yourself, that which I am sure you do not -know; or jump the after inquiry on your own -peril; and how you shall speed in your journey's -end, I think you'll never return to tell one.</p> - -<p><i>Post.</i>—I tell thee, fellow, <i>there are none want eyes to -direct them the way I am going, but such as -wink, and will not use them</i>.</p> - -<p class="right"><i>Cymbeline</i>, V. 4.</p></blockquote> - -<p>Shakespeare, in truth, never attempts to lift -the veil which for living man can be raised -only by Revelation. The silence of his philosophy,—for -we must not confound occasional -sentiments and mere dramatic utterances with -what justifies us in deducing that philosophy,—in -relation to a life after this, is unbroken. -It is, indeed, remarkable that he represents such -speculations,—the dwelling on such problems,—as -more likely to disturb, perplex, and hamper -us, than to give us any comfort. As Hamlet -puts it in the well-known lines:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">The native hue of resolution</div> -<div class="i0">Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,</div> -<div class="i0">And enterprises of great pith and moment,</div> -<div class="i0">With this regard, their currents turn awry,</div> -<div class="i0">And lose the name of action.</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_360" id="Page_360" href="#Page_360">[360]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<p>Did he believe in the immortality of the soul -and in a future state? Who can say? What -we can say is, that if we require affirmative -evidence of such a faith, we shall seek for it in -vain. In the Sonnets, where he seems to speak -from himself, the only immortality to which he -refers is the permanence of the impression which -his genius as a poet will leave—immortality in -the sense in which Cicero and Tacitus have so -eloquently interpreted the term. But on the -other hand, if there is nothing to warrant a -conclusion in the affirmative, there is nothing -to warrant one in the negative. His attitude is -precisely that of Aristotle in the <i>Ethics</i>; a life -beyond this is neither affirmed nor denied, but -the scale of probability inclines towards the -negative, and his moral philosophy proceeds -on the assumption that life is the end of life.<a name="FNanchor_54_54" id="FNanchor_54_54"></a><a href="#Footnote_54_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a></p> - -<p>Goethe has said that man was not born to -solve the problems of the universe, but to attempt -to solve them, that he might keep within -the limits of the knowable. And it is within -the limits of the knowable that Shakespeare's -theology confines itself. Starting simply, as -Gervinus says, from the point, that man is born -with powers and faculties which he is to use, -and with powers of self-regulation and self-determination -which are to direct aright the -powers of action, the "Whence we are," and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_361" id="Page_361" href="#Page_361">[361]</a></span> -the "Whither we are going," are problems for -which he has no solution.<a name="FNanchor_55_55" id="FNanchor_55_55"></a><a href="#Footnote_55_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i10">Men must endure</div> -<div class="i0">Their going hence e'en as their coming hither:</div> -<div class="i0">Ripeness is all.</div></div></div> - -<p>And for ripeness or unripeness, man's will is responsible. -He would probably have agreed with -the saying of Heraclitus, <ins title="êthos -anthrôpô daimôn">ηθος ανθρωπω δαιμων</ins>. -Throughout his Dramas all is explicable, with -the single exception of Macbeth, without reference -to supernaturalism. Perfectly intelligible -effects follow perfectly intelligible causes; the -moral law solves all. But especially conspicuous -is the absence of the theological element -where we should especially have looked for it. -"Men and women," says Brewer, "are made to -drain the cup of misery to the dregs; but, as from -the depths into which they have fallen, by their -own weakness, or by the weakness of others, the -poet never raises them, in violation of the inexorable -laws of nature, so neither does he put a new -song in their mouths, or any expression of confidence -in God's righteous dealing. With as hard -and precise a hand as Bacon does he sunder the -celestial from the terrestrial kingdom, the things -of earth from the things of heaven."<a name="FNanchor_56_56" id="FNanchor_56_56"></a><a href="#Footnote_56_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a></p> - -<p>His theology, indeed, in its application to life, -seems to resolve itself into the recognition of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_362" id="Page_362" href="#Page_362">[362]</a></span> -universal law, divinely appointed, immutable, -inexorable, ubiquitous, controlling the physical -world, controlling the moral world, vindicating -itself in the smallest facts of life, and in the -most stupendous convulsions of nature and -society. In morals it is maintained by the observance -of the mean on the one hand, and the -due fulfilment of duty and obligation on the -other. In politics it is maintained by the subordination -of the individual to the state, and of -the state to the higher law. Hooker says of -Law, that as her voice is the harmony of the -world, so her seat is the bosom of God. The -Law Shakespeare recognises; of the Law-giver -he is silent. As he is dumb before the mystery -of death, so is he equally reticent in the face of -that other mystery. He has nothing of the -anthropomorphism of the Old Testament, of -the Homeric poems, and of Milton. Nor has he -ever expressed himself as Goethe has done in -the famous passage in <i>Faust</i>, beginning: "Wer -darf ihn nennen." In two important respects he -seems to differ from the Christian conception. -He represents no miraculous interpositions of -Providence, no suspension of natural laws in -favour of the righteous, and to the detriment of -the wicked. He is too reverend to say with -Goethe, that man, so far as direction in action -goes, is practically his own divinity. But he -does say and represent—and that repeatedly—what -is expressed in such passages as these:—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_363" id="Page_363" href="#Page_363">[363]</a></span></p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Our remedies oft in ourselves do lie</div> -<div class="i0">Which we ascribe to Heaven: the fated sky</div> -<div class="i0">Gives us full scope.</div> -<div class="i7"><i>All's Well that Ends Well.</i></div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Men at some time are masters of their fate.</div> -<div class="i12"><i>Julius Cæsar.</i></div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Omission to do what is necessary</div> -<div class="i0">Seals a commission to a blank of danger.</div> -<div class="i9"><i>Troilus and Cressida.</i></div></div></div> - -<p>And we have no right to expect that Providence -will cancel it. If deeds do not go with -prayer, prayer is not likely to be of much avail. -So the Bishop of Carlisle in <i>Richard II.</i>:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">The means that Heaven yields must be embrac'd</div> -<div class="i0">And not neglected; else if Heaven would</div> -<div class="i0">And we will not, Heav'n's offer we refuse:—</div></div></div> - -<p>while the words which he puts into the mouth -of Leonine in <i>Pericles</i> are, we feel, significant:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i2">Pray: but be not tedious,</div> -<div class="i0">For the Gods are quick of ear, and I am sworn</div> -<div class="i0">To do my work with haste.</div> -</div></div> - -<p>He has no sympathy with pious recluses. He -has depicted no saint or religious enthusiast, or -written a line to indicate that he had any -respect for their ideals. With him,—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Spirits are not finely touched</div> -<div class="i0">But to fine issues.</div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">They say best men are moulded out of faults,</div> -<div class="i0">And, for the most, become much more the better</div> -<div class="i0">For being a little bad.</div></div></div> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Most subject is the fattest soil to weeds</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_364" id="Page_364" href="#Page_364">[364]</a></span></div></div> - -<p>are typical axioms in his philosophy of life. And -the nearest approaches he has given us to the -saintly type of character are the sentimental -pietists, Henry VI. and Richard II., both of whom -are failures, and border closely on moral imbecility. -On the spiritual and moral efficacy of -faith, he has nowhere laid stress. In his innumerable -reflections on life and man, in his maxims -and precepts, there is, as a rule, scarcely any -flavour of Christian theology. They are just -such as might be expected from a pure rationalist. -Such is the philosophy of Hamlet, of Jacques, of -the Duke in <i>Measure for Measure</i>, and of Prospero. -Even Friar Laurence, though an ecclesiastic, -reasons and advises just as a Stoic philosopher -might have done. The friars in <i>Much Ado about -Nothing</i>, and in <i>Measure for Measure</i>, the Bishop -of Carlisle in <i>Richard II.</i>, and the Archbishops -of Canterbury and York in <i>Henry IV.</i> and <i>Henry -V.</i>, and Cardinal Beaufort in <i>Henry VI.</i>, act and -speak like mere men of the world. A bulky -volume would scarcely sum up the ethical and -political reflections scattered up and down his -plays; a few pages would comprise all that could -be put down as exclusively theological. This -complete subordination of the theological element -to the ethical is the more conspicuous -when we compare his dramas with the Homeric -Epics, and with the tragedies of Æschylus and -Sophocles.</p> - -<p>And yet if a thoughtful person, after going<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_365" id="Page_365" href="#Page_365">[365]</a></span> -attentively through the thirty-six plays, were -asked what the prevailing impression made on -him was, he would probably reply the profound -reverence which Shakespeare shows universally -for religion—his deep sense of the mysterious -relation which exists between God and man. -We feel that his silence on transcendental subjects -springs not from indifference, but from -awe. The remarkable words which he places -in the mouth of Lafeu, in <i>All's Well that Ends -Well</i> (Act II. 3), merely sum up what we hear -<i>sotto voce</i> in various forms of expression throughout -his dramas; "we have our philosophical -persons, to make modern and familiar, things -supernatural and causeless. Hence it is that -we make trifles of terrors, ensconcing ourselves -into seeming knowledge, when we should submit -ourselves to an unknown fear." And the same -reverence and humility find a voice in the verses -in which, in all probability, he took leave of the -world of active life.</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Now my charms are all overthrown,</div> -<div class="i0">And what strength I have's mine own,</div> -<div class="i0">Which is most faint.</div> -<div class="i6">... Now I want</div> -<div class="i0">Spirits to enforce, art to enchant,</div> -<div class="i0">And my ending is despair</div> -<div class="i0">Unless I be relieved by prayer,</div> -<div class="i0">Which pierces so that it assaults</div> -<div class="i0">Mercy itself, and frees all faults.</div></div></div> - -<p>No poet has dwelt more on the duty and moral -efficacy of prayer, on the omnipresence of God,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_366" id="Page_366" href="#Page_366">[366]</a></span> -and on the fact that in conscience we have a -Divine monitor.</p> - -<p>Of the respect which Shakespeare entertained -for Christianity as a creed, of his conviction of -its competency to fulfil and satisfy all the ends -of religion in men of the highest type of intelligence -and ability, we require no further proof -than his Henry V. Henry V. is undoubtedly his -ideal man, as Theseus in the <i>Œdipus Coloneus</i> -is the ideal man of Sophocles. And Henry V. -is pre-eminently a Christian. Wherever Shakespeare -refers to the person and to the teachings -of Christ, it is always with peculiar tenderness -and solemnity. His ethics are in one respect -essentially Christian, and that is in their emphatic -insistence on the virtues of mercy and -forgiveness of injuries. In <i>Measure for Measure</i>, -he stretched the first as far as the Master Himself -stretched it, at the eleventh hour, to the -penitent thief. And in the <i>Tempest</i>, that play -which seems to embody in allegory Shakespeare's -mature and final philosophy of life, -who does not recognise the symbol of Him -who rules, not merely in justice and righteousness, -but in benevolence and mercy, when -Prospero, with sinners and traitors and foes -in his power, proclaims—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i6">The rarer action is</div> -<div class="i0">In virtue than in vengeance: they being penitent,</div> -<div class="i0">The sole drift of my purpose doth extend</div> -<div class="i0">Not a frown further.</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_367" id="Page_367" href="#Page_367">[367]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<p>He struck this note in one of the earliest of -his plays:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Who by repentance is not satisfied,</div> -<div class="i0">Is nor of heaven, nor earth: for these are pleas'd.</div> -<div class="i0">By penitence th' Eternal's wrath's appeas'd.<a name="FNanchor_57_57" id="FNanchor_57_57"></a><a href="#Footnote_57_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a></div></div></div> - -<p>and the note vibrates through his works. It is -the crowning moral of <i>Measure for Measure</i>; it -is one of the dominant notes in <i>Cymbeline</i>. He -also reflects Christianity in the beautiful optimism -which discerns in evil the agent of good, and -in calamity and sorrow the benevolence and -mercy of God. This is the philosophy which -penetrates what were probably his last three -dramas, <i>The Winter's Tale</i>, <i>Cymbeline</i>, and <i>The -Tempest</i>.</p> - -<p>In these respects, then, it may fairly be maintained -that Shakespeare is Christian. For the -rest his dramas might, so far as their philosophy -is concerned, have come down to us from -classical antiquity. Nothing can be more Greek -than the main basis on which his ethics rest—the -observance of the mean, and the recognition -of the relation of virtue to the becoming. -When Claudio says:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">As surfeit is the father of much fast,</div> -<div class="i0">So every scope by the immoderate use</div> -<div class="i0">Turns to restraint;</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_368" id="Page_368" href="#Page_368">[368]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<p>when Norfolk says:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">The fire that mounts the liquor till 't o'erflow</div> -<div class="i0">In seeming to augment it wastes it;</div></div></div> - -<p>when Friar Laurence tells us that:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">Virtue itself turns vice, being misapplied,</div> -<div class="i0">And vice sometime 's by action dignified;</div></div></div> - -<p>and Portia that</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">There is no good without respect,</div></div></div> - -<p>we have not only the keys to his ethics but -the texts for sermons which find living illustrations -in the fall of Angelo, of Coriolanus, of -Timon, and of many others of his protagonists. -Thus do his ethics temper and readjust for the -sphere of working life, those of the Divine -Enthusiast who legislated, in some respects, too -exclusively perhaps, for a kingdom which is -not of this world.</p> - -<p>And so, his 'religion' being, to borrow an -expression of his own, "as broad and general -as the casing air," it has come to pass, that -Shakespeare has been claimed as an orthodox -Protestant by Knight, Bishop Wordsworth, and -Trench; as an orthodox Roman Catholic by -M. Rio, Mr. Simpson, and Father Bowden; and -as a simple agnostic by Gervinus, Kreysig, and -Professor Caird.</p> - -<p>"He hath," says Sir Thomas Browne speaking -of himself, "one common and authentic philosophy -which he learnt in the schools, whereby he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_369" id="Page_369" href="#Page_369">[369]</a></span> -reasons and satisfies the reason of other men: -another more reserved and drawn from experience -whereby he satisfies his own." It may be, -it may quite well be, for he has left nothing to -justify conclusion to the contrary, that the -words of Shakespeare's Will—mere formula -though they be—are the expression of what he -"reserved" to satisfy himself, and that he -accepted the Christian Revelation. It may be, -that what we are <i>certainly</i> warranted in concluding -about him, represents all that can be -concluded, namely, that:—</p> - -<div class="center"><div class="poem"> -<div class="i0">He at least believed in soul, was very sure of God.</div> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_370" id="Page_370" href="#Page_370">[370]</a></span> -</div></div> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_50_50" id="Footnote_50_50"></a><a href="#FNanchor_50_50"><span class="label">[50]</span></a> Act I. Sc. i. This is a very pointed reference, but in the -second instance, in <i>All's Well that Ends Well</i>, Act II. Sc. i., -"They say miracles are past," he gives a turn to the expression -which converts it into a rebuke of Rationalism.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_51_51" id="Footnote_51_51"></a><a href="#FNanchor_51_51"><span class="label">[51]</span></a> Act I. Sc. ii.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_52_52" id="Footnote_52_52"></a><a href="#FNanchor_52_52"><span class="label">[52]</span></a> Act II. Sc. ii.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_53_53" id="Footnote_53_53"></a><a href="#FNanchor_53_53"><span class="label">[53]</span></a> In opposition to these may, it is true, be cited Othello's -words to Desdemona—<i>Othello</i>, V. 2: the Duke's remark about -putting the unrepentant Barnardine to death—<i>Measure for -Measure</i>, IV. 3: the dying speeches of Buckingham and -Catharine in <i>Henry VIII.</i>, II. 1; IV. 2: Laertes on Ophelia,—<i>Hamlet</i>, -V. 1. But these passages, and others like them, -cannot be cited as evidence to the contrary; they are merely -dramatic utterances.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_54_54" id="Footnote_54_54"></a><a href="#FNanchor_54_54"><span class="label">[54]</span></a> Cf. <i>Ethics</i>, I. x. 11, and III. vi. 6.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_55_55" id="Footnote_55_55"></a><a href="#FNanchor_55_55"><span class="label">[55]</span></a> <i>Shakespeare Commentaries</i>, Vol. II. 620-1.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_56_56" id="Footnote_56_56"></a><a href="#FNanchor_56_56"><span class="label">[56]</span></a> Article on Shakespeare, <i>Quarterly Review</i> for July, 1871, -p. 46.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_57_57" id="Footnote_57_57"></a><a href="#FNanchor_57_57"><span class="label">[57]</span></a> <i>Two Gentlemen of Verona</i>: V. 4.</p></div> -</div> - - -<hr /> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_371" id="Page_371" href="#Page_371">[371]</a></span></p> -<h2><a name="INDEX" id="INDEX">INDEX</a></h2> - - - - -<ul> - - <li class="letter"><span class="smcap">Accius</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Addison</span>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>: <a href="#Page_272">272</a>: <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Æschylus</span>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li> - <li>his descriptions of Nature, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>;</li> - <li>his theology, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>: <a href="#Page_261">261</a>: <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Alcæus</span>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Alcman</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Alamanni</span>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Anacreon</span>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Anthology</span>, Greek, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>: <a href="#Page_117">117</a>: <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Antimachus</span> of Colophon, his Poems, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Antipater</span> of Sidon, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Apollonius Rhodius</span>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>beauty of his descriptions, <a href="#Page_242">242-3</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Archilochus</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Ariosto</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his <i>Orlando</i>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Aristophanes</span>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>: <a href="#Page_260">260</a>: <a href="#Page_280">280</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his censure of Euripides, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Aristotle</span>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>: <a href="#Page_67">67</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>influence on Spenser, <a href="#Page_120">120-1</a>;</li> - <li>style, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li> - <li>his doctrine of the <ins title="katharsis">καθαρσις</ins>, <a href="#Page_264">264-5</a>;</li> - <li>his Æsthetics, <a href="#Page_265">265-6</a>;</li> - <li>Poetics, <a href="#Page_274">274-6</a>;</li> - <li>his <i>Rhetoric</i>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Armstrong</span>, Dr. John, his connection with Thomson, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Arnold</span>, Matthew, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>: <a href="#Page_105">105</a>: <a href="#Page_106">106</a>: <a href="#Page_194">194</a>: <a href="#Page_272">272-3</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Athenæus</span>, <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Ausonius</span>, his <i>Rosæ</i>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Avitus</span>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Bacon</span>, Lord, his <i>Sylva Sylvarum</i>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his Latin style, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>;</li> - <li>on poetry, <a href="#Page_279">279</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Barclay</span>, his <i>Argenis</i>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Barnum</span>, the late Mr., on Advertisement, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Beaconsfield</span>, Lord, quoted, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct16" id="Correct16"><span class="smcap">Benecke</span></a>, Mr. E. F. M., his <i>Antimachus of Colophon</i><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_372" id="Page_372" href="#Page_372"> - [372]</a></span> and <i>Position of Women in Greek Poetry</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_283">283-93</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct17" id="Correct17"><span class="smcap">Bentley</span></a>, Richard, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Bernays</span>, Prof., on the <ins title="katharsis">καθαρσις</ins> of Aristotle, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Boileau</span>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Bolingbroke</span>, Lord, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>: <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Boswell</span>, James, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Bowden</span>, Rev. H. Sebastian, his <i>Religion of Shakespeare</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_351">351-69</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Brewer</span>, Rev. Prof., quoted, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Brown</span>, Mr. J. T. T., his <i>Authorship of the Kingis Quair</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_172">172-82</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Browne</span>, Sir Thomas, his <i>Hydriotaphia</i>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Browning</span>, Robert, on the Comparative Study of Ancient and Modern Classical Literature, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Browning</span>, Mrs., <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Burke</span>, Edmund, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>: <a href="#Page_100">100-1</a>: <a href="#Page_125">125</a>: <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Burns</span>, Robert, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>Comparison with Catullus, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Butcher</span>, Prof. S. H., his <i>Some Aspects of the Greek Genius</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_255">255-69</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Butler</span>, Bishop, quoted, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Butler</span>, Mr. Samuel, on Shakespeare's Sonnets, <a href="#Page_222">222-4</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Cædmon</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Caine</span>, Mr. Hall, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Callimachus</span>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Camoens</span>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Campbell</span>, Prof. Lewis, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Carew</span>, Thomas, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Catullus</span>, his descriptions of Nature, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>: <a href="#Page_336">336-9</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>;</li> - <li>characteristics of his genius, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>;</li> - <li>his <i>Attis</i>, <a href="#Page_339">339-40</a>;</li> - <li>his pathos, <a href="#Page_337">337-8</a>;</li> - <li>his connection with Lesbia, <a href="#Page_342">342-5</a>;</li> - <li>parallel between Poems to Lesbia and Shakespeare's Sonnets, <a href="#Page_345">345-6</a>;</li> - <li>his versatility, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>;</li> - <li>comparison with Burns, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</li> - <li>Mr. Tremenheere's version of the Love Poems, <a href="#Page_347">347-9</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Cawthorn</span>, John, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct18" id="Correct18"><span class="smcap">Chaucer</span></a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>: <a href="#Page_6">6</a>: <a href="#Page_122">122-3</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Churchill</span>, Charles, quoted, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Cicero</span>, influence on English prose, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>as a critic of rhetoric, <a href="#Page_278">278-9</a>;</li> - <li>on immortality, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Clarendon</span>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Classics</span>, influence of the Greek and Roman Classics on English Literature, <a href="#Page_58">58-63</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>exclusion of from Schools of Literature by the English Universities, <a href="#Page_45">45-64</a>;</li> - <li>effects of this illustrated, <a href="#Page_76">76-83</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_373" id="Page_373" href="#Page_373">[373]</a></span></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Claudian</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Colvin</span>, Mr. Sidney, his edition of Stevenson's Letters reviewed, <a href="#Page_165">165-71</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Coleridge</span>, S. T., <a href="#Page_127">127</a>: <a href="#Page_130">130</a>: <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Coleridge</span>, the late Lord, on Greek, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Cory</span>, William, <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Cousin</span>, Victor, his theory of beauty and art, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Criticism</span>, reasons of present degraded state of, <a href="#Page_13">13-26</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>characteristics of current criticism described, <a href="#Page_26">26-30</a>: <a href="#Page_270">270-1</a>;</li> - <li>effects on literature generally, <a href="#Page_31">31-4</a>;</li> - <li>refusal of the Universities to train critics and men of letters, <a href="#Page_38">38-44</a>;</li> - <li>lethargy and indifference of scholars, progressive degradation of literature the certain result, <a href="#Page_43">43-44</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Critics</span>, characteristics of popular, <a href="#Page_27">27-31</a>: <a href="#Page_93">93-109</a>: <a href="#Page_110">110-32</a>: <a href="#Page_151">151-7</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Crowe</span>, William, <a href="#Page_249">249</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Cynewulf</span>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Dante</span>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_335">335</a>;</li> - <li>his <i>Sonnets and Canzoni</i>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct19" id="Correct19"><span class="smcap">De Quincey</span></a>, Thomas, characteristics of, <a href="#Page_203">203-4</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his comparative failure, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</li> - <li>Mr. Hogg's recollections of, <a href="#Page_203">203-10</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Douglas</span>, Gavin, his translation of Virgil, <a href="#Page_96">96-7</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Drayton</span>, Michael, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Dryden</span>, his <i>Discourse on Epic Poetry</i>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li> - <li>on the functions of poetry, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</li> - <li>his translations, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Dubos</span>, the Abbé, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Dunbar</span>, William, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>Mr. Smeaton's <i>Life of</i>, reviewed, <a href="#Page_183">183-92</a>;</li> - <li>characteristics of his poetry, <a href="#Page_190">190-1</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Dyer</span>, John, his descriptive poetry, <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Earle</span>, Prof., on relation of Classics to English Literature, <a href="#Page_59">59</a> (note)</li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Earle</span>, John, his <i>Microcosmographie</i>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Editors</span>, their relation to current literature, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>in no way responsible for the present condition of current literature, <a href="#Page_23">23-24</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Ennius</span>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Euripides</span>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his fine pictures of Nature, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>;</li> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>;</li> - <li>his <i>Alcestis</i> quoted, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> - </ul></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Feltham</span>, Owen, his <i>Resolves</i>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Flaccus</span>, Valerius, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Fletcher</span>, Phineas, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Foote</span>, Samuel, quoted, <a href="#Page_205">205</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_374" id="Page_374" href="#Page_374">[374]</a></span></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Fox</span>, John, his <i>Book of Martyrs</i>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Fraunce</span>, Abraham, his <i>Countess of Pembroke's Ivy Church</i>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Froude</span>, James Anthony, on the effect of discouraging the study of the Classics, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Garnett</span>, Father, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Geoffrey</span> of Monmouth, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Gervinus</span>, Prof., quoted, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Glanville</span>, Joseph, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct20" id="Correct20"><span class="smcap">Gibbon</span></a>, Edward, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>: <a href="#Page_150">150</a>: <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Goethe</span>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>: <a href="#Page_86">86</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>: <a href="#Page_360">360</a>: <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Goldsmith</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_247">247</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Gosse</span>, Edmund, his <i>Short History of Modern English Literature</i> reviewed <a href="#Page_110">110-32</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Gossing</span>, analysis of the accomplishment, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>compared with Euphuism, id.</li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct21" id="Correct21"><span class="smcap">Gower</span></a>, John, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li><i>Confessio Amantis</i>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Gray</span>, Thomas, on Lydgate, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Greene</span>, Robert, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Hall</span>, William, Mr. Sidney Lee on, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Hampole</span>, Richard of, his <i>Pricke of Conscience</i>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Harrison</span>, Mr. Frederic, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Hawes</span>, Stephen, his <i>Pastime of Pleasure</i>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Heraclitus</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Hermesianax</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Hill</span>, Aaron, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Hoccleve</span>, Thomas, <a href="#Page_198">198</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Hogg</span>, Mr. James, his <i>Recollections of De Quincey</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_203">203-10</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Homer</span> quoted, his fine descriptions of Nature, <a href="#Page_237">237-9</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his women, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>: <a href="#Page_288">288</a>;</li> - <li>his description of Hades, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Hooker</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Horace</span>, influence of his Epistles and Satires on English poetry, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>: <a href="#Page_297">297</a>: <a href="#Page_301">301</a>;</li> - <li>deficient in poetic sensibility, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Hroswitha</span>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Huxley</span>, Prof., on Merton Chair at Oxford, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Ibycus</span>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Jago</span>, Richard, <a href="#Page_249">249</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">James I.</span> of Scotland, his <i>Kingis Quair</i>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>its genuineness vindicated, <a href="#Page_174">174-82</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Japp</span>, Dr. Alexander, <i>Life of De Quincey</i>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Jebb</span>, Prof., his services to Greek Literature, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Johnson</span>, Dr., quoted, <a href="#Page_152">152</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_375" id="Page_375" href="#Page_375">[375]</a></span></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Jonson</span>, Ben, on Poetry, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Jowett</span>, Prof., quoted, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Jusserand</span>, M., his <i>Literary History of the English People</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_193">193-202</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Keats</span>, John, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>: <a href="#Page_298">298</a>: <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Landor</span>, W. S., <a href="#Page_298">298</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Lang</span>, Mr. Andrew, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Lauderdale</span>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Leaf</span>, Mr. Walter, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Lee</span>, Mr. Sidney, his <i>Life of Shakespeare</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_211">211-8</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>on Shakespeare's Sonnets, <a href="#Page_229">229-30</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Le Gallienne</span>, Mr. Richard, his <i>Retrospective Reviews</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_151">151-7</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Leopardi</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>: <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Lesbia</span> and <span class="smcap">Catullus</span>, <a href="#Page_335">335-50</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Lessing</span>, on Philologists, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his <i>Laocoon</i>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li> - <li>his <i>Hamburgishe Dramaturgie</i>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Log-rolling</span>, its pernicious effects, <a href="#Page_133">133-44</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Longinus</span>, the Treatise attributed to, discussed, <a href="#Page_276">276-8</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Lydgate</span>, his style and versification, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>id., <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li> - <li>characteristics of his poetry, <a href="#Page_198">198-9</a></li> - </ul></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><a name="Correct22" id="Correct22"><span class="smcap">Macaulay</span></a>, Lord, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>: <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Mallet</span>, David, claim to authorship of <i>Rule Britannia</i> discussed, <a href="#Page_321">321-4</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Malory</span>, Thomas, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Mannyng</span>, his <i>Handlying of Synne</i>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Marlowe</span>, Christopher, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Martial</span>, his epigrams, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Max Müller</span>, Prof., <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Meleager</span>, his Anthology, <a href="#Page_116">116-7</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Menander</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Mimnermus</span>, his love poetry to Nanno, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Milton</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_41">41</a> (note): <a href="#Page_62">62</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his apology for <i>Smectymnuus</i>, quoted, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li> - <li>on poetry, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>;</li> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>;</li> - <li>music of his verse, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Mitford</span>, Rev. J., on the corrections in Thomson's <i>Seasons</i>, <a href="#Page_330">330-4</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Montague</span>, Lady Mary Wortley, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>: <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Morel</span>, M. Léon, his Monograph on Thomson, <a href="#Page_319">319</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">More</span>, Sir Thomas, his Utopia, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">More</span>, Henry, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Morgan</span>, Sir George Osborne, his <i>Translation of Virgil's Eclogues</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_308">308-17</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Morley</span>, Mr. John, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Myers</span>, Mr. Ernest, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Müller</span>, Prof. E., his <i>Geschichte der Theorie der Kunst bei den Alten</i>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_376" id="Page_376" href="#Page_376">[376]</a></span></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Ogilvie</span>, John, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Ovid</span>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>: <a href="#Page_177">177</a>: <a href="#Page_178">178</a>: <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Pacuvius</span>, his <i>Dulorestes</i> quoted, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Palgrave</span>, Francis Turner, his <i>Landscape in Poetry</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_236">236-49</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>an appreciation of, <a href="#Page_250">250-4</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct23" id="Correct23"><span class="smcap">Pater</span></a>, Walter, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>: <a href="#Page_152">152</a>: <a href="#Page_265">265</a>: <a href="#Page_267">267</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Pecock</span>, Reginald, his <i>Repressor</i>, <a href="#Page_128">128-9</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Petrarch</span>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>: <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct24" id="Correct24"><span class="smcap">Persius</span></a> quoted, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Phillips</span>, Mr. Stephen, his poems reviewed, <a href="#Page_294">294-300</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Pindar</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his word pictures, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Plato</span>, his Symposium, <a href="#Page_78">78-9</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>;</li> - <li>his theory of poetry, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>: <a href="#Page_276">276</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Plutarch</span>, his pictures of women, <a href="#Page_290">290</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Pomfret</span>, John, his <i>Choice</i>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct25" id="Correct25"><span class="smcap">Pope</span></a> quoted, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>on Philologists, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li> - <li>his <i>Satires</i> and <i>Epistles</i>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>;</li> - <li>his alleged revision of Thomson's <i>Seasons</i> discussed, <a href="#Page_328">328-32</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Propertius</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Publishers</span>, honourable character of the leading, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Quarterly Review</span>, article on <i>From Shakespeare to Pope</i>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Quintilian</span> as a critic, <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Raffety</span>, Mr. Frank W., his <i>Books worth Reading</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_145">145-50</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Rossetti</span>, Dante Gabriel, quoted, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Rossetti</span>, William Michael, his edition of Shelley's <i>Adonais</i>, <a href="#Page_76">76-83</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Rucellai</span>, his dramas and his <i>L'Api</i>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Sainte-Beuve</span>, his essays, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>on Philologists, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li> - <li>his criticism, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>;</li> - <li>the master of Matthew Arnold, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Saintsbury</span>, Prof., his <i>Short History of English Literature</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_93">93-109</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Sallust</span>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Schiller</span>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Schick</span>, Dr., on Lydgate's versification, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct26" id="Correct26"><span class="smcap">Schipper</span></a>, Dr. J., on Dunbar, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Schmeding</span>, Dr. G., his Monograph on Thomson, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">School of English Literature at Oxford</span>, its deplorable organization, <a href="#Page_45">45-72</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>how this may be remedied, <a href="#Page_73">73-5</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_377" id="Page_377" href="#Page_377">[377]</a></span></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Scott of Amwell</span>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Scott</span>, Sir Walter, on Dunbar, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Self-Advertisement</span>, its organization and effects, <a href="#Page_158">158-64</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Seneca</span>, influence on English prose, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Sedulius</span>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Shaftesbury</span>, third Earl of, his style, <a href="#Page_117">117-9</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Shakespeare</span>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>: <a href="#Page_81">81-2</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>Clarendon Press edition of his <i>Hamlet</i>, <a href="#Page_84">84-92</a>;</li> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>: <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> - <li>Mr. Lee's <i>Life of</i>, <a href="#Page_211">211-8</a>;</li> - <li>scantiness of traditions of, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</li> - <li>his sonnets, various theories, <a href="#Page_219">219-20</a>;</li> - <li>about difficulties of supposing them autobiographical, <a href="#Page_225">225-6</a>;</li> - <li>his relations with Southampton and Pembroke, <a href="#Page_228">228-34</a>;</li> - <li>story in the Sonnets probably fictitious, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li> - <li>religion of Shakespeare, <a href="#Page_351">351-69</a>;</li> - <li>his politics, <a href="#Page_352">352-3</a>;</li> - <li>not a Roman Catholic, <a href="#Page_352">352-6</a>;</li> - <li>on death, <a href="#Page_357">357-8</a>;</li> - <li>silence about a future life, <a href="#Page_359">359</a>,</li> - <li>and about metaphysical questions, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>;</li> - <li>comparison in this respect with Aristotle, <a href="#Page_360">360</a>;</li> - <li>his theology, <a href="#Page_362">362-4</a>;</li> - <li>on prayer, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>;</li> - <li>on conscience, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>;</li> - <li>his attitude to Christianity, <a href="#Page_366">366</a>;</li> - <li>when his ethics are Christian, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>;</li> - <li>his religious ideas summed up, <a href="#Page_368">368-9</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Sharp</span>, Archbishop, quoted, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Shelley</span>, his <i>Adonais</i>, <a href="#Page_76">76-83</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>absurd criticism of his style, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Shenstone</span>, William, <a href="#Page_249">249</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Sidney</span>, Sir Philip, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Simpson</span>, Richard, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>: <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Smart</span>, Christopher, his <i>Song to David</i>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Smeaton</span>, Mr. Oliphant, his life of Dunbar reviewed, <a href="#Page_183">183-92</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Sophocles</span>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his ethics, <a href="#Page_267">267-9</a>;</li> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>;</li> - <li>his ideal man, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Spenser</span>, Edmund, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>: <a href="#Page_113">113</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>influence of Greek and Latin Classics on, <a href="#Page_120">120-1</a>;</li> - <li>influence of, on Milton, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>;</li> - <li>on the functions of poetry, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Stanihurst</span>, Richard, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Stephen</span>, Mr. Leslie, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Stesichorus</span>, his <i>Calyce</i>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Stevenson</span>, R. L., <i>Letters</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_165">165-71</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Strabo</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_287">287</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_378" id="Page_378" href="#Page_378">[378]</a></span></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct27" id="Correct27"><span class="smcap">Swift</span></a>, Jonathan, his <i>Sentiments of a Church of England Man</i>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li><i>Tale of a Tub</i>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li> - </ul></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Tacitus</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>: <a href="#Page_192">192</a>: <a href="#Page_254">254</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>as a critic, <a href="#Page_278">278-9</a>;</li> - <li>on immortality, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Talleyrand</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Tennyson</span>, Lord, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>: <a href="#Page_162">162-3</a>: <a href="#Page_245">245</a>: <a href="#Page_247">247</a>: <a href="#Page_298">298</a>: <a href="#Page_337">337</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>as a critic, <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Terence</span>, women of, <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Text-Books</span> on English Literature, specimens of, <a href="#Page_76">76-150</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Thackeray</span> on Wordsworth and Moore, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Theocritus</span>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Theognis</span> quoted, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Thomson</span>, James, <a href="#Page_243">243</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li> - <li>claim to the authorship of <i>Rule Britannia</i> vindicated, <a href="#Page_321">321-8</a>;</li> - <li>corrections in the <i>Seasons</i> discussed, <a href="#Page_328">328-34</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Thorpe</span>, Thomas, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>: <a href="#Page_227">227</a>: <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Tovey</span>, Rev. D. C., his edition of Thomson's poems reviewed, <a href="#Page_318">318-34</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Tremenheere</span>, Mr. J. H. A., his version of Catullus' Love Poems, <a href="#Page_335">335-50</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Trissino</span>, his <i>Sofonisba</i>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Thucydides</span>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>: <a href="#Page_260">260</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>on hope, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Tupper</span>, Martin, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Tyler</span>, Mr. Thomas, on Shakespeare's Sonnets, <a href="#Page_228">228</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Tyrwhitt</span>, Thomas, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>: <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Universities</span>, their indifference to the interests of literature, <a href="#Page_38">38-40</a>: <a href="#Page_45">45-50</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>effects of the exclusion of the Greek and Roman Classics from the so-called Schools of Literature at Oxford and Cambridge, <a href="#Page_55">55-71</a></li> - </ul></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Varro</span>, as a critic, <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Virgil</span>, his beautiful descriptions of Nature, <a href="#Page_245">245-6</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>his Eclogues, <a href="#Page_308">308-17</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Voltaire</span> on Philologists, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Walters</span>, Cuming, on Shakespeare's Sonnets, <a href="#Page_220">220-1</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Warburton</span>, Bishop, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>quoted, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Warton</span>, Dr. Joseph, on Thomson's poetry, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Warton</span>, Thomas, on Lydgate, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Watson</span>, Mr. William, great beauty of his English hexameters, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><a name="Correct28" id="Correct28"><span class="smcap">Wharton</span></a>, Dr., his <i>Sappho</i>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Willmott</span>, Rev. Aris, his <i>Gems from English Literature</i>, <a href="#Page_163">163-4</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_379" id="Page_379" href="#Page_379">[379]</a></span></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Willoughby</span>, his <i>Avisa</i>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>: <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Wordsworth</span>, William, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>; - <ul class="nest"> - <li>on Dyer's poetry, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li> - <li>his poems on classical legends, <a href="#Page_298">298</a></li> - </ul></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Worsfold</span>, Mr. Basil, his <i>Principles of Criticism</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_270">270-82</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Wrangham</span>, Archdeacon, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Wright</span>, Dr. Aldis, his edition of Shakespeare's <i>Hamlet</i>, <a href="#Page_84">84-92</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Wright</span>, Mr. W. H. Kearley, his <i>West Country Poets</i> reviewed, <a href="#Page_301">301-7</a></li> - - <li class="entry"><span class="smcap">Wyntown</span>, his <i>Chronicle</i>, <a href="#Page_180">180-1</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Xenophon</span> on women, <a href="#Page_290">290</a></li> - - - <li class="entry2"><span class="smcap">Young</span>, Edward, quoted, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> - -</ul> - - -<div> -<br /> -<br /> -<br /> -<hr /> -<p class="center xsm">Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. -</p><br /></div> - -<div class="transnotes"><a name="Corrections" id="Corrections"></a> -<h3>Corrections:</h3> - - -<p class="footnote">Page 81 <b>Hamlet, act iv. sc .1</b> should be <b>sc. 5</b> (<a href="#Correct1">There is pansies</a>)</p> - - -<p>The following errors have been corrected in the text.</p> - - -<p class="footnote">Page 8 changed <b>Jasserand</b> to <b>Jusserand</b> (<a href="#Correct2">done M. Jusserand - grave injustice</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 63 added space (<a href="#Correct3">Addington Symonds</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 90 added single quotes (<a href="#Correct4">The rest is silence.' 'O, O,</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 90 changed <b>than</b> to <b>that</b> (<a href="#Correct5">it would be more natural that</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 96-7 moved double quotes from (<a href="#Correct6">evicit gurgite moles,"</a>) - to end of last line (<a href="#Correct6">armenta trahit."</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 97 added opening double quotes (<a href="#Correct7">"Not sa fersly</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 101 added double quotes (<a href="#Correct8"><i>Lord</i>, 1790." <i>A Letter to</i></a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 107 changed <b>")</b> to <b>)"</b> (<a href="#Correct9">teeth of its subject)". "His voluminous</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 184 added comma (<a href="#Correct10">and the few outsiders, whether</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 205 added single quote (<a href="#Correct11">Warburton on Shakespeare.'"</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 212 added comma (<a href="#Correct12">every alley green,</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 252 changed <b>charactistic</b> to <b>characteristic</b> (<a href="#Correct13">distinctive - feature is the characteristic</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 321 changed comma to period (<a href="#Correct14">both these questions.</a>)</p> - -<p class="footnote">Page 326 changed period to semicolon (<a href="#Correct15">Britain's wide domain;</a>)</p> - - -<p>The following errors have been corrected in the index.</p> - - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct16"><span class="smcap">Benecke</span></a> changed <b>255</b> to <b>283</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct17"><span class="smcap">Bentley</span></a> changed <b>156</b> to <b>160</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct18"><span class="smcap">Chaucer</span></a> changed <b>8</b> to <b>6</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct19"><span class="smcap">De Quincey</span>; his comparative failure</a> changed <b>305</b> to <b>204</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct20"><span class="smcap">Gibbon</span></a> changed <b>198</b> to <b>195</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct21"><span class="smcap">Gower</span>; <i>Confessio Amantis</i></a> changed <b>196</b> to <b>195</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct22"><span class="smcap">Macaulay</span></a> changed <b>145: 151</b> to <b>141: 155</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct23"><span class="smcap">Pater</span></a> changed <b>62</b> to <b>63</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct24"><span class="smcap">Persius</span></a> changed <b>15</b> to <b>158</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct25"><span class="smcap">Pope</span>; quoted</a> changed <b>139</b> to <b>138</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct26"><span class="smcap">Schipper</span></a> changed <b>183</b> to <b>187</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct27"><span class="smcap">Swift</span>; <i>Tale of a Tub</i></a> changed <b>144</b> to <b>149</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><a href="#Correct28"><span class="smcap">Wharton</span></a> changed <b>148</b> to <b>152</b></p> - - -<p>The following inconsistencies have been left as printed.</p> - -<p class="footnote"><b>bookmaker</b> vs. <b>book-maker</b> vs. <b>book maker</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><b>rodomontade</b> vs. <b>rhodomontade</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><b>Wriothesley</b> vs. <b>Wriothesly</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><b>analysed</b> vs. <b>analyzed</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><b>Mort d'Arthur</b> vs. <b>Morte d'Arthur</b></p> - -<p class="footnote"><b>Quinctilian</b> vs. <b>Quintilian</b><br /> -<span style="margin-left: 2em">(<b>Quintilia</b> (Latin <b>Quintiliæ</b>) is a different person)</span></p> -</div> - - - - - - - - -<pre> - - - - - -End of Project Gutenberg's Ephemera Critica, by John Churton Collins - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EPHEMERA CRITICA *** - -***** This file should be named 34370-h.htm or 34370-h.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/3/4/3/7/34370/ - -Produced by Juliet Sutherland, Hannah Joy Patterson and -the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at -http://www.pgdp.net - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - - -</pre> - -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/34370.txt b/old/34370.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 99bd946..0000000 --- a/old/34370.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,9636 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Ephemera Critica, by John Churton Collins - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - - -Title: Ephemera Critica - or plain truths about current literature - -Author: John Churton Collins - -Release Date: November 19, 2010 [EBook #34370] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EPHEMERA CRITICA *** - - - - -Produced by Juliet Sutherland, Hannah Joy Patterson and -the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at -http://www.pgdp.net - - - - --------------------- -Transcriber's Note: - -Text transliterated from Greek is marked as +Greek+. -To see the original Greek, please view the UTF-8 or HTML version. - -For clarity, some footnotes have been placed under the chapter -headings where they are referenced. Other footnotes will be -found at the end of each chapter. - -Typographical errors corrected are listed at the end of the text. --------------------- - - - - - EPHEMERA CRITICA - - OR PLAIN TRUTHS ABOUT - CURRENT LITERATURE - - BY JOHN CHURTON - COLLINS - - - Non verebor nominare singulos, quo facilius, propositis exemplis, - appareat, quibus gradibus fracta sit et deminuta eloquentia. - _--Dial. de Orat._ - - - +ainen ainta, momphan di' epispeirn alitrois.+ - _--Pindar_ - - - FOURTH EDITION - - - NEW YORK - E. P. DUTTON & COMPANY - ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE AND CO LTD - 2 WHITEHALL GARDENS, WESTMINSTER - - 1902 - - - BUTLER & TANNER, - THE SELWOOD PRINTING WORKS, - FROME, AND LONDON. - - - - -PREFACE - - -It is time for some one to speak out. When we compare the condition and -prospects of Science in all its branches, its organization, its -standards, its aims, its representatives with those of Literature, how -deplorable and how humiliating is the contrast! In the one we see an -ordered realm, in the other mere chaos. The one, serious, strenuous, -progressive, is displaying an energy as wonderful in what it has -accomplished as in what it promises to accomplish; the other, without -soul, without conscience, without nerve, aimless, listless and decadent, -appears to be stagnating, almost entirely, into the monopoly of those -who are bent on futilizing and degrading it. - -Science stands where it does, not simply by virtue of the genius, the -industry, the example of its most distinguished representatives, but -because by those representatives the whole sphere of its activity is -being directed and controlled. The care of the Universities, the care of -learned societies, the care of devoted enthusiasts, its interests and -honour are watchfully and jealously guarded. The qualifications of its -teachers are guaranteed by tests prescribed by the highest authorities -on the subjects professed. To standards fixed and maintained by those -authorities is referred every serious contribution to its literature. -Even a popular lecturer, or a popular writer, who undertook to be its -exponent would be exploded at once if he displayed ignorance and -incompetence. Such, indeed, is the solidarity of its energies that it is -rather in the degrees and phases of their manifestation than in their -essence and characteristics that they vary. There is not a scientific -institution in England the regulations and aims of which do not bear the -impress of such masters as Huxley and Tyndall and their disciples; not a -work issuing from the scientific Press which is not a proof of the -influence which such men have exercised and are exercising, and of the -high standard exacted and attained wherever Science is taught and -interpreted. - -It is far otherwise with Literature. Those who represent it, in a sense -analogous to that in which the men who have been referred to represent -Science, have neither voice nor influence in its organization, as a -subject of instruction, at the centres of education. They neither give -it the ply, nor in any way affect its standards and its character in -practice and production. As examples few follow them, as counsellors no -one heeds them. They constitute what is little more than an esoteric -body, moving in a sphere of its own. - -And yet there is no reason at all why there should not be the same -solidarity in the activity of Literature as there is in the activity of -Science, and why the standard of aim and attainment in the one should -not be as high as in the other. But this can never be accomplished until -certain radical reforms are instituted, and the first step towards -reform is to demonstrate the necessity for it. I have done so here. I -have drawn attention to the state of things in our Universities,--in -other words, to what I must take leave to call the scandalous and -incredible indifference of the Councils of those Universities to the -appeals which have, during the last fifteen years, been made to them to -place the study of Literature, in the proper sense of the term, upon the -footing on which they have placed other studies. I have pointed out what -have been, and what must continue to be, the effects of that -indifference. I have given specimens of the books to which the -Universities are not ashamed to affix their _imprimatur_, and I have -shown that, so far from them considering even their reputation involved -in such a matter, they do not scruple to circulate works teeming with -blunders and absurdities of the grossest kind, blunders and absurdities -to which their attention has been publicly called over and over again. I -have given specimens of the kind of works which the occupants of -distinguished Chairs of Literature can, with perfect impunity, address -to students; and I would ask any scientific man what would be thought of -a Professor, say, of the Royal Naval College, or of the City and Guilds -of London Institute, who should put his name to analogous -publications--to publications, that is to say, as unsound in their -theories, as inaccurate in their facts, as slovenly and perfunctory in -general execution, as those to which I have here directed attention? If -such things are done in the green tree, what is likely to be done in the -dry? or, as Chaucer puts it, "if gold ruste, what schal yren doo?" That -is one of the questions on which these essays may, perhaps, throw some -light. - -To be misrepresented and misunderstood is the certain fate of a book -like this, and I am well aware of the responsibilities incurred in -undertaking it. It is very distasteful to me to give pain or cause -annoyance to any one, and, whether I am believed or not, I can say, with -strict truth, that I have not the smallest personal bias against any of -those whom I have censured most severely. I believe, for the reasons -already explained, that Belles Lettres are sinking deeper and deeper -into degradation, that they are gradually passing out of the hands of -their true representatives, and becoming almost the monopoly of their -false representatives, and that the consequence of this cannot but be -most disastrous to us as a nation, to our reputation in the World of -Letters, to taste, to tone, to morals. It is surely a shame and a crime -in any one, and more especially in men occupying positions of influence -and authority, to assist in the work of corruption, either by -deliberately writing bad books or by conniving, as critics, at the -production of bad books; and I am very sure it has become a duty, and an -imperative duty, to expose and denounce them. - -These essays are partly a protest and partly an experiment. As a protest -they explain, and, I hope, justify themselves; as an experiment they are -an attempt to illustrate what we should be fortunate if we could see -more frequently illustrated by abler hands. They are a series of studies -in serious, patient, and absolutely impartial criticism, having for its -object a comprehensive survey of the vices and defects, as well as of -the merits, characteristic of current Belles Lettres. I do not suppose -that anything I have said will have the smallest effect on the present -generation, but on the rising generation I believe that much which has -been said will not be thrown away. In any case, what I was constrained -to write I have written. And it is my last word in a long controversy. - -It remains to add that most of these essays appeared originally in the -_Saturday Review_, and I desire to express my thanks to the late and -present Editors, not merely for permission to reproduce the essays, but -for much kindness besides. Three appeared in the _Pall Mall Gazette_, -and one, the first essay on "English Literature at the Universities," in -the _Nineteenth Century_; and my thanks are due to the Editor of the -_Pall Mall Gazette_ and to Mr. Knowles. But all of them have been -carefully revised and greatly enlarged, in some cases to more than -double their original form. The introductory essay is, with the -exception of the opening pages, in which I have drawn on an old article -of mine in the _Quarterly Review_, quite new; and, indeed, that may be -said of a great part of the volume. - - -NOTE TO THE SECOND EDITION - -I regret to find that I have done M. Jusserand grave injustice in -censuring him for being ignorant of the existence of the _Speculum -Meditantis_, the MS. of which was identified after the publication of -his work. - - - - -LIST OF CONTENTS - - - CHAPTER PAGE - - I. THE PRESENT FUNCTIONS OF CRITICISM 13 - - II. ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES. PART I. 45 - - III. ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES. PART II. 76 - - IV. ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES. PART III. 84 - - V. OUR LITERARY GUIDES. PART I. 93 - - VI. OUR LITERARY GUIDES. PART II. 110 - - VII. LOG-ROLLING AND EDUCATION 133 - - VIII. OUR LITERARY GUIDES. PART III. 145 - - IX. THE NEW CRITICISM 151 - - X. THE GENTLE ART OF SELF-ADVERTISEMENT 158 - - XI. R. L. STEVENSON'S LETTERS 165 - - XII. LITERARY ICONOCLASM 172 - - XIII. WILLIAM DUNBAR 183 - - XIV. A GALLOP THROUGH ENGLISH LITERATURE 193 - - XV. DE QUINCEY AND HIS FRIENDS 203 - - XVI. LEE'S LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE 211 - - XVII. SHAKESPEARE'S SONNETS 219 - - XVIII. LANDSCAPE IN POETRY 236 - - XIX. AN APPRECIATION OF FRANCIS TURNER PALGRAVE 250 - - XX. ANCIENT GREEK AND MODERN LIFE 255 - - XXI. THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICISM 270 - - XXII. WOMEN IN GREEK POETRY 283 - - XXIII. MR. STEPHEN PHILLIPS' POEMS 294 - - XXIV. THE ILLUSTRIOUS OBSCURE 301 - - XXV. VIRGIL IN ENGLISH HEXAMETERS 308 - - XXVI. THE LATEST EDITION OF THOMSON 318 - - XXVII. CATULLUS AND LESBIA 335 - - XXVIII. THE RELIGION OF SHAKESPEARE 351 - - - - -THE PRESENT FUNCTIONS OF CRITICISM - - -It may sound paradoxical to say that the more widely education spreads, -the more generally intelligent a nation becomes, the greater is the -danger to which Art and Letters are exposed. And yet how obviously is -this the case, and how easily is this explained. The quality of skilled -work depends mainly on the standard required of the workman. If his -judges and patrons belong to the discerning few who, knowing what is -excellent, are intolerant of everything which falls short of excellence, -the standard required will necessarily be a high one, and the standard -required will be the standard attained. In past times, for example, the -only men of letters who were respected formed a portion of that highly -cultivated class who will always be in the minority; and to that class, -and to that class only, they appealed. A community within a community, -they regarded the general public with as much indifference as the -general public regarded them, and wrote only for themselves, and for -those who stood on the same intellectual level as themselves. It was so -in the Athens of Pericles; it was so in the Rome of Augustus; it was so -in the Florence of the Medici; and a striking example of the same thing -is to be found in our own Elizabethan Dramatists. Though their bread -depended on the brutal and illiterate savages for whose amusement they -catered, they still talked the language of scholars and poets, and -forced their rude hearers to sit out works which could have been -intelligible only to scholars and poets. Each felt with pride that he -belonged to a great guild, which neither had, nor affected to have, -anything in common with the multitude. Each strove only for the applause -of those whose praise is not lightly given. Each spurred the other on. -When Marlowe worked, he worked with the fear of Greene before his eyes, -as Shakespeare was put on his mettle by Jonson, and Jonson by -Shakespeare. We owe _Hamlet_ and _Sejanus_, _Much Ado about Nothing_ and -the _Alchemist_, not to men who bid only for the suffrage of the mob, -but to men who stood in awe of the verdict which would be passed on them -by the company assembled at the Mermaid and the Devil. - -As long as men of letters continue to form an intellectual aristocracy, -and, stimulated by mutual rivalry, strain every nerve to excel, and as -long also as they have no temptation to pander to the crowd, so long -will Literature maintain its dignity, and so long will the standard -attained in Literature be a high one. In the days of Dryden and Pope, in -the days even of Johnson and Gibbon, the greater part of the general -public either read nothing, or read nothing but politics and sermons. -The few who were interested in Poetry, in Criticism, in History, were, -as a rule, those who had received a learned education, men of highly -cultivated tastes and of considerable attainments. A writer, therefore, -who aspired to contribute to polite literature, had to choose between -finding no readers at all, and finding such readers as he was bound to -respect--between instant oblivion, and satisfying a class which, -composed of scholars, would have turned with contempt from writings -unworthy of scholars. A classical style, a refined tone, and an adequate -acquaintance with the chief authors of Ancient Rome and of Modern -France, were requisites, without which even a periodical essayist would -have had small hope of obtaining a hearing. Whoever will turn, we do not -say to the papers of Addison and his circle in the early part of the -last century, or to those of Chesterfield and his circle later on, but -to the average critical work of Cave's and Dodsley's hack writers, -cannot fail to be struck with its remarkable merit in point of literary -execution. - -But as education spreads, a very different class of readers call into -being a very different class of writers. Men and women begin to seek in -books the amusement or excitement which they sought formerly in social -dissipation. To the old public of scholars succeeds a public, in which -every section of society has its representatives, and to provide this -vast body with the sort of reading which is acceptable to it, becomes a -thriving and lucrative calling. An immense literature springs up, which -has no other object than to catch the popular ear, and no higher aim -than to please for the moment. That perpetual craving for novelty, which -has in all ages been characteristic of the multitude, necessitates in -authors of this class a corresponding rapidity of production. The writer -of a single good book is soon forgotten by his contemporaries; but the -writer of a series of bad books is sure of reputation and emolument. -Indeed, a good book and a bad book stand, so far as the general public -is concerned, on precisely the same level, as they meet with precisely -the same fate. Each presents the attraction of a new title-page. Each is -glanced through, and tossed aside. Each is estimated not by its -intrinsic worth, but according to the skill with which it has been -puffed. Till within comparatively recent times this literature was, for -the most part, represented by novels and poems, and by those light and -desultory essays, sketches and _ana_, which are the staple commodity of -our magazines. And so long as it confined itself within these bounds it -did no mischief, and even some good. Flimsy and superficial though it -was, it had at least the merit of interesting thousands in Art and -Letters, who would otherwise have been indifferent to them. It afforded -nutriment to minds which would have rejected more solid fare. To men of -business and pleasure who, though no longer students, still retained the -tincture of early culture, it offered the most agreeable of all methods -of killing time, while scholars found in it welcome relaxation from -severer studies. It thus supplied a want. Presenting attractions not to -one class only, but to all classes, it grew on the world. Its patrons, -who half a century ago numbered thousands, now number millions. - -And as it has grown in favour, it has grown in ambition. It is no longer -satisfied with the humble province which it once held, but is extending -its dominion in all directions. It has its representatives in every -department of Art and Letters. It has its poets, its critics, its -philosophers, its historians. It crowds not our club-tables and -news-stalls only, but our libraries. Thus what was originally a mere -excrescence on literature, in the proper sense of the term, has now -assumed proportions so gigantic, that it has not merely overshadowed -that literature, but threatens to supersede it. - -No thoughtful man can contemplate the present condition of current -literature without disgust and alarm. We have still, indeed, lingering -among us a few masters whose works would have been an honour to any age; -and here and there among writers may be discerned men who are honourably -distinguished by a conscientious desire to excel, men who respect -themselves, and respect their calling. But to say that these are in the -minority, would be to give a very imperfect idea of the proportion which -their numbers bear to those who figure most prominently before the -public. They are, in truth, as tens are to myriads. Their comparative -insignificance is such, that they are powerless even to leaven the mass. -The position which they would have occupied half a century ago, and -which they may possibly occupy half a century hence, is now usurped by a -herd of scribblers who have succeeded, partly by sheer force of numbers, -and partly by judicious co-operation, in all but dominating literature. -Scarcely a day passes in which some book is not hurried into the world, -which owes its existence not to any desire on the part of its author to -add to the stores of useful literature, or even to a hope of obtaining -money, but simply to that paltry vanity which thrives on the sort of -homage of which society of a certain kind is not grudging, and which -knows no distinction between notoriety and fame. A few years ago a man -who contributed articles to a current periodical, or who delivered a -course of lectures, had, as a rule, the good sense to know that when -they had fulfilled the purpose for which they were originally intended, -the world had no more concern with them, and he would as soon have -thought of inflicting them in the shape of a volume on the public, as he -would have thought of issuing an edition of his private letters to his -friends. Now all is changed. The first article in the creed of a person -who has figured in either of these capacities, appears to be, that he is -bound to force himself into notice in the character of an author. And -this, happily for himself, but unhappily for the interests of -literature, he is able to do with perfect facility and with perfect -impunity. Books are speedily manufactured and as speedily reduced to -pulp. A worthless book may be as easily invested with those superficial -attractions which catch the eye of the crowd as a meritorious one. As -the general public are the willing dupes of puffers, it is no more -difficult to palm off on them the spurious wares of literary charlatans, -than it is to beguile them into purchasing the wares of any other kind -of charlatan. No one is interested in telling them the truth. Many, on -the contrary, are interested in deceiving them. As a rule, the men who -write bad books are the men who criticise bad books; and as they know -that what they mete out in their capacity of judges to-day is what will -in turn be meted out to them in their capacity of authors to-morrow, it -is not surprising that the relations between them should be similar to -those which Tacitus tells us existed between Vinius and -Tigellinus--"nulla innocenti cura, sed vices impunitatis." - -Meanwhile all those vile arts which were formerly confined to the -circulators of bad novels and bad poems are practised without shame. It -is shocking, it is disgusting to contemplate the devices to which many -men of letters will stoop for the sake of exalting themselves into a -factitious reputation. They will form cliques for the purpose of mutual -puffery. They will descend to the basest methods of self-advertisement. -And the evil is fast-spreading. Indeed, things have come to such a pass, -that persons of real merit, if they have the misfortune to depend on -their pens for a livelihood, must either submit to be elbowed and -jostled out of the field, or take part in the same ignoble scramble for -notoriety, and the same detestable system of mutual puffery. Thus -everything which formerly tended to raise the standard of literary -ambition and literary attainment has given place to everything which -tends to degrade it. The multitude now stand where the scholar once -stood. From the multitude emanate, to the multitude are addressed -two-thirds of the publications which pour forth, every year, from our -presses. - - Viviamo scorti - Da mediocrit: sceso il sapiente, - E salita la turba a un sol confine - Che il mondo agguaglia. - -Matthew Arnold very truly observed, that one of the most unfortunate -tendencies of our time was the tendency to over-estimate the -performances of "the average man." The over-estimation of these -performances is no longer a tendency, but an established custom. -Literature, in all its branches, is rapidly becoming his monopoly. As -judged and judge, as author and critic, there is every indication that -he will proceed from triumph to triumph, and establish his cult wherever -books are read. Now the only sphere in which "the average man" is -entitled to homage is a moral one, and he is most venerable when he is -passive and unambitious. But if ambition and the love of fame are -awakened in him, he is capable of becoming exceedingly corrupt and of -forfeiting every title to veneration. He is capable of resorting to all -the devices to which men are forced to resort in manufacturing -factitious reputations, to imposture, to fraud, to circulating false -currencies of his own, and to assisting others in the circulation of -theirs. Even when he is free from these vices, so far as their -deliberate practice is concerned, he is scarcely less mischievous, if he -be uncontrolled. To say that his standard is never likely to be a high -one, either with reference to his own achievements or with reference to -what he exacts from others, and to say that the systematic substitution -of inferior standards for high ones must affect literature and all that -is involved in its influence, most disastrously, is to say what will be -generally acknowledged. And he has everything, unhappily, in his -favour--numbers, influence, the spirit of the age. For one who sees -through him and takes his measure, there are thousands who do not: for -one who could discern the justice of an exposure of his shortcomings, -there are thousands who would attribute that exposure to personal enmity -and to dishonest motives. His power, indeed, is becoming almost -irresistible. The one thing which he and his fellows thoroughly -understand is the formidable advantage of co-operation. The consequence -is that there are probably not half a dozen reviews and newspapers now -left which they are not able practically to coerce. An editor is obliged -to assume honesty in those who contribute to his columns, and also to -avail himself of the services of men who can write good articles, if -they write bad books. In the first case, it is not open to him to -question the justice of the verdict pronounced; in the second case, the -courtesy of the gentleman very naturally and properly predominates, -under such circumstances, over public considerations--and how can truth -be told? Nor is this all. Assuming that an editor is free from such -ties, he has to consult the interests of his paper, to study -popularity, and not to estrange those who are, from a commercial point -of view, the mainstays of all our literary journals, those who advertise -in them,--the publishers. "If," said an editor to me once, "I were to -tell the truth, as forcibly as I could wish to do, about the books sent -to me for review, in six months my proprietors would be in the -bankruptcy court." It is in the power of the publishers to ruin any -literary journal. There is probably not a single Review in London which -would survive the withdrawal of the publishers' advertisements. - -A more honourable class of men than those who form the majority of the -London publishers does not exist, nor have the interests of Literature, -as distinguished from commercial interests, ever found heartier and more -ungrudging support, than they have long found in three or four of the -leading firms, and as they are now finding in two or three of the firms -which have been more recently established. But, unhappily, this is not -everywhere the case. While the firms, to which I have referred, have -never, in any way, attempted to interfere with the independence of -reviewers, others have made no secret of their intention to make their -patronage in advertisement dependent on favourable notices of their -publications. The strain of temptation and peril to which editors are -thus exposed may be estimated by the fact that, a flattering review may, -if supplemented by similar ones, put some three hundred a year into the -pockets of their proprietors, while severity and justice would involve a -corresponding loss. It need hardly be said that no editor of a -respectable review would allow any definite understanding of this kind -to exist, or that any publisher would ever dare to suggest it, but there -can be no doubt that such considerations have to be taken into account -almost universally, and place serious restraint on freedom of judgment. - -There is, it is true, another aspect of this question. Publishers must -protect themselves. Though reviews offend much more frequently on the -side of dishonest and interested puffery, they are very often made the -vehicles of equally unscrupulous rancour and spite. If they do their -readers injustice, by attempting to foist bad books on them, they do -every one concerned injustice, by damning good ones. No one could blame -a publisher for declining to support a paper which was continually -making his books the subjects of unmerited attacks. But a publisher who -attempts to prevent the truth from being told, and so secures, or seeks -to secure, currency for his spurious wares, is guilty of an act which -borders closely on fraud. - -Another circumstance very favourable to the encouragement of -inferiority, and not of inferiority only, but of charlatanism and -imposture, is the increasing tendency to regard nothing of importance -compared with the spirit of tolerance and charity. An all-embracing -philanthropy exempts nothing from its protection. Every one must be -good-natured. Severity, we are told, is quite out of fashion. Such -censors as the old reviewers are now mere anachronisms. It is vain to -plead that tolerance and charity must discriminate; that, like other -virtues, they may be abused, and that in their abuse they may become -immoral; that there are higher considerations than the feelings of -individuals; and that, if to give pain or annoyance admits of no -justification but necessity, necessity may exact their infliction as an -exigent duty. - -But this spirit of tolerance and charity has also become attenuated into -the spirit of mere _laissez-faire_. We have no lack of real scholars and -of real critics, who see through the whole thing, and probably deplore -it; but they make no sign, look on with a sort of amused perplexity, and -do their own work, thankful, no doubt, sometimes, when it is oppressive, -that they need not be over-scrupulous about its quality. If, -occasionally, they get a little impatient and indulge their genius, -protest goes no further than sarcasm and irony, so fine that it is -intelligible only among themselves; while the objects of their satire, -as well as the general public, missing the one and misinterpreting the -other, take it all for applause. Resistance, it is said, is useless. -Literature is a trade. What has come was inevitable: _vive la -bagatelle_, and drift with the stream. - -And now let us consider what are the results of all this. The first and -most important is the degradation of criticism. Criticism is to -Literature what legislation and government are to States. If they are in -able and honest hands all goes well; if they are in weak and dishonest -hands all is anarchy and mischief. And as government in a Republic, the -true analogy to the sphere of which we are speaking, is represented not -by those who form the minority in its councils, but by those who form -the majority, so in criticism, it is not on the few but on the many -among those who represent it, that its authority and influence depend. -And what are its characteristics in the hands of its prevailing -majority--in the hands of those who are its legislators in a realm -co-extensive with the reading world? It is not criticism at all. To -criticism, in the true sense of the term, it has no claim even to -approximation. It seems to have resolved itself into something which -wants a name,--something which is partly dithyramb and partly rhetoric. -Without standards, without touchstones, without principles, without -knowledge, it appears to be regarded as the one calling for which no -equipment and no training are needed. What a master of the art has -called the final fruit of careful discipline and of much experience is -assumed to come spontaneously. A man of literary tastes is born -cultured. A critic, like a poet, is the pure product of nature. Such -canons as these "critics" have are the mysterious and somewhat -perplexing evolutions of their own inner consciousness, or derived, not -from the study of classical writers in English or in any other language, -of all of whom they are probably profoundly ignorant, but from a current -acquaintance with the writings of contemporaries, who are, in -intelligence and performance, a little in advance of themselves. But -what they lack in attainments they make up in impudence. The effrontery -of some of these "critics," whose verdicts, ludicrous to relate, are -daily recorded as "opinions of the Press," literally exceeds belief. -They will sit in judgment on books written in languages of whose very -alphabets they are ignorant. They will pose as authorities and pronounce -_ex cathedr_ on subjects literary, historical, and scientific of which -they know nothing more than what they have contrived to pick up from the -works which they are "reviewing." Their estimates of the books, on the -merits and demerits of which they undertake to enlighten the public, -correspond with their qualifications for forming them. Books displaying -in their writers the grossest ignorance of the very rudiments of the -subjects treated, and literally swarming with blunders and absurdities, -all of which pass undetected and unnoticed, are made the subjects of -elaborate panegyrics, which would need some qualification if applied to -the very classics in the subjects under discussion. Books, on the other -hand, of unusual and distinguished merit are despatched summarily in a -few lines of equally undeserved depreciation; books written in the worst -taste and in the vilest style are pronounced to be models of both. -Sobriety, measure, and discrimination have no place either in the creed -or in the practice of these writers. They think in superlatives; they -express themselves in superlatives. It never seems to occur to them that -if criticism has to reckon with Mr. Le Gallienne it has also to reckon -with Shakespeare; that if it has to take the measure of Mr. Hall Caine, -it has likewise to take the measure of Cervantes and Fielding, and that -of some dozen prose writers and poets, it cannot be pronounced, at the -same time of each, that he is "the greatest living master of English -prose," or "without parallel for his superlative command of all the -resources of rhythmical expression." There is one accomplishment in -which these critics are particularly adroit, and that is in keeping out -of controversy, and so avoiding all chance of being called to account. -For this reason they deal more in eulogy than in censure, for the public -is less likely to complain of a bad book being foisted on them for a -good one, than its irate author to sit silent under reproof. - -If we go a little higher, things are almost as bad, if not quite so -ridiculous. In everything but in criticism it is necessary to -specialize. A man who posed as an authority on all the literatures of -the world, and on the history of every nation in the world, would be -very justly set down as an impostor. And yet pretentions which men would -be the first to ridicule, as private individuals, they do not scruple to -claim, as critics. An historical student enriches History with a volume -throwing new and important light on some obscure episode or period; a -classical student deserves the gratitude of scholars for an invaluable -monograph; English Literature or one of the Continental Literatures is -illustrated by a series of dissertations as instructive as they are -original; or a truly memorable contribution has been made to political -philosophy, to sthetics, or to ethics. What is their fate? It is by no -means improbable that they will be 'reviewed,' in the course of a few -days, by the same man for three or four, or it may be for five or six, -daily and weekly journals, and their fortune in the market made or -marred by a censor who has probably done no more than glance at their -half-cut pages, and who, if he had studied them from end to end, would -have been no more competent to take their measure than he would have -been to write them. This leads, it is needless to say, to every kind of -abuse: to works which deserve to be authorities on the subjects of which -they treat dropping at once into oblivion, to works which every scholar -knows to be below contempt usurping their places; to the deprivation of -all stimulus to honourable exertion on the part of authors of ability -and industry; to the encouragement of charlatans and fribbles; to gross -impositions on the public. A very amusing and edifying record might be -compiled partly out of a selection of the various verdicts passed -contemporaneously by reviews on particular works, and partly out of -comparisons of the subsequent fortunes of works with their fortunes -while submitted to this censorship. - -But it is not these causes only which contribute to the degradation of -criticism. A very important factor is the prevalence, or rather the -predominance, of mere prejudice, the prejudice of cliques in favour of -cliques, the prejudice of cliques against cliques, the prejudice of the -veteran against or in favour of the novice, the subsequent compensation, -in corresponding prejudice on the part of the novice, when his novitiate -is over. The two things which never seem to be considered are the -interests of Literature and the interests of the public. The appearance -of a work by the member of a particular coterie is the signal, on the -one hand, for a series of preposterously intemperate eulogies, and for a -series, on the other hand, of equally intemperate depreciations, in such -organs as are accessible to both parties. If a work, with any pretension -to originality, by a previously unknown author makes its appearance, it -is pretty sure to fare in one of three ways: it will scarcely be noticed -at all; it will be made the theme of a philippic against innovating -eccentricities and newfangled notions; or it will fall into the hands of -a critic who is on the look-out for a "discovery." Its fortune, so far -as notoriety is concerned, will, in that case, be made. The critic, thus -on his mettle and with his character for discernment at stake, will not -only become proportionately vociferous but will rally his equally -vociferous partisans. Hyperbole will be heaped on hyperbole, rodomontade -on rodomontade, till real merit will be made ridiculous, and the unhappy -author awake at last, to assume his true proportions, in a Fool's -Paradise. - -And to this pass has criticism come, and Literature generally, in almost -all its branches, is necessarily following suit. It would be no -exaggeration to say, that the sole encouragement now left to authors to -produce good books is the satisfaction of their own conscience, and the -approbation of a few discerning judges; and this attained, they must -starve if their bread depends upon their pen. It is not that a good book -will not be praised, but that bad books are praised still more; it is -not that it will fail to find fair and competent reviewers, but that for -one fair and competent reviewer it will find fifty who are unfair and -incompetent. It is on its acceptance, not with the few who can estimate -its merits, but with the many who take that estimate on trust from -judges, whose competence or incompetence they are equally unable to -gauge, that the possibility of a book yielding any return to its author -depends. The public neither can nor will distinguish. A book which has -two or three favourable press notices which are merited cannot stand -against a book having twenty or thirty which are unmerited. Nor is this -all. Measured and discriminating eulogy, which means precisely what it -expresses, and which is always the note of sound and just criticism, is -to the uninitiated poor recommendation compared with that which has no -limitation but extremes. How can the still small voice of truth expect -to get a hearing amid a bellowing Babel of its undistinguishable mimic? -What inducement has an author to aim at excellence, to spend three or -four years on a monograph or a history that it may be sold for waste -paper, when some miserable compilation, vamped up in as many weeks, -will, with a little management, give him notoriety and fill his purse? -There is not a scholar, not a discerning reader in England who will not -bear me witness when I say that, as a rule, the best books produced in -Belles Lettres are those of which the general public knows nothing, and -that he has been guided to them sometimes by pure accident, and -sometimes, it may be, by a depreciatory notice or curt paragraph in -"our library table" limbo. And what does this mean? It means that a -writer has discovered that it is impossible for him to have a -conscience, or aim at an honourable reputation, unless he can afford to -lose money. It means more; it means that publishers are obliged to -discourage the production of solid and scholarly works. It is notorious -that the Delegates of the Clarendon Press at Oxford, and one or two -firms in London, having regard to the honourable traditions of their -predecessors, have wished to maintain those traditions by encouraging -the production of such works, and have, at a great pecuniary loss, -persevered in this ambition. But no publisher can continue to multiply -books which do not pay their expenses, and whose sale begins and ends in -the remainder market. - -This state of things is the more deplorable when we consider its effect, -not merely in degrading and corrupting Literature on its productive -side, but in detracting so seriously from its efficacy on its -influential side. During the last few years the rapid spread of higher -education, the popularization of liberal culture through such agencies -as the University Extension Lectures, the National Home Reading Union -and similar institutions have called into being an immense and -constantly multiplying class of serious readers and students. These -already number tens of thousands, they will before long number hundreds -of thousands. Now it is of the utmost importance that these readers, who -are quite prepared to appreciate what is excellent, should be guided to -what is excellent, and discouraged in every way from conversing with -what is bad and inferior in Literature. But how is this to be done when -those who are striving, in every way, to raise the standard of popular -taste and of popular culture, as teachers, find all their efforts -counteracted by the intense activity of those who are doing their utmost -to degrade both, as writers. It is only those engaged in education, and -more particularly in popular education, who can understand the extent of -the mischief which bookmakers and the puffers of bookmakers are doing, -who can understand the tone, the taste, the temper induced by the -habitual and exclusive perusal of the writings characteristic of these -pests,--the inaccuracies and errors, the misrepresentations and -absurdities, to which these writings give currency. - -In the days of our forefathers, a reader of literary tastes, if he -wished to acquaint himself with an English classic, went to the fountain -head and read Spenser or Milton, Pope or Addison for himself. If he -desired to know what criticism had said about them, he had criticism of -authority at hand, and he consulted it. In our day it is about an even -chance whether the ordinary reader would trouble himself to turn to the -originals or not: he would probably content himself with the notices of -them in some current manual of English Literature, or with some essay or -monograph. Now, in the myriads of such publications, in vogue or out of -vogue, knocked under by their successors or scuffling with their -contemporaries, he might have the luck to light on a good guide; he -might have the luck to light on Dean Church, or Mark Pattison, or Mr. -Leslie Stephen, or Professor Courthope, or Mr. Frederic Harrison; but he -is much more likely to make his way to a luminary in the last -well-puffed "series." The first article in the creed of the modern -book-maker seems to be that the appearance or existence of a good book -is a sufficient justification for the production of a bad one to take -its place. An excellent monograph is published, and is popular. This is -the signal for the manufacture of half a dozen inferior ones, which are -mutually destructive, and serve no end except to substitute bad books -for a good one, and to make the good one forgotten. Again, a work which -has long been classical in criticism is assumed not to be "up to date," -and is either edited on this hypothesis, or we have another substituted -for it. This in turn yields its vogue--for fashions change quickly in -modern taste--to a similar experiment, till a third is announced. Of the -relation of criticism to principles, or indeed to anything else but to -their own whims or impressions, these iconoclasts appear to be -profoundly unaware. - -It requires, needless to say, the utmost wariness and care on the part -of those who regulate, and on the part of those who are engaged in, -education, to keep this inferior literature in its place. If it were -allowed to make its way authoritatively into our schools and -Universities, or indeed into any of our educational institutions, the -consequences would be most disastrous. It is not so much that it would -disseminate error as that it would become influential in more serious -ways, sthetically in its influence on taste, morally in its influence -on tone and character, intellectually in lowering the whole standard of -aim and attainment in studies. - -That the evils which have been described admit of no remedy at present, -or perhaps in the present generation, may be fully conceded. But they -may be palliated if they cannot be cured, and they must be palliated by -the agents to whom we may ultimately look for their cure, education and -fearless criticism. As their origin may be mainly ascribed to the -failure of the Universities to adapt themselves to new conditions, so on -the willingness of the Universities to repair their error must depend -all possibility of rectifying the results of it. From its organization -at the Universities everything comprehended in the system of liberal -study takes its ply; its standards are there determined, its methods -formulated, its aims defined. As a subject of teaching, and as the -result of teaching, in its relation to theory and in its relation to -practice, it there receives an impression which is permanent. It has -been so with classical scholarship, and with Philology; it has been so -with Philosophy and Theology, with Jurisprudence and History. What has -been imparted in the lecture-rooms of Oxford and Cambridge has orally, -and by the pen, become influential wherever these subjects are -represented. There is not an educational institute in Great Britain or -in the colonies, there is not a serious magazine or review on which it -has not set its seal. We have a striking illustration of this in the -case of Modern History. Some thirty years ago it was practically -unrepresented, either at Oxford or Cambridge. Since then its study has -been organized. What has been the result? It has become one of the most -flourishing branches of learning. It has reduced chaos to order; it has -raised its teaching, and by implication its literature, to a very high -standard; it has put the _canaille_ of sciolists and fribbles into their -proper place; while disciplining energy it has directed it to fruitful -objects; it has revolutionized the study of the whole subject. - -Thus the condition and fortune of everything which is affected by -education depend on the Universities. All that they do, or neglect to -do, passes into precedent. There is nothing susceptible of educational -impression which does not take its colour and its characteristics from -them. They have made the subjects which are represented in their schools -what they are, and every intelligent English citizen proud and grateful. - -But, owing to a disastrous confusion between two branches of study which -are radically and essentially distinct,--Philology and Belles -Lettres,--both Oxford and Cambridge have not only left unorganized, but -assisted in the degradation of studies, which are of as much concern, -and vital concern, to national life as any which are represented in -their Schools. To leave an important department of education -unrecognised in their system, is sufficient cause for surprise and -regret; but that they should be doing all in their power to prevent any -possibility of such a defect being supplied is deplorable. And yet this -is what is being done. That Chairs, Schools and Degrees may be -established in the interests of Philology, Philology is, by a palpable -fiction, identified with Literature. As the result of what the late -Professor Huxley denounced as "a fraud upon letters," a Chair founded in -the interests of Literature was at Oxford appropriated by the -philologists. This has been followed by the establishment of a School, -in which all that can provide for the honour of Philology is blended -with all that contributes to the degradation of Literature; while, to -give further currency and authority to this absurd complication, the -approval of a thesis, on some subject pertaining purely to Philology, -entitles the writer to the diploma, not of a Doctor in Philology, but of -a Doctor in Literature! - -Meanwhile, to make confusion worse confounded, the Universities, or, to -speak more correctly, a party in the Universities, are undertaking to -provide the country with teachers for the dissemination of literary -culture,--for the interpretation of Literature in the proper sense of -the term. Whether this is done competently or incompetently depends, of -course, and must depend purely on accident, on the willingness and -ability, that is to say, of individual teachers to educate themselves. -Common standards and common aims they have none. Each does what is right -in his own eyes. As some have graduated in the classical schools, some -in the Medival and Modern Languages Tripos, some in Modern History, -some in Moral Science or Theology, and some in nothing, there is -naturally much variety in their methods and aims. - -But it is when we turn to the works in modern Belles Lettres, and more -particularly to those dealing with English Literature, which the -University Presses publish, that we realize the full significance of -this anarchy. It would not be going too far to say, that all which is -worst in current literature, when at its worst finds in some of these -works comprehensive illustration. It is indeed almost an even chance -whether a work issuing from those Presses is excellent, whether it is -indifferent, or whether it is executed with shameful incompetence.[1] - -All, therefore, so far as Belles Lettres are concerned is chaos at the -Universities, and all consequently is chaos everywhere else. - -The next appeal--for all appeals to the Universities have been -vain--must be made to those who regulate the curriculums where -Literature is made a subject of teaching. Let them rigorously exclude -all but the best books. Let them discourage the study of such Epitomes, -Manuals, and Histories as are the work of mere irresponsible book -makers, and prescribe in its place the study of literary masterpieces. -Without excluding the best modern poetry and prose, let most -attention--for obvious reasons--be paid to the writings of the older -masters. Let them lay special stress on the study of criticism,--of -works treating of its principles, of works illustrating the application -of its principles to particular writers; and let no work be recognised -which is not of classical authority. Translations should, of course, as -a rule, be avoided; but in such a subject as the principles of -criticism, there is not the smallest reason why those works which are -most excellent in other languages, such as the _Treatise on the -Sublime_, and some portions of Aristotle's _Poetic_, such as Lessing's -_Laocoon_, Schiller's _Letters on sthetics_, the best Essays of -Sainte-Beuve should not be included.[2] Nor can it be emphasized too -strongly that the theory on which all literary teaching should proceed -is that its object is not so much to plant as to cultivate, not so much -to convey information, which, after all, is but its medium, as to -inspire, to refine, to elevate. I cannot but think, too, that the -foundations of all this might be laid much earlier than they are, -especially in our classical schools, by encouraging, as, according to -Coleridge, Dr. Boyer used to do, the study of some of our greater -writers, such as Shakespeare and Milton, side by side with that of Homer -and Sophocles. - -But it is in criticism, in criticism competently, honestly, and -fearlessly applied, that the chief salvation lies. There is probably no -review or newspaper in London which does not number among its -contributors men of the first order of ability and intelligence, men who -are real scholars and real critics, men who see through all that I have -been describing and are sick of it. Let them not remain an impotent -minority, but combine, and become influential. If popular Literature -aspires to be ambitious, and trespasses on the domains of scholarship -and criticism, let them submit it to the tests which it invites, let -them try it by the standards which it exacts. There is no more reason -for the co-existence of two standards, as is now practically the case, -in the production of writings treating of our own Literature than there -is in the production of writings dealing with Classical Literature. The -work of any one who meddles with the last, even in the way of -popularizing it, is instantly called by scholars to a strict account, -and sciolism and charlatanry are exploded at once. But in the case of -our own Literature there is no such solidarity. It seems to be assumed -that a scholar is one thing and a man of letters another, that the -difference between work which appeals to connoisseurs and work which -appeals to the public is not simply a difference in degree, but a -difference in kind, and that the criteria of the multitude need be the -only criteria of what is addressed to the multitude. The manuscript of a -History of Greek or Roman Literature, or a monograph on an ancient -classic, if it were not at least solid and trustworthy, would have no -chance of ever getting beyond a publisher's reader. But a History of -English Literature, or a monograph on an English classic, teeming with -errors in fact and with absurdities in theory and opinion, will not -improbably be regarded as an authority, and pass, unrevised, into more -than one edition. - -The progressive degradation of Literature and of what is involved in its -influence is, and must be, inevitable, unless criticism is prepared -watchfully and faithfully to do its duty. Let it guard jealously the -standards and touchstones of excellence as distinguished from -mediocrity, even though it may be prudent to make great allowances in -applying them; let it institute a rigorous censorship over books -designed for the use of students at the Universities and in other -educational establishments; let it permit no writer to pose in a false -position, and deliberately trade on the ignorance and inexperience of -his readers; let it discourage in every way the production of worthless -and superfluous books, whether in poetry or in prose; and lastly, while -fully recognising how much must be conceded to professional authors -writing against time, having to court popularity or being fettered by -conditions imposed on them by their employers, let it take care that -their productions shall at least not be mischievous, either by -disseminating error or by corrupting taste. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 1: One illustration of the indifference of the authorities of -our University Presses to the interest of Literature is so scandalous -that it must be specified. Fourteen years ago a series of lectures was -delivered by the then Clarke Lecturer in the Hall of Trinity College, -Cambridge. They were afterwards published under the title of _From -Shakespeare to Pope_, and reviewed in the _Quarterly Review_ for -October, 1886. The lectures, as the Review showed, absolutely swarmed -with blunders, many of them so gross as to be almost incredible. Ever -since then the volume has been circulated by the Press, absolutely -unrevised, indeed without a single correction, and is now in -circulation.] - -[Footnote 2: Cf. what Milton says in prescribing the study of -masterpieces in criticism: "This would make them (students) soon -perceive what despicable creatures our common rimers and play-writers -be, and show them what religious, what glorious and magnificent use -might be made of poetry, both in Divine and human things. From hence, -and not till now, will be the right season of forming them to be able -writers and composers in every excellent matter, when they shall be thus -fraught with an universal insight into things."--_Tractate on -Education._] - - - - -ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES - -I. LANGUAGE _VERSUS_ LITERATURE AT OXFORD - - -To say that the anarchy which has resulted from confusing the -distinction between the study and interpretation of Literature as the -expression of art and genius, and its study and interpretation as a mere -monument of language, has had a most disastrous effect on education -generally, would be to state very imperfectly the truth of the case. It -has led to inadequate and even false conceptions of what constitutes -Literature. It has led to all that is of essential importance in -literary study being ignored, and all that is of secondary or accidental -interest being preposterously magnified; to the substitution of -grammatical and verbal commentary for the relation of a literary -masterpiece to history, to philosophy, to sthetics; to the mechanical -inculcation of all that can be imparted, as it has been acquired, by -cramming, for the intelligent application of principles to expression. -It has led to the severance of our Literature from all that constitutes -its vitality and virtue as an active power, and from all that renders -its development and peculiarities intelligible as a subject of -historical study. In a word, it has led to a total misconception of the -ends at which literary instruction should aim, as well as of its most -appropriate instruments and methods. All this is illustrated nowhere -more strikingly than in the publications of the two great University -Presses. It would be easy to point to editions of English classics, and -to works on English Literature, bearing the _imprimatur_ of Oxford and -Cambridge, in which all that is worst in the opposite extremes of -pedantry and dilettantism finds ludicrous expression. - -And in thus speaking we are saying nothing more than is notorious, -nothing more than is admitted, and admitted unreservedly, in the -Universities themselves, or at least at Oxford. But different sections -of Academic society regard the matter in different lights. The majority -of the classical professors and teachers, deprecating any attempt on the -part of the University to meddle with "Literature," treat the whole -thing as a joke, and, so far from supposing that the reputation of the -University is concerned, find infinite amusement in the constant -exposures which are being made in the reviews and newspapers of the -absurdities of the "English Literature party." They regard the "study -of Literature" precisely as they regard the University Extension -Movement--the one as a contemptible excrescence on our Academic system, -the other as a contemptible excrescence on Academic curricula. Another -section takes a very different view. Recognising the reasonableness of -the appeals which have, during the last twelve years, been made to -Oxford to place the study of Literature on the same sound footing as she -has placed that of other subjects included in her courses, and -discerning clearly that what is required cannot be obtained as long as -the interests of Philology and those of Literature continue to collide, -this party, unhappily a small minority, has pleaded for the -establishment of a School of Literature. They have very properly laid -stress on four points: First, that, as the chief justification for the -establishment of such a School is the fact that the University is -undertaking by innumerable agencies, its Press, its oral teachers both -at home and abroad, to disseminate liberal instruction through the -medium of English Literature, the principal object of the School should -be the education of these agencies. Secondly, they have insisted that, -if the interpretation of Literature is to effect what it is of power to -effect, if, as an instrument of political instruction, it is to warn, to -admonish, to guide, if, as an instrument of moral and sthetic -instruction, it is to exercise that influence on taste, on tone, on -sentiment, on opinion, on character--on all, in short, which is -susceptible of educational impression--it must both be properly defined -and liberally studied; and they contend that, if it is to be so defined -and so studied outside the Universities, it must first be so defined and -so studied within. Thirdly, they insist that the study of our own -Literature should be associated with that of ancient classical -literature, for two indisputable reasons: first, because the basis of -all liberal literary culture, of a high standard, must necessarily rest -on competent classical attainments, and because, historically speaking, -the development and characteristics of the greater part of what is most -valuable in our Literature would be as unintelligible, without reference -to the Greek and Roman classics, as the Literature of Rome would be -without reference to that of Greece. Fourthly, they point out that, as -our Literature is, in various intimate ways, associated with the -Literatures of Italy, France, and Germany, and that, as an acquaintance -with the classics of those countries must form an essential element in a -literary education, the comparative study of those Literatures and our -own ought, by all means, to be encouraged and provided for. And, -fifthly, they show that what is demanded is perfectly feasible. There -already exists in the University, they contend, every facility for -organizing such a course of Literature as is required. All that is -needed is co-ordination. In the Classical Moderations and in the -_Liter Humaniores_ Honour Schools a liberal literary education on the -classical side is already provided; two-thirds in fact of the -discipline, culture, and attainments desiderated in a literary teacher -it is the aim of those Schools to impart. The Taylorian Institute -provides instruction in the languages and literatures of the Continent; -and, if its professors could be roused into a little more activity, a -youth might, in two years, if he pleased,--and that side by side with -his severer studies--acquire something more than a superficial -acquaintance with the language and writings of Dante and Machiavelli, of -Montaigne and Molire, of Lessing and Goethe. What he could not obtain -would be instruction and guidance in the study of our own Literature. In -a word, all that is required to secure what this party plead for is -simply the establishment of a School of English Literature, in the -proper acceptation of the term, and the co-ordination of studies which -are at present pursued independently. It was proposed that it should -take the form of a Post-graduate Honour School, standing in the same -relation to the other schools in the University as the old Law and -History School used to stand to the old _Liter Humaniores_ School, and -as the examination for the Bachelorship in Civil Law now stands to the -ordinary Law School. Thus a youth who had graduated in honours in -Moderations and in the Final Classical School, who had studied modern -literatures at the Taylorian and our own Literature under its -professor, or even by himself, would have an opportunity of displaying -his qualifications for an honour diploma in Literature. But the appeals -and arguments of this party have been of no avail. - -Next come the philologists. They are in possession of the field. All the -revenues supporting the Chairs of Language and Literature are their -monopoly. They have steadily resisted all attempts on the part of what -may be denominated the Liberal party to encroach on their dominions. In -their eyes the Universities are simply nurseries for esoteric -specialists, and to talk of bringing them into touch with national life -is, in their estimation, mere cant. Their attitude towards Literature, -generally, is precisely that of the classical party towards our own -Literature; they regard it simply as the concern of men of letters, -journalists, dilettants, and Extension lecturers. They defeated sixteen -years ago an attempt to establish a Chair of English Literature by -transforming it into a Chair of Language and securing it for themselves. -They attempted, subsequently, to supplement what they had done by the -establishment of a School of Language on the model of the Medival and -Modern Languages Tripos at Cambridge. They were defeated by a coalition -of the classical party, the Liberals, of whom we have just spoken, and a -third party which insisted on a compromise between Philology and -Literature. Reviving the scheme, they have, by accepting the -modifications of the compromisers, just succeeded in getting it -accepted. The new School of English Language and Literature is the -result of that compromise. - -Now it will not be disputed that if the Universities ought, in the -interests of liberal culture, to provide adequately for instruction in -Literature, they ought also, in the interests of science, to provide -adequately for instruction in Philology. It is a branch of learning of -immense importance. It is, and ought to be, the peculiar care of -Universities, and nothing could be more derogatory to a University than -deficiency in such a study. But it is a study in itself. As a science it -has no connection with Literature. Indeed the instincts and faculties -which separate the temperament of the mathematician from the temperament -of the poet are not more radical and essential than the instincts and -faculties which separate the sympathetic student of Philology from the -sympathetic student of Literature. But no science resolves itself more -easily into a pseudo-science, and it is in this degenerate form that it -has become linked with Literature and been, in all ages, the butt of -wits and men of letters. Nothing but anarchy can result till this -mutually degrading alliance be dissolved. It has been forced on the -philologists by the compromise to which reference has been made. Let -them be free to rescind it. Let the "pia vota" of Professor Max Mller -be fulfilled and Oxford have her School of Philology. That such a School -should be established is desirable for three reasons. In the first -place, it would define what is at present vague and indeterminate, the -scope and functions of Philology. Secondly, it would place that study on -its proper footing, and, by placing it on its proper footing, it would -not only demonstrate its relation to other studies, but it would enable -it to effect fully what it is competent to effect. Thirdly, it might, -and probably would, do something to relieve Oxford of the opprobrium of -being behind the rest of the learned world in this branch of science. -The School would probably not attract many students, for Philology, -unlike Literature, can never appeal to more than a small minority. If, -therefore, the choice lay between the institution of a School of -Philology and that of a School of Literature, there can be no doubt -which should have precedence. But no such choice is offered. If the -philologists were not strong enough to refuse to compromise, they are -strong enough to crush any attempt to forestall them. - -Let us now turn to the constitution of the School which has been the -result of this arrangement, and which will authorize the University to -confer, not, be it remembered, an ordinary, but an honour, degree in -English Language and Literature. The following are the Regulations. The -subjects for examination are four. 1. Portions of English authors. 2. -The History of the English Language. 3. The History of English -Literature. 4. In the case of those candidates who aim at a place in the -first or second class, a Special Subject of language or literature. The -portions of the authors specified are these. _Beowulf_, the texts -printed in Sweet's _Anglo-Saxon Reader_, _King Horn_, _Havelok_; -Laurence Minot, _Sir Gawain and the Green Knight_. Of Chaucer's -_Canterbury Tales_, the _Prologue_, _The Knight's Tale_, _The Man of -Law's_, _The Prioress's_, _Sir Thopas_, _The Monk's_, _The Nun -Priest's_, _The Pardoner's_, _The Clerk's_, _The Squire's_, _The Second -Nun's_, _The Canon Yeoman's_. Next come the _Prologue_ and the first -seven _passus_ (text B) of _Piers Ploughman_. Then come select plays of -Shakespeare, chosen apparently at haphazard, _Love's Labour's Lost_, -_Romeo and Juliet_, _Richard the Second_, _Twelfth Night_, _Julius -Csar_, _Winter's Tale_, _King Lear_. Then we have the following -extraordinary farrago:-- - -Bacon's _Essays_. - -Milton, with a special study of _Paradise Lost_ and the _Areopagitica_. - -Dryden's _Essay on Epic_ (sic). - -Pope's _Satires and Epistles_. - -Johnson's _Lives of the Poets_--the Lives of Eighteenth-Century Poets. - -Goldsmith's _Citizen of the World_. - -Burke's _Thoughts on the Present Discontents_. - -Lyrical Ballads (Wordsworth and Coleridge), Shelley's _Adonais_.[3] - -The second part of the examination will be on the History of the English -Language. "Candidates will be examined in Gothic (the Gospel of St. -Mark), and in translation from Old English and Middle English authors -not specially offered." - -This is to be followed by the History of English Literature, to which -portion of the Regulations the following odd clause is appended: "the -examination will include the History of Criticism and of style in prose -and verse." Last come the special subjects designed for "those who aim -at a place in the First or Second Class." Six of these consist of -certain prescribed periods of English Literature. The other subjects are -as follows:-- - -(1) Old English Language and Literature down to 1150 A.D. - -(2) Middle English Language and Literature, 1150-1400 A.D. - -(3) Old French Philology with special reference to Anglo-Norman French, -together with a special study of the following texts:--_Computus of -Phillippe de Thaun_, _Voyage of St. Brandan_, _The Song of Dermot and -the Earl_, _Les Contes moraliss de Nicole Bozon_. - -(4) Scandinavian Philology, with special reference to Icelandic, -together with a special study of the following texts:--_Gylfaginning_, -_Laxdla Saga_, _Gunnlaugssaga Ormstungu_. - -(5) French Literature down to 1400 A.D. in its bearing on English -Literature. - -(6) Italian Literature as influencing English down to the death of -Milton. - -(7) German Literature from 1500 A.D. to the death of Goethe in its -bearing on English Literature. - -(8) History of Scottish Poetry. - -Such is the scheme which will, in conjunction with the similar scheme at -Cambridge, supply England and the colonies with their literary -professors. Let us examine it in detail. The first thing which strikes -us is the contrast between the competence and judgment displayed in the -organization of the philological part of the course and the confusion, -inadequacy, and flimsiness so conspicuous in the literary part. Nothing -could be more satisfactory than the provisions made for the study of -Language. They are obviously the work of legislators who knew what they -were about, and who, but for the thwarting requirements of the -provisions for Literature, would have proceeded to a superstructure -worthy of the foundation. A student who, in addition to having mastered -the prescribed works in Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, and Middle English, is -competent to translate and comment on unprepared passages from those -dialects, has certainly laid the foundation of sound scholarship in an -important department of Philology. In the fact that what properly -belongs to his study has been relegated to the subjects out of which he -has only the option of choosing one, we have a lamentable illustration -of the effects of the compromise forced on the philologists. If, for the -literary portion of the curriculum, a candidate could substitute the -first four of the special subjects, he would have completed a thoroughly -satisfactory course of Philology, so far at least as relates to the -Teutonic and Romance languages. - -But to pass from what concerns Philology to what concerns Literature. -Now in considering this point it is necessary to remember that we are -not dealing with the regulations of any subordinate institution or -curriculum, with provincial Universities and seminaries, or with schemes -of study in which Literature is only one out of many subjects. We are -dealing with a Final Honour School at Oxford, with regulations which -will inevitably form a precedent and model wherever the study of English -literature shall be organized in Great Britain. We are dealing with a -school which is to educate those who are to educate the country. -Nothing, therefore, could be more disastrous than unsoundness and -deficiency in the provisions of such an institution, nothing more -deplorable than its giving countenance and authority to error and -inadequacy. It is not too much to say that, if this scheme had been -designed with the express object of degrading the standard of literary -teaching, and of perpetuating all that is worst in present systems, it -could hardly have been better adapted for its purpose. Not to dwell upon -subordinate defects, it completely severs the study of our own -literature from that of the ancient classical literatures. It -necessitates no knowledge of any of the Continental literatures. It -ignores absolutely the higher criticism. Contracting Literature within -the narrowest bounds, its selection of books for special study is worthy -of an Army Examination. In the wretched jumble in which Goldsmith's -_Citizen of the World_ jostles Shelley's _Adonais_ and Burke's _Thoughts -on the Present Discontents_ Wordsworth's and Coleridge's _Lyrical -Ballads_, no attempt is made to discriminate between compositions which -are representative, either critically of the work of particular authors, -or historically of particular epochs, and works which have no such -significance, while many of the most important departments of our prose -Literature are unrepresented. Nor is this all. It affords every facility -for cramming. It is adapted to test nothing but what may be -mechanically acquired and mechanically imparted, what may be poured out -from lectures into notebooks, and from notebooks into examination -papers. Proceeding on the assumption that a literary education is merely -the acquisition of positive knowledge, it neither requires nor -encourages, as the prescription of an essay or thesis, or even -"taste-paper," might have done, any of the finer qualities of literary -culture, such, for example, as a sense of style, sound judgment, good -taste, the touch of the scholar. We can assure these legislators, and we -speak from knowledge, that, setting aside the philological portion of -this curriculum, which is, so far as it goes, solid enough, an -experienced crammer, would, in about three months furnish an astute -youth with all that is requisite for graduating in this school. - -But to proceed to details. Conceive the qualifications of an interpreter -and critic of English Literature, a graduate in Honours in his subject, -whose education has proceeded on the hypothesis that he need have no -acquaintance with the classics of Greece and Rome. Would any competent -scholar deny that the history of English Literature, in its mature -expression, is little less than the history of the modifications of -native genius and characteristics by classical influence, that the -development and peculiarities of our epic, dramatic, elegiac, didactic, -pastoral, much of our lyric, of our satire and of other species of our -poetry is, historically speaking, unintelligible without reference to -ancient classical literature? That what is true of our poetry is true of -our criticism, of our oratory, sacred and secular, of our dialectic and -epistolary Literature, of our historical composition, of the greater -part, in short, of our national masterpieces in prose? What, indeed, the -Literature of Greece was to that of Rome, the Literatures of Greece and -Rome have been to ours.[4] - -It was the influence of schylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Menander, -Diphilus, which transformed the _Ludi Scenici_ and the Atellan farces -into the tragedies of Ennius and Pacuvius and the comedies of Plautus -and Terence. It was the influence of the Roman drama and of a drama -modelled on the Roman which transformed, so far at least as structure -and style are concerned, our similarly rude native experiments into the -tragedies and comedies of Shakespeare. On the epics of Greece were -modelled the epics of Rome, and on the epics of Greece and Rome are -modelled our own great epics. Of our elegiac poetry, to employ the term -in its conventional sense, one portion is largely indebted to -Theocritus, Moschus, and Virgil, and another to Catullus and Ovid. -Almost all our didactic poetry is modelled on the didactic poetry of -Rome. Theocritus and Virgil have furnished the archetypes for our -eclogues and pastorals. One important branch of our lyric poetry springs -directly from Pindar, another important branch directly from Horace, -another directly from the choral odes of the Attic dramatists and of -Seneca. Our heroic satire, from Hall to Lord Lytton, is simply the -counterpart--often, indeed, a mere imitation--of Roman satire. And if -this is true of our satire, it is equally true of our best ethical -poetry. The Epistles, which fill so large a space in the poetical -literature of the seventeenth and eighteenth century, derive their -origin from those of Horace. To the _Heroides_ of Ovid we owe a whole -series of important poems from Drayton to Cawthorn. The Greek anthology -and Martial have furnished the archetypes of our epigrams and of our -epitaphs. It is the same with our prose. The history of English -eloquence begins from the moment when the Roman classics moulded and -coloured our style, when periodic prose was modelled on Cicero and Livy, -when analytic prose was modelled on Sallust, Seneca, and Tacitus. With -the exception of fiction, there is no important branch of our prose -composition, the development and characteristics of which are -historically intelligible without reference to the ancients. How -radically inadequate must any study of the principles of criticism be, -which has no reference to the critical works of the Greek and Roman -writers, is obvious. But it is not merely in tracing the development and -explaining the peculiarities generally of our prose and of our poetry -that competent classical scholarship is indispensable. Is it not -notorious that in each generation, from Spenser to Tennyson, from More -to Froude, our leading poets and prose writers have been, with very few -exceptions, men nourished on classical literature and saturated with its -influence? Many entire masterpieces, much, and in some cases the greater -portion, of other masterpieces, particularly in our poetry, are simply -unintelligible--we are speaking, of course, of serious critical -students--except to classical scholars. Take, for example, the _Faerie -Queen_, and the _Hymns_ of Spenser, Milton's _Paradise Lost_, _Comus_, -_Lycidas_, and _Samson Agonistes_, Pope's satires, the two great odes -of Gray, Collins's odes to _Fear_ and the _Passions_, Wordsworth's great -_Ode_ and his _Laodamia_, Shelley's _Adonais_ and _Prometheus Unbound_, -Landor's _Hellenics_, much of the poetry of Tennyson, Browning, and -Matthew Arnold. Indeed it would be as preposterous to attempt any -critical study of our Literature, without reference to the ancients, as -it would be for a man to set up as an interpreter in Roman Literature -without reference to the Greek. - -And the effect of this severance of the study of the ancient classics -from the study of our own is written large throughout the whole domain -of education, in the instruction given in schools and institutes, in the -monographs, manuals, and "editions" which pour from scholastic presses. -In one of the most popular manuals now in circulation, the writer -gravely tells us that "the pastoral name of _Lycidas_ was chosen by -Milton to signify purity of character," adding "in Theocritus a goat was -so called +leukitas+ for its whiteness," that Comus "the drinker -of human blood" revelled in the palace of Agamemnon.[5] Another writer -confounds the "choruses" in Shakespeare with the choruses of the Greek -plays. Another, commenting on the symbolism of ivy in the wreath of a -poet, tells us that it indicates "constancy."[6] Nothing is more common -than to find elaborate critical comments on the _Faerie Queen_ without -the smallest reference to its connection with Aristotle's _Ethics_, and -on Wordsworth's great _Ode_ without any reference to Plato. But such is -the confidence reposed in Professor Earle and his theory, and so -determined are the legislators for the new School to exclude all -connection with classical literature, that it is not admitted even as a -special subject. A candidate has, as we have seen, the option of -studying the influence exercised on old English literature by French, -and on later literature by Italian and German; but the one thing which -he has not the option of studying is the influence exercised on it by -the literatures of Greece and Rome. Some of our readers may remember -that a few years ago a public appeal was made for an expression of -opinion on the question of associating the study of our own classics and -that of the ancients. Opinions were elicited from many of the most -distinguished men in England. They were all but unanimous, not merely in -supporting the association, but in deprecating the severance. So wrote -Mr. Gladstone, Cardinal Manning, Professor Jowett, Matthew Arnold, Lord -Lytton, Mr. John Morley, Walter Pater, Addington Symonds; so wrote the -Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London, the Rector of -Lincoln, the President of Magdalen, the Warden of All Souls, and many -others. We may add, also--for we are now at liberty to state it -publicly--that this was emphatically the opinion of Robert Browning. We -cannot, of course, quote these opinions _in extenso_,[7] and that of the -late Professor Jowett and a portion of that of Mr. John Morley must -suffice. - - I am as strongly of opinion that in an Honour School of English - Literature or Modern Literature the subject should not be - separated from classical literature, as I am of opinion that - English literature should have a place in our curriculum. - -So writes Professor Jowett. - - It seems to me to be as impossible effectively to study English - literature, except in close association with the classics, as - it would be to grasp the significance of medival or modern - institutions without reference to the political creations of - Greece and Rome. I should be very sorry to see the study of - Greek and Latin writers displaced, or cut off from the study of - our own. - -So writes Mr. John Morley. - -But the Professor of Anglo-Saxon and his friends, as we have seen, think -otherwise, and have, unhappily for the interests of letters and -education, persuaded Oxford to think otherwise too. We say advisedly the -interests of letters and education. For the precedent of excluding from -a School of "Literature," and that at the chief centre and nursery of -liberal culture, the Literatures of Greece and Rome cannot but be -detrimental to the vitality and influence of the ancient classics; and, -as Froude truly observed, both the national taste and the tone of the -national intellect would suffer serious decline, if they lost their -authority. The reaction against philological study which has set in -during the last ten years has given them a new lease of life. But the -spirit of the age is against them; they have rivals in languages far -easier to acquire; they are not, and never can be, in touch with the -many. Let them become disassociated from our curriculums of Literature, -and they will cease to be influential, They will cease to be studied -seriously, to be studied even in the original, except by mere scholars. - -Another absurdity, not less monstrous, in these regulations, is the -absence of all provision for instruction in the principles of criticism. -There is indeed an unmeaning clause about the history of criticism, and -of style in verse and prose, being included in the examination; but as -nothing is specified, and as no work on criticism, with the exception of -Dryden's _Discourse on Epic Poetry_, and Johnson's _Lives_ (of -eighteenth-century poets),[8] is included in the books prescribed for -special study, it is plain that this important subject has no place. Why -it should not have occurred to these legislators to substitute, say, for -Goldsmith's _Citizen of the World_ and Burke's _Thoughts on the Present -Discontents_, some work which would at least have opened the eyes of the -literary professors of the future to the existence of philosophical -criticism, is certainly odd. Had they prescribed select essays from -Hume; and Shaftesbury's _Advice to an Author_, or Campbell's _Philosophy -of Rhetoric_, or Burke's _Treatise on the Sublime and Beautiful_, or -even the critical portions of Coleridge's _Biographia Literaria_, with -the two essays of Wordsworth, it would have been something. But the -truth is that, as they have excluded, except from the optional subjects, -all literatures but the English, one absurdity has involved them in -another. The course for the literary education of our future professors, -proceeding on the principle that they need know no language but Gothic -and Anglo-Saxon, has necessitated the elimination of all the great -masterpieces of critical literature. As they are assumed to know no -Greek, they can have no serious instruction in such works as Aristotle's -_Poetic_ and _Rhetoric_, and in the _Treatise on the Sublime_. As they -are assumed to know no Latin, they can have no instruction in Roman -criticism. On the same principle such works as Lessing's _Laocoon_ and -_Hamburgische Dramaturgie_, Schiller's sthetical Letters and Essays, -Villemain's Lectures, and Sainte-Beuve's Essays, can find no place in -their curriculum of study. And so it comes to pass that Dryden's -_Discourse on Epic Poetry_ and Johnson's _Lives_ of the -eighteenth-century poets, represent--_proh pudor!_--the course in -Criticism. - -Now it is not too much to say that, for a University like Oxford to -confer an honour degree in English Literature on a student who need -never have read a line of the works to which we have referred, is to -authorize not simply superficiality, but sheer imposture. How can a -teacher deal adequately even with the subject which these regulations -profess to include--the history of criticism--who need have no -acquaintance with the _Poetic_ and _Rhetoric_, the _Treatise on the -Sublime_, and the _Institutes of Oratory_? How could a teacher possibly -be a competent exponent and critic of the masterpieces of our -literature, who had not received a proper critical training, and how -could he have any pretension to such a training when all that is best -in criticism had been expressly excluded from his education? - -It may be urged that he would himself supply these deficiencies, that -the study of our own Literature would naturally lead him to the study of -other Literatures, that intelligent curiosity, ambition, or a sense of -shame would induce him to supplement voluntarily, and by his own -efforts, what he needed in his profession. In some instances this would -undoubtedly be the case. In the great majority of instances such a -supposition would be against all analogy. As a general rule, a high -honour degree in any subject represented at the Universities is final. -It winds a man up for life. It determines, fixes, and colours his -methods, his views, his tone, in all that relates to the subject in -which he has graduated. If he chooses teaching as a profession, he has -no inducement to correct, to modify, or even materially add to what has -been imparted to him, for his scholastic reputation has been made, and a -comfortable independence is assured. To very many men, indeed, who go up -to the Universities with the intention of following teaching as a -profession, a high degree is a mere investment, the one instinct in them -which is not quite banausic being the conscientious thoroughness with -which they impart what they have been taught. Nothing, therefore, is of -more importance to education than the sound constitution of the Honour -Schools of Oxford and Cambridge, and nothing could be more disastrous -than the toleration in those Schools of inadequate standards, and of -palpably erroneous theories of study. - -But to return to the Regulations. The ridiculous disproportion between -the ground covered and the work involved in the different "special -subjects" open to the option of candidates, would seem to indicate, -either that the regulators are very inadequately informed on those -subjects, or that divided counsels have resulted in the settlement of -very different standards of requirement. Compare, for instance, what is -involved respectively in such subjects as "English Literature between -1700 and 1745," and "The History of Scottish Poetry." Why, a competent -knowledge of the history of Scotch poetry in the fifteenth century alone -would be more than an equivalent to the first subject. Not less absurd -is the prescription of "English Literature between 1745 and 1797" as an -alternative for "English Literature between 1558 and 1637." The -prescription of such "special subjects" as the influence exercised on -our Literature by the Literatures of Italy, Germany, and France, is one -of the few steps in a wise direction discernible in these regulations; -but, as no student is free to take more than one of them, or required to -take any of them at all, their inclusion in no way affects the -constitution of the School. A competent literary education is not very -much furthered by a student being invited to study how our Literature -has been affected by one out of the five Literatures which have -influenced it. As, moreover, the integrity of a chain depends on its -weakest link, so the efficiency of examinational tests, in their -application to purely optional subjects, depends on that subject in the -list which involves least labour. A candidate who can "get a first" out -of "English Literature between 1700 and 1745," or between 1745 and 1797, -will be much too wise to attempt to "get a first" out of subjects which -will require treble the time and labour to master. Is it likely that -candidates, anxious, naturally, from less lofty motives than the love of -Literature for its own sake, to obtain an honour degree, will, after -laboriously acquiring Anglo-Saxon and Middle English, which are -compulsory, voluntarily specialize in a subject requiring a knowledge of -Italian and German, when it is open to them to choose, as their special -subject, "Old English Language and Literature down to 1150"? - -The statute authorizing the foundation of this School recites that in -its curriculum and examinations "equal weight" is, "as far as possible, -to be given to Language and Literature, provided always that candidates -who offer special subjects shall be at liberty to choose subjects -connected either with Language or Literature, or with both." It would -be interesting to know what this means. If by "equal weight" be meant -equality in the proportions of what is prescribed for the study of -Literature, and what is prescribed for the study of Language, the -provision is stultified by the very constitution of the course. To -suppose that the history of English Literature, and the special study of -a few particular works like Shelley's _Adonais_, Burke's _Present -Discontents_, and the _Lyrical Ballads_, is equivalent to the History of -the English language, the Gospel of St. Mark in Gothic, the _Beowulf_, -and a volume of extracts in Anglo-Saxon, _King Horn_, _Havelok_, _Sir -Gawain_, and the prologue and seven _passus_ of _Piers Ploughman_ in -Middle English, is palpably absurd. If by "equal weight" be meant that -an examiner is to assign equal marks to candidates who distinguish -themselves in Literature, and to candidates who distinguish themselves -in Language, it involves gross injustice. For while the latter have -every opportunity for displaying knowledge and competence, the former -have not. If a student has literary tastes and sympathies, if he is -conversant with the Classics, if, attracted by what is best not merely -in our own but in other modern Literatures, he has indulged himself in -their study, if he has made himself a good critic and acquired a good -style, what chance has he of doing his attainments and accomplishments -justice? But if it be meant that "equal weight" will be given, not to -literary merit regarded as Sainte-Beuve and Matthew Arnold would regard -it, but regarded in relation to the standard indicated by the -regulations of the School, then the philologists would have just reason -to complain. - -As the constitution of this School is still open to amendment, it is -devoutly to be hoped that Oxford will see its way to reconsidering a -matter so seriously affecting the interests of education and culture. It -is neither too late to remedy what has been done, nor to devise a -remedy. Let it be remembered that there is an essential distinction -between what should constitute an Honour School and what should -constitute a Pass School, between what is to educate those who are to -educate others, and what guarantees nothing more than a smattering. The -present institution could be reformed in two ways. By reducing the -philological part of its provisions to the level of the literary part, -it could, with a little further simplification, be made into an -excellent Pass School, which would supply a real want. By eliminating -the literary part, and adding proportionately to the philological, it -could be transformed into a perfectly satisfactory Honour School of -Modern Languages. But no modification could make it into an Honour -School of English Literature correspondingly adequate, for the simple -reason that the study of English Literature cannot be isolated from the -study of those literatures with which it is inseparably linked. The -absurdity of assuming that the student of Philology could separate a -single language or dialect from the group to which it belongs, that he -could isolate Anglo-Saxon from Gothic, or Middle English from -Anglo-Saxon, the Celtic of the Cymbry from the Celtic of the Gaels, is -not greater than to assume that the study of our Literature can be -severed from the study of those literatures which stand in precisely the -same relation to it as one of those dialects stands to the others in the -same group. - -If the legislators of this School decline to reform it, then it is the -duty of Oxford--a duty which she owes alike to education and to her own -honour--to counteract the mischief which this institution must, by -degrading throughout England and the colonies the whole level of liberal -instruction and study on its most important side, inevitably do. To the -herd of imperfectly and erroneously disciplined teachers which this -institution will turn loose on education, let her oppose, at least, a -minority which shall worthily represent her. Let her establish a proper -degree or diploma in Literature. There exist, as we have already said, -scattered throughout the various institutions of the University, nearly -all the facilities for a complete course in this subject, and nothing -more is needed than to encourage and render possible their -co-ordination. Let it be open to a man who has obtained a high class in -Moderations and in the Final Classical Schools, who has availed himself -of the opportunities offered for the study of Modern Languages and -Literatures in the Taylorian Institute, and who has studied what he -would at present have to study for himself, our own Literature--let it -be open to him to present himself for examination in these subjects, and -to obtain, as the result of such an examination, a degree analogous to -the Bachelorship of Civil Law. It would no doubt not be possible for -these studies to be pursued, systematically, side by side with the work -required for a high class in Moderations and _Liter Humaniores_. Nor is -it necessary. There need be no limit assigned to the time at which a -candidate would be free to qualify himself for obtaining this diploma. -As a general rule it would probably be about six months, possibly a -year, after the attainment of the present degree in Arts. And, -considering the high prizes open to teachers in Literature, it would be -well worth a student's while to spend this additional time in preparing -himself for the examination. If a post-graduate scholarship, analogous -to the Craven or the Derby scholarships, could be founded for the -encouragement of a comparative study of Classical and Modern Literature, -an important step would, at any rate, be taken in a right direction; -something would be done for the competent equipment of future Professors -of Literature. - -Thus would a precedent, disastrous beyond expression to the interests of -liberal instruction and culture, as well as to the reputation of the -University--we mean the severance of the study of Classical Literature -from that of our own--be at least deprived of its authority. Thus would -the mass at any rate be leavened, and such institutions in the provinces -and elsewhere as have, unlike Oxford and Cambridge, had the wisdom to -separate their Chairs of Language and Literature, know where to go for -those who should fill them; and thus, finally, would there be some -chance of the literary curriculum in Oxford ceasing to be a by-word in -the Universities of the Continent and America. - - Since the first edition of these essays appeared the liberality - of Mr. John Passmore Edwards has supplied the scholarship here - desiderated, and Oxford has instituted a University - scholarship, bearing the donor's name, "for the encouragement - and promotion of the study of English Literature in connection - with the Classical Literatures of Greece and Rome." - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 3: For the sort of textbook from which the student who is a -candidate for "honours in English" will be required to get his knowledge -of this poem, see _infra_, the review of the Clarendon Press Edition of -Shelley's _Adonais_.] - -[Footnote 4: The Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford, one of the chief -legislators for the new School, thinks otherwise, and we should like to -place the following passage on record. In his extraordinary _History of -English Prose_ (p. 485) he writes thus: "The idea that English -literature rests upon a classical basis has been formulated and -industriously circulated as the watchword of a pedantic faction, and -hardly any organ of current literature has proved itself strong enough, -or vigilant enough, to secure itself against the insidious entrance of -the above indoctrination." And so it comes to pass that we read in the -account of the debate in Congregation, on the occasion of the former -attempt to establish this School:-- - -"The proposal to add the Professors of Greek and Latin to the Board of -Studies was rejected by thirty-eight votes to twenty-four, Professor -Earle maintaining that the fallacious notion that English literature was -derived from the classics was so strong that it was unwise to place even -the Professor of Latin on the Board."--_Times_, May 26, 1887.] - -[Footnote 5: - - +kai mn pepks g', hs thrasynesthai pleon, - broteion aima, kmos en domois menei - dyspemptos ex xyngonn Erinyn.+ - - --_Agamem._, 1159-61. -] - -[Footnote 6: For ample illustration of this, see _infra_ the review of -the Clarendon Press edition of Shelley's _Adonais_.] - -[Footnote 7: They may all be found in full in a _Pall Mall "Extra"_ -(January, 1887), and in the present writer's _Study of English -Literature_.] - -[Footnote 8: It is amusing to notice how carefully the greater part of -what is most precious and instructive in Johnson's work, the lives -namely of Cowley and Dryden, and the noble critique of _Paradise Lost_, -is expressly excluded, and the greater part of what is most trivial, and -regarded by himself as trivial, the lives of the minor poets of the -eighteenth century, selected instead. Macaulay ranks the lives of Cowley -and Dryden, with that of Pope, as the masterpieces of the work; and -Johnson himself considered the life of Cowley to be the best.] - - - - -ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES[9] - -II. TEXT BOOKS - -[Footnote 9: Shelley's _Adonais_, edited with introduction and notes by -William Michael Rossetti. (Oxford: at the Clarendon Press.)] - - -If any proof were needed of what has been insisted on over and over -again, that, until the Universities provide adequately for the proper -study of English Literature--for the study of it side by side with -Classical Literature--there will be small hope of its finding competent -critics and interpreters, it would be afforded by the volume before us. -For this volume the delegates of the Oxford University Press are -responsible; and in allowing it their _imprimatur_ they have been guilty -of a very grave error. No such standard of editing would have been -tolerated in any other subject in which they undertake to provide books. -A work pertaining to Classics, to History, to Philosophy, to Science, -marked by corresponding deficiencies, would have been suppressed at -once, until those deficiencies had been supplied. To Mr. Rossetti -himself we attach no blame. What he was competent to do he has, for the -most part, done well and conscientiously,--conscientiously, as may be -judged from the fact that, while the poem itself occupies twenty pages -in large type, Mr. Rossetti's dissertations and notes occupy one hundred -and twenty-eight in small type. It was, indeed, his misfortune, rather -than his fault, to be entrusted with a work which required a peculiar -qualification, an intimate acquaintance, that is to say, with Classical -Literature. That he has no pretension to this is abundantly plain from -his Introduction and from every page of his notes. - -When one of the Universities undertakes to provide our colleges and -schools with comments and notes on a poem so saturated with classicism -as _Adonais_, the least that could be expected from bodies who are, as -it were, the guardians of classical literature, is the provision that -the classical part of the work should be done at least competently; it -would be hardly too much, perhaps, to expect that it should be done -excellently. Of this part of Mr. Rossetti's work we scarcely know which -are the worse--his sins of commission or his sins of omission. His -classical qualifications for commenting on a poem as unintelligible, -critically speaking, without constant reference to the Platonic -dialogues, particularly to the _Symposium_ and the _Timus_, and to the -Greek poets, as the _neid_ would be without reference to the Homeric -poems and the _Argonautica_ of Apollonius, appear to begin and end with -some acquaintance with Mr. Lang's version of Bion and Moschus. We will -give a few specimens. Mr. Rossetti is greatly puzzled with Shelley's -allusion to Urania in stanzas 2 to 4. - - "Where was lone Urania - When Adonais died?" - - "Most musical of mourners, weep again. - Lament, anew, Urania!" - -"Why out of the nine sisters," he asks, "should the Muse of Astronomy be -selected? Keats never wrote about astronomy." Perhaps, he suggests, -Shelley was not thinking of the Muse Urania, "but of Aphrodite Urania." -Yet, if so, why should she be called "musical"?--a question to be asked, -no doubt, as our old friend Falstaff would say. However, after balancing -the respective claims of both, he finally comes to the conclusion that -the Urania of _Adonais_ is Aphrodite. If Mr. Rossetti had been -acquainted with a work to which he never even refers, but which -exercised immense influence over Shelley's poem--the _Symposium_ of -Plato--it would have saved him two pages of speculation. His ignorance -of this is the more surprising as Shelley has himself translated the -dialogue. But Mr. Rossetti need not, in this case, have gone so far -afield. Has he never read the prologue to the seventh book of Milton's -_Paradise Lost_? In his note on the lines-- - - "The one remains, the many change and pass," - -it is really pitiable to find him supposing that this is an allusion to -"the universal mind," and "the individuated minds which we call human -beings," when any schoolboy could have told him that the allusion is, of -course, a technical one to the Platonic "forms" or archetypes; while -"the power" in stanza 42, the "sustaining love" in stanza 54, and the -"one spirit" in stanza 43, are allusions respectively to the Aphrodite -Urania in the discourse of Eryximachus in the _Symposium_, and to the -Divine Artificer in the _Timus_. And these dialogues form the proper -commentary on Shelley's metaphysics in this poem. - -Still more extraordinary is Mr. Rossetti's note on "wisdom the mirrored -shield"-- - - "What was then - Wisdom, the mirrored shield?" - -(st. 27), which is as follows: "Shelley was, I apprehend, thinking of -the _Orlando Furioso_ of Ariosto (!). In that poem we read of a magic -shield which casts a supernatural and intolerable splendour ... a sea -monster, not a dragon, so far as I recollect, becomes one of the victims -of the mirrored shield." This slovenly and perfunctory mode of reference -is, we may remark in passing, hardly the sort of thing to be expected -in works issued from University Presses. We wonder what the Universities -would say to an editor of Virgil who, in commenting on some Homeric -allusion in his author, contented himself with observing that Virgil "is -here thinking of the _Iliad_," and, "so far as I can recollect," etc. -The reference is, we need hardly remark, not to any magic shield in the -_Orlando_, but to the _scutum crystallinum_ of Pallas Athene, as any -well-informed fourth-form schoolboy would know. If Mr. Rossetti will -turn to Bacon's _Wisdom of the Ancients_, chap. vii., he will find some -information on this subject, which may be of use to him, should this -work run into a second edition. Take, again, the note on the symbolism -of the flowers and cypress cone in stanza 33:-- - - "His head was bound with pansies overblown, - And faded violets, white and pied and blue; - And a light spear topped with a cypress cone, - Round whose rude shaft dark ivy tresses grew." - -Here the editor's ignorance of ancient Classical Literature has led him -into a whole labyrinth of blunders and misconceptions. "The ivy," he -says, "indicates constancy in friendship"! Is it credible that a -Clarendon Press editor should be ignorant that ivy--_doctarum heder -prmia frontium_--is the emblem of the poet? The violet, he remarks, -indicates modesty. It neither indicates, nor can possibly indicate, -anything of the kind. Its traditional signification, deduced perhaps -from Pliny's remark (_Nat. Hist._, xxi. c. 38), that it is one of the -longest-lived of flowers, is fidelity. But the passage of which Shelley -was thinking when he wrote this stanza--a passage to which Mr. Rossetti -makes no reference at all, was _Hamlet_, act iv. sc. 1: "There is -pansies that's for thoughts.... I would give you some violets, but they -withered all when my father died." So that it is quite possible that the -"faded violets," associated as these flowers are with the Muses and the -Graces, merely symbolize the fading and drooping towards what may be -further symbolized in the cypress cone,--death. We are by no means sure, -however, that the cypress cone does, as Mr. Rossetti remarks, "explain -itself." Shelley, assuming he gave the image another application, was -doubtless thinking of Silvanus--"teneram ab radice ferens, Silvane, -cupressum," _Georg._ i. 20 (see, too, Spenser's _Faerie Queene_, I. vi. -st. 14), and may possibly have been symbolizing his sympathy with the -genius of the woods--have been referring to that "gazing on Nature's -naked loveliness," which he describes in stanza 31. In any case, Mr. -Rossetti has entirely misinterpreted the meaning of the whole passage. - -Wherever classical knowledge is required--as it is in almost every -stanza--he either gives no note at all, or he blunders. Thus in stanza -24 he gives no note on the use of the word "secret." In stanza 28 he has -evidently not the smallest notion of the meaning of the word "obscene" -as applied to ravens. The fine adaptations from _Lucretius_ (II. -578-580) in stanza 21, and again from II. 990-1010 in stanzas 20 and 42; -the adaptation from the _Agamemnon_ (49-51) in stanza 17; from the -fragments of the _Polyidus_ of Euripides in stanza 39; from the _Iliad_ -(vi. 484) in stanza 34; from Theocritus, _Idyll._, i. 66, and Virg., -_Ecl._, x. 9-10 in stanza 2; and again from Theocritus, _Idyll._, i. 77 -seqq., from which the procession of the mourners is adapted, and on -which the whole architecture of the poem is modelled--all these are -alike unnoticed. Nor is Mr. Rossetti more fortunate in explaining -allusions to passages in other literatures. The adaptation of the -sublime passage in Isaiah (xiv. 9, 10), by which one of the finest parts -of the poem was suggested, stanzas 45 and 46; the singular reminiscence -in stanza 28:-- - - "The vultures - ... Whose wings rain contagion;" - -of Marlowe's _Jew of Malta_, act ii. sc. 1, where he speaks of the raven -which - - "Doth shake contagion from her sable wings;" - -the obvious reminiscence of Dante, _Inf._, 44 seqq. in stanza 44; of -Shakespeare's _Romeo and Juliet_, v. 3, which forms the proper -commentary on lines 7 and 8 of stanza 3; of none of these is any notice -taken. On many important points of interpretation we differ _toto -coelo_ from Mr. Rossetti. The "fading splendour," for example, in -stanza 22, cannot possibly mean "fading as being overcast by sorrow and -dismay" (cf. stanza 25), it simply means vanishing, receding from -sight--a magnificently graphic epithet. Is Mr. Rossetti acquainted with -the proleptic use of adjectives and participles? We may add that Mr. -Rossetti has not even taken the trouble to ascertain who was the writer -of the famous article, of which so much is said both in the preface of -the poem and in the poem itself, but "presumes," etc. _Et sic omnia._ -And _sic omnia_ it will inevitably continue to be, until the -Universities are prepared to do their duty to education by placing the -study of our national Literature on a proper footing. - -It is, we repeat, no reproach to Mr. Rossetti, who has distinguished -himself in more important studies than the production of scholastic -text-books, that he should have failed in an undertaking which happened -to require peculiar qualifications. Indeed, our respect for Mr. Rossetti -and our sense of his useful services to Belles Lettres would have -induced us to spare him the annoyance of an exposure of the deficiencies -of this work, had it not illustrated, so comprehensively and so -strikingly, the disastrous effects of the severance of the study of -English Literature from that of Ancient Classical Literature at our -Universities. - - - - -ENGLISH LITERATURE AT THE UNIVERSITIES[10] - -III. TEXT BOOKS - -[Footnote 10: _Shakespeare--Select Plays. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark_ -(Oxford: at the Clarendon Press. MDCCCXC.)] - - -More than a century and a half has passed since Pope thus expressed -himself about philologists,-- - - "'Tis true on words is still our whole debate, - Dispute of _Me_ or _Te_, of _aut_ or _at_, - To sound or sink in _Cano_ O or A, - To give up Cicero or C or K; - The critic eye, that microscope of wit, - Sees hairs and pores, examines bit by bit; - How parts relate to parts or they to whole, - The body's harmony, the beaming soul, - Are things which Kuster, Burmann, Wasse shall see, - When man's whole frame is obvious to a _Flea_." - -We need scarcely say that we have far too much respect for Dr. Aldis -Wright and for his distinguished coadjutor to apply such a description -as this to them as individuals, for no one can appreciate more heartily -than we do their monumental contribution to the textual criticism of -Shakespeare, but we can make no such reserve in speaking of this edition -of _Hamlet_. A more deplorable illustration, we do not say of the -subjection of Literature to Philology, for that would very imperfectly -represent the fact, but of the absolute substitution of Philology, and -of Philology in the lowest sense of the term, for Literature it would be -impossible to imagine. Had it been expressly designed to prove that its -editors were wholly unconscious of the artistic, literary, and -philosophical significance of Shakespeare's masterpiece, it could -scarcely have taken a more appropriate form. - -The volume contains 117 pages of Shakespeare's text, printed in large -type; the text is preceded by a preface of twelve pages, and followed by -notes occupying no less than 121 pages in very small type; so that the -work of the poet stands in pretty much the same relation to that of his -commentators as Falstaff's bread stood to his sack. In the case of a -play like _Hamlet_, so subtle, so suggestive, so pregnant with critical -and philosophical problems of all kinds, commentary on a scale like this -might have been quite appropriate. But in this stupendous mass of -exegesis and illustration there is, with the exception of one short -passage, literally not a line about the play as a work of art, not a -line about its structure and architecture, about its style, about its -relations to sthetic, about its metaphysic, its ethic, about the -character of Hamlet, or about the character of any other person who -figures in the drama. The only indication that it is regarded in any -other light than as affording material for philological and antiquarian -discussion is a short quotation, huddled in at the conclusion of the -preface, from Goethe's _Wilhelm Meister_, and an intimation that -"Hamlet's madness has formed the subject of special investigation by -several writers, among others by Dr. Conolly and Sir Edward Strachey." - -A more comprehensive illustration of the truth of the indictment brought -against philologists by Voltaire, Pope, Lessing, and Sainte-Beuve than -is supplied by the notes in this volume it would be difficult to find. -Dulness, of course, may be assumed, and of mere dulness we do not -complain; but a combination of prolixity, irrelevance, and absolute -incapacity to distinguish between what to ninety-nine persons in every -hundred must be purely useless and what to ninety-nine persons in every -hundred is the information which they expect from a commentator, is -intolerable. We will give a few illustrations. A plain man or a student -for examination comes to these lines:-- - - "'Tis the sport to have the enginer - Hoist with his own petar;" - -and, though he knows what the general sense is wishes to know exactly -what Shakespeare means. He turns to the note for enlightenment, and the -enlightenment he gets is this:-- - - "_Enginer._ Changed in the quarto of 1676 to the more modern - form of engineer. Compare _Troilus and Cressida_ ii. 3. 8, - "Then there's Achilles a rare enginer." For a cognate form - mutiner see note on iii. 4. 83. So we have pioner for pioneer - _Othello_ iii. 3. 346. _Hoist_ may be the participle either of - the verb 'hoise' or 'hoist.' In the latter case it would be the - common abbreviated form for the participles of verbs ending in - a dental. _Petar._ So spelt in the quartos, and by all editors - to Johnson, who writes 'petards.' In Cotgrave we have 'Petart: - a Petard or Petarre; an Engine (made like a bell or morter) - wherewith strong gates,' etc."-- - -And so the hungry sheep looks up and is not fed. Again, he finds-- - - "He smote the sledded Polacks on the ice," - -turns to the note, and reads:-- - - "_Polacks._ The quartos have 'pollax,' the two earliest folios - read 'Pollax,' the third 'Polax,' the fourth 'Poleaxe.' Pope - read 'Polack' and Malone 'Polacks.' The word occurs four times - in _Hamlet_. For 'the sledded Polacks' Molke reads 'his leaded - pole-axe.' But this would be an anticlimax, and the poet, - having mentioned 'Norway' in the first clause, would certainly - have told us with whom the 'parle' was held." - -The poet Young noted how - - "Commentators each dark passage shun, - And hold their farthing candles to the sun." - -The Clarendon Press editors are certainly adepts in these -accomplishments. Take one out of a myriad illustrations. The line in Act -i. sc. 2, "The dead vast and middle of the night," is the signal for a -note extending to twelve closely printed lines. "'Tis bitter cold, and I -am sick at heart," says Francisco. If any note were needed here, it -might have been devoted to pointing out to tiros the fine subjective -touch. The note is this:-- - - "_Bitter cold._ Here bitter is used adverbially to qualify the - adjective 'cold.' So we have 'daring hardy' in _Richard II._ i. - 3. 43. When the combination is likely to be misunderstood, - modern editors generally put a hyphen between the two words. - _Sick at heart._ So _Macbeth_ v. 3. 19, 'I am sick at heart.' - We have also in _Love's Labour's Lost_ ii. 1. 185, 'sick at the - heart,' and _Romeo and Juliet_ iii. 3. 72, 'heart-sick - groans.'" - -Now let us see how the poor student fares when real difficulties occur. -Every reader of Shakespeare is familiar with the corrupt passage, Act -iv. sc. 1:-- - - "The dram of eale - Doth all the noble substance of worth out - To his own scandal-- - -a passage which, as all Shakespearian scholars know, has been -satisfactorily emended and explained. We turn to the notes for guidance, -and find ourselves treated as poor Mrs. Quickly was treated by Falstaff, -"fubbed off"--thus:-- - - "We leave this hopelessly corrupt passage as it stands in the - two earliest quartos. The others read 'ease' for 'eale,' and - modern writers have conjectured for the same word base, ill, - bale, ale, evil, ail, vile, lead. For 'of a doubt' it has been - proposed to substitute 'of worth out,' 'soul with doubt,' 'oft - adopt,' 'oft work out,' 'of good out,' 'of worth dout,' 'often - dout,' 'often doubt,' 'oft adoubt,' 'oft delase,' 'over-cloud,' - 'of a pound,' and others." - -This, it may be added, is the sort of stuff--_incredibile dictu_--that -our children have to get by heart; for this Press, be it remembered, -practically controls half the English Literature examinations in -England. As students know quite well that nine examiners out of ten will -set their questions from "the Clarendon Press notes," it is with "the -Clarendon Press notes" that they are obliged to cram themselves. But to -continue. Even a well-read man might be excused for not knowing the -exact meaning of the following expression:-- - - "They clepe us drunkards, and with _swinish phrase - Soil our addition_." - -He turns to the notes, and having been briefly informed that _clepe_ -means "call," and _addition_ "title," is left to flounder with what he -can get out of--"Could Shakespeare have had in his mind any pun upon -'Sweyn,' which was a common name of the kings of Denmark?" - -Another leading characteristic of the _genus_ philologist, we mean the -preposterous importance attached by them to the smallest trifles, finds -ludicrous illustration in the following note:-- - - "My father, in his habit, as he lived!" - -exclaims Hamlet to his mother. This is the signal for:-- - - "There is supposed to be a difficulty in these words, because - in the earlier scenes the Ghost is in his armour, to which the - word 'habit' is regarded as inappropriate. In the earlier form - of the play, as it appears in the quarto of 1603, the Ghost - enters 'in his nightgowne,' and as the words 'in the habit as - he lived' occur in the corresponding passage of that edition, - it is probable that on this occasion the Ghost appeared in the - ordinary dress of the king, although this is not indicated in - the stage directions of the other quartos or of the folios." - -As a possible solution of this grave difficulty, we would suggest that, -as the Ghost was undoubtedly in a very hot place, he might have found -his nightgown less oppressive than his armour, and though it would -certainly have been more decorous to have exchanged his nightgown for -his uniform on revisiting the earth, yet, as the visit was to his wife, -he thought perhaps less seriously about his apparel than our editors -have done. We have nothing to warrant us in assuming that he was in his -"ordinary dress." The choice must lie between the nightgown and the -armour. But a truce to jesting. - -If any one would understand the opacity and callousness which -philological study induces, we would refer them to the note on Hamlet's -last sublime words, "The rest is silence":-- - - "The quartos have 'Which have solicited, the rest is silence.' - The folios, 'Which have solicited. The rest is silence.' 'O, O, - O, O. _Dyes._' If Hamlet's speech is interrupted by his death - it would be more natural that the words 'The rest is silence' - should be spoken by Horatio." - -We said at the beginning of this article that there was not a word of -commentary on the poetical merits of the play. We beg the editors' -pardon. They have in one note, and in one note only, ventured on an -expression of critical opinion. We all know the lines-- - - "There is a willow grows aslant a brook - That shows his hoar leaves in the glassy stream," - -etc., etc. We transcribe the note on this passage that it may be a sign -to all men of what Philology is able to effect, an omen and testimony of -what must inevitably be the fate of Literature if the direction and -regulation of its study be entrusted to philologists:-- - - "This speech of the Queen is certainly unworthy of its author - and of the occasion. The enumeration of plants is quite as - unsuitable to so tragical a scene as the description of Dover - cliff in _King Lear_ iv. 6. 11-24. Besides there was no one by - to witness the death of Ophelia, else she would have been - rescued." - -As this beggars commentary, transcription shall suffice. - -Now we would ask any sensible person who has followed us, we do not say -in our own remarks--for they may be supposed to be the expression of -biassed opinion--but in the specimens we have given of such an edition -as this of _Hamlet_, and of such an edition as we have just reviewed of -_Adonais_, what is likely to be the fate of English Literature, as a -subject of teaching, so long as our Universities ignore their -responsibilities as the centres of culture by not only countenancing, -but assisting in the production and dissemination of such publications -as these? How can we expect anything but anarchy wherever the subject -is treated?--there an extreme of flaccid dilettantism, here an extreme -of philological pedantry. Conceive the tone and temper which, especially -at the impressionable age of the students for whom the book is intended, -the study of Shakespeare, under such guides as the editors of this -_Hamlet_, would be likely to induce. Is it not monstrous that young -students between the ages of about fifteen and eighteen should have such -text books as these inflicted on them? - -The radical fault of those who regulate education in our Universities -and elsewhere, and prescribe our schoolbooks, is their deplorable want -of judgment. They seem to be utterly incapable of distinguishing between -what is proper for pure specialists and what is proper for ordinary -students. There is not a page in this edition which does not proclaim -aloud, that it could never have been intended for the purposes to which -it has been applied, that it is the work of technical scholars, -concerned only in textual and philological criticism and exegesis, and -appealing only to those who approach the study of Shakespeare in the -same spirit and from the same point of view. Anything more sickening and -depressing, anything more calculated to make the name of Shakespeare an -abomination to the youth of England it would be impossible for man to -devise. It is shameful to prescribe such books for study in our Schools -and Educational Institutes. - - - - -OUR LITERARY GUIDES - -I. A SHORT HISTORY OF ENGLISH LITERATURE[11] - -[Footnote 11: _A Short History of English Literature._ By George -Saintsbury, Professor of Rhetoric and English Literature in the -University of Edinburgh.] - - -This Short History is evidently designed for the use of serious readers, -for the ordinary reader who will naturally look to it for general -instruction and guidance in the study of English Literature, and to whom -it will serve as a book of reference; for students in schools and -colleges, to many of whom it will, in all likelihood, be prescribed as a -textbook; for teachers engaged in lecturing and in preparing pupils for -examination. Of all these readers there will not be one in a hundred who -will not be obliged to take its statements on trust, to assume that its -facts are correct, that its generalizations are sound, that its -criticisms and critical theories are at any rate not absurd. It need -hardly be said that, under these circumstances, a writer who had any -pretension to conscientiousness would do his utmost to avoid all such -errors as ordinary diligence could easily prevent, that he would guard -scrupulously against random assertions and reckless misstatements, that -he would, in other words, spare no pains to deserve the confidence -placed in him by those who are not qualified to check his statements or -question his dogmas, and who naturally suppose that the post which he -occupies is a sufficient guarantee of the soundness and accuracy of his -work. But so far from Professor Saintsbury having any sense of what is -due to his position and to his readers, he has imported into his work -the worst characteristics of irresponsible journalism: generalizations, -the sole supports of which are audacious assertions, and an indifference -to exactness and accuracy, as well with respect to important matters as -in trifles, so scandalous as to be almost incredible. - -Sir Thomas More said of Tyndale's version of the New Testament that to -seek for errors in it was to look for drops of water in the sea. What -was said very unfairly of Tyndale's work may be said with literal truth -of Professor Saintsbury's. The utmost extent of the space at our -disposal will only suffice for a few illustrations. We will select those -which appear to us most typical. In the chapter on Anglo-Saxon -literature the Professor favours us with the astounding statement, that -in Anglo-Saxon poetry "there is practically no lyric."[12] It is -scarcely necessary to say that not only does Anglo-Saxon poetry abound -in lyrics, but that it is in its lyrical note that its chief power and -charm consists. In the threnody of the _Ruin_, and the _Grave_, in the -sentimental pathos of the _Seafarer_, of _Deor's Complaint_, and of the -remarkable fragment describing the husband's pining for his wife, in the -fiery passion of the three great war-songs, in the glowing subjective -intensity of the _Judith_, in the religious ecstasy of the _Holy Rood_ -and of innumerable passages in the other poems attributed to Cynewulf, -and of the poem attributed to Cdmon, deeper and more piercing lyric -notes have never been struck. Take such a passage as the following from -the _Satan_, typical, it may be added, of scores of others:-- - - "O thou glory of the Lord! Guardian of Heaven's hosts, - O thou might of the Creator! O thou mid-circle! - O thou bright day of splendour! O thou jubilee of God! - O ye hosts of angels! O thou highest heaven! - O that I am shut from the everlasting jubilee, - That I cannot reach my hands again to Heaven, - ... Nor hear with my ears ever again - The clear-ringing harmony of the heavenly trumpets."[13] - -And this is a poetry which has "practically no lyric"! On page 2 the -Professor tells us that there is no rhyme in Anglo-Saxon poetry; on page -18 we find him giving an account of the rhyming poem in the _Exeter -Book_. Of Mr. Saintsbury's method of dealing with particular works and -particular authors, one or two examples must suffice. He tells us on -page 125 that the heroines in Chaucer's _Legend of Good Women_ are "the -most hapless and blameless of Ovid's Heroides." It would be interesting -to know what connexion Cleopatra, whose story comes first, has with -Ovid's Heroides, or if the term "Heroides" be, as it appears to be, (for -it is printed in italics) the title of Ovid's Heroic Epistles, what -connexion four out of the ten have with Ovid's work. In any case the -statement is partly erroneous and wholly misleading. In the account -given of the Scotch poets, the Professor, speaking of Douglas' -translation of the _neid_, says, he "does not embroider on his text." -This is an excellent illustration of the confidence which may be placed -in Mr. Saintsbury's assertions about works on which most of his readers -must take what he says on trust. Douglas is continually "embroidering on -his text," indeed, he habitually does so. We open his translation purely -at random; we find him turning _neid_ II. 496-499:-- - - "Non sic, aggeribus ruptis cum spumeus amnis - Exiit, oppositasque evicit gurgite moles, - Fertur in arva furens cumulo, camposque per omnes - Cum stabulis armenta trahit." - - "Not sa fersly the fomy river or flude - Brekkis over the bankis on spait quhen it is wode. - And with his brusch and fard of water brown - The dykys and the schorys betis down, - Ourspreddand croftis and flattis wyth hys spate - Our all the feyldis that they may row ane bate - Quhill houssis and the flokkis flittis away, - The corne grangis and standard stakkys of hay." - -We open _neid_ IX. 2:-- - - "Irim de coelo misit Saturnia Juno - Audacem ad Turnum. Luco tum forte parentis - Pilumni Turnus sacrat valle sedebat. - Ad quem sic roseo Thaumantias ore locuta est." - -We find it turned:-- - - "Juno that lyst not blyn - Of hir auld malyce and iniquyte, - Hir madyn Iris from hevin sendys sche - To the bald Turnus malapart and stout; - Quhilk for the tyme was wyth al his rout - Amyd ane vale wonnder lovn and law, - Syttand at eys within the hallowit schaw - Of God Pilumnus his progenitor. - Thamantis dochter knelys him before, - I meyn Iris thys ilk fornamyt maide, - And with hir rosy lippis thus him said." - -We turn to the end of the tenth _neid_ and we find him introducing six -lines which have nothing to correspond with them in the original. And -this is a translator who "does not embroider on his text"! It is -perfectly plain that Professor Saintsbury has criticised and commented -on a work which he could never have inspected. The same ignorance is -displayed in the account of Lydgate. He is pronounced to be a versifier -rather than a poet, his verse is described as "sprawling and -staggering." The truth is that Lydgate's style and verse are often of -exquisite beauty, that he was a poet of fine genius, that his -descriptions of nature almost rival Chaucer's, that his powers of pathos -are of a high order, that, at his best, he is one of the most musical of -poets. We have not space to illustrate what must be obvious to any one -who has not gone to encyclopdias and handbooks for his knowledge of -this poet's writings, but who is acquainted with the original. It will -not be disputed that Gray and Warton were competent judges of these -matters, and their verdict must be substituted for what we have not -space to prove and illustrate. "I do not pretend," Gray says, "to set -Lydgate on a level with his master Chaucer, but he certainly comes the -nearest to him of any contemporary writer that I am acquainted with. His -choice of expression and the smoothness of his verse far surpass both -Gower and Occleve." Of one passage in Lydgate, Gray has observed that -"it has touched the very heart strings of compassion with so masterly a -hand as to merit a place among the greatest poets."[14] Warton also -notices his "perspicuous and musical numbers," and "the harmony, -strength, and dignity" of his verses.[15] - -Turn where we will we are confronted with blunders. Take the account -given of Shakespeare. He began his metre, we are told, with the -lumbering "fourteeners." He did, so far as is known, nothing of the -kind. Again: "It is only by guesses that anything is dated before the -_Comedy of Errors_ at the extreme end of 1594." In answer to this it may -be sufficient to say that _Venus and Adonis_ was published in 1593, that -the first part of _Henry VI._ was acted on 3rd March, 1592, that _Titus -Andronicus_ was acted on 25th January, 1594, and that _Lucrece_ was -entered on the Stationers' books 9th May, 1594. This is on a par with -the assertion, on page 315, that Shakespeare was traditionally born on -24th April! On page 320 we are told that _Measure for Measure_ belongs -to the first group of Shakespeare's plays, to the series beginning with -_Love's Labour's Lost_ and culminating with the _Midsummer Night's -Dream_. It is only fair to say that the Professor places a note of -interrogation after it in a bracket, but that it should have been placed -there, even tentatively, shows an ignorance of the very rudiments of -Shakespearian criticism which is nothing short of astounding. Take, -again, the account given of Burke. Our readers will probably think us -jesting when we tell them that Professor Saintsbury gravely informs us -that Burke supported the American Revolution. Is the Professor -unacquainted with the two finest speeches which have ever been delivered -in any language since Cicero? Can he possibly be ignorant that Burke, so -far from supporting that revolution, did all in his power to prevent it? -The whole account of Burke, it may be added, teems with inaccuracies. -The American Revolution was not brought about under a Tory -administration. What brought that revolution about was Charles -Townshend's tax, and that tax was imposed under a Whig administration, -as every well-informed Board-school lad would know. Burke did not lose -his seat at Bristol owing to his support of Roman Catholic claims. If -Professor Saintsbury had turned to one of the finest of Burke's minor -speeches--the speech addressed to the electors of Bristol--he would have -seen that Burke's support of the Roman Catholic claims was only one, and -that not the most important, of the causes which cost him his seat. -Similar ignorance is displayed in the remark (p. 629) that "Burke -joined, and indeed headed, the crusade against Warren Hastings, in -1788." The prosecution of Warren Hastings was undertaken on Burke's sole -initiative, not in 1788, but in 1785. A few lines onwards we are told -that the series of Burke's writings on the French Revolution "began with -the _Reflections_ in 1790, and was continued in the _Letter to a Noble -Lord_, 1790." _A Letter to a Noble Lord_ had nothing to do with the -French Revolution, except collaterally as it affected Burke's public -conduct, and appeared, not in 1790, but in 1795. - -It seems impossible to open this book anywhere without alighting on some -blunder, or on some inaccuracy. Speaking (p. 277) of Willoughby's -well-known _Avisa_, the Professor observes that nothing is known of -Willoughby or of _Avisa_. If the Professor had known anything about the -work, he would have known that _Avisa_ is simply an anagram made up of -the initial letters of _Amans_, _vxor_, _inviolata semper amanda_, and -that nothing is known of Avisa for the simple reason that nothing is -known of the site of More's Utopia. On page 360 we are told that Phineas -Fletcher's _Piscatory Eclogues_, which are, of course, confounded with -his _Sicelides_, are a masque; on page 624, but this is perhaps a -printer's error, that Robertson wrote a history of Charles I. On page -482, John Pomfret, the author of one of the most popular poems of the -eighteenth century, is called Thomas. On page 550, Pope's _Moral -Essays_ are described as _An Epistle to Lord Burlington_, presumably -because the last of them, the fourth, is addressed to that nobleman. On -page 587 we are told that Mickle died in London: he died at Forest Hill, -near Oxford. On page 556 we are informed that Prior was part author of a -parody of the "Hind and Panther," and that he was "imprisoned for some -years." The work referred to is wrongly described, as it only contained -parodies of certain passages in Dryden's poem, and he was in confinement -less than two years. On page 358, Brutus, the legendary founder of -Britain, is actually described as the son of neas. If Professor -Saintsbury were as familiar as he affects to be with Geoffrey of -Monmouth, with Layamon and with the early metrical romances, he would -have known that Brutus is fabled to have been the son of Sylvius, the -son of Ascanius, and, consequently, the great-grandson of neas. Many of -the Professor's critical remarks can only be explained on the -supposition that he assumes that his readers will not take the trouble -to verify his references or question his dogmas. We will give one or two -instances. On page 468, speaking of seventeenth-century prose, he says, -with reference to Milton: "The close of the _Apology_ itself is a very -little, though only a very little, inferior to the _Hydriotaphia_." By -the _Apology_ he can only mean the _Apology for Smectymnuus_, for the -defence of the English people is in Latin. Now, will our readers credit -that one of the flattest, clumsiest and most commonplace passages in -Milton's prose writings, as any one may see who turns to it, is -pronounced "only a little inferior" to one of the most majestically -eloquent passages in our prose literature. That our readers may know -what Professor Saintsbury's notions of eloquence are, we will transcribe -the passage: - - "Thus ye have heard, readers, how many shifts and wiles the - prelates have invented to save their ill-got booty. And if it - be true, as in Scripture it is foretold, that pride and - covetousness are the sure marks of those false prophets which - are to come, then boldly conclude these to be as great seducers - as any of the latter times. For between this and the judgment - day do not look for any arch deceivers who, in spite of - reformation, will use more craft or less shame to defend their - love of the world and their ambition than these prelates have - done. And if ye think that soundness of reason or what force of - argument so ever shall bring them to an ingenuous silence, ye - think that which shall never be. But if ye take that course - which Erasmus was wont to say Luther took against the pope and - monks: if ye denounce war against their riches and their - bellies, ye shall soon discern that turban of pride which they - wear upon their heads to be no helmet of salvation, but the - mere metal and hornwork of papal jurisdiction; and that they - have also this gift, like a certain kind of some that are - possessed, to have their voice in their bellies, which, being - well drained and taken down, their great oracle, which is only - there, will soon be dumb, and the divine right of episcopacy - forthwith expiring will put us no more to trouble with tedious - antiquities and disputes." - -And this is "a very little, only a very little, inferior," to the -"Hydriotaphia"! - -On page 652, Swift's style, that perfection of simple, unadorned _sermo -pedestris_--is described as marked by "volcanic magnificence." On page -300 Hooker is described as "having an unnecessary fear of vivid and -vernacular expression." Vivid and vernacular expression is, next to its -stateliness, the distinguishing characteristic of Hooker's style. It -would be interesting to know what is meant by the remark on page 445 -that Barrow's style is "less severe than South's." Another example of -the same thing is the assertion on page 517 that Joseph Glanville is one -of "the chief exponents of the gorgeous style in the seventeenth -century." Very 'gorgeous' the style of the _Vanity of Dogmatizing_, of -its later edition the _Scepsis Scientifica_, of the _Sadducismus -Triumphatus_, of the _Lux Orientalis_, and of the Essays! - -Indeed, the Professor's critical dicta are as amazing as his facts. We -have only space for one or two samples. Cowley's _Anacreontics_ are "not -very far below Milton"(!) Dr. Donne was "the most gifted man of letters -next to Shakespeare." Where Bacon, where Ben Jonson, where Milton are to -stand is not indicated. Akenside's stilted and frigid _Odes_ "fall not -so far short of Collins." We wonder what Mr. Saintsbury's criterion of -poetry can be. But we forget, with that criterion he has furnished us. -On page 732, speaking of "a story about a hearer who knew no English, -but knew Tennyson to be a poet by the hearing," he adds that "the story -is probable and valuable, or rather invaluable, for it points to the -best if not the only criterion of poetry." And this is a critic! We -would exhort the Professor to ponder well Pope's lines: - - "But most by numbers judge a poet's song, - - * * * * * - - In the bright muse, tho' thousand charms conspire, - Her voice is all these tuneful fools admire, - Who haunt Parnassus but to please their ear." - -On page 734 we are told Browning's _James Lee_--the Professor probably -means _James Lee's Wife_--is amongst "the greatest poems of the -century." On Wordsworth's line, judged not in relation to its context, -but as a single verse--"Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting"--we -have the following as commentary: "Even Shakespeare, even Shelley have -little more of the echoing detonation, the auroral light of true -poetry"; very "echoing," very "detonating"--the rhythm of "Our birth is -but a sleep and a forgetting." Mr. Saintsbury's notions of what -constitutes detonation and auroral light in poetry appear to resemble -his notions of what constitutes eloquence in prose. Nothing, we may add -in passing, is more amusing in this volume than Mr. Saintsbury's cool -assumption of equality as a critical authority with such a critic as -Matthew Arnold, whom he sometimes patronises, sometimes corrects, and -sometimes assails. The Professor does not show to advantage on these -occasions, and he leaves us with the impression that if "Mr. Arnold's -criticism is piecemeal, arbitrary, fantastic, and insane," the criticism -which appears, where it is not mere nonsense, to take its touchstones, -its standards, and its canons from those of the average Philistine is, -after all, a very poor substitute. But enough of Mr. Saintsbury's -"criticism," which is, almost uniformly, as absurd in what it praises as -in what it censures. - -The style, or, to borrow an expression from Swift, what the poverty of -our language compels us to call the style, in which this book is -written, is on a par with its criticism. We will give a few examples. -"It is a proof of the greatness of Dryden that he knew Milton for a -poet; it is a proof of the smallness (and mighty as he was on some -sides, on others he was very small) of Milton that (if he really did so) -he denied poetry to Dryden."[16] "What the _Voyage and Travaile_ really -is, is this--it is, so far as we know, and even beyond our knowledge in -all probability and likelihood, the first considerable example of prose -in English dealing neither with the beaten track of theology and -philosophy, nor with the, even in the Middle Ages, restricted field of -history and home topography, but expatiating freely on unguarded plains -and on untrodden hills, sometimes dropping into actual prose romance and -always treating its subject as the poets had treated theirs in _Brut_ -and _Mort d'Arthur_, in _Troy-book_ and _Alexandreid_, as a mere canvas -on which to embroider flowers of fancy."[17] Again, "With Anglo-Saxon -history he deals slightly, and despite his ardent English -patriotism--his book opens with a vigorous panegyric of England, the -first of a series extending to the present day (from which an anthology -_De Laudibus Angli_ might be made)--he deals very harshly with Harold -Godwinson."[18] "He had a fit of stiff Odes in the Gray and Collins -manner." "_The Hind and Panther_ (the greatest poem ever written in the -teeth of its subject)". "His voluminous Latin works have been _tackled_ -by a special Wyclif Society." These are a few of the gems in which every -chapter abounds. - -Of Professor Saintsbury's indifference to exactness and accuracy in -details and facts we need go no further for illustrations than to his -dates. Such things cannot be regarded as trifles in a book designed to -be a book of reference. We will give a few instances. We are informed on -page 238 that Ascham's _Schoolmaster_ was published in 1568; it was -published, as its title-page shows, in 1570. Hume's _Dissertations_ -were first published, not in 1762, but in 1757. Bale's flight to -Germany was not in 1547, when such a step would have been unnecessary, -but in 1540. Pecock was, we are told, translated to Chichester in 1550, -exactly ninety years after his death! As if to perplex the readers of -this book, two series of dates are given; we have the dates in the -narrative and the dates in the index, and no attempt is made to -reconcile the discrepancies. Accordingly we find in the narrative that -Caxton was probably born in 1415--in the index that he was born in 1422; -in the narrative that Latimer, Fisher, Gascoign and Atterbury were born -respectively in 1489, in 1465, about 1537 and in 1672--in the index that -they were born respectively in 1485, 1459, 1525 and 1662; in the -narrative Gay was born in 1688--in the index he was born in 1685. In the -narrative Collins dies in 1756, and Mrs. Browning is born in 1806--in -the index Collins dies in 1759, and Mrs. Browning is born in 1809. The -narrative tells us that Aubrey was born in 1626, and John Dyer _circa_ -1688--in the index that Aubrey was born in 1624 and Dyer _circa_ 1700. -In the index Mark Pattison dies in 1884--in the narrative he dies in -1889. In Professor Saintsbury's eyes such indifference to accuracy may -be venial: in our opinion it is nothing less than scandalous. It is -assuredly most unfair to those who will naturally expect to find in a -book of reference trustworthy information. - -We must now conclude, though we have very far from exhausted the list of -errors and misstatements, of absurdities in criticism and absurdities in -theory, which we have noted. Bacon has observed that the best part of -beauty is that which a picture cannot express. It may be said, with -equal truth, of a bad book, that what is worst in it is precisely that -which it is most difficult to submit to tangible tests. In other words, -it lies not so much in its errors and inaccuracies, which, after all, -may be mere trifles and excrescences, but it lies in its tone and -colour, its flavour, its accent. Professor Saintsbury appears to be -constitutionally incapable of distinguishing vulgarity and coarseness -from liveliness and vigour. So far from having any pretension to the -finer qualities of the critic, he seems to take a boisterous pride in -exhibiting his grossness. - -If our review of this book shall seem unduly harsh, we are sorry, but a -more exasperating writer than Professor Saintsbury, with his -indifference to all that should be dear to a scholar, the mingled -coarseness, triviality and dogmatism of his tone, the audacious nonsense -of his generalisations, and the offensive vulgarity of his diction and -style--a very well of English defiled--we have never had the misfortune -to meet with. Turn where we will in this work, to the opinions expressed -in it, to the sentiments, to the verdicts, to the style, the note is the -same,--the note of the _Das Gemeine_. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 12: Page 37.] - -[Footnote 13: - - E l drihtenes rym! e l dugua helm! - e l meotodes miht! e l middaneard! - e l dg lehta! e l drem godes! - e l engla ret! e l upheofon! - e l t ic eam ealles les can dremes, - t ic mid handum ne mg heofon gercan - ne mid egum ne mt up lcian - ne hru mid erum ne sceal fre gehran - re byrhtestan bman stefne. - - --_Satan._ edit. Grein, 164-172. -] - -[Footnote 14: _Some Remarks on Lydgate._ Gray, Aldine Ed. v. 292-321.] - -[Footnote 15: That Lydgate's verse should occasionally be rough and -halting is partly to be attributed to the wretched state in which his -text has come down to us from the copyists, and partly to the arbitrary -way in which he varies the accent. His heroic couplets in the _Storie of -Thebes_ are certainly very unmusical. For the whole question of his -versification see Dr. Schick, Introduction to his edition of _The Temple -of Glas_, pp. liv.-lxiii., and Schipper, _Altenglische Metrik_, 492-500. -But neither of these scholars does justice to the exquisite music of his -verse at its best.] - -[Footnote 16: Page 474.] - -[Footnote 17: Page 150.] - -[Footnote 18: Page 63.] - - - - -OUR LITERARY GUIDES - -II. A SHORT HISTORY OF MODERN ENGLISH LITERATURE[19] - -[Footnote 19: _A Short History of Modern English Literature._ By Edmund -Gosse. London, 1898.] - - -The author of this work has plainly not pondered the advice of Horace, -"Sumite materiam vestris, qui scribitis, quam viribus." His ambitious -purpose is "to give the reader, whether familiar with books or not, a -feeling of the evolution of English Literature in the primary sense of -the term," and he adds that "to do this without relation to particular -authors and particular works seems to me impossible." This may be -conceded; for, a feeling of the evolution of English or of any other -literature, without reference to particular authors and particular -books, would be analogous to the capacity for feeling without anything -to feel. But, unfortunately, those of Mr. Gosse's readers who wish to -have the feeling to which he refers will merely find the conditions -without which, as he so justly observes, the said feeling is -impossible. In other words, references, in the form of loose and -desultory gossip, to particular authors and particular works -chronologically arranged, are all that represent the "evolution" of -which he is so anxious "to give a feeling." - -Described simply, the work is an ordinary manual of English Literature -in which, with Mr. Humphry Ward's _English Poets_, Sir Henry Craik's -_English Prose Writers_, Chambers' _Cyclopdia of English Literature_, -the _Dictionary of National Biography_, and the like before him, the -writer tells again the not unfamiliar story of the course of our -Literature from Chaucer to the present time. But Mr. Gosse is no mere -compiler, and brings to his task certain qualifications of his own, a -vague and inaccurate but extensive knowledge of our seventeenth, -eighteenth and nineteenth century Belles Lettres; and here, as a rule, -he can acquit himself creditably. Though far from a sound, he is a -sympathetic critic; he has an agreeable but somewhat affected style, and -can gossip pleasantly and plausibly about subjects which are within the -range indicated. But at this point, as is painfully apparent, his -qualifications for being an historian and critic of English Literature -end. The moment he steps out of this area he is at the mercy of his -handbooks; so completely at their mercy that he does not even know how -to use them. And it is here that Mr. Gosse becomes so irritating, partly -because of the sheer audacity with which mere inferences are -substituted for facts and simple assumptions for deduced -generalizations, and partly because of the habitual employment of -phraseology so vague and indeterminate that it is difficult to submit -what it conveys to positive test. These are serious charges to bring -against any writer; and if they cannot be abundantly substantiated, a -still more serious charge may justly be urged against the accuser. - -To turn to the work. On page 85 Mr. Gosse favours us with the following -account of the _Faerie Queene_: "A certain grandeur which sustains the -three great Cantos of Truth, Temperance, and Chastity fades away as we -proceed.... The structure of it is loose and incoherent when we compare -it with the epic grandeur of the masterpieces of Ariosto and Tasso." It -would be difficult to match this; every word which is not a blunder is -an absurdity. Where are "the three great Cantos"? Can Mr. Gosse possibly -be ignorant that the poem is divided into books, each book containing -twelve Cantos? Assuming, however, that he has confounded books with -Cantos, where is the great book dealing with 'Truth'? As he places it -before 'Temperance,' we presume that he means the first book and that he -has confounded 'Truth' with 'Holiness.' This is pretty well, to begin -with. Where, we next ask in amazement, is the 'grandeur' which sustains -the prolix farrago of the third book, and which 'fades away' as we -proceed to the only book which almost rivals the first and second, the -fifth, and the sublimest portion of the whole work, the superb Cantos -which represent all that remains of the seventh? What, we gasp, is the -meaning of the 'epic grandeur' of Ariosto? and "the loose and incoherent -structure" of the _Faerie Queene_ when compared with that of the -_Orlando Furioso_? Could any poem be more loose and incoherent in -structure than the _Orlando_, or any term be less appropriate to its -tone and style than 'grandeur'? On page 80 he actually tells us that -Fox's well-known _Book of Martyrs_ was written in Latin and translated -by John Day, and that it is John Day's translation of the Latin original -which represents that work, confounding Fox's _Commentarii Rerum in -Ecclesi gestarum_, etc., printed at Basil with the _Acts and Monuments -of the Church_, and making John Day, the publisher of it, the translator -of it into English! And this is his account of one of the most -celebrated works in our language. Of Swift's _Sentiments of a Church of -England Man_, we have the following account: "That such a tract as the -_Sentiments of a Church of England Man_, with its gusts of irony, its -white heat of preposterous moderation, led on towards Junius is -obvious." This is an excellent example of the confidence which may be -placed in Mr. Gosse's assertions. Of this pamphlet, it may be sufficient -to say that there is not a single touch of irony or satire in it; that -it stands almost alone among Swift's tracts for its perfectly temperate -and logical tone; it is a calm appeal to pure reason. There is the same -audacity of assertion in classing Feltham's _Resolves_ with Hall's and -Overbury's Character Sketches, and Earle's _Microcosmogonie_ as "a -typical example" of "a curious school of comic or ironic portraiture, -partly ethical and partly dramatic." In 1625, we are told that Bacon -completed the _Sylva Sylvarum_. If Mr. Gosse knew anything of Bacon's -philosophical writings, he would have known that the _Sylva Sylvarum_ -never was and never could have been completed, for it was in itself a -fragment--a mere collection of materials to be incorporated in the -_Phoenomena Universi_, a work which was to have been six times larger -than Pliny's _Natural History_. In giving an account of Tillotson, he -speaks of "the serene and insinuating periods" of the elegant -latitudinarian who "was assiduous in saying what he had to say in the -most graceful and intelligible manner possible." A more perfect -description of the very opposite of Tillotson's style could hardly be -given. Those who are acquainted with Fuller's writings will be equally -surprised to find him classed with Jeremy Taylor and Henry More, and to -learn that his style is 'florid and involved,' distinguished by its -'long-windedness' and 'exuberance.' Has Mr. Gosse no apprehension of his -readers turning to the originals and testing his statements? We have -another of these bold assertions in the account of Lydgate, derived, we -suspect, from a hasty generalization from a remark made about him in Mr. -Ward's _British Poets_. "Lydgate," says Mr. Gosse, "had a most defective -ear; his verses are not to be scanned. His ear was bad and tuneless." -Any one who has read Lydgate knows that, if we except his heroic -couplets, a more musical poet is not to be found in the fifteenth -century, or, indeed, in our language; the softness and smoothness of his -verse, wherever he writes in stanzas, as he generally does, is indeed -his chief characteristic. These remarks are minor illustrations of an -accomplishment in which Mr. Gosse has no rival. - -The Euphuists of the sixteenth century drew, for purposes of simile and -illustration, on a fabulous natural history which assumed the existence -of certain animals, herbs, and minerals, and of certain properties and -qualities possessed by them. This gave great point and picturesqueness -to their style, and though it was certainly misleading and occasionally -perplexing to those who went to them for natural history, it had a most -charming and imposing effect. Mr. Gosse seems to have imported a similar -fiction into criticism. Of this we have a most amusing illustration on -page 155. Speaking of Herrick Mr. Gosse remarks, "In the midst of these -extravagances, like Meleager winding his _pure white violets_"--the -Italics are ours--"into the _gaudy garland of late Greek Euphuism_, we -find Robert Herrick." Meleager's Anthology is not extant, but the -dedication is, and from that dedication we know exactly from what poets -it was compiled. It ranged from about B.C. 700 till towards the close of -the Alexandrian Age, for, with the exception of Antipater of Sidon, it -is very doubtful whether he inserted any epigrams by his contemporaries, -but he admitted a hundred and thirty-one of his own. In other words his -collection comprised epigrams composed by the masters preceding the -Alexandrian Age from Archilochus downwards, and by those who, during -that age and afterwards, cultivated with scrupulous care the simplicity -and purity of the early models. Indeed, the poets represented in his -Anthology are, with one exception, the artists of Greek epigram in its -purest, simplest, and chastest form. That one exception is himself. In -him are first apparent the _dulcia vitia_ of the Decadence; he is full -of dainty subtleties, he is almost more Oriental than Greek, his style -is luscious, elaborate and florid. Such, then, was the composition of -"the gaudy garland of late Greek Euphuism," and such the nature of the -"pure white violets" wound into it by Meleager. It is amusing to trace -Mr. Gosse's rodomontade to its source. In the well-known dedication to -which we have referred, Meleager prettily compares the various poets, -from whose works he selects, to flowers, speaking modestly of his own -contributions as "early white violets." To critics like Mr. Gosse the -rest is easy. Meleager, he no doubt argued, was an excellent poet; he -belonged to a late age: 'Euphuism'--a delightfully vague term, is likely -to characterise a late age; a poet who compares his verses to white -violets had evidently a taste for simplicity, and presumably, therefore, -was no Euphuist; a gaudy garland is an excellent set off for pure white -violets. And so, to the great perplexity of scholars, but to the great -satisfaction of those who enjoy a pretty sentence, Meleager will -continue "to wind his pure white violets into the gaudy garland of late -Greek Euphuism." - -We have a similar illustration of the same thing in Mr. Gosse's account -of Shaftesbury. We are told that he "was perhaps the greatest literary -force between Dryden and Swift"; that "he deserves remembrance as the -first who really broke down the barrier which excluded England from -taking her proper place in the civilization of literary Europe"; that -"he set an example for the kind of prose which was to mark the central -years of the century"; that "his style glitters and rings, and ... yet -so curious that one marvels that it should have fallen completely into -neglect"; that "he was the first Englishman who developed theories of -formal virtue, who attempted to harmonize the beautiful with the true -and the good"; that the modern attitude of mind seems to meet us first -in the graceful cosmopolitan writings of Shaftesbury; that "without a -Shaftesbury there would hardly have been a Ruskin or a Pater." Such -amazing nonsense almost confounds refutation by its sheer absurdity. - -With regard to the first statement, it may be sufficient to say that -between the period of Dryden's literary activity and the publication of -Swift's _Battle of the Books_ and _Tale of a Tub_ were flourishing -Hobbes, Izaak Walton, Bunyan, Temple, and Locke; that between the -publication of the _Tale of a Tub_ and of Shaftesbury's collected -writings were flourishing Addison, Steele, De Foe, Arbuthnot, Berkeley. -With regard to the second statement, it would be interesting to know how -a writer who had been preceded by Bacon, Hobbes and Locke, could be -described as a writer who had been the first "to break down the barrier -which excluded England from taking her proper place in the civilization -of literary Europe." The truth is, that Shaftesbury exercised no -influence at all on Continental Literature until long after our -Literature had generally become influential in France. Equally absurd -and baseless is the remark that he "set an example of the kind of prose -that was to mark the central years of the century." Whose prose was -affected by him? Bolingbroke's? or Fielding's? or Richardson's? or -Middleton's? or Johnson's? or Goldsmith's? or Hume's? or Hawkesworth's? -or Sterne's? or Smollett's? or Chesterfield's? that of the writers in -the _Monthly Review_? or in the _Adventurer_? or in the _World_? or in -the _Connoisseur_? To say of Shaftesbury's style that "it glitters and -rings," is to say what betrays utter ignorance of its characteristics. -As a rule, it is diffuse, involved, and cumbrous, affected, but with an -affectation which sedulously aims at the very opposite effects of -"glittering and ringing." When he is eloquent, as in the _Moralists_, he -imitates the style of Plato; his vice is florid verbosity; it may be -doubted whether a single sentence could be found to which Mr. Gosse's -description would be applicable. If, it may be added, his style had -"fallen completely into neglect," it is somewhat surprising that "he -should set an example for the kind of prose which was to mark the -central years of the century." When we are told that he was "the first -Englishman who attempted to harmonize the beautiful with the true and -the good," we ask in amazement whether Mr. Gosse has ever inspected the -_Hymns_ of Spenser and the writings of the Cambridge Platonists; and -when he tells us that without a Shaftesbury there would hardly have been -a Ruskin or a Pater, we would suggest to him that both Ruskin and Pater -were perhaps not ignorant of the Platonic Dialogues. In the account -given of Spenser, a poem is attributed to him which he never wrote. "In -one of his early pieces, _The Oak and The Briar_, went far," etc., the -oak and the briar is simply an episode in the second eclogue of the -_Shepherd's Calendar_. Mr. Gosse, probably finding it quoted in some -book of selections, has jumped to the conclusion that it is a separate -poem. Of Mr. Gosse's qualifications for dealing with Spenser, we have, -by the way, an excellent example in the following remark: "Spenser, -although he boasted of his classical acquirements, was singularly little -affected by Greek or even Latin ideas." Spenser's _Hymns_ in honour of -Love and in Honour of Beauty are simply saturated with Platonism, being -indeed directly derived from the _Phdrus_ and the _Symposium_, -numberless passages from which are interwoven with the poems. The whole -scheme of the _Faerie Queene_ was suggested by, and based on, -Aristotle's _Ethics_ with elaborate particularity, Arthur, in his -relation to the several knights, corresponding to the virtue -+megalopsychia+ in its relation to the other virtues. The conclusion of -the tenth canto of the first book is simply an allegorical presentation -of the relation of the +bios thertikos+ to practical life. The -"Castle of Medina" in the second book is a minutely technical exposition -of the Aristotelian doctrine of the mean, modified by the Platonic -theory of morals: the three mothers being the +logistik+, the -+epithymtik+, and +thymtik+, the three daughters, -Elissa, Perissa, and Medina, being respectively the Aristotelian -+elleipsis+, the +hyperbol+ and the +mesots+. In fact, -the whole passage is simply an allegory of the Aristotelian doctrine of -the mean. The whole of the ninth canto of the second book is founded on -the famous passage in the _Timus_ describing the anatomy of man. In -truth the poem teems with references to Plato and Aristotle, and with -passages imitated from the Greek poets, as every scholar knows. And this -is a poet "singularly little affected by Greek ideas!" - -The same astonishing ignorance is displayed in a remark about Milton. We -are told that in his youth he was "slightly subjected to influence from -Spenser." If Mr. Gosse had any adequate acquaintance with Milton and -Spenser, he would have known that Spenser was to Milton almost what -Homer was to Virgil, that Spenser's influence simply pervades his poems, -not his youthful poems only, but _Paradise Lost_ and even _Paradise -Regained_. On page 194 we find this sentence: "From 1660 onwards ... -what France originally, and then England, chose was the _imitatio -veterum_, the Literature in prose and verse which seemed most closely -to copy the models of Latin style. Aristotle and Horace were taken, not -merely as patterns, but as arbiters." It would be very interesting to -know what English author took Aristotle as a pattern for style. Is Mr. -Gosse acquainted with the characteristics of Aristotle's style? Should -he ever become so, he will probably have some sense of the immeasurable -absurdity of asserting that our prose writers from 1660 onwards took -that style for their model. On a par with this is the assertion that up -to 1605 Bacon had mainly issued his works in "Ciceronian Latin." Is Mr. -Gosse aware of the meaning of "Ciceronian Latin"? Very "Ciceronian" -indeed is Bacon's Latinity, and particularly that of the _Meditationes -Sacr_, the only work published in Latin by Bacon up to 1605! It is -scarcely necessary to say, in passing, that such works as Bacon had -published up to 1605 were, with the one exception referred to, all in -English. Nothing, it may be added, is so annoying in this book as its -slushy dilettantism. Mr. Gosse appears to be incapable of accuracy and -precision. Thus he tells us that Chaucer's expedition to Italy in 1372 -was "the first of several Italian expeditions." Chaucer, so far as is -known, visited Italy, after this, exactly once. Again, he tells us that -the _Complaint of Mars_ and the _Parliament of Fowls_ are interesting as -showing that Chaucer had completely abandoned his imitation of French -models. Chaucer wrote several poems in the pure French style, and based -on French models, after the date of these poems. Such would be the -Rondel _Merciless Beauty_ suggested by Williamme d'Amiens, the -_Compleynt of Venus_, partly adapted and partly translated from three -Ballades by Sir Otes de Graunson, and the _Compleynt to his Empty -Purse_, modelled on a Ballade by Eustache Deschamps, while French -influence continued to modify his work throughout. On page 238 we are -told that Thomson revived the Spenserian stanza; it had been revived by -Pope, Prior, Shenstone, and Akenside. On page 151 we are informed that -the first instalment of Clarendon's History remained unprinted till -1752, and the rest of it till 1759. If Mr. Gosse knew anything about one -of the most remarkable controversies of the eighteenth century, he would -have known that the greater part of it was printed and published between -1702 and 1704, and frequently reprinted between 1704 and 1731. - -There is not a chapter in the book which does not teem with errors. -Trissino's _Sofonisba_ was not the only work in which blank verse had -attained any prominence in Italy about 1515; it had been employed in -works equally prominent, by Rucellai in his _Rosmunda_, and in his -_Oreste_, as well as in his didactic poem _L'Api_, and by Alamanni in -his _Antigone_, all of which were composed within a few years of that -date. On page 120 we are told that Davies was the first to employ, on a -long flight, the heroic quatrain; it had been employed by Spenser in a -poem extending to nearly a thousand lines. Nor was Surrey's essay in -_terza rima_ "the earliest in the language." Chaucer made the same -experiment, though a little irregularly, in the _Compleynt to his Lady_. -We are told on page 79 that Gascoigne was "the first translator of Greek -tragedy." Gascoigne never translated a line from the Greek. His -_Jocasta_, to which presumably the reference is made, is simply an -adaptation of Ludovico Dolce's _Giocasta_. On page 25 we are informed -that "Gower's French verse has mainly disappeared." Gower is not known -to have written anything in French except the _Ballades_ and the -_Speculum Meditantis_, both of which are extant, as it is inexcusable in -any historian of English Literature not to know. The account given on -page 25 of the _Confessio Amantis_ shows that Mr. Gosse is very -imperfectly acquainted with what he so fluently criticises, or he would -have been aware that the seventh book is purely episodical and has -nothing whatever to do with "The lover's symptoms and experience." In -the account of Pope we are informed that "Boileau discouraged love -poetry and Pope did not seriously attempt it." Pope is the author of -the most famous love poem in the eighteenth century, _Eloisa to -Abelard_, to say nothing of the _Elegy to an Unfortunate Lady_, of the -beautiful hymn to Love in the second chorus in the tragedy of _Brutus_, -and the exquisite fragment supposed to have been addressed to Lady Mary -Wortley Montagu. "The satires of Pope," he continues, "would not have -been written but for those of his French predecessor." Can Mr. Gosse -possibly be ignorant that the satires of Pope are modelled on the -Satires and Epistles of Horace, that they owe absolutely nothing to -Boileau, not even the hint for applying Roman satire to modern times, as -he had precedents in his own countrymen Dryden and Rochester? - -Mr. Gosse's criticism is often very amusing, as here, speaking of -Gibbon: "Perhaps he leaned on the strength of his style too much, and -_sacrificed the abstract to the concrete_." Of all historians who have -ever lived, Gibbon is the most "abstract" and has most sacrificed the -"concrete" to the "abstract," as every student of history knows. On a -par with this is the prodigious statement (p. 291) that there is "an -absence of emotional imagination" in Burke! That excellent man, Mr. -Pecksniff, was, we are told, in the habit of using any word that -occurred to him as having a fine sound and rounding a sentence well, -without much care for its meaning; "and this," says his biographer "he -did so boldly and in such an imposing manner that he would sometimes -stagger the wisest people and make them gasp again." This is precisely -Mr. Gosse's method. About the propriety of his epithets and statements, -so long as they sound well, he never troubles himself; sometimes they -are so vague as to mean anything, as often they have no meaning at all, -as here: "His [that is Shelley's] style, carefully considered, is seen -to rest on a basis built about 1760, from which it is every moment -springing and sparkling, like a fountain, in columns of ebullient -lyricism." Could pure nonsense go further? We have another illustration -of the same audacity of absurd assertion on page 260. We are there -informed--Mr. Gosse is speaking of our prose literature about the centre -of the eighteenth century--that "Philosophy by this time had become -detached from _belles lettres_; it was now quite indifferent to those -who practised it, whether their sentences were harmonious or no.... -Philosophy in fact quitted literature." If there was any period in our -prose literature when philosophy was in the closest alliance with belles -lettres, and was most studious of the graces of style, it was between -about 1750 and 1771. In those years appeared Hutcheson's _System of -Moral Philosophy_, Adam Smith's _Theory of Moral Sentiments_, one of the -most eloquent philosophical treatises ever written, Burke's _Treatise on -the Sublime and Beautiful_, Reid's _Inquiry into the Human Mind_, -Tucker's _Light of Nature Pursued_, Beattie's _Essay on Truth_, to say -nothing of Hume's _Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals_, his -_Political Discourses_, and his _Natural History of Religion_, all of -them works pre-eminently distinguished by the graces of style, while so -far from philosophy quitting belles lettres, it was during these years -that the foundations of philosophical criticism were laid by Burke, -Harris, Hurd, Kames, and others. Mr. Gosse appears to have forgotten -that he had himself told us (p. 205) that Shaftesbury's style set the -example of the prose which was to mark the central years of the century! -Thus again Burton's _Anatomy of Melancholy_ is "an entertaining neurotic -compendium"; Bacon's _Essays_ are "often mere notations ... enlarged in -many cases merely to receive the impressions of a Machiavellian -ingenuity." Shelley's _Triumph of Life_ is "a noble but vague gnomic -poem, in which Petrarch's Trionfi are summed up and sometimes excelled." -Keats' "great odes are Titanic and Titianic." On page 284 we are -informed that for fifteen years after the close of 1800 "poetry may be -said to have been stationary in England." When we remember that within -these years appeared the best of Wordsworth's poems, the best of -Coleridge's, the best of Scott's, the best of Crabbe's, the first two -cantos of _Childe Harold_, the best of Campbell's, the best of Moore's, -and of Southey's--we wonder what can be meant, till we read on to find -that it was "on the contrary extremely active." But "its activity took -the form of the gradual acceptance of the new romantic ideas, the slow -expulsion of the old classic taste, and the multiplication of examples -of what had once for all been supremely accomplished in the hollows of -the Quantocks." In other words, its activity took the form of its -activity, and its activity led to its becoming stationary. Mr. Gosse is -sometimes solemnly oracular, as here: "It is a sentimental error to -suppose that the winds of God blow only through the green tree; it is -sometimes the dry tree which is peculiarly favourable to their passage." -It is not sometimes, we submit, but always that the dry tree will be -most propitious to their passage. But we like Mr. Gosse best when he is -eloquent, as here: "In the chapel of Milton's brain, entirely devoted -though it was to a Biblical form of worship, there were flutes and -trumpets to accompany one vast commanding organ." No wonder poor Milton -suffered, as we know he did suffer, from insomnia! - -The statement that "so miserable is the poverty of the first half of the -seventeenth century, when we have mentioned Pecock and Capgrave, there -is no other prose writer to be named," is bad enough. But to sum up -Pecock's work with the remark, "the matter is paradoxical and -casuistical reasoning on controversial points, in which he secures the -sympathy neither of the new thought nor the old," is to demonstrate that -Mr. Gosse knows nothing whatever about it. The _Repressor_ is in many -important respects one of the most remarkable works in our early prose -Literature. It would be interesting to know what is the meaning of the -following: "The masterpiece of Chillingworth stands almost alone in a -sort of underwood of Theophrastian character sketches." Does Mr. Gosse -suppose that English prose Literature in and about 1637 is represented -by Hall's _Characters of Vices and Virtues_, by Sir Thomas Overbury's -_Characters_, and by Earle's _Microcosmographie_, which appeared -respectively, not in and about 1637, but in 1608, in 1614, and in 1628? -If this was the underwood in which Chillingworth's work stood, it stood -also in a dense forest represented by some of the most celebrated prose -writings of the seventeenth century, such as the greater part of the -writings of Bacon and of Raleigh, the _Anatomy of Melancholy_, Selden's -_Titles of Honour_ and _Mare Clausum_, Lord Herbert of Cherbury's _De -Veritate_, Feltham's _Resolves_, the best of Hall's writings, Purchas' -_Pilgrims_, Barclay's _Argenis_, the Histories of Speed, Stowe, Hayward, -and Raleigh, Heylin's _Microcosmus_, Prynne's _Histrio-Mastix_, and the -famous sermons of Lancelot Andrewes, all of which appeared between 1608 -and 1637. These are the sort of remarks in which Mr. Gosse habitually -indulges. We have another example in the following: "Shelley's attitude -to style is in the main retrograde," a generalization based on the fact -that he was no admirer of "the arabesque of the cockney school." But -were Shelley's chief contemporaries admirers of the arabesque of the -cockney school, or were they affected by it? Was Wordsworth, was -Coleridge, or Southey, or Byron, or Crabbe, or Campbell, or Landor?--a -question which Mr. Gosse probably never stopped to ask himself. On a par -with this is the absurd assertion that "English poetry was born again -during the autumn months of 1797." The appearance of the _Lyrical -Ballads_ did not make, but mark, an era in our poetry. The revolution of -which they were the expression had been maturing, as surely but -distinctly as the social and political revolution marked by the assembly -of the States-General ten years before. There was hardly a note struck -in the _Lyrical Ballads_ which had not been struck in our poetry between -1740 and the date of their appearance. - -To call this compilation a _History of Modern English Literature_ is -ludicrous. Mr. Gosse has no conception even of the eras into which our -Literature naturally falls, or of the movements which in each of those -eras defined themselves. Nothing could be more misleading and inadequate -than the accounts given of the historians, theologians, philosophers, -and critics, many of whom--nay, whole schools of whom--are not noticed -at all. Sidney's epoch-marking little treatise is dismissed in four -unmeaning lines as "an urbane and eloquent essay, which labours under -but one disadvantage, namely, that when it was composed in 1581 there -was scarcely any poesy in England to be defended. This was posthumously -printed in 1595." Ben Jonson's not less remarkable _Discoveries_ are not -even mentioned. How writers like Bacon, Hooker, Hobbes, Locke, and -Berkeley fare we have not space to illustrate. Mr. Gosse, indeed, -judging by his excursions into the realms of theology and philosophy, -has certainly been wise to assign more space to _The Flower and the -Leaf_ than is assigned to Hobbes, Barrow, Butler, and Paley put -together. We have by no means exhausted the list of blunders and -absurdities to be found in this book; but we have, we fear, exhausted -the patience of our readers, and we must bring our examination of it to -a close. - -The melancholy thing about all this is the perfect impunity with which -such works as these can be given to the public. We have not the smallest -doubt that this book has been extolled to the skies in reviews which -have not detected a single error in it, and which have accepted its -generalizations and its criticisms with unquestioning credulity; and we -have as little doubt that those scholars who have discerned its defects -and absurdities have chosen, from motives possibly of kindness, possibly -of prudence, and possibly in mere contempt, to maintain silence about -them. Had it appeared twenty years ago, it would instantly have been -exposed and exploded, indeed no writer would have dared to insult -serious readers by such a publication. What every reader has a right to -demand from those who take upon themselves to instruct him are -sincerity, industry, and competence; and what no critic has a right to -condone is ostentatious indifference on the part of an author to the -responsibilities incurred by him in undertaking to teach the public. - -The sooner Mr. Gosse, and writers like Mr. Gosse, come to understand -that, however ingeniously expressed, reckless generalizations, random -assertions and the specious semblance of knowledge, erudition, and -authority may pass current for a time, but are certain at last to be -detected and exposed, the better for themselves and the better for their -readers. If, too, they wish justice to be done to the accomplishments -which they really possess, they will do well to remember what is implied -in the proverb _Ne sutor ultra crepidam_, and what the Germans mean by -VERMESSENHEIT. - - - - -LOG-ROLLING AND EDUCATION - - -We see no objection to Mutual Admiration Societies; they are -institutions which afford much pleasure, and can, as a rule, do little -harm. If vanity be a foible, it is a foible well worth cherishing, and -will be treated tenderly even by a philosopher. For, of all the -illusions which give a zest to life, the illusions created by this -flattering passion are the most delightful and inspiring. They are so -easily evoked; they respond with such impartial obsequiousness to the -call of the humblest magician. He has but to speak the word--and they -are made; to command--and they are created. A becomes what B and C -pronounce him to be, and what A and C have done for B, that will B and A -do in turn for C. It is a delicious occupation, no doubt, a feast for -each, in which no crude surfeit reigns, where, in Bacon's phrase, -satisfaction and appetite are perpetually interchangeable; it is like -the herbage in the Paradise of the Spanish poet, "quanto mas se goza -mas renace,"--the more we enjoy it the more it grows. It is an old -game--"Vetus fabula per novos histriones":-- - - "'Twas, 'Sir, your law,' and 'Sir, your eloquence,' - 'Yours Cowper's manner and yours Talbot's sense'; - Thus we dispose of all poetic merit: - Yours Milton's genius and mine Homer's spirit. - Walk with respect behind, while we at ease - Weave laurel crowns and take what name we please. - 'My dear Tibullus!' if that will not do, - Let me be Horace, and be Ovid you." - -And there is this advantage. If a sufficient number of magicians can, or -will, combine, these illusions may not only serve each magician for -life, but become, for a time, simply indistinguishable from realities. -Now, as we said before, we see no great harm in this. It is, to say the -least, a very amiable and brotherly employment; and were it quite -disinterested and honest, it would be closely allied with that virtue -which St. Paul exalts above all virtues. But everything has or ought to -have its limits. When Boswell attempted to defend certain Methodists who -had been expelled from the University of Oxford, Johnson retorted that -the University was perfectly right--"They were examined, and found to be -mighty ignorant fellows." "But," said Boswell, "was it not hard to expel -them? for I am told they were good beings." "I believe," replied the -sage, "that they might be good beings, but they were not fit to be in -the University of Oxford. A cow is a very good animal in the field, but -we turn her out of a garden." - -To our certain knowledge many of those who owe their reputation to the -art to which we are referring are good beings, and we have little doubt -that most of those who are least scrupulous in practising it are good -beings also. Indeed it may be conceded at once that there is always a -strong presumption that members of Mutual Admiration Societies belong to -this class. On the reciprocity of essentially Christian virtues their -very existence depends. Whatever may be thought of their heads, their -hearts are pretty sure to be in the right place. They may, it is true, -act more in the spirit of the precept that we should do unto others as -we would they should do unto us than in that of the precept which -pronounces that it is more blessed to give than to receive. This, -however, is a trifle--one of those distinctions without differences -which are so common in Christian ethics. But for ourselves we must, as -we have said before, discriminate. To the cow in the field we have no -objection; it is of the cow in the garden that we complain. - -To drop metaphor: there are certain spheres of literary activity in -which the circulation of mutual puffery by this clique or by that -clique can do comparatively little harm to any one or to anything. -There are some subjects on which every reader is not only perfectly -competent to form his own judgment, but is pretty certain to do so. He -may amuse himself by seeing what the critics have to say, and he may be -induced by them in the first instance to turn to the book which is in -question, but he is practically unaffected by any opinions unless they -happen to coincide with his own. Such is the case with books of travel, -with novels, and, as a rule, with poetry. Here the arts of the -log-roller are as harmless as the frolics of whales with tubs. No one -takes what he sees seriously except those who are engaged in the -pastime. If Mr. A cannot give the general public what it appreciates, -nothing that Mr. B can say will cajole that public into believing that -it has what it has not. Mr. C and Mr. D may vociferate, till they are -hoarse, that "Mr. E is the subtlest and most discriminating critic that -the English-speaking world has ever known"; but if Mr. E's eulogies of -Mr. C's verses and of Mr. D's novels are not corroborated by the general -reader's independent judgment, the fame of Messrs. C and D will not -extend beyond their clique. If in poetry or prose fiction trash -succeeds, as it undoubtedly does, it succeeds not because of the skill -with which it has been puffed, though this may be a factor in its -success, but because it hits the popular taste. The public is seldom -deceived except when it wishes to be deceived. Log-rolling has much to -answer for: it loads our bookstalls with nonsense and rubbish, it -impedes the production of sound literature, it degrades the standard of -taste, it degrades the standard of aim and attainment, and indirectly it -is in every way mischievous to literature. But we very much question -whether in the case of publications which appeal directly to general -readers, and are within the scope of their judgments, the fortune of a -book is in any way affected by the arts of the log-roller. Amusement -mingled with impatience is probably the prevailing sentiment when Mr. C -and Mr. D are loud in each other's praises. We remember the amoeban -strains of Hayley and Miss Seward in Porson's epigram:-- - - _Miss Seward_: Tuneful poet, Britain's glory; - Mr. Hayley, that is you. - - _Mr. Hayley_: Ma'am, you carry all before you; - Trust me, Lichfield Swan, you do. - - * * * * * - - _Miss Seward_: Ode, didactic, epic, sonnet; - Mr. Hayley, you're divine. - - _Mr. Hayley_: Ma'am, I'll take my oath upon it, - You yourself are all the nine. - -Or, in a less good-natured mood, we may perhaps recall with a certain -satisfaction Pope's cruel but pathetic picture of the minor log-rollers -of his day:-- - - Next plunged a feeble but a desperate pack, - With each a sickly brother at his back. - Sons of a day! just buoyant on the flood, - Then numbered with the puppies in the mud. - -But there are certain subjects and certain spheres in which the arts of -the log-roller, if equally contemptible, are not quite so harmless. - -During the last fifteen years the Press has been teeming with books -designed to circulate among readers who are seriously interested in -_belles lettres_ and criticism. Some of them have appeared as volumes in -a series, some as independent monographs and manuals, and some in the -humbler forms of editorial introductions and notes. Among them may be -found works of really distinguished scholars, and works in every way -worthy of such scholars; and it is no doubt works like these which have -given credit and authority generally to publications of this kind. The -popularity of these productions has been extraordinary, and their -manufacture has become one of the most lucrative of hackney employments. -Nor is this all. Their professed purpose is the dissemination of serious -instruction, is to become text-books in literary history and in literary -criticism; and, as text-books on those subjects, they have made their -way, or are making their way, not merely into our public libraries, but -also into the libraries of nearly every educational institute in -England. Indeed it would not be too much to say that if, among general -readers, about eighty in every hundred derive almost all they know about -English literature, both historically and critically, from these -volumes, in our schools and colleges, the average number of those whose -studies are and ought to be independent of them is yearly diminishing. -It is of these text-books and of the responsibilities incurred by those -who produce and circulate them that we wish to speak. - -We have already commented on the distinction which must be drawn between -what is best and what is inferior in the publications to which we have -been referring; and, in truth, the difference is one not of degree but -in kind. As our desire is, in Swift's phrase, to lash the vice but spare -the name, we shall not specify the works which we have selected as -typical of log-rolling in relation to education. Till we saw them we had -no conception of the lengths to which this sort of thing has run. -Ostensibly the works before us are critical and biographical monographs -designed to become text-books for students of English literature; they -may be more correctly described as complete epitomes of the art of -puffery. The writers begin by assuming that the objects of their -ludicrous adulation--who are, like themselves, contributors of the -average order to current periodicals, and the authors of monographs -similar to their own--are by general consent critics of classical -authority. The most deferential references are made to them in almost -every page. Now it is "Goethe and Mr. So-and-so have observed," or -"Coleridge has remarked, but Mr. So-and-so is inclined to think," etc. -Sometimes it assumes the form of a sort of awful reverence, as "Mr. -So-and-so is a little uncertain, but surely he more than hints," or "Mr. -So-and-so, as we all know, was once of opinion, though he has recently -found reason to alter," etc. We saw not long ago in the notes to a -certain edition of a classical author: "Socrates and Mr. X---- _of -Trinity_ have observed," etc. Occasionally this homage expresses -itself--and this is more serious--in the form of long extracts from Mr. -So-and-so's writings. Nothing is more common in works like these than to -find critics and writers of classical authority either completely -ignored, or, if cited at all, cited only in the connection which we have -indicated. That the gentlemen who are the subjects of this grotesque -flattery either have paid or will pay their friends in kind may, of -course, be taken for granted. Thus one factitious reputation builds up -another, and one bad book ushers in twenty which are worse. - -Macaulay has an amusing passage in which he has collected the names of -those who, according to Horace Walpole, were "the first writers" in -England in 1753. It might have been expected that Hume, Fielding, Dr. -Johnson, Richardson, Smollett, Collins, and Gray would at least have had -a place among them. Not at all. They were Lord Bath, Mr. W. Whithed, Sir -Charles Williams, Mr. Soame Jenyngs, Mr. Cambridge, and Mr. Coventry; in -other words, a clique of politicians and men of fashion of the very -titles of whose writings even a reader tolerably well read in the -literature of those times might excusably be ignorant. We are not -exaggerating when we say that this system of strenuous and well-directed -mutual puffery is, in our own time, leading to similarly perverted -conceptions about the relative position of those who owe their celebrity -to these ignoble arts and those on whose fame Time's test has set its -seal, not merely on the part of the general public, but on the part of -those who are responsible for the books introduced into schools and -educational institutes. We will give an illustration. - -At a meeting held not long ago, for the purpose of prescribing books for -a Reading Society, the choice lay between some of Johnson's Lives, -Select Essays by Sainte Beuve, and Select Essays by Matthew Arnold on -the one hand, and on the other certain books typical of the literature -of which we have been speaking. The debate which ensued was very -amusing. A member of the committee, a gentleman of conservative temper, -strongly urged the claims of Johnson, Sainte Beuve, and Arnold, on the -ground that it was the duty of the Society to encourage the study of -what was excellent and of classical quality, especially in criticism; -that it was not merely the information contained in a book which had to -be considered, but the style, the tone, the touch; that the monographs -proposed as an alternative could scarcely be regarded as of the first -order, either in expression or in matter, for he had observed, though he -had only glanced at them, several solecisms in grammar and several -inaccuracies of statement; and he concluded by adding that other -writings of these particular authors with which he happened to be more -familiar had not prejudiced him in their favour. Upon that, another -member of the council, who had been busily conning the Press notices -inserted in the monographs in question, pleaded their claim to -preference. "Dr. Johnson," he remarked, "was no doubt a great man in his -day, but his day had long been over; no one read him now. Sainte Beuve -and Matthew Arnold might be classical and all that, but they were not up -to date." He could not talk as an expert on literary matters, and -therefore he would not contradict what the former speaker had said, -"but there could be no doubt that Messrs. So-and-so," the authors of the -monographs in question, "were very big men--bigger men, I should think -(glancing at the Press notices in his hand), than Sainte Beuve and -Matthew Arnold. At any rate, everybody has heard of them; and," he -continued, "listen to this." He then proceeded to read out some of the -notices, adding that it was difficult, if he might say so without -offence, to reconcile what his friend, the preceding speaker, had said -with what was said in these notices. He was a little staggered--for, -though a simple, he was a shrewd man--when the very remarkable -similarity between Mr. A's eulogies of Mr. B and Mr. B's eulogies of Mr. -A was pointed out to him, and when, in reference to anonymous testimony, -he was reminded that one voice may have many echoes. It was generally -felt, more especially as Mr. A or Mr. B had, we believe, more than one -acquaintance among the committee, that the debate was taking rather an -embarrassing turn. The question was then put to the vote, and the -monographs were carried by a majority of three to one. - -What occurred at this meeting is occurring every day, variously -modified, wherever the choice of books is in question, whether in public -libraries or in educational institutions. A literature, the sole -credentials of which are derived from those who produce and circulate -it, is gradually superseding that of our classics. We seem in truth to -be losing all sense of the essential distinction between the writings of -the average man of letters and those of the masters. - - - - -OUR LITERARY GUIDES - -III. BOOKS WORTH READING[20] - -[Footnote 20: _Books Worth Reading._ A Plea for the Best and an Essay -towards Selection, with Short Introductions. By Frank W. Raffety, -London.] - - -Were it not for its melancholy significance, this would be one of the -most amusing books which it has ever been our fortune to meet with. Of -Mr. Frank W. Raffety we have not the honour to know anything, except -what we have gathered from this little volume and from its title-page. -But he must be a singularly interesting gentleman. His enthusiasm for -books, his portentous ignorance of them; his strenuous desire to improve -the popular taste by pleading for the best, his instinctive tendency to -make in all cases for the worst; his sublime intolerance of everything -in literature which falls short of excellence, his more than sublime -indifference to the commonest rules of grammar and syntax in expressing -that intolerance; the _navet_, the frankness, the recklessness with -which he displays his incompetence for the task which he has -undertaken--in these qualifications and accomplishments Mr. Raffety is -not perhaps alone, but he has certainly no superior. - -Mr. Raffety aspires to guide his readers through the chief literatures -of the world. Now the task of a reviewer, who has a conscience, is not -always a cheerful one, and we confess that, when we had generally -surveyed Mr. Raffety's work, we resolved to amuse ourselves by trying to -discover of which of the literatures, to which Mr. Raffety constitutes -himself a guide, Mr. Raffety is probably most ignorant. It is a nice -point. Let our readers judge. We will begin with Mr. Raffety and the -Classics. Of Theognis, the most voluminous of the Greek Gnomic poets, it -is said that "only a few sentences"--Mr. Raffety is presumably under the -impression that Theognis wrote in prose--"quoted in the works of Plato -and others survive." "The Greek Anthology," we are astounded to learn, -"is by Lord Neaves" and "is one of the best volumes in the A.C.E.R. -series." What Mr. Raffety no doubt means is, that Lord Neaves is the -author of a monograph on the Greek anthology, as he certainly was. With -regard to Herodotus, Mr. Raffety has evidently got some information not -generally accessible. His _History_, we are told, "is a great prose -epic.... The second book is of the most interest. In other works are the -histories of Croesus, Cyrus," etc. It would be interesting to know -what other works besides his _History_ Herodotus has left. Of the -_Prometheus Bound_ of schylus Mr. Raffety gives the following -interesting account. It contains, he says, "the story of Prometheus and -his defiance of Jupiter, who condemned him to be bound to a rock, where -he died rather than yield." We exhort Mr. Raffety, before his work -passes into a second edition, to consult his Classical Dictionary. - -Of the translations recommended by Mr. Raffety we should very much like -to get a sight of the translation of Pindar by Calverley, of the joint -translation of the same classic by Messrs. E. Myers and A. Lang, and of -the joint translation of Thucydides "by Jowett and Rev. H. Dale, 2 -vols." Of Herodotus, of schylus, of Sophocles, of Pindar, of Polybius, -of Demosthenes, what are, by general consent, esteemed the best -translations are not so much as mentioned. Latin literature fares even -worse in the hands of our guide. Mr. Raffety appears to know no more -about Catullus than that he was a writer of epigrams. Such trifles as -the _Attis_, the _Peleus and Thetis_, the Julia and Manlius marriage -song, the _Coma Berenices_, the love lyrics and threnodies he does not -condescend to notice. In "guiding" his readers to translations of -Lucretius and Juvenal, Munro's version of the first in prose and -Gifford's version of the second in verse--which Conington pronounced to -be the best version of any Roman classic in our language--are not so -much as referred to. Nor, again, in the case of Plautus and Terence, -are the excellent versions of Thornton and Coleman noticed. Tacitus, who -is oddly described as "the foremost man of the day," an estimate which -might have pleased but which would certainly have surprised him, -chronicled, we are told, "the foundation of the Christian religion." Mr. -Raffety's assurance on this point will probably disappoint inquisitive -readers. Equally surprising are the portions of the work dealing with -the modern literatures. In the course of these we learn that "the -_Nibelungen Lied_ is the oldest drama in Europe"; that the -_Areopagitica_ and the _Defence of the People of England_ are Milton's -best prose writings--Mr. Raffety apparently not being aware that the -second work is in Latin, and that if he means the first _Defence_, it is -anything but one of the best of Milton's writings. We are also informed -that Dryden was most valuable as a translator from the Greek and Latin; -Dryden's versions from the Greek begin and end with paraphrases of four -Idylls of Theocritus, the first book of the _Iliad_ and the parting of -Hector and Andromache from the sixth, and are notoriously the very worst -things he ever did. - -Sometimes Mr. Raffety fairly takes our breath away, as when he informs -us that Gray's tomb can be seen in the little churchyard of Stoke Pogis -"with the _Elegy_ written upon it." Can Mr. Raffety be acquainted with -the length of the _Elegy_ and with the proportions of a tombstone? -Chaucer, we are informed, wrote some poems in Italian. We should very -much like to see them, and so probably would Professor Skeat, for they -appear to have escaped the notice of all Chaucer's editors. Swift's -_Tale of a Tub_ was written, we are told, "against the teaching of -Hobbes!" - -It is indeed impossible to open this book anywhere without alighting on -some most discreditable blunder or absurdity. Thus we are informed that -Macaulay's essay on Burleigh treats of the time of James I.--Burleigh, -as we need hardly say, dying nearly five years before James came to the -throne, and Macaulay's essay having no reference at all to James I.'s -time. "There is," says Mr. Raffety, "no more stirring lyric than _The -Cotter's Saturday Night_," a remark which shows that Mr. Raffety does -not know what a lyric poem is. But to look for blunders in Mr. Raffety's -pages would be to look for leaves in a summer forest. His critical -remarks and biographical notes are truly delightful. We wish we had -space to quote some of them. Of their general quality the following -profound remark is a fair specimen:--"Dante requires study, and an -endeavour after appreciation." Mr. Raffety is always anxious to conduct -his readers by short cuts and to save them trouble. Macaulay's _Essays_, -for example, should be read before his _History_; "they will be more -easily tackled," he says, "than the _History_ in the first instance." -But on the subject of Gibbon Mr. Raffety is adamant, being fully of the -late Professor Freeman's opinion--"Whatever else is read, Gibbon must be -read." How Gibbon is to be read, or why Gibbon is to be read, or in what -edition he should be read, Mr. Raffety does not explain. - -Now, what possible end can be served by books like these, except to -misguide and misinform? Here is a writer, who certainly leaves us with -the impression that he cannot read the Greek and Latin classics in the -original, setting up as a director of classical study, and pronouncing -_ex cathedr_ on the merits of translations of these classics. His -knowledge of the modern literature is, as is abundantly manifest, though -we have neither space nor patience to illustrate, equally insufficient -and unsubstantial, and yet he undertakes to initiate and guide the -inexperienced in these studies. This book is presented to the public in -a most attractive form, being excellently printed on excellent paper, -and will naturally be taken seriously by those to whom it appeals. It is -for this reason that we also have felt it our duty to take it seriously. -And, as we believe that every bad book stands in the way of a good one, -we can promise Mr. Raffety, and writers like Mr. Raffety, that we shall -continue to take them seriously. - - - - -THE NEW CRITICISM[21] - -[Footnote 21: _Retrospective Reviews._ A Literary Log. By Richard Le -Gallienne. 2 vols.] - - -Nearly two thousand years ago Horace observed that, though every calling -presupposed some qualification in those who followed it, and a man who -knew nothing of marine affairs would not undertake to manage a ship, or -a man who knew nothing of drugs to compound prescriptions, yet everybody -fancied himself competent to commence poet. Qualified or unqualified, at -it we all go, he complains, and scribble verses. But times have changed, -and those who in Horace's day were the pests of poetry, with which they -could amuse themselves without mischief, have now become the pests of -another kind of literature in which their diversions are not quite so -harmless. Where the poetaster once stood the criticaster now stands. The -transformation of the one pest into the other, where they do not, as -they often do, become both, is easily accounted for, and as Dr. Johnson -has so excellently explained it, we cannot do better than transcribe -his words. "Criticism," says the Doctor, "is a study by which men grow -important and formidable at a very small expense. The power of invention -has been conferred by nature upon few, and the labour of learning those -sciences which may by mere labour be attained is too great to be -willingly endured; but every man can exert such judgment as he has upon -the works of others, and he whom nature has made weak and idleness keeps -ignorant may yet support his vanity by the name of critic." But -criticasters and their patrons have improved on this--for "he whom -nature has made weak and idleness keeps ignorant" may, in our time, not -merely support his vanity, but support himself. - -Till we inspected the volumes before us, we had really no conception of -the pass to which things have now come in so-called criticism. The -writer sits in judgment on most of the authors who have, during recent -years, been before the public. He passes sentence not merely on current -novelists, poets, and essayists, but on some of our classics, and on -books like the late Mr. Pater's _Lectures on Plato and Platonism_ and -Dr. Wharton's edition of _Sappho_. To any acquaintance with the -principles of criticism, to any conception of criticism in relation to -principles, to any learning, to any scholarship, to any knowledge of the -history of literature and of the masterpieces of literature, either in -our own language or in other languages, he has not the smallest -pretension. Nor does he allow this to be gathered simply from the work -itself, where it is, needless to say, abundantly apparent, but with a -_navet_ and impudence which are at once ludicrous and exasperating he -glories in his ignorance. Literature and its interpretation are to him -what the Bible and its interpretation were to the ranting sectaries of -Dryden's satire. In its explanation knowledge and learning were folly, -nothing was needed but "grace." - - "No measure ta'en from knowledge, all from grace, - Study and pains were now no more their care, - Texts were explained by fasting and by prayer." - -So to our critic knowledge and learning are of equal unimportance--nay, -equally contemptible--and all that is needed to take the measure of -Plato and Wordsworth is, in his own words, "the capacity for -appreciation." With this very slender outfit he sits down to the work of -criticism, to enlighten the world _de omni scibili_ in literature, from -the lyrics of _Sappho_, "the singer, a single petal of whose rose is -more than the whole rose-garden of later women singers," to "the -statesmanlike reach and grasp" of Mr. E. Gosse's essays. - -To discuss seriously the opinions or impressions of a writer of this -kind would be as absurd as to attempt to fight gnats with a sword, and -we shall merely content ourselves with transcribing, without comment, a -few of the aphorisms with which these volumes are studded. "Criticism is -the art of praise." "Shakespeare is the greatest English poet, not -because he created Hamlet and Lear, but because he could write that -speech about Perdita's flowers and Claudio's speech on death in _Measure -for Measure_." "The perfection of prose is the essay, of poetry the -lyric, and the most beautiful book is that which contains the most -beautiful words." These specimens will probably suffice. Mr. Le -Gallienne is also of opinion that "culture is mainly a matter of -temperament"--that "a man is born cultured," that mere education and -study are to such a one not simply superfluities, but impertinences. -"What matters it," he eloquently asks, "that one does not remember or -even has never read great writers? Our one concern is to possess an -organization open to great and refined impressions." A paltry scholar, -for example, may be able to construe Sappho, but it is only "an -organization open to great and refined impressions" which can discern -(in a crib) "the pathos of eternity in some twenty words" of "this -passionate singer of Lesbos." Plato may be studied by poor pedants, but -to an organization of this kind the binding of a volume is sufficient -enlightenment; "to merely hold in the hand and turn over its pages is a -counsel in style," for do not "the temperate beauty, the dry beauty -beloved of Plato, find expression in the sweet and stately volume -itself" [he is "reviewing" the late Mr. Pater's lectures on Plato], -"with its smooth night-blue binding, its rose-leaf yellow pages, its -soft and yet grave type"? The value of Mr. Le Gallienne's judgments, of -his praise, and of his censure, which, ludicrous to relate, are quoted -by some publishers as recommendations, or "opinions of the press," may -be estimated by these dicta, and by this theory of a critical education. - -Macaulay somewhere speaks of a certain nondescript broth which, in some -Continental inns, was kept constantly boiling, and copiously poured, -without distinction, on every dish as it came up to table. The writer of -these essays appears, metaphorically speaking, to be provided with a -similar abomination. Whatever be his theme, poem, essay, novel, picture, -he contrives to serve it up with the same condiment, a sickly and -nauseous compound of preciosity and sentimentalism. - -The melancholy thing about all this is the profound unconsciousness on -the part of the author of these volumes that he is exciting ridicule; -that he is, in Shakespeare's phrase, making himself a motley to the -view. But there are considerations more melancholy still. We should not -have noticed these volumes had they not been representative and typical -of a school of so-called critics which is becoming more and more -prominent. Incredible as it may seem, there are certain sections of -literary society and of the general public which take Mr. Le Gallienne -and his dicta quite seriously, and to which the prodigious nonsense in -these volumes does not present itself as absurdity, but as the articles -of a creed. These essays have, moreover, appeared in publications the -names of some of which carry authority. It is, therefore, high time that -some stand should be made, some protest entered against writings which -cannot fail to corrupt popular taste and to degrade the standard of -popular literature. Of one thing we are very certain, that no -self-respecting literary journal which undertook to review these volumes -could allow them to pass without denunciation. - -Of Mr. Le Gallienne we know nothing personally. He is, if we are rightly -informed, still a young man, and we would in all kindness exhort him to -turn the abilities which he undoubtedly possesses to better account. -There is much in these essays which shows that he was intended for -something better than to further the decadence. If, instead of sneering -at scholars, affecting to despise learning and study, indulging in silly -paradoxes, tinsel epigrams, and absurd generalisations, he would read -and think, and endeavour to do justice to himself and to his -opportunities, he might, we make no doubt, obtain an honourable -reputation. There is much which is attractive in his work, and in the -personality reflected in it. He is not a charlatan, for though he is -ignorant, he is honest. Genial and sympathetic, he has much real -critical insight, and, in going through his volumes, we have noted many -remarks which were both sound and fine. At its best his style is -excellent,--clear, lively, and engaging. Let him cease to play the -buffoon, which can only end in his gaining the applause of mere fools -and the contempt of every one else. - - - - -THE GENTLE ART OF SELF-ADVERTISEMENT - - -The illustrious Barnum once observed that, if a man's capital consisted -of a shilling, one penny of that shilling should be spent in purchasing -something, and the remaining eleven-pence should be invested in -advertising what was purchased. There was, perhaps, a touch of -exaggeration in that great man's remark, but it was founded on a -profound knowledge both of human nature and of the world. Intrinsically -nothing is valuable; things are what we make or imagine them. Even the -diamond, as a costly commodity, exists on suffrage. If a man cannot -persuade his fellow-creatures that he has genius, talent, learning, -"'twere all alike as if he had them not." What Persius asks with a -sneer, "Scire tuum nihil est, nisi te scire hoc sciat alter?"--is your -knowledge nothing, unless some one else know that you are knowing?--a -wiser man would ask in all seriousness. Shakespeare was never nearer the -truth than when he wrote-- - - "No man is the lord of anything, - Though in and of him there be much consisting, - Till he communicates his parts to others; - Nor doth he of himself know them for aught, - Till he behold them formed in the applause - Where they are extended." - -And never was a man more mistaken than the old preacher who said to his -congregation, "If you have a talent in your napkin, you should take care -not to hide it; but if you have no talent, but only a napkin, you should -not so flourish your napkin as to create the impression that it is full -of talents." Why, this is just what nine men in ten who court fame have -to do. Nature is kind, but seldom profuse. If she really endows a man -with what, if trumpeted, would make him famous, the odds are she couples -with her gifts pride, modesty, or self-respect, which, to say the least, -heavily handicap him in the race for reputation. When she does not endow -with the reality, she compensates by bestowing the power of acquiring -the credit for it. She is, as a rule, much too thrifty to heap on the -same man the keen pleasures of genuine enthusiasm and the sweets of -popular applause. An impartial mother, she loves all her children, and -divides her favours equally between shams and true men. This Churchill -marks in his brutal way; speaking of a certain contemporary, he -describes him as endowed with - - "That low cunning which in fools supplies, - And amply too, the place of being wise, - Which Nature, kind, indulgent parent, gave - To qualify the blockhead for a knave." - -But our business is not with knaves and blockheads, but with "gentler -cattle," and the quotation demands an apology. - -The importance of the art of self-advertisement, as must be abundantly -clear from the preceding remarks, can scarcely be overestimated. Though -it is perhaps still in its infancy, its progress during the last few -years has been most encouraging. The old coarse methods so familiar to -us in the past, and still successfully practised in the present--we mean -mutual admiration cliques, log-rolling, and what is vulgarly known as -"pulling the strings"--have been greatly improved upon and refined. -Bentley's famous remark when, explaining how it was that he took to -commentating, he said, that as he despaired of standing on his own legs -in the Temple of Fame, he got on to the shoulders of the Ancients, -appears to have suggested one of the most ingenious of modern -expedients. This consists of "getting up" a memorial to some -distinguished man--a statue, it may be, or modest bust. Some labour, -some ability, and some learning are involved in the more cumbrous device -of Bentley. But here all is simple and very easy. You are on the -shoulders of your great man at a bound, and stand side by side with him -in a trice. There is nothing which redounds to his credit which does -not redound to your own. As the Red Indian is under the impression that -in possessing himself of a scalp he possesses himself of the virtues -belonging to the former owner of the scalp, so this tribute of -enthusiastic admiration quietly assumes, without trouble, all that -enthusiastic admiration naturally implies. Is the object of your homage -a poet, a critic, a scholar, the very fact that you pay him homage is, -in itself, testimony of your own right to one or other of these -honourable titles. If, moreover it should happen that you know very -little about the writings of the author whom you have elected to honour, -this is of no consequence; for of all the disguises which ignorance can -assume, "enthusiasm" is the most effective. Nor are these the only -advantages of this particular method of getting reputation. The -collection of subscriptions and the formation of a committee bring you -into contact, or may, if judiciously managed, bring you into contact -with all your distinguished contemporaries; and we know what the proverb -says--"Noscitur a sociis"--a man is what his companions are. - -But nothing is more effectual, for purposes of self-advertisement, than -a device which has lately been practised with signal success. This -consists of scraping up an acquaintance with some person, whose name is -not unknown to the public,--even a second-rate novelist will do--and -waiting till he dies. As there is a tide in the affairs of men, so, as -we all know, there is a moment at the demise of literary men when the -voracity of public curiosity knows neither distinction nor satiety. This -is the moment for the self-advertiser to nick; this is the time for him -to float, with his defunct friend, on the lips of men. He will find -readers for anything he may choose to print--that letter with its -exquisite compliments, that conversation in which his poor attainments -were so generously over-estimated, or the importance of his slight -literary services so much exaggerated. Of course, the value of such -advertisements will be in proportion to the eminence of the subject of -the reminiscences--and happy, thrice happy, those who were able to turn -men like Darwin, Tennyson, and Browning to this account; their -reputation may be regarded as made. But it is not always necessary to -wait till great men die, though it is an experiment too bold and -perilous for most aspirants to make this sort of capital out of them -while they are still alive. Still _audentes fortuna juvat_, and it has -been done. A certain minor poet published in an American magazine, not -many years ago, an article entitled "A Day with Lord Tennyson," in which -he represented the Laureate as turning the conversation on his (the -minor bard's) poetry. We are told how the great man, after fervently -reiterating a stanza of that minor bard which pleased him, requested his -son to take it down in writing; how that son, though the day was cold -and blowy, took it down; how Tennyson grasped, at parting, his brother -poet's hand, and begged in transport that he would "come again and come -often." He came, we believe, no more. But what of that? He had -accomplished a feat so simple and yet so original that it may fairly be -questioned whether what Mr. Burnum used to call his masterpiece was in -any way comparable to it. To interview a great man, even on an -assumption of equality, is, as we all know, a comparatively easy matter, -but to turn the conversation of the great man into a seasonable puff of -yourself requires a combination of qualities not often united in a -single person. The worst of feats like these is that they must have a -tendency to make great men a little shy of encouraging the acquaintance -of those to whom they can be so useful. But simplicity, as Thucydides -remarks, is one of the chief ingredients of greatness, and it is a -quality very difficult to wear out. - -If Tennyson's interviewer has ever had a rival in the important art -which has been discussed--for the benefit of youthful ambition--in this -article, we are inclined to think that that rival was the Rev. Aris -Willmott. This now almost forgotten writer was a very voluminous author -both in verse and prose; but his merits were not appreciated by an -ungrateful public so much as they ought to have been. He resorted, -therefore, to the following exquisitely ingenious device. He published -a handsome volume, which is now before us, entitled _Gems from English -Literature_, thus arranged: Bacon, Rev. Aris Willmott, Jeremy Taylor, -Rev. Aris Willmott, Barrow, Rev. Aris Willmott, sandwiching himself -regularly through the prose classics, and in the same way through the -poets--Shakespeare, Rev. Aris Willmott, Milton, Rev. Aris, etc. As -birthday books, press notices, interviews at home, portraits of -distinguished authors in their studies, and the like are getting a -little stale, we cordially recommend this rev. gentleman's expedient--it -may be judiciously modified--to the notice of all who are unable to -distinguish fame from notoriety. - - - - -R. L. STEVENSON'S LETTERS[22] - -[Footnote 22: _The Letters of Robert Louis Stevenson to his Family and -Friends._ Selected and Edited with Notes and Introduction by Sidney -Colvin. 2 vols.] - - -The late Robert Louis Stevenson is a writer who has every title to -commiseration, and the appearance of the volumes before us may be said -to mark the climax of his misfortunes. Diseased and sickly from his -birth, with his life frequently hanging on a thread, he probably never -knew the sensation of perfect health. During the impressionable years of -early youth his surroundings appear to have been most uncongenial; he -was forced into a profession for which he had no taste and no aptitude. -In constant straits for money, at times he was miserably poor; his -apprenticeship to letters was long and arduous, for he was not one of -Nature's favourites, and attained what he did attain by unsparing and -severe labour. His wandering and restless life, bringing him as it did -into contact with all phases of humanity and with all parts of the -world, was of course in many respects favourable to his work, but it -had at the same time serious disadvantages. It gave him little time for -reflection; it imported a certain feverishness into his energy, and -rendered that concentration and steadiness, without which no really -great work can be accomplished, impossible. That in these circumstances -Stevenson should have produced so much, and so much which is of a high -order of merit, is most creditable to him, and not a little surprising. -"He stands," says his friend Professor Colvin, "as the writer who in the -last quarter of the nineteenth century has handled with the most of -freshness and inspiriting power the widest range of established literary -forms--the moral, critical and personal essay, travels sentimental and -other, parables and tales of mystery, boys' stories of adventure, -memoirs; nor let lyrical and meditative verse both English and Scottish, -and especially nursery verse, a new vein for genius to work in, be -forgotten." With some reservation this may be conceded, and this is as -far as eulogy can legitimately be stretched. - -But, unhappily, some of Stevenson's admirers have made themselves and -their idol ridiculous, by raising him to a position his claims to which -are preposterous. If he be measured with his contemporaries the -comparison will generally be in his favour--he certainly did best what -hundreds can do well. His essays have distinction and excellence; his -novels, travels, and short tales, though scarcely entitled to the praise -of originality, as they strike no new notes and are mere variants of the -work of Scott, Kingston, Ballantyne, De Quincey and Poe, bear the -impress of genius as distinguished from mere talent, and reflect a very -charming personality; his verse, too, is pleasing and skilful. But when -we are told that he will stand the third in a trio with Burns and Scott, -and when we have to listen to serious appeals to Edinburgh to raise a -statue to him beside the author of _Marmion_ and the Waverley Novels, -all who truly appreciate his work may well tremble for the reaction -which is certain to succeed such extravagant overestimation. The truth -is that poor Stevenson, himself one of the simplest, sincerest and most -modest of men, got involved with a clique who may be described as -manufacturers of factitious reputations,--the circulators of a false -currency in criticism. In these days of appeals to the masses it is as -easy to write up the sort of works which are addressed to them--popular -essays, tales and novels--as it is to write up the commodities of quack -doctors and the shares of bogus companies. The production of popular -literature is now a trade, and in some cases this kind of puffery is the -work of deliberate fraud, originating from various motives. In many -cases it simply springs from ignorance and critical incompetence, -current criticism being, to a considerable extent, in the hands of very -young men who, having neither the requisite knowledge nor the proper -training, are unable to judge a writer comparatively. In other cases it -is to be attributed to good nature and the tendency in the genial -appreciation of real merit to indulge in extravagant expression. But the -result is the same. A reputation, so grotesquely out of proportion to -what is really merited that sober people are inclined to suspect that -all is imposture, is gradually inflated. Eulogy kindles eulogy; -hyperbole is heaped on hyperbole; a ludicrous importance is attached to -every trifle which falls, or which ever has fallen, from this -Press-created Fetish. While he is alive he is encouraged, or rather -importuned, to force his power of production to keep pace with the -demand for everything bearing his signature; when he is dead the very -refuse of his study finds eager publishers. - -This kind of thing has obviously many advantages, which are by no means -confined to the object of the idolatry itself. In the first place it -means business; it is the creation of a goose which can lay golden eggs, -and it is, in the second place, a creation which reflects no little -glory on the creators. Is it nothing to be the satellites of so radiant -a luminary? When the familiar correspondence of the great man is -printed, will not what he was pleased to say, with all the friendly -license of private intercourse, in the way of compliment and eulogy, be -proclaimed from the house-tops? - -All this is exactly what has happened in the case of poor Stevenson. No -man ever took more justly his own measure, or would have been more -annoyed at the preposterous eulogies of which he has been made the -subject, on the part of interested or ill-judging friends. We wonder -what he would himself have said, could he have seen the letters before -us described, as they were described in one of the current Reviews, as -"the most exhaustive and distinguished literary correspondence which -England has ever seen." We entirely absolve Professor Colvin from any -suspicion of being actuated by unworthy motives in publishing them. It -is abundantly clear that he has not published them to puff himself, that -his labour has been a labour of love, and that he believed himself to be -piously fulfilling a duty to his friend. But they ought never to have -been given to the world. More than two-thirds have nothing whatever to -justify their appearance in print, and merely show, what will surprise -those who knew Stevenson by his literary writings, how vapid, vulgar and -commonplace he could be. In their slangy familiarity and careless -spontaneity they remind us of Byron's, but what a contrast do these -trivial and too often insipid tattlings present to Byron's brilliance -and point, his wit, his piquancy, his insight into life and men! Only -here and there, in a touch of description, or in a casual reflection, do -we find anything to distinguish them from the myriads of letters which -are interchanged between young men every day in the year. Their one -attraction lies in the glimpses they reveal of Stevenson's own charming -personality, his kindliness, his sympathy, his great modesty, his -manliness, his transparent truthfulness and honesty. It is amusing to -watch him with one of his correspondents who was evidently endeavouring -to establish a mutual exchange of flattery. The urbane skill with which -this gentleman's persistently fulsome compliments are either fenced or -waived aside, the ironical delicacy with which, when a return is -extorted, they are repaid, in a measure strictly adjusted to desert and -yet certain not to disappoint expectant vanity, are quite exquisite. -"The suns go swiftly out," he writes to him, referring to the death of -Tennyson and Browning and others, "and I see no suns to follow, nothing -but a universal twilight of the demi-divinities, with parties like you -and me beating on toy drums, and playing on penny whistles about -glow-worms." The indignant letter to the _New York Tribune_, in defence -of James Payn, who had been accused of plagiarising from one of -Stevenson's fictions, well deserves placing on permanent record, as an -illustration of his chivalrous loyalty to his friends. - -We are sorry, we repeat, that these letters have been given to the -world. So far as Stevenson's reputation is concerned they can only -detract from it. When they illustrate him on his best side they merely -emphasise what his works illustrate so abundantly that further -illustration is a mere work of supererogation. When they present him, as -for the most part they do, in dishabille, they exhibit him very greatly -to his disadvantage. If Professor Colvin had printed about one-third of -them, and retained his excellent elucidatory introductions, which form -practically a biography of Stevenson, he would have produced a work for -which all admirers of that most pleasing writer would have thanked him. -As it is, he has been guilty, in our opinion, of a grave error of -judgment. - - - - -LITERARY ICONOCLASM[23] - -[Footnote 23: _The Authorship of the Kingis Quair._ A New Criticism by -J. T. T. Brown.] - - -Among the worthies of the fifteenth century there is no more interesting -and picturesque figure than the Poet-King of Scotland, James I. Long -before the poem on which his fame rests was given to the world, -tradition had assigned him a high place among native makers, and his -countrymen had been proud to add to the names of Dunbar and Douglas, of -Henryson and Lyndsay, the name of the best of their kings. Great was -their joy, therefore, when, in 1783, William Tytler gave public proof -that the good King's title to the laurel was no mere title by courtesy, -but that he had been the author of a poem which could fairly be regarded -as one of the gems of Scottish literature. There cannot, in truth, be -two opinions about the _Kingis Quair_. It is a poem of singular charm -and beauty, and, though it is modelled closely on certain of Chaucer's -minor poems, and is in other respects largely indebted to them, it is -no servile imitation; it bears the impress of original genius, not so -much in details and incident as in tone, colour, and touch; it is a -brilliant and most memorable achievement, and Rossetti hardly -exaggerates when he describes it as - - "More sweet than ever a poet's heart - Gave yet to the English tongue." - -For more than a hundred years it has been the delight of all who care -for the poetry of the past, and the story it tells, and tells so -pathetically, is now among the "consecrated legends" which every one -cherishes. "The best poet among kings, and the best king among poets," -the name of the author of the _Kingis Quair_ heads the list of royal -authors. The stanza which he employed, though invented or adopted by -Chaucer, takes its title from the King, and "the rime royal" will be in -perpetual evidence of his services to poetry, as the University of St. -Andrews will be of his services to learning and education. No generation -has passed, from Sir Walter Scott to Mrs. Browning, and from Mrs. -Browning to Gabriel Rossetti, which has not been lavish of honour and -homage to him. - -But, it seems, we have all been under a delusion. Our simple ancestors -believed that James was the author of _Peebles to the Play_ and -_Christ's Kirk on the Green_; but _Peebles to the Play_ and _Christ's -Kirk on the Green_ "are now"--Mr. J. T. T. Brown is -speaking--"relegated to the anonymous poetry of the sixteenth century, -inexorably deposed by the internal evidence"; and Mr. Brown aspires to -send the _Kingis Quair_ the same way. His fell purpose is "to deprive -James of his singing garment, and reduce him to the humbler rank of a -King of Scots." There is something almost terrible in the exultation -with which Mr. Brown assumes that--the King's claim to every other poem -attributed to him having been completely demolished--it only remains to -deprive him of the _Kingis Quair_, to make his poetical bankruptcy -complete. And to the demolition of the King's claim to the "Quair" Mr. -Brown ruthlessly proceeds. Now we have no intention of entering into the -question of the authenticity of the minor poems to which Mr. Brown -refers; but we shall certainly break a lance with this destructive -critic in defence of James's claim to the _Kingis Quair_. - -Mr. Brown contends, first, that there is no satisfactory external -evidence in favour of the King's authorship of the poem; and, secondly, -that the internal evidence is almost conclusive against him. What are -the facts? In the Bodleian Library is a MS. the date of which is -uncertain, but it cannot be assigned to an earlier period than 1488. -This MS. contains certain poems of Chaucer, Hoccleve, Lydgate, and -others, together with the _Kingis Quair_. Of the _Kingis Quair_ it is, -so far as is known, the only MS., and to it alone we owe the -preservation of the poem. Both title and colophon assign the work to -James I., the words being: "Heireefter followis the quair Maid be King -James of Scotland ye first, callit ye Kingis quair, and Maid quhen his -Ma. wes in Ingland," the colophon running, "Explicit, &c., &c., quod -Jacobus primus scotorum rex Illustrissimus." This is surely precise -enough; but Mr. Brown insists that the statement carries very little -weight, being no more than the _ipse dixit_ of not merely an -irresponsible, but of an unusually reckless copyist. The recklessness of -this copyist Mr. Brown deduces from the fact that, of ten poems -attributed to Chaucer in the same MS., five undoubtedly do not belong to -him. On this we shall only remark that it would be interesting to know -whether these poems have been attributed to Chaucer in other MSS. In any -case, Mr. Brown must surely know that it is a very different thing for a -copyist to miss-assign a few short poems and to make a statement so -explicit as the statement here made with regard to the _Kingis Quair_. -He must either have been guilty of deliberate fraud--and what right have -we to assume this?--or he must have been misled, an hypothesis which is -equally unwarrantable, unless it be adequately supported. And how does -Mr. Brown proceed to support it? He contends that we have no -satisfactory evidence from other sources that James was the author of -the poem. Walter Bower, the one contemporary historian, though he gives -in his _Scotichronicon_ an elaborate account of the King's -accomplishments, is silent, Mr. Brown triumphantly observes, about his -poetry. This may be conceded. But Weldon is equally silent about the -poetry of James VI., and Buchanan about the poetry of Mary. And what -says the next historian, John Major? "In the vernacular"--we give the -passage in Mr. Brown's own version--"he was a most skilful composer.... -He wrote a clever little book about the Queen before he took her to wife -and while he was a prisoner," a plain reference to the _Kingis Quair_. -Testimony to his poetical ability is also given by Hector Boyes in his -_History of Scotland_, "In lingu vernacul tam ornata faciebat carmina, -ut poetam natum credidisses." So say John Bellenden, John Leslie, and -George Buchanan. Of these witnesses Mr. Brown coolly observes that they -carry little or no weight, because they only echo each other and Major. -Major, Mr. Brown insists, is "the sole authority for the ascription to -James of the vernacular poems." Certainly fame in the face of such -critics as Mr. Brown is held on a very precarious tenure. Dunbar, in his -_Lament of the Makaris_, enumerates, continues our critic, twenty-one -Scottish poets, but passes James over in silence, therefore James's -title to being a poet was unknown to him. Possibly; but that Dunbar's -list was not meant to be exhaustive is proved by the fact that he makes -no mention of a poet, and of a considerable poet, who must have been -well known to him, Thomas of Ercildoune. Nothing can be more misleading -than deductions like these. Ovid has given us an elaborate catalogue of -the poets of his time, but makes no mention of Manilius. Heywood and -Taylor have given elaborate catalogues of the contemporary Elizabethan -dramatists and make no mention of Cyril Tourneur. Addison has given us -an account of the principal English poets, and makes no mention of -Shakespeare. If Dante's and Chaucer's acquaintance with their -distinguished brethren is to be estimated by those whom they noticed, it -must have been far more limited than we know it, by other evidence, to -have been. Lyndsay, again, is cited as testimony of ignorance of James's -title to rank among poets; but in the list, in which he is silent about -James, he is silent about poets so famous as Barbour, Blind Harry, -Wyntown, Kennedy, and Douglas. - -Mr. Brown next proceeds to the question of internal evidence. He cannot -understand how it could come to pass, that a Scotchman, who left his -native country when he was under twelve years of age, and who was -educated by English tutors in England, should, after eighteen years of -exile, employ "the Lowland Scottish dialect." This is surely not very -difficult to explain. Nothing so much endears his country to a man as -exile, and nothing is more cherished by a patriot than his native -language. Ten years' exile among the Get did not corrupt the Latinity -of Ovid, and more than twenty years' exile did not impair the purity of -Thucydides' Attic. The King may have had English tutors, but Wyntown -distinctly tells us that he was allowed to retain, as his companions, -four of his countrymen. When he served in France he had a Scottish -bodyguard. The document in the King's own handwriting, printed by -Chalmers, proves that in 1412 he was conversant with the Lowland -dialect. In all probability, therefore, he carefully cherished his -native language. The consensus of tradition places it beyond all doubt -that he composed poetry in the vernacular, and as he wrote the _Kingis -Quair_ when he knew that he was about to return to Scotland as its king, -it was surely the most natural thing in the world that he should compose -a poem which told the story of himself and his young bride, whom he was -introducing to his subjects as their queen, in the language of the -country. But, says Mr. Brown, it is the Lowland dialect, with inflexions -peculiar to Midland English, with many Chaucerian inflections engrafted -on it. And what more natural? The Midland dialect was the dialect of his -English teachers. The poems of Chaucer he probably had by heart. - -Mr. Brown's object in all this is to relegate the _Kingis Quair_ to -that group of poems which are represented by the _Romaunt of the Rose_, -_The Court of Love_, and _Lancelot of the Lak_, which appeared late in -the fifteenth century, and in which all these peculiarities are very -pronounced. Into philological details we have not space to enter, but -this we will say. We will admit that _ane_ before a consonant, the past -participle in _yt_ or _it_, the pronouns _thaire_ and _thame_, the -plural form _quhilkis_, the employment of the verb _to do_ in the -emphatic conjugation and the like, are peculiarities which belong to a -period not earlier than about 1440, and that all these peculiarities are -to be found in the poem. But, we contend that these are just as likely -to be due to the transcriber as they are to the author. Nothing was so -common with copyists as to import into their texts the peculiarities of -their own dialects, indeed it was habitual with them. Thus Hampole's -_Pricke of Conscience_ was greatly altered by southern scribes. Thus, in -the Bannatyne MS., Chaucer's minor poems were similarly altered by -northern scribes. It is, in truth, the very height of rashness to -dispute the genuineness of an original, in consequence of the presence -of peculiarities which might quite well have been imported into it by a -copyist. The resemblances between this poem and the _Court of Love_ are, -we admit, not likely to have been mere coincidences, and we are quite -ready to admit that the _Court of Love_ in the form in which we have it -now, must be assigned to a much later date, more than a century later, -than the date (1423) assigned to the _Kingis Quair_. But this is -certain--that many, and very many, of the resemblances between the two -poems are to be attributed to the fact that the writers were saturated -with the influence of Chaucer, and delighted in imitating and recalling -his poetry. If, again, it be assumed that one poem was the exemplar of -the other, this is indisputable, that the _Court of Love_ was modelled -on the _Kingis Quair_, and not the _Kingis Quair_ on the _Court of -Love_. For, setting aside peculiarities which may be assigned to -transcribers, there can be little doubt that the _Court of Love_ belongs -to the sixteenth century at the very earliest, while Mr. Brown himself -admits that the MS. of the _Kingis Quair_ may be approximately fixed at -1488. - -Nothing can be more unsatisfactory than Mr. Brown's attempt to show that -the poem breaks down in autobiographical details, and that it derives -these details from Wyntown's _Chronicle_. James does not mention the -exact year in which he was taken prisoner. He tells us that he commenced -his voyage when the sun had begun to drive his course upward in the sign -of Aries, that is, on or about the 12th of March--and that he had not -far passed the state of innocence, "bot nere about the nowmer of zeris -thre"--in other words, that he was about ten years of age. Hereupon Mr. -Brown, assuming that Wyntown gives the date of the King's birth -correctly, proceeds to point out that the King was not at this time -"about ten," but that he was about eleven and a half; and then asks -triumphantly whether James would have been likely to forget his own age. -Again, he contends that the King's capture could not have taken place in -March, because it is highly probable that at the end of February, or at -the beginning of March, the King was in the Tower. For the fact that he -was in the Tower at that date there is not an iota of proof, or even of -tolerably satisfactory presumptive evidence. How the author of the -_Kingis Quair_ could have been indebted to Wyntown's _Chronicle_ for the -autobiographical details it is, indeed, difficult to see. The poem gives -March as the date of the capture; the _Chronicle_ gives April. According -to the poem, the King's age at the time of his capture was about ten; -according to the _Chronicle_, about eleven and a half. The _Chronicle_ -gives the year of the capture; the poem does not. The _Chronicle_ gives -details not to be found in the poem; the poem details not to be found in -the _Chronicle_. Mr. Brown has no authority whatever for asserting that -Book IX. chap. xxv. of the _Chronicle_ was certainly written years -before James returned to Scotland. All we know about the _Chronicle_ is -that it was finished between the 3rd of September, 1420, and the return -of James in April, 1424. - -Mr. Brown must forgive us for expressing regret that he should have -wasted so much time and learning, in attempting to support a paradox -which can only serve to perplex and mislead. Scholars, especially in -these days, would do well to remember, that nothing can justify -destructive criticism but a conscientious desire, on the part of those -who apply it, to correct error and to discover truth. And they would -also do well to ponder over Bacon's weighty words: "Like as many -substances in Nature which are solid do putrify and corrupt into worms, -so it is the property of good and sound knowledge to putrify and -dissolve into a number of subtle, idle, unwholesome, and, as I may term -them, vermiculate questions, which have indeed a kind of quickness and -life of spirit, but no soundness of matter nor goodness of substance." - - - - -WILLIAM DUNBAR[24] - -[Footnote 24: _William Dunbar._ By Oliphant Smeaton. Edinburgh: -Oliphant.] - - -Boswell tells us that he once offered to teach Dr. Johnson the Scotch -dialect, that the sage might enjoy the beauties of a certain Scotch -pastoral poem, and received for his reply, "No, sir; I will not learn -it. You shall retain your superiority by my not knowing it." It would -not be true to say that Dr. Johnson's indifference to the Scotch -language and to Scotch poetry has been shared by all cultivated -Englishmen, but it has certainly been shared by a very large majority in -every generation. The superb merit of many of the Scotch ballads, the -lyrics of Burns and the novels of Scott have practically done little to -diminish this majority and to induce English readers to acquire the -knowledge which Dr. Johnson disdained. Nine Englishmen out of ten read -Burns, either with an eye uneasily fishing the glossary at the bottom of -the page, or _ad sensum_, that is, in contented ignorance of about three -words in every nine. And this is, perhaps, all that can reasonably be -expected of the Southerner. Life is short; the world of Scotch drink, -Scotch religion and Scotch manners is not, as Matthew Arnold observed, a -lovely one, and the time which such an accomplishment would require -would be far more profitably spent in acquiring, say, the language of -Dante and Ariosto, or even the language of the _Romancero General_ and -of Cervantes. A modern reader may stumble, with more or less -intelligence, through a poem of Burns, catching the general sense, -enjoying the lilt, and even appreciating the niceties of rhythm. But -this is not the case with the Scotch of the fifteenth century--the -golden age of the vernacular poetry, the age when poets were writing -thus:-- - - "Catyvis, wrechis, and ockeraris, - Hud-pykis, hurdaris, and gadderaris, - All with that warlo went; - Out of thair throttis thay schot on udder - Hett moltin gold, me thocht, a fudder - As fyre-flawcht, maist fervent, - Ay as thay tumit them of schot, - Feyndis fild thame new up to the thrott - With gold of allkin prent." - -The usual consequences have been the result of this ignorance. The -Scotch have had it all their own way in estimating the merits of their -vernacular classics, and the few outsiders, whether English or German, -who have made the Scotch language and literature a special subject of -study, have very naturally not been willing to underestimate the value -of what it has cost them labour to acquire, and so have supported the -exaggerated estimates of the Scotch themselves. What Voltaire so -absurdly said of Dante, that his reputation was safe because no -intelligent people read him, is literally true of such poets as -Henryson, Douglas, and Dunbar. We simply take them on trust, and, as -with most other things which are taken on trust, we seldom trouble -ourselves about the titles and guarantees. It may be accepted as an -uncontrolled truth that the world is always right, and very exactly -right, in the long run. That mysterious tribunal which, resolved into -the individuals which compose it, seems resolved into every conceivable -source of ignorance, error, and folly, is ultimately infallible. There -are no mismeasurements in the reputation of authors with whom readers of -every class have been familiar for a hundred years. But, in the case of -minor writers who appeal only to a minority, critical literature is the -record of the most preposterous estimates. The history of the building -up of these pseudo-reputations is generally the same in all cases. First -we have the _obiter dictum_ of some famous man whose opinion naturally -carries authority, uttered, it may be, carelessly in conversation, or -committed, without deliberation, to paper, in a letter or occasional -trifle. Then comes some little man, who takes up in deadly seriousness -what the great man has said, and out comes, it may be, an essay or -article. This wakes up some dreary pedant, who follows with an "edition" -or "Study," which naturally elicits from some kindred spirit a -sympathetic review. Thus the ball is set rolling, or, to change the -figure, bray swells bray, echo answers to echo, and the thing is done. -Meanwhile, all that is of real interest and importance in the author -thus resuscitated is lost sight of; in advocating his factitious claims -to attention his real claims are ignored. For the true point of view is -substituted a false, and the whole focus of criticism, so to speak, is -deranged. The first requisite in estimating the work and relative -position of a particular author is the last thing which these -enthusiasts seem to consider, that is, the application of standards and -touchstones derived not simply from the study of the author himself, but -from acquaintance with the principles of criticism, and with what is -excellent in universal literature. - -All this has been illustrated in the case of the poet who is the subject -of the volume before us. As Mr. Ruskin has pronounced _Aurora Leigh_ to -be the greatest poem of this century, so Sir Walter Scott, who has, by -the way, been singularly unjust to Lydgate and Hawes, pronounced Dunbar -to be "a poet unrivalled by any that Scotland has ever produced." a -reckless judgment which he could never have expressed deliberately. -Ellis followed suit, and in Ellis' notice Dunbar is "the greatest poet -Scotland has produced." These judgments have, in effect, been -reverberated by successive writers and editors. In due time, some -fourteen years ago, appeared the inevitable German monograph, "William -Dunbar: sein Leben und seine Gedichte," by Dr. J. Schipper, to whom Mr. -Oliphant Smeaton appropriately and reverently inscribes the present -monograph. - -In Mr. Oliphant Smeaton's work Dunbar assumes the proportions which -might be expected--he is a "mighty genius." "The peer, if not in a few -qualities, the superior of Chaucer and Spenser. By the indefeasible -passport of the supreme genius he has an indisputable title to the -apostolic succession of British poetry to that place between Chaucer and -Spenser, that place which can only be claimed by one whose genius was -co-ordinate with theirs." As probably eight out of every ten of Mr. -Smeaton's readers will know nothing more of Dunbar than what Mr. Smeaton -chooses to tell them, and as we, considering the space at our disposal, -cannot refute him by a detailed examination of Dunbar's works, it is -fortunate that he has given us a succinct illustration of the value of -his critical judgment. The following are four typical stanzas of a poem -which Mr. Smeaton ranks with Milton's _Lycidas_ and Shelley's -_Adonais_; we give them as Mr. Smeaton gives them, modernised:-- - - "I that in health was and gladness - Am troubled now with great sickness. - Enfeebled with infirmity, - _Timor mortis conturbat me._ - - "Our pleasure here is all vain glory, - This false world is but transitory, - The flesh is brittle, the fiend is slee, - _Timor mortis conturbat me._ - - "The state of man doth change and vary, - Now sound, now sick, now blyth, now sary - Now dancing merry, now like to dee, - _Timor mortis conturbat me._ - - "No state on earth here stands sicker, - As with the wind waves the wicker, - So waves this world's vanity, - _Timor mortis conturbat me._" - -As the following is pronounced to be one of the finest stanzas Dunbar -ever penned, it is interesting as illustrating what is, in Mr. Smeaton's -opinion, the best work of this rival of Chaucer and Spenser:-- - - "Have mercy, love, have mercy, lady bright; - What have I wrought against your womankeid, - That you should murder me a sackless wight, - Trespassing on you nor in word nor deed? - That ye consent thereto, O God forbid; - Leave cruelty and save your man for shame, - Or through the world quite losd is your name." - -It may be added that what are by far the finest passages in Dunbar's -poems are passed unnoticed and unquoted by Mr. Smeaton. Indeed, his -acquaintance with Dunbar, or, at all events, his taste in selection, is -exactly on a par with that of Ned Softley's with Waller. "As that -admirable writer has the best and worst verses among our English poets, -Ned," says Addison, "has got all the bad ones by heart, which he repeats -upon occasion to show his reading." Should Mr. Smeaton ever meet his -idol in Hades, we would in all kindness advise him to avoid an -encounter; let him remember that the fulsome eulogy is his own, but that -the verses quoted are the poet's. Attempted murder--so the irate shade -might argue--is less serious than compulsory suicide. - -Dunbar was undoubtedly a man of genius, but a reference to the poets who -immediately preceded him will make large deductions from the praises -lavished on him by his eulogists. He struck no new notes. _The Thistle -and the Rose_ and _The Golden Terge_ are mere echoes of Chaucer and -Lydgate, and, in some degree, of the author of _The King's Quair_, and -are indeed full of plagiarisms from them. _The Dance of the Seven Deadly -Sins_ is probably little more than a faithful description of a popular -mummery. His moral and religious poems had their prototypes, even in -Scotland, in such poets as Johnston and Henryson. His most remarkable -characteristic is his versatility, which ranges from the composition of -such poems as _The Merle and the Nightingale_ to the _Twa Maryit Wemen -and the Wedo_, from such lyrics as the _Meditation in Winter_ to such -lyrics as the _Plea for Pity_. Mr. Smeaton calls him "a giant in an age -of pigmies." The author or authoress of _The Flower and the Leaf_ was -infinitely superior to him in point of style, Henryson was infinitely -superior to him in originality, and Gavin Douglas at least his equal in -power of expression and in description. - -Let us do Dunbar the justice which Mr. Smeaton has not done him, and -take him at his very best. Here is part of a picture of a May morning,-- - - "For mirth of May, wyth skippis and wyth hoppis - The birdis sang upon the tender croppis, - With curiouse notis, as Venus Chapell clerkis. - The rosis yong, new spreding of their knoppis, - War powderit brycht with hevinly beriall droppis; - Throu bemes rede, birnyng as ruby sperkis, - The skyes rang for schoutyng of the larkis." - -This is brilliant and picturesque rhetoric touched into poetry by the -"Venus Chapell clerkis," and the magical note in the last line; so too -the touch in _The Golden Terge_, likening the faery ship to "blossom -upon the spray." But in his allegorical poem he is too fond of the -"quainte enamalit termes," and his verse has a certain metallic ring. It -will be admitted, we suppose, that the best of his moral poems would be -_The Merle and the Nightingale_ and "Be Merrie Man"; but the utmost -which can be said for them is, that the philosophy is excellent and its -expression adequate; that is, that they have little to distinguish them -from hundreds of other poems of the same class. - -In speaking of Dunbar's satires, Mr. Smeaton indulges himself in the -following nonsense, "From the genial, jesting, and ironical -incongruities of Horace and Persius we are introduced at once into the -bitter, vitriolic scourgings of Juvenal," and in the following -rhodomontade, telling us that they unite "the natural directness of -Hall, the subtle depth of Donne, the delicate humour of Breton, the -sturdy vigour of Dryden, the scalding, vitriolic bitterness of Swift, -the pungency of Churchill, the rural smack of Gay, united to an approach -at least to the artistic perfection of Pope." Stuff like this and -indiscriminate eulogy are, no doubt, much easier to produce than an -estimate of a writer's historical position and importance. Of the -relation of Dunbar to his predecessors and contemporaries in England and -Scotland, of his prototypes and models in French and Provenal -literature, of the influence which he undoubtedly exercised on -subsequent poetry, and especially on Spenser, Mr. Smeaton has nothing to -say. It never seems to occur to him that his hero, like every one else, -must have had his limitations, that "the many-sidedness of that genius -which has a ring"--the metaphors are not ours, but Mr. -Smeaton's--"almost Shakespearian, about it," could hardly have been -distinguished by uniformity of excellence; that "that painter of -contemporary manners, who had all the vividness of a Callot, united to -the broad humour of a Teniers and the minute touch of a Meissonier," who -"reflected in his verse the most delicate _nuances_, as well as the most -startling colours of the age wherein he lived," must have had degrees in -success. - -We have singled out this volume for special notice, not because of any -intrinsic title it possesses to serious attention, but because it is -typical of a species of literature which is rapidly becoming one of the -pests of our time. While every encouragement should be given to sober, -judicious, and competent reviews of our older writers, every -discouragement should be given, out of respect to the dead, as well as -in the interests of the living, to such books as the present. For they -are as mischievous as they are ridiculous. They misinform; they mislead; -they corrupt, or tend to corrupt, taste. After laying down a volume like -this we feel, and we expect Dunbar would have felt, that there is -something much more formidable than the old horror, "the candid friend," -even that indicated by Tacitus--_pessimum inimicorum genus--laudantes_. - - - - -A GALLOP THROUGH ENGLISH LITERATURE[25] - -[Footnote 25: _A Literary History of the English People from the Origins -to the Renaissance._ By J. J. Jusserand.] - - -There is a breeziness and hilarity, a gay irresponsibility and abandon, -about M. Jusserand which is perfectly delightful. He is the very -Autolycus of History and Criticism. What more sober students, who have -some conscience to trouble them, are "toiling all their lives to find" -appears to be his as a sort of natural right. The fertility of his -genius is such, that it seems to blossom spontaneously into erudition. -Like the lilies he toils not, but unlike the lilies he spins, and very -pretty gossamer too. It is impossible to take him seriously. - -The truth is that M. Jusserand belongs to a class of writers which, -thanks to indulgent publishers, a more indulgent public, and most -indulgent reviewers, is just now greatly in the ascendant. -"Encyclopdical heads," who took all knowledge for their province, -probably died with Bacon, but encyclopdical heads who take all -Literature or all History for their province appear to be as common as -the "excellence" which, in opposition to Matthew Arnold's opinion, the -American lady maintained was so abundant on both sides of the Atlantic. -These are the gentlemen who complacently sit down "to edit the -Literatures of the world," or "to trace the development of the human -race, from its picturesque cradle in the valleys of Central Asia, to its -infinite ramifications in our own day"--within "the moderate compass of -an octavo volume." - -M. Jusserand's first feat is to dispose of some six centuries in -ninety-three pages, in a narrative which simply tells over again, though -certainly after a more jaunty fashion, what Ten Brink, Henry Morley, and -others have told much more seriously, and, we may add, much more -effectively. The Norman Conquest and an account of the Anglo-Norman -literature occupy about a hundred and ten pages, while some eighty pages -more, dealing with the fusion of the races and the gradual evolution of -the English people and language, bring us to Chaucer. It might have been -expected that M. Jusserand would have justified his survey of a period -so often reviewed before, either by tracing, with more fulness and -precision than his predecessors, the successive stages in the -development of our nationality and its expression in literature, or by -adding to our knowledge of the characteristics and peculiarities of the -literature itself. He has done neither. He has, on the contrary, -obscured the first by the constant introduction of irrelevant matter, -and he has apparently no notion of the relative importance of the -authors on whose works he dilates or touches. Thus Richard Rolle of -Hampole fills more space than Layamon, whose work is despatched in a -page! Thus two lines in a note suffice for the _Ormulum_, two lines for -Mannyng's _Handlyng of Synne_, a singularly interesting and significant -work, ten lines for Robert of Gloucester, who is rather perplexingly -described as "a distant ancestor of Gibbon and Macaulay," while four -pages are accorded to _Tristan_ and five to the _Roman du Renart_. How -the Latin Chroniclers fare may be judged from the fact that a little -more than a page serves for Geoffrey of Monmouth, a line for Ordericus -Vitalis, and two for Giraldus Cambrensis. In the chapter on Chaucer M. -Jusserand does more justice to his subject, and it is to be regretted -for his own sake that he has not confined himself to such essays. He is -never safe except when he is on the beaten path. Nothing could be more -inadequate than the section on Gower. It certainly indicates that M. -Jusserand is not very familiar with the _Confessio Amantis_. Not one -word is said about the remarkable prologue, and to dismiss such a work -in less than three pages, observing that "it contains a hundred and -twelve short stories, two or three of which are very well told, one, the -adventure of Florent, being, perhaps, related even better than in -Chaucer," is not quite what we should expect in a work purporting to -narrate the "literary history of the English people." M. Jusserand has -not even taken the trouble to keep pace with modern investigation in his -subject, but actually tells us that Gower's _Speculum Meditantis_ is -lost! If Gower's writings are not of much intrinsic value, they are of -immense importance from an historical point of view. John de Trevisa, a -most important name in the history of English prose, is despatched in -eight lines of mere bibliographical information, without a word being -said about his great services to our literature, and without any -reference being made either to the remarkable preface to his great work, -or to his version of the Dialogue attributed to Occam. - -The only satisfactory chapter in the book is the chapter dealing with -Langland and his works; but it is certainly surprising that no account -should be given of the very remarkable anonymous poem entitled _Piers -Ploughman's Crede_. Again, whole departments of literature, such as the -Metrical Romances, the Laies, Fabliaux, early lyrics and ballads, are -most inadequately treated, some of the most memorable and typical being -not even specified. Surely Minot was not a man to be dismissed, with a -flippant joke, in half a page, or _King Horn_ and _Havelok_ poems to be -relegated to passing reference in a note. - -But it is in dealing with the literature of the fifteenth century that -M. Jusserand's superficiality and, to put it plainly, incompetence for -his ambitious task become most deplorably apparent. In treating the -earlier periods he had trustworthy guides even in common manuals, and he -could not go far wrong in accepting their generalizations and -statements. Books easily attainable, and indeed in everybody's hands, -could enable him to dance airily through the Anglo-Saxon literature and -through the period between Layamon and Chaucer. No one can now very well -go wrong in Chaucer and his contemporaries, who has at his side some -half-dozen works which any library can supply. But it is otherwise with -the literature of the fifteenth century. Here, as every one who happens -to have paid particular attention to it knows, popular manuals and -histories are most misleading guides. Deterred, no doubt, by the -prolixity of the poetry and by the comparatively uninteresting nature of -the prose literature, modern historians and critics have contented -themselves with accepting the verdicts of Warton and his followers, who -probably had as little patience as themselves; and so a kind of -conventional estimate has been formed, which appears and reappears in -every manual and handbook. We turned, therefore, with much curiosity to -this portion of M. Jusserand's work. We had, we own, our suspicions -about his first-hand knowledge of the literature through which he glided -so easily in the earlier portions of his book, and here, we thought, -would be the crucial test of his pretension to original scholarship. -Would he do voluminous Lydgate the justice which, as the specialist -knows, has so long been withheld from him? Would he point out the strong -human interest of Hoccleve; the great historical interest of Hardyng; -the power and beauty of the ballads; or, if he included Hawes within the -century, would he show what a singularly interesting poem, intrinsically -and historically, the _Pastime of Pleasure_ really is? If, again, he -included the Scotch poets, how would he deal with the problems presented -by Huchown? Would he accord the proper tribute to the genius of Dunbar; -would he estimate what poetry owes respectively to James I., Henry the -Minstrel, Robert Henryson, and Gavin Douglas? In our prose literature, -would he comment on the great importance of Pecock's memorable work, of -Fortescue's two treatises, of the _Paston Letters_, of Caxton's various -publications? How would he deal with the one "classical" work of the -century, Malory's _Morte d'Arthur_? - -Now, of Lydgate, "to enumerate whose pieces," says Warton, "would be to -write the catalogue of a little library," it is not too much to say -that he was one of the most richly gifted of our old poets, that as a -descriptive poet he stands almost on the level of Chaucer, that his -pictures of Nature are among the gems of their kind, that his pathos is -often exquisite, "touching," as Gray said of him, "the very heartstrings -of compassion with so masterly a hand as to merit a place among the -greatest of poets." His humour is often delightful, and his pictures of -contemporary life, such as his _London Lickpenny_ and his _Prologue to -the Storie of Thebes_, are as vivid as Chaucer's. In versatility he has -no rival among his predecessors and contemporaries. Gray notices that, -at times, he approaches sublimity. His style often is -beautiful,--fluent, copious, and at its best eminently musical. The -influence which he exercised on subsequent English and Scotch literature -would alone entitle him to a prominent position in any history of -English poetry. But the handbooks think otherwise, and he occupies just -three pages in M. Jusserand's work, the only estimate of his work being -confined to the assertion that "he was a worthy man if ever there was -one, industrious and prolific," etc., and the only criticism is the -remark that his "prosody was rather lax." And this is how poor Lydgate -fares at our historian's hands. To Hoccleve are assigned just one page -and a few lines. Hardyng figures only in the bibliography at the bottom -of a page. The ballads are despatched in fifteen lines. Hawes' _Pastime -of Pleasure_, memorable alike both for the preciseness with which it -marks the transition from the poetry of medivalism to that of the -Renaissance, for its probable influence on Spenser, and for its -intrinsic charm, its pathos, its picturesqueness, and its sweet and -plaintive music, is curtly dismissed, as the handbooks dismiss it, as -"an allegory of unendurable dulness." If M. Jusserand would throw aside -the manuals and turn to the original, he would probably see reason to -modify his verdict. Our author's breathless gallop through the Scotch -poets, to whom he allots nine pages, can only be regarded with silent -astonishment by readers who happen to known anything about those most -remarkable men. Huchown is not so much as mentioned. The amazing -nonsense which he writes in summing up Dunbar, we will transcribe, _ut -ex uno discas omnia_: - - "Dunbar, with never-flagging spirit, attempts every style.... - His flowers are too flowery, his odours too fragrant; by - moments it is no longer a delight, but almost a pain. It is not - sufficient that his birds should sing; they must sing among - perfumes, and these perfumes are coloured." - -Has M. Jusserand ever read _The Dance of the Seven Deadly Sins_, _The -Twa Maryit Wemen and the Wedo_, and the minor poems of Dunbar? If he -has, would he pronounce that these "flowers" are "too flowery"--these -"odours" "too fragrant," or would he feel the absurdity of generalizing -on ludicrously insufficient knowledge? His verdicts on the other Scotch -poets are marked by the same superficiality, and we regret to add -flippancy. To class Henryson among poets whose style is "florid" and -whose roses are "splendid but too full-blown" is to show that M. -Jusserand knows as little about him as he seems to know about Dunbar. In -all Henryson's poems there are only three short passages which could by -any possibility be described as florid. The prose of the fifteenth -century fares even worse at his hands. Capgrave is mentioned only in the -bibliography! Of the interest and importance of Pecock, historically and -intrinsically, he appears to have no conception; on the real -significance of the _Repressor_ he never even touches, and how indeed -could he in the less than one page which is assigned to one of the most -remarkable writers in the fifteenth century? A page suffices for the -_Paston Letters_, and four lines for Malory's _Morte d'Arthur_! - -Now we would ask M. Jusserand, in all seriousness, what possible end can -be served by a book of this kind, except the encouragement of everything -that is detestable to the real scholar: superficiality, want of -thoroughness, and false assumption, and what is more, the public -dissemination of error, and of crude and misleading judgments. Such a -work as the present, the soundness and trustworthiness of which -ninety-nine readers in every hundred must necessarily take for granted, -can only be justified when it proceeds from one who is a master of his -immense subject, from one whose generalizations are based on amply -sufficient knowledge, whose suppressions and omissions spring neither -from carelessness nor from ignorance, but from discrimination, and in -whose statements and judgments implicit reliance can be placed. To none -of these qualifications has M. Jusserand the smallest pretension. - -We have no wish to seem discourteous to M. Jusserand or to say anything -which can cause him annoyance, but it is no more than simple duty in any -critic with a becoming sense of responsibility to discountenance in -every way the production of such books as these. They are not only -mischievous in themselves, but they form precedents for books which are -more mischievous still. We like M. Jusserand's enthusiasm, but we would -exhort him to reduce the flatulent dimensions, which his ambition has -here so unhappily assumed, to that more tempered ambition which gave us -the monographs on Piers Ploughman and on the Tudor novelists. - - - - -DE QUINCEY AND HIS FRIENDS[26] - -[Footnote 26: _Personal Recollections, Souvenirs, and Anecdotes of -Thomas De Quincey and his Friends and Associates._ Written and collected -by James Hogg.] - - -To a thoughtful reader there is, perhaps, no sadder spectacle than those -sixteen volumes which represent all that remains to us of Thomas De -Quincey. What superb powers, what noble and manifold gifts, what -capacity for invaluable and imperishable achievements had Nature -lavished on this extraordinary man! Metaphysics might for all time have -been a debtor to that vigorous, acute, and subtle intellect, at once so -speculative and logical, so inquisitive and discriminating. sthetic -criticism might have found in him a second Lessing, and literary -criticism a superior Sainte-Beuve. For, in addition to all that would -have enabled him to excel in abstract thought, he had--and in ample -measure--the qualities which make men consummate critics: rare power of -analysis, the nicest perception, sensibility, sympathy, good taste, -good sense, immense erudition. He might have contributed masterpieces to -Theology, to History, to Economic Science. But they know not his name. -He has set his seal on nothing but on English style. About a hundred and -fifty articles contributed to magazines and encyclopdias, some of them -of a high order of literary merit, many of them simply worthless, the -majority of them containing what is inferior so disproportionately in -excess of what is valuable that they may be likened to dustbins, with -jewels here and there glittering among the rubbish;--this is what -represents him. It is as a master of style, by virtue of what he -accomplished as a rhetorician and prose poet only, that he will live. -But this, comparatively scanty as it is, is of pre-eminent, of unique -value, and will suffice to secure him a place for ever among the -classics of English prose. He has also another claim, if not to our -reverence, at least to our curious attention and interest,--and that -attention and interest he can scarcely fail to excite in every -generation,--his autobiographical writings give us a picture, and that -with fascinating power, of one of the most extraordinary personalities -on record. - -Indiscriminating admiration is among the most pleasing traits of youth, -but in men of mature years it loses its attractiveness. When it is no -longer the effervescence of juvenile enthusiasm for which all make -allowance, it becomes, like the levities of boyhood affected in middle -life, merely vapid folly. In relation to its object it not only defeats -its own ends, but is apt to make recipient and donor alike ridiculous. -Nor is this all. By some curious law of association which we cannot -pretend to explain, its almost inevitable ally is dulness, and dulness -of a peculiarly wearisome and exasperating kind. During the last few -years these peculiarities have become so alarmingly epidemic that it -really seems high time to form, on the principle of Mr. Morris's Society -for the Preservation of Ancient Monuments, a Society for the -Preservation of Literary Reputations. When those "of whom to be -dispraised were no small praise" take to eulogy and editing, an unhappy -Classic may well look to his true friends. It is nothing less than -appalling to behold the mountains of rubbish now gradually accumulating -over the work--the real work--of such poets as Wordsworth, Shelley, and -Keats; rubbish of their own, rescued with cruel industry from the -oblivion to which they would themselves have consigned it, rubbish of -their commentators and editors, dulness and inanity unutterable. "What, -sir," asked an Eton boy of Foote, "was the best thing you ever said?" -"Well," was the reply, "I once saw a chimney-sweep on a high prancing, -high-mettled horse. 'There,' said I, 'goes Warburton on Shakespeare.'" -But it is not in the Warburtons, not in the chimney-sweepers, that the -mischief lies; it is in those who may be called the scavengers and -sextons of literature, in those who, utterly unable to discern between -what is precious and what is worthless in a man's work, thrust all, -without distinction, into prominence, and thus not only enable an author -to "write himself down," but, by their indiscriminating eulogies, assist -him in his suicide. The subtlest form, indeed, which detraction can -assume is over-praise, for a man is thus forced to give the lie to his -own reputation. - -No one, perhaps, has suffered so much from ill-judging admirers as De -Quincey. If ever an author needed a judicious adviser, when preparing -his works for publication in a permanent form, and a judicious editor, -when the time had come for that final edition on which his title to -future fame should rest, it was the English opium-eater. But, unhappily, -he had no such adviser in his lifetime, and he has had no such editor -since. He consequently reprinted much which ought never to have been -reprinted at all, and he omitted to reprint some things which would have -done honour to him. His besetting faults, even in his vigour, were -loquacity and silliness, a habit of "drawing out the thread of his -verbosity finer than the staple of his argument"--a tendency to peddle -and dawdle, as well as to indulge in a sort of pleasantry, so attenuated -as to border closely on inanity. As he grew older these habits became -more confirmed. His puerility and garrulousness in his later writings -are often intolerable. But this was not the worst. In revising some of -his earlier papers, and particularly the _Confessions_, he not only -imported into them tiresome irrelevancies and superfluities, but, in -emending, ruined the glorious passages on which his fame as a -rhetorician and prose poet rests; such has been the fate, among others, -of the exquisite description of the powers of opium,--the superb passage -beginning, "The town of L.. represented the earth with its sorrows and -its graves,"[27] and of the dreams in the second part of the -_Confessions_, particularly of the sublime one beginning, "The dream -commenced with a music."[28] - -Mr. James Hogg tells us that his design in publishing the present volume -was that he might "place a stone upon the cairn of the man" who had -treated him "with an almost paternal tenderness." We sincerely -sympathize with Mr. Hogg's pious intention, but we submit that the -truest kindness which he, or any other admirer of De Quincey could do -him, would be not to augment but to lighten the cairn which indiscreet -admirers are so industriously piling over him. To change the figure, the -best service which could be rendered to De Quincey would be to relieve -him of his superfluous baggage, not to add to it. His fame would stand -much higher, if his sixteen volumes were vigorously weeded; if the -sweepings and refuse of his study, so injudiciously given to the world -by Dr. Japp and Mr. Hogg, were given instead to the flames; and if -reminiscents and biographers would only leave him to tell, in his own -fashion, his own story, especially as it is one of those stories the -interest of which depends purely on the telling. We have already -expressed our sympathy with Mr. Hogg's pious intention. It only remains -for us to express our regret that Mr. Hogg's piety should have taken the -form of the most barefaced piece of book-making which we ever remember -to have met with. Addison, if we are not mistaken, somewhere describes a -man to whom a single volume afforded all the amusement and variety of a -whole library, for, by the time he had arrived at the middle, he had -completely forgotten the beginning, and when he arrived at the end, he -had completely forgotten the whole. Mr. Hogg appears to proceed on the -assumption that it is pretty much the same with the public and its -memory, that its capacity for amusement is permanent, but that its -recollection of what has amused it is so treacherous, that repetition -will be sure to have all the attraction of novelty. This is, no doubt, -unhappily true. But it is a truth which no critic has a right to -concede. - -All that is of interest in this volume is little more than the literal -reproduction, in another shape, of material embodied in a Life of De -Quincey, published by Dr. Alexander Japp, under the pseudonym of H. A. -Page, in 1877. Its exact composition is as follows. Eliminating the -preface and the index, the book consists of 359 pages. Of these, seventy -consist of a dreary _rchauff_ by Dr. Japp himself of his own Life of -De Quincey, and of the additional information contained in his edition -of the Posthumous Works. Next comes a series of reminiscences, extracted -from Dr. Japp's Life, from Dr. Garnett's edition of the _Confessions_, -from the _Quarterly Review_, and from other sources all equally -accessible. Then Mr. Hogg himself opens fire with _Days and Nights with -De Quincey_. An essay--"On the supposed Scriptural Expression for -Eternity"--excellently illustrating De Quincey in his senility, is -reprinted, with awe-struck admiration, from the American edition of his -works. - -For the purpose, presumably, of adding to the bulk of the book, Moir's -ballad, _De Quincey's Revenge_, is included, though its sole connection -with De Quincey is, that it deals with a legend concerning the possible -ancestors of a possible branch of his possible family. Then we have one -of Mr. Shadworth Hodgson LL.D.'s _Outcast Essays_, "On the genius of De -Quincey," the reason for the hospitable entertainment of the outcast -being by no means apparent. Among other dreary trifles is a reprint of -a Latin theme, one of De Quincey's college exercises. As Mr. Hogg has -chosen to reprint and translate this, it would have been as well to -print and translate it correctly. "Qu ansibus obstant" should, of -course, have been "ausibus," and "oculi perstringuntur" cannot possibly -mean "are spellbound," but "are dazzled." - -The republication of these pieces was, we repeat, a great mistake, -another lamentable illustration of the cruel wrong which officious and -ill-judging admirers may inflict on a writer's reputation. Talleyrand -once observed that, a wise man would be safer with a foolish than with a -clever wife, for a foolish wife could only compromise herself, but a -clever wife might compromise her husband. Substituting 'unambitious' for -'foolish' and 'ambitious' for 'clever,' we are very much inclined to -apply the same remark to a great writer and his friends. It requires a -Johnson to support a Boswell, and a Goethe to support an Eckermann. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 27: See Works. Black's Edit., Vol. I. p. 212, compared with -original Edit., pp. 113-114.] - -[Footnote 28: _Id._, p. 272 and original Edit., pp. 177-178.] - - - - -LEE'S _LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE_[29] - -[Footnote 29: _A Life of Shakespeare._ By Sidney Lee.] - - -It is a pleasure to turn from the slovenly and perfunctory work, from -the plausible charlatanry and pretentious incompetence which it has so -often been our unwelcome duty to expose in these columns, to such a -volume as the volume before us. It is books like these which retrieve -the honour of English scholarship. A wide range of general knowledge, -immense special knowledge, scrupulous accuracy, both in the -investigation and presentation of facts, the sound judgment, the tact, -the insight which in labyrinths of chaotic traditions and conflicting -testimony can discern the clue to probability and truth--these are the -qualifications indispensable to a successful biographer of Shakespeare. -And these are the qualifications which Mr. Lee possesses, in larger -measure than have been possessed by any one who has essayed the task -which he has here undertaken. A ranker and more tangled jungle than that -presented by the traditions, the apocrypha, the theories, the -conjectures which have gradually accumulated round the memory of -Shakespeare since the time of Rowe, could scarcely be conceived. In this -jungle some, like Charles Knight, have altogether lost themselves; -others, like Joseph Hunter, have struck out vigorously into wrong -tracks, and floundered into quagmires. Halliwell Phillipps, sure-footed -and wary though he was, certainly had not the clue to it. But Mr. Lee, -who can plainly say with Comus,-- - - "I know each lane, and every alley green, - Dingle or bushy dell of this wild wood, - And every bosky bourne from side to side, - My daily walks and ancient neighbourhood," - -has thridded it, and taught others to thrid it, as no one else has done. -And he will have his reward. He has produced what deserves to be, and -what will probably become, the standard life of our great national poet. - -Mr. Lee's book is substantially a reproduction of his article on -Shakespeare, contributed to the _Dictionary of National Biography_, the -high merits of which have long been recognised by scholars; and he has -certainly done well to make that article popularly accessible by -reprinting it in a separate form. But the present volume is not a mere -reproduction of his contribution to the Dictionary; it is much more. He -has here filled out what he could there sketch only in outline; what he -could there state only as results and conclusions, he here illustrates -and justifies by corroboration and proof. He has, moreover, both in the -text and in the appendices, brought together a great mass of interesting -and pertinent collateral matter which the scope of the Dictionary -necessarily precluded. - -More than a century ago George Steevens wrote: "All that can be known -with any degree of certainty about Shakespeare is that he was born at -Stratford-on-Avon, married and had children there, went to London, where -he commenced actor, wrote poems and plays, returned to Stratford, made -his will, died, and was buried there." And, if we set aside probable -inferences, this is all we do know of any importance about his life. His -pedigree cannot certainly be traced beyond his father. Nothing is known -of the place of his education--that he was educated at the Stratford -Grammar School is pure assumption. His life between his birth and the -publication of _Venus and Adonis_ in 1593, is an absolute blank. It is -at least doubtful whether the supposed allusion to him in Greene's -_Groat's Worth of Wit_, and in Chettle's _Kind Heart's Dream_ have any -reference to him at all; it is still more doubtful whether the William -Shakespeare of Adrian Quiney's letter, or of the Rogers and Addenbroke -summonses, or the William Shakespeare who was assessed for property in -St. Helens, Bishopsgate, was the poet. We know practically nothing of -his life in London, or of the date of his arrival in London; we are -ignorant of the date of his return to Stratford, of his happiness or -unhappiness in married life, of his habits, of his last days, of the -cause of his death. Not a sentence that fell from his lips has been -authentically recorded. At least one-half of the alleged facts of his -biography is as purely apocryphal as the life of Homer attributed to -Herodotus. - -But probability, as Bishop Butler says, is the guide of life, and on the -basis of probability may be raised, it must be owned, a fairly -satisfactory biography. Mr. Lee has not been able to contribute any new -facts to Shakespeare's life, which is certainly not his fault; but he -has given us a recapitulation, as lucid as it is exhaustive, of all that -the industry of successive generations of memorialists from Ben Jonson -to Halliwell Phillipps has succeeded in accumulating, and he has been as -judicious in what he has rejected as in what he has adopted. From the -curse of the typical Shakespearian biographer--we mean the statement of -mere inference and hypothesis as fact--he is absolutely free. He has -done excellent service in giving, if not finishing, at least swashing -blows to the monstrous fictions of the theorists on the sonnets, -particularly to the Fitton-Pembroke mare's nest, fictions which have -been gradually generating a Shakespeare, as purely apocryphal as the -Roland of the song or the Apollonius of Philostratus. - -Mr. Lee's most remarkable contribution to speculative Shakespearian -criticism, in which, we are glad to say, he does not often indulge, is -his contention that the W. H. of the dedication to the sonnets was -William Hall, a small piratical stationer. It is never wise to speak -positively on what must necessarily be, till certain evidence is -obtainable, a matter of speculation. But we are very much inclined to -think that Mr. Lee's contention has at least something in its favour. -Our readers will remember that one of the chief points in the enigma of -the sonnets is the dedication, and it runs thus: "To the onlie begetter -of these ensuing Sonnets, Mr. W. H., all happiness and that eternitie -promised by our ever-living poet wisheth the well-wishing adventurer in -setting forth. T. T." It has generally been assumed that the "W. H." is -the youth who is the hero of the first group of sonnets, and the poet's -friend, and he has commonly been identified either with William Herbert, -third Earl of Pembroke, or with Henry Wriothesley, third Earl of -Southampton. The difficulties in the way of either hypothesis--and on -each hypothesis not Babels merely, but cities of Babels have been -raised--are to an unprejudiced mind insurmountable. Mr. Lee maintains -with plausible ingenuity, but not, we think, conclusively, that there is -no proof that the youth of the sonnets was named "Will" at all. His -analysis of the "Will" sonnets is a masterpiece of subtle ingenuity, and -well deserves careful attention. He then proceeds to adopt the theory -that the word "begetter" is not to be taken in the sense of "inspirer," -but simply as "procurer" or "obtainer" of the sonnets for T. T., _i.e._, -the publisher, Thomas Thorpe. In other words, that Thorpe dedicated the -sonnets to W. H., in return for W. H. having piratically obtained them -for him. This is at least doubtful. In the first place it may reasonably -be questioned whether "begetter" could have the meaning which is here -assigned to it; the passages quoted from _Hamlet_ ("acquire and beget a -temperance") and from Dekker's _Satiro-mastix_, "I have some cousins -german at Court shall beget you the reversion of the Master of the -King's Revels," are anything but conclusive. Still, Thorpe, who is by no -means remarkable for the purity of his English, may have used it in the -sense which Mr. Lee's theory requires. - -Shakespeare's sonnets, as is well known, were circulating among his -friends in manuscript, and Mr. Lee has discovered that one William Hall -was well known as an Autolycus among publishers, and had already edited, -under the initials W. H., a collection of poems left by the Jesuit poet, -Southwell--in other words had already done for the publisher, George -Eld, what it is assumed that he now did for Thomas Thorpe. Mr. Lee's -theory is, it must be admitted, plausible, and few would hesitate to -pronounce it far more probable than the theory which would identify the -enigmatical initials with the names of Pembroke or Southampton. - -The chapters dealing with the sonnets are, in our opinion the most -valuable contribution which has ever been made to this important -province of Shakespearian study, and it may be said of Mr. Lee, as -Porson said of Bentley, that we may learn more from him when he is wrong -than from many others when they are right. His contention is, and it is -supported with exhaustive erudition, that these poems are, in the main, -a concession to the fashion, then so much in vogue, of sonnet writing; -that their themes are the conventional themes treated in those -compositions; that some of them were dedicated to Southampton, that some -may be autobiographical, but that they are wholly miscellaneous, and -tell no consecutive story, as so many critics have erroneously assumed. -We cannot accept all Mr. Lee's theories and conclusions, but one thing -is certain, that they are supported with infinitely more skill and -learning than any other theories which have been broached on this -hopelessly baffling problem. - -We will conclude by noticing what seem to us slight blemishes in this -admirable work. There is nothing to warrant the assertion on p. 158 that -most of Shakespeare's sonnets were produced in 1594, which is to cut the -knot of a most difficult question. Indeed, with respect to the whole -question of the sonnets, Mr. Lee is, we venture to submit, a little too -dogmatic. It is a question which no one can settle as positively as Mr. -Lee seems to settle it. There is surely no good, or even plausible -reason for doubting the authenticity of _Titus Andronicus_, whatever -innumerable Shakespearian critics may say, external and internal -evidence alike being almost conclusive for its genuineness. There is -nothing to warrant the supposition that Shakespeare was on bad terms -with his wife. The famous bequest in his Will was probably a delicate -compliment, and we are surprised that Mr. Lee should not have noticed -this. Among the testimonies to Shakespeare in the seventeenth century, -Mr. Lee should have recorded that of Archbishop Sharp, who, according to -Speaker Onslow, used to say "that the Bible and Shakespeare had made him -Archbishop of York." - -Mr. Lee must also forgive us for adding that, in this work at least, -sthetic criticism is not his strong point, and he would have done well -to keep it within even narrower bounds than he has done. Many of those -who would be the first to admire his erudition and the other scholarly -qualities which are so conspicuous in every chapter of his book, will, -we fear, take exception to much of his criticism, especially in relation -to the sonnets. It is too positive; it is unsympathetic; it is too -mechanical. But our debt to Mr. Lee is so great, that we feel almost -ashamed to make any deductions in our tribute of gratitude. - - - - -SHAKESPEARE'S SONNETS[30] - -[Footnote 30: _The Mystery of Shakespeare's Sonnets: an attempted -Elucidation._ By Cuming Walters. _Testimony of the Sonnets as to the -Authorship of the Shakespearian Plays and Poems._ By Jesse Johnson. -_Shakespeare's Sonnets Reconsidered and in part Re-arranged, with -Introductory Chapters, Notes and a Reprint of the Original 1609 -Edition._ By Samuel Butler.] - - -There goes a story that an ingenuous youth, who had the privilege of an -introduction to Lord Beaconsfield, resolved to make the best of the -occasion, by extracting, if possible, from that astute political sage -the secret of success in life. It might take the form, he thought, of a -little practical advice. For that advice, explaining the object with -which it was asked, he accordingly applied. "Yes," said Lord -Beaconsfield, "I think I can give you some advice which may possibly be -of use to you. Never trouble yourself about The Man in the Iron Mask, -and never get into a discussion about the authorship of the Letters of -Junius." In all seriousness we think it is high time that the "closure" -should be applied to a debate on another "mystery" of which every one -must be tired to death, except perhaps those who contribute to it. If -some progress could be made towards the solution of the Mystery of -Shakespeare's Sonnets, if there was the faintest indication of any dawn -on the darkness, even the wearied reviewer would be patient. But the -thing remains exactly where it was, before this appalling literary -epidemic set in. During the last three or four years scarcely a month -has passed without its "monograph," many of these treatises, mere -replicas of their predecessors, differing only in degrees of stupidity -and uselessness. Mr. Cuming Walters' volume, sensible enough and -intelligent, we quite concede, simply thrashes the straw. It professes -to be an original contribution to the question. There is not a view or -theory in it, which is not now a platitude to every one who has had the -patience to follow this controversy. It analyses the Sonnets; they have -been analysed hundreds of times. It asks who was W. H.; it answers the -question as it has been answered _usque ad nauseam_. It discusses the -dark lady, and lands us in the same shifting quagmire of opinion in -which Mr. Tyler and his coadjutors and opponents have been floundering -for the last four years. It assumes, it rejects, it questions, it -suggests, what has been assumed, rejected, questioned, and suggested -over and over again. Indeed, it may now be said with literal truth that, -unless some fresh discovery is made, nothing new, whether in the way of -absurdity or sense, can be advanced on this subject. But books are -multiplied with such rapidity and in such prodigious numbers in these -days, that they thrive, like cannibals, on one another. The last comer -is simply its forgotten predecessor in disguise. - -But platitude is the very last charge that can be brought against Mr. -Jesse Johnson's contribution to the curiosities of Shakespearian -criticism. The theory advanced here is, that Shakespeare never wrote the -Sonnets at all, that he was quite unequal to their composition, that the -author of them "was probably fifty, perhaps sixty, and that he was -besides a man of genius, which Shakespeare certainly was not. I would -not," says Mr. Jesse Johnson, "deny to Shakespeare great talent. His -success in and with theatres certainly forbids us to do so. That he had -a bent or a talent for rhyming or for poetry, an early and persistent -tradition and the inscription over his grave indicate. And otherwise -there could hardly have been attributed to him so many plays, besides -those written by the author of the Sonnets." Shakespeare may have been -equal to trifles like _Hamlet_ or _Lear_--for Mr. Jesse Johnson would be -the last to dispute the claim made for Shakespeare as a hard-working -playwright clearing his twenty-five thousand dollars a year (Mr. Jesse -Johnson is calculating his income according to the present time)--but -"to Shakespeare working as an actor, adapter or perhaps author came a -very great poet, one who outclassed all the writers of that day, and it -is the poetry of that great unknown which, flowing into Shakespeare's -work, comprises all or nearly all of it which the world treasures or -cares to remember." If we told Mr. Jesse Johnson, and all who resemble -Mr. Jesse Johnson, the truth about their productions, we are quite -certain of one thing--but the one thing of which we are certain it -would, perhaps, be good taste in us to leave unsaid. - -Of a very different order is Mr. Samuel Butler's _Shakespeare's Sonnets -Reconsidered_. This is the work of a scholar, but of a scholar mounted -on a hobby-horse of unusually vigorous mettle. Mr. Butler begins with a -tremendous onslaught on the theories of the Southamptonites, the -Herbertists and the anti-autobiographical party; and in this part of his -work he has certainly much to say which is both pertinent and plausible, -nay, in our opinion, convincing. But he is less successful in -construction than in demolition. His own contention is, that the Sonnets -are undoubtedly autobiographical, and very derogatory to Shakespeare's -moral character. He is satisfied that "Mr. W. H." was the youth who -inspired them, not the youth who simply collected, or procured them, and -gave them to Thorpe, but that this youth was neither the Earl of -Southampton nor the Earl of Pembroke, nor, indeed, any one of superior -social rank to the poet, though this has always been assumed. Adopting -the theory of Tyrwhitt and Malone that the key to the youth's name is to -be found in the seventh line of the twentieth sonnet,-- - - "A man in hew all _Hewes_ in his controlling." - -and deducing, with them, from Sonnets cxxxv., cxxxvi. and cxliii. that -the youth's Christian name was William, Mr. Butler believes, as they -did, that the youth's name was William Hughes, or Hewes; and Mr. Butler -is inclined to identify him, though he speaks, of course, by no means -confidently, with a William Hughes, who served as steward in the -_Vanguard_, _Swiftsure_ and _Dreadnought_, and who died in March, -1636-7. Mr. Butler supports his theories with hypotheses which an -impartial judge of evidence will find it difficult to concede. In the -face of Sonnets xxxvi., xxxvii. and cxxiv. the contention that the youth -was not in a superior social station to the poet cannot be maintained -with any confidence. There are still graver difficulties in the way of -supposing that the Sonnets were written between January, 1585-6 and -December, 1588. That they could be the work of a young man between his -twenty-first and his twenty-fourth year, and have preceded by some four -years the composition of _Venus and Adonis_ and the _Rape of Lucrece_, -is simply incredible; but it is a question which cannot be argued, for -we have nothing but mere hypothesis to go upon. Mr. Butler's -arrangement and interpretation of the Sonnets are, moreover, purely -fanciful. When Mr. Butler would have us believe that some of the Sonnets -in the second group, from cxxvii. to clii., are addressed to and concern -not the woman, but the youth, he asks us to accept a theory which is not -only revolting, but which sets all probability at defiance. Similarly -absurd, he must forgive us for saying, is his grotesquely repulsive -interpretation of Sonnet xxxiv. Nor is there anything to justify the -interpretation placed on Sonnets xxxiii. and xxxiv. or the collocation -of cxxi. All that can be said for Mr. Butler's exceedingly ingenious and -admirably argued theory is, that it supports a view of the question -which, if it admits of no positive confutation, produces no conviction. -No theory, based on an arbitrary arrangement of these poems and on -positive deductions drawn, or rather strained, from most ambiguous -evidence and from pure hypotheses, can possibly be satisfactory. - -The problem presented in these Sonnets is undoubtedly the most -fascinating problem in all literature, and it is as exasperating as it -is fascinating. It appears to be so simple, it seems constantly to be on -the verge of its solution, and yet the moment we get beyond a certain -point in inquiry, the more complex its apparent simplicity is discovered -to be, the more hopeless all prospect of explaining the enigma. Take -the difficulty of assuming, what seems to be obvious, that they are -autobiographical. Here we have the poet, and that poet Shakespeare, -admitting the world into the innermost secrets of his life, taking his -contemporaries, without the least reserve, into his confidence, inviting -and assisting them to the study of his own morbid anatomy, and, in a -word, stripping himself bare with all the shameless abandon of Jean -Jacques and of Casanova. Everything that we know of Shakespeare seems to -discountenance the probability of his having any such intention. No -anecdote, with the smallest pretence to authenticity, couples his name -with scandal. The theory which identifies him with the W. S. of -Willobie's _Avisa_ has no real basis to rest on, and without -corroboration is absolutely inadmissible as evidence. Whatever -Shakespeare's private life may have been, it is quite clear that he -carefully regarded the decencies, and would have been the last man in -the world to pose publicly in the character presented to us in the -Sonnets. If the poems are autobiographical, we can only conclude that -they were published without his consent, and even to his great -annoyance. This may certainly have been the case, and is indeed often -assumed to have been so. But even then it is, to say the least, curious, -that there should have been no tradition about the extraordinary story -which they tell, especially considering the distinction of the _dramatis -person_. Assuming that the youth, who is their hero, was a real person, -he must, judging from Sonnets xxxvi., xxxvii. and cxxiv., have been -conspicuous in the society of that time; assuming the rival poet to be a -real person, he must have been equally conspicuous in another sphere, -while Shakespeare himself, at the time the Sonnets were published, was -the most distinguished poet and playwright in London. It is, therefore, -extraordinary that all traces of an affair in which persons of so much -eminence were involved, and which would have furnished scandal-mongers -with the topics in which such gossips most delight, should have entirely -disappeared. We must either conclude that posterity has been very -unfortunate in the loss of records which would have thrown light on the -matter, or that Shakespeare's contemporaries knew nothing of the facts, -and contented themselves with the poetry; or, lastly, that what we may -call the fable of the Sonnets, the drama in which W. H., "the dark -lady," and the rival poet play their parts, is as fictitious as the plot -of _The Midsummer Night's Dream_ or _The Tempest_. - -It is not our intention to support any of the numerous theories which -pretend to give us the key to these Sonnets, still less to propose any -new one, but simply to show that the enigma presented by them is as -insoluble as ever, and that all attempts to throw light on it have -served to effect nothing more than to make darkness visible and -confusion worse confounded. Let us briefly review the facts. In 1609, -Thomas Thorpe, a well-known Elizabethan bookseller, published a small -quarto volume, entitled _Shakespeare's Sonnets_, having apparently not -obtained them from the poet himself, and to this volume was prefixed the -following dedication:--"To the onlie begetter of these ensuing Sonnets, -Mr. W. H., all happiness and that eternitie promised by our ever-living -poet wisheth the well-wishing adventurer in setting forth. T. T." Here -begins and ends all that is certainly known about W. H. and his relation -to these poems. No one knows who he was; no one knows what is exactly -meant by the word "begetter," whether it is to be taken in the sense of -inspirer, whether that is to say W. H. is the youth celebrated in the -Sonnets--"the master-mistress" of the poet's passion, or whether it -simply means the person who got or procured the poems for Thorpe,--in -which case the identification of the initials is of no consequence, -unless we are to suppose that the youth who inspired them presented them -to Thorpe. Mr. Sidney Lee, in his very able paper in the _Fortnightly -Review_ for February, 1898, and in his Life of Shakespeare, argues that -there is no proof that the youth of the Sonnets was named "Will," though -this has always been assumed to be the case. The evidence on which the -point must be argued will be found in the puns on "Will" in Sonnets -cxxxiv.-vi. and cxliii. It seems to us, we must own, that the balance of -probability, though not certainly in favour of the affirmative, -decidedly inclines towards it. Granting then,--for it is, after all, -only an hypothesis,--that the initials W. H. are those of the youth -celebrated in the Sonnets, to whom are they to be assigned? The youth, -whoever he was, is represented as being in a social position superior to -that of the poet; he has apparently rank and title; he has wealth; he is -young and eminently handsome, his beauty being of a delicate, effeminate -cast; he is highly cultivated and accomplished; he is on terms of the -closest intimacy with the poet, by whom he is passionately beloved; he -lives a free, loose life, and he intrigues with his friend's mistress. - -Passing by all preposterous theories about William Harte, William -Hughes, William Himself and the like, we come to the two names which -seem worth serious consideration, William Herbert, third Earl of -Pembroke, and Henry Wriothesly, third Earl of Southampton. The Pembroke -theory, with Mr. Thomas Tyler's corollary identifying the "dark lady" -with Mary Fitton, has been adopted by Dr. Brandes in his work on -Shakespeare just published. But the difficulties in the way of accepting -it are insuperable. They have been admirably discussed by Mr. Sidney -Lee in the article to which we have referred. In the first place, while -Shakespeare must have been on terms of more than brotherly intimacy with -the youth of the Sonnets, there is no evidence at all that he had ever -been in any other relation with the Earl than in the ordinary one of -servant and patron. The words of Heminge and Condell, in the dedication -of the first folio to Pembroke and his brother, merely state that they -had both of them "prosequted" him with favour; in other words, been to -him what they had been to many other dramatists and men of letters; and -that is the only evidence of any connection between Shakespeare and -Pembroke. Tradition was certainly silent about any relations between -them, for Aubrey, as Mr. Lee has pointed out, though he has collected -much information about both, says nothing about their acquaintanceship, -though he mentions Pembroke's connection with Massinger, and -Southampton's with Shakespeare. But Thorpe's dedication is conclusive -against Pembroke. In 1609, Pembroke, who had succeeded to the title on -the death of his father in January, 1601, was Lord Chamberlain, a Knight -of the Garter, and one of the most distinguished noblemen in England. Is -it credible that Thorpe would address him as Mr. W. H., more especially -as in the other works which he inscribed to him,--and he inscribed -several,--he is careful to give him all his titles, and to address him -with the most fulsome servility? Again, Pembroke, as Mr. Lee points out, -was never a "Mister" at all. As the eldest son of an earl, he was -designated by courtesy Lord Herbert, and as Lord Herbert he is always -spoken of in contemporary records. The appellation "Mr." was not, as Mr. -Lee observes, used loosely, as it is now, and could never have been -applied to any nobleman, whether holding his title by right or by -courtesy. Whatever allowance may be made for a poet's passion and fancy, -some weight must be attached to the insistence made in the Sonnets on -the youth's delicate and effeminate beauty. It is true that we have no -portraits of Pembroke before he arrived at middle age, but those -portraits justify us in concluding that he could never, at any time, -have been distinguished by beauty of the type indicated in the poems. - -Against all this the advocates of the Pembroke theory have nothing to -place but conjectures, a series of insignificant coincidences and the -assumption that the woman in the Sonnets is to be identified with the -woman who bore Herbert a child, Mary Fitton. The publication of Sonnet -xliv. by Jaggard, in 1599, shows that the intrigue between the youth and -the dark lady, which is the central event of the Sonnets, was already, -and had probably been for some time, in full career, while there is no -evidence that Pembroke was involved with Mary Fitton before the summer -of 1600. But what finally disposes of this theory is the testimony -afforded by Lady Newdigate-Newdegate's recently published _Gossip from a -Muniment Room_. Indispensable requisites in the lady of the Sonnets are, -that she should be dark, a "black beauty" with "eyes raven black," with -hair which resembles "black wires," and that she should be a married -woman; but the portraits--and there are two of them--of Mary Fitton, -show that she had a fair complexion, with brown hair and grey eyes; and -she remained unmarried, until long after her connection with Pembroke -had ceased. - -The theory which identifies W. H. with the Earl of Southampton is -slightly more plausible, but the difficulties in the way of accepting it -are, in truth, equally insuperable. This theory has at least one great -point in its favour. Shakespeare was acquainted, and it may be inferred -intimately acquainted, with Southampton, as the dedications of _Venus -and Adonis_ and the _Rape of Lucrece_ indicate. Of his affection and -respect for this nobleman he has left an expression almost as remarkable -as the language of the sonnets. "The love I dedicate to your lordship is -without end.... What I have done is yours; what I have to do is yours: -being part in all I have devoted yours. Were my worth greater, my duty -would show greater." This bears a singularly close resemblance to Sonnet -xxvi.,-- - - "Lord of my love, to whom in vassalage - Thy merit hath my duty strongly knit, - To thee I send this written embassage - To witness duty, not to show my wit, - Duty so great, which wit so poor as mine - May make seem bare, in wanting words to show it." - -And there is much in the Sonnets which can be made to coincide with what -we know of Southampton. But, as we push inquiry, difficulties of all -kinds begin to swarm in on us. The first is, as in the case of Pembroke, -with the dedication. To say nothing of the fact that "W. H." is not "H. -W."--the possibility of the appellation of "Mr." being applied to one -who had been an Earl since 1581, and who had twice been addressed in -dedications by his full titles, and that by Shakespeare himself, is a -wholly inadmissible hypothesis. To argue that this was merely "a blind," -is simply to beg the question. If the Sonnets were addressed to -Southampton, they must have been written between 1593 and 1598. In 1593 -Southampton was in his twenty-first year, in 1598 in his twenty-sixth; -Shakespeare, respectively, in his thirty-first and thirty-fifth year. -Now, what is especially emphasized in the sonnets is the youthfulness of -the young man to whom they are dedicated, and the advanced age of the -poet. In Sonnet cviii. the youth is addressed as "a sweet boy," in -cxxvi. as "a lovely boy," in liv. as "a beauteous and lovely youth"; in -xcv. his "budding name" is referred to, while the poet speaks of -himself as "old," as "beaten and chopped with tanned antiquity," as -being "with Time's injurious hand crushed and o'erworn." And so, as has -been more than once pointed out, we have this anomaly--a man of -thirty-four describing himself as a thing of "tanned antiquity" in -writing to "a sweet and lovely boy" of twenty-five. No one could have -been less like the effeminate youth of the Sonnets than Southampton. All -we know about him, including his portraits, indicates that he was -eminently masculine and manly. Again, it is matter of history that he -greatly distinguished himself on the Azores expedition in 1597, -acquitting himself with so much gallantry that, during the voyage, he -was knighted by Essex. To this expedition, which must have involved one -of those absences of which we hear so much in the Sonnets, to this -exploit and this honour, which afforded so much opportunity for -peculiarly acceptable compliment, Shakespeare makes no reference at all. -There is nothing to indicate that the youth of the Sonnets had gained -any military or political distinction, had taken any part in public -life, or had ever been absent from England. To assume with Mr. Lee that -the Sonnets were written in or before 1594, and therefore before -Southampton had become distinguished, is to involve ourselves in -inextricable difficulties. Even Mr. Lee admits that Sonnet cvii. must -have reference to the death of Elizabeth in 1603. With regard to the -supposed references to Southampton's relations with Elizabeth Vernon, no -certain, or, to speak more accurately, no even plausible inferences can -be drawn in any particular: all that they can be reduced to are degrees -of improbability. - -If, again, we accept the theory of Tyrwhitt and Malone, supported by Mr. -Butler, and suppose that W. H. was some obscure person, we are -proceeding on mere hypothesis, and a hypothesis seriously shaken by the -plain meaning expressed in Sonnets xxxvi., xxxvii., and cxxiv. - -The enigma of these Sonnets is, we repeat, as insoluble now as it was -when inquiry was first directed to them. Whether they are to be regarded -as autobiographical, as dramatic studies, as a mixture of both, as a -collection of miscellaneous poems, as written to order for others, as -mere exercises in the sonnet-cycle, or as all of these things, is alike -uncertain. Our knowledge of the time of their composition begins and -ends with the facts, that some of them were, presumably, in circulation -in or before 1598, that two of them had certainly been composed in or -before 1599, and that all of them had been written by 1609. The rest is -mere conjecture; and on mere conjecture and mere hypothesis is based -every attempt to solve their mystery. If certainty about them can ever -be arrived at, it can only be attained by evidence of which, as yet, we -have not even an inkling. The probability is, that it was Shakespeare's -intention, or rather Thorpe's intention, to baffle curiosity, and, -except in the judgment of fanatics, he has certainly succeeded in doing -so. - -For our own part we are very much inclined to suspect, that they owed -their origin to the fashion of composing sonnet-cycles, that those -cycles suggested their themes and gave them the ply; that the beautiful -youth, the rival poet, and the dark lady are pure fictions of the -imagination; and that these poems are autobiographical only in the sense -in which _Venus and Adonis_, the _Rape of Lucrece_, _Romeo and Juliet_ -and _Othello_ are autobiographical. - - - - -LANDSCAPE IN POETRY[31] - -[Footnote 31: _Landscape in Poetry from Homer to Tennyson._ By Francis -T. Palgrave.] - - -It would be scarcely possible for a critic of Mr. Palgrave's taste and -learning to produce a treatise on any aspect of poetry, which would not -be full of interest and instruction, and the present volume is a -contribution, and in some respects a memorable contribution, to a -particularly attractive subject of critical inquiry. Its purpose is to -trace the history of descriptive poetry in its relation, that is to say, -to natural objects and more particularly to landscape, by illustrating -its characteristics at different periods, and among different nations. -Beginning with the Homeric poems, Mr. Palgrave reviews successively the -"landscape" of the Greeks, the Romans, the Hebrews, the medival -Italians, the Celts, the Anglo-Saxons, and of our own poets, from the -predecessors of Chaucer to Lord Tennyson. That a work, covering an area -so immense, should be far less satisfactory in some portions than in -others is no more than what might be expected, and Mr. Palgrave would -probably be himself the first to admit that, except when he is dealing -with the classical poetry of Hellas, of ancient and medival Italy, and -of our own country, his treatise has no pretension to adequacy. Even -within these bounds there is much which is irrelevant, and much which is -surprisingly defective. Where, as in a subject like this, the material -at the author's disposal is necessarily so superabundant, surely the -utmost care should have been taken both to keep within the limits of the -theme proposed, and to select the most pertinent and typical -illustrations. But when Mr. Palgrave illustrates "Homeric landscape" by -the simile describing the heifers frisking about the drove of cows in -the fold-yard, and the "Sophoclean landscape" by the simile of the -blast-impelled wave rolling up the shingle, he lays himself open to the -imputation of drawing at random on his commonplace book. Indeed, the -pleasure with which lovers of classical poetry will read this book -cannot fail to be mingled with the liveliest surprise and -disappointment. Take the Homeric poems. If a reader, tolerably well -versed in the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_, were asked for illustrations of the -power with which natural phenomena are described, to what would he turn? -Certainly not to Mr. Palgrave's meagre and trivial examples, three of -which alone have any title to pertinence. He would turn to the winter -landscape in _Iliad_, xii. 278-286, to the lifting of the cloud from -the landscape in _Iliad_, xvi. 296:-- - - +hs d' hot' aph' hypsls koryphs oreos megaloio - kins pykinn nepheln steropgereta Zeus, - ek t' ephanen pasai skopiai kai prones akroi - kai napai, ouranothen d' ar' hyperrhag aspetos aithr.+ - - "As when Zeus, the gatherer of the lightning, moves a thick - cloud from the high head of some mighty mountain, and all the - cliffs and the jutting crags and the dells start into light, - and the immeasurable heaven breaks open to its highest"; - -to the descent of the wind on the sea, _Ib._ xi. 305-308:-- - - +hs hopote Zephyros nephea styphelix - argestao Notoio, bathei lailapi typtn; - pollon de trophi kyma kylindetai, hypsose d' achn - skidnatai ex anemoio polyplanktoio is.+ - - "As when the west wind buffets the cloudlets of the brightening - south wind, lashing them with furious squall, and the big wave - swells up and rolls along, and the spray is scattered on high - by the blast of the careering gale"; - -or to the pictures of the billow-buffeted headland, and the wave -bursting on the ship in _Iliad_, xv. 618-628; or to the storm-cloud -coming over the sea in _Iliad_, iv. 277; or to the descent of the wind -on the standing corn, _Iliad_, ii. 147. He would point, above all, to -the description of Calypso's grotto, in _Odyssey_, v. 63-74; to that of -the harbour of Phorcys, in _Odyssey_, xiii. 97-112; to the fountain in -the grove, xvii. 205-211. Mr. Palgrave comments justly on Homer's minute -observation of nature; but he only gives one illustration, where it is -noticed in _Odyssey_, vi. 94, that the sea, in beating on the coast, -"washed the pebbles clean." He might have added with propriety many -others: as the "earth blackening behind the plough," in _Iliad_, xviii. -548; the bats in the cave, _Odyssey_, xxiv. 5-8; the birds escaping from -the vultures, _Iliad_, xxii. 304, 305; the wasps "wriggling as far as -the middle," +sphkes meson aioloi+, _Iliad_, xii. 167; the dogs -and the lions, _Iliad_, xviii. 585, 586. - -Mr. Palgrave observes that Homer "was not only familiar with the sea, -but loved it with a love somewhat unusual in poets." We venture to -submit that there is not a line in Homer indicating that he "loved" the -sea, except for poetical purposes; like most of the Greeks he probably -dreaded it; his real feeling towards it is no doubt indicated in his own -words:-- - - +ou gar eg ge ti phmi kakteron allo thalasss andra - ge suncheuai.+ - ---nothing crushes a man's spirit more than the sea. Mr. Palgrave justly -points out that Hesiod's rude prosaic style and matter are not congenial -to the poetic landscape, yet it is only fair to Hesiod to say, that his -poetry is not without vivid touches of natural description, as the -winter scene in _Works and Days_, 504 sqq., and his description of the -beginning of spring, 565-569, show. Professor Palgrave next glances at -the treatment of nature in the lyric poets, and very properly cites the -lovely fragment of Alcman: - - +bale d bale krylos ein - hos t' epi kymatos anthos ham' alkyonessi pottai, - nleges tor echn, haliporphyros eiaros ornis,+-- - -but in translating it makes a truly extraordinary blunder. - - "Would I were the kingfisher, as he flies, with his mates _in - his feeble age_, between wind and water." - -+nleges tor+ meaning, as we need hardly say, "reckless heart"; -it is exactly Byron's, "With all her _reckless_ birds upon the wing." In -the quotations from Sappho, Ibycus, and Pindar, Mr. Palgrave has been -judicious and happy, but surely he ought to have found place for the -lovely flower cradle of Iamus in the sixth Olympic Ode, and for the -moonlight evening in the third Olympian,--only seven words, but what a -picture!--while, in the popular poetry, the omission of the Swallow Song -is inexplicable.[32] Nor can we forgive him the omission of the -magnificent simile of the spring wind clearing away the clouds, in the -thirteenth of the fragments attributed to Solon. - -But it is in dealing with the Greek dramatists that Mr. Palgrave is most -defective in illustration. It is not to the opening of the _Prometheus_, -or to the conclusion, or, indeed, to any of the passages from this poet -which Mr. Palgrave cites, that we must turn for schylean landscape, or -for illustration of this poet's power of natural description. It is to -his brief picture--his pictures of scenery, though singularly vivid, are -always brief--of the airy seat "against which the watery clouds drift -into snow," - - +lissas aigilips aprosdeiktos oiophrn kremas - gypias petra+ (_Supplices_, 772-3), - -where almost every word is a perfect picture, literally beggaring mere -translation; it is to his description, so magical in its rhythm, of the -mid-day sea slumbering in summer calm (_Agamemnon_, 548-50), - - + thalpos, eute pontos en mesmbrinais - koitais akymn nnemois eudoi pesn+, - -to his picture of the keen brisk wind, clearing the clouds away, to -bring into relief against the sky the dark masses of waves tossing on -the horizon (_Agamemnon_, 1152-54), to his world-famous - - +pontin kymatn - anrithmon gelasma+. - - "The multitudinous laughter of the ocean waves." - - --_Prometheus_, 89-90. - -Mr. Palgrave has, of course, cited with reference to Sophocles the great -chorus in the _Oedipus Coloneus_, but he has omitted to notice that, -if Sophocles has not elsewhere given us so elaborate a piece of natural -description, innumerable touches in the dramas, and more particularly -in the fragments, show that he observed nature almost as minutely as -Shakespeare. Nothing could be more vivid than the touches of description -in the _Philoctetes_. From Euripides Mr. Palgrave cites nothing, -observing that he rarely goes beyond somewhat conventional phrases. -Surely Mr. Palgrave must have forgotten the magnificent description of -Parnassus, as seen from the plain, in the _Phoeniss_, the glorious -description of a moonlight night, as represented on the tapestry, in the -_Ion_, the vivid touches of natural description in the _Bacch_, that of -the meadow in the _Hippolytus_, and the chorus about Athens in the -_Medea_, to say nothing of the charming rural picture in the fragments -of the _Phaeton_.[33] To say of Aristophanes that, in his treatment of -nature, he rarely goes beyond somewhat common phrases, is to say what is -refuted, not merely in the chorus referred to by Mr. Palgrave, but in -the _Frogs_ and in the _Birds_. He stands next to Homer in his keen -sensibility to the charm of nature. Shelley himself might have written -the choruses referred to. In dealing with the Alexandrian poets Mr. -Palgrave passes over Apollonius Rhodius and Callimachus entirely, and -yet the fine picture of Delos given by Callimachus in the Hymn to Delos -is one of the gems of ancient description, and Apollonius Rhodius -abounds with the most graphic and charming delineations of scenery and -natural objects. What a beautiful description of early morning is -this!-- - - +mos d' ouranothen charop hypolampetai s - ek perats aniousa, diaglaussousi d' atarpoi, - kai pedia drosoenta phaein lampetai aigl.+ - - _Argon._ i. 1280-1283. - - "What time from heaven the bright glad morn coming up from the - East begins to shine, and path and road are all agleam, and the - dew-bespangled plains are flashing with the radiant light." - -How vivid too, and with the vividness of modern poetry, are his -descriptions of the cave of Hades and its neighbourhood (ii. 729-750), -and the Great Syrtis (iv. 1230-1245)! In his selections from the Greek -Anthology Mr. Palgrave is much happier; but here again he has many -omissions, and among them the most remarkable illustration of Greek -nature-painting to be found in that collection--namely, Meleager's idyll -giving an elaborate description of a spring day, which might have been -written by Thomson (_Pal. Anthology_, ix. 363). It may be observed in -passing that +ouresiphoita krina+ (_Pal. Anth._, v. 144) can -hardly mean "lilies that wander over the hills," but lilies "that haunt -the hills," and that +xouthai melissai+ in Theocritus, vii. 142, -probably means "buzzing" bees, not "tawny." - -In dealing with the Roman poets Mr. Palgrave is, with one exception, -most unsatisfactory. From the poets preceding Lucretius, amply as the -fragments would serve his purpose, he gives only one illustration. We -should have expected the vivid picture given by Accius in his -_Oenomaus_ of the early morning: - - "Forte ante Auroram, radiorum ardentum indicem, - Cum e somno in segetem agrestis cornutos cient, - Ut rorulentas terras ferro rufidas - Proscindant, glebasque arvo ex molli exsuscitent." - - "Perchance before the dawn that heralds the burning rays, what - time rustics bring forth the oxen from their sleep into the - cornfields, to break up the red dew-spangled soil with the - ploughshare, and turn up the clods from the soft soil"; - -or the wonderfully graphic description of a sudden storm at sea, in the -fragments of the _Dulorestes_ of Pacuvius: - - "Profectione lti piscium lasciviam - Intuentur, nec tuendi capere satietas potest. - Interea prope jam occidente sole inhorrescit mare, - Tenebr conduplicantur, noctisque et nimbum occcat nigror, - Flamma inter nubes coruscat, clum tonitru contremit, - Grando mixta imbri largifico subita prcipitans cadit, - Undique omnes venti erumpunt, svi existunt turbines, - Fervit stu pelagus." - - "Glad at heart when they set out they gaze at the sporting - fish, and are never weary of looking at them. Meanwhile, hard - upon sunset, the sea ruffles, darkness gathers thick, the - blackness of the storm-clouded night hides everything, flame - flashes between the clouds, heaven shakes with thunder, hail, - mingled with streaming rain, dashes suddenly down, from every - quarter all the winds tear forth, wild whirlwinds rise, the sea - boils with the seething waters." - -With Lucretius, indeed, he deals fully, and this portion of his work -leaves little to be desired. But a reference to the lines to Sirmio and -one illustration from the _Peleus and Thetis_ exhaust his examples from -Catullus. We should have expected the picture of the stream leaping from -the mossy rock into the valley beneath, in the Epistle to Manlius, of -the morning chasing away the shadows in the _Attis_, and the lovely -flower pictures in the Epithalamia. In dealing with Virgil most of Mr. -Palgrave's citations are practically irrelevant; scarcely any of the -passages which best illustrate Virgil's power of landscape painting -being even referred to. "The _neid_," says Mr. Palgrave, "may be -briefly dismissed. Natural description can have but little place in an -epic." And yet what are the passages to which any one, who wishes to -illustrate the charm and power of Virgil's pictures of scenery, would -naturally turn? Surely to these: the description of the rocky recess -which sheltered neas's ships (_neid_, i. 159-168), a picture worthy of -Salvator; the picture of tna (iii. 570-582), which rivals the picture -of it given by Pindar, a picture praised so justly by Mr. Palgrave -himself; the description of a calm night (iv. 522-527); the -wave-buffeted, gull-haunted rock (v. 124-128); and, above all, the -scenery at the mouth of the Tiber, bathed in the rays of the morning -sun, a picture unexcelled even by Tennyson. Nor even in the _Georgics_ -is any reference made to the superb description of a storm in harvest -time (i. 216-334), or to the magnificent winter piece (iii. 349-370). - -The remarks about the indifference of Propertius to natural scenery are -most unjust. What a charming picture is this!-- - - "Grata domus Nymphis humida Thyniasin, - Quam supra null pendebant debita cur - Roscida desertis poma sub arboribus; - Et circum irriguo surgebant lilia prato - Candida purpureis mixta papaveribus." - - _El._, I. xx. 35-39. - -It may be conceded that Ovid is conventional and commonplace in his -treatment of nature; but why is Valerius Flaccus, with his bold, vivid -touches, left unnoticed? Why does one citation suffice for the many -exquisite cameos which ought to have been given from Statius? Another -inexplicable omission in Mr. Palgrave's work is the poem entitled -_Ros_, attributed to Ausonius--a lovely poem, infinitely more beautiful -than the epigram quoted by Mr. Palgrave from the Latin Anthology, and -rivalling the fragment given by him from Tiberianus. Most readers would -agree with him in his estimate of Claudian, but he might have added the -fine description of Olympus in the _De Consulatu Theodori_, 200-210: - - "Ut altus Olympi - Vertex, qui spatio ventos hiemesque relinquit, - Perpetuum null temeratus nube serenum - Celsior exsurgit pluviis, auditque ruentes - Sub pedibus nimbos, et rauca tonitrua calcat;" - -which Goldsmith, by the way, has borrowed and paraphrased in the -_Deserted Village_, together with its sublime application: - - As some tall cliff that lifts its awful form - Swells from the vale and midway leaves the storm, - Though round its breast the rolling clouds are spread, - Eternal sunshine settles round its head. - -Space does not serve to follow Mr. Palgrave through his chapters on -Italian, Celtic, and Anglo-Saxon poetry, in all of which his omissions -are as remarkable as his citations; so we must content ourselves with -making a few remarks on his treatment of the English poets. It is -pleasing to see that, guided by Gray, he has done justice to Lydgate, -but he has not noticed the distinguishing peculiarity of this poet in -his description, his extraordinary sensitive appreciation of colour. - -Among the Scotch poets of the fifteenth century a prominent place should -have been given to Henryson who is not even mentioned. Mr. Palgrave -hurries over the Elizabethan poets with too much expedition, and the -poets of the eighteenth century fare even worse. Great injustice is done -to Thomson. Why did not Mr. Palgrave, instead of citing what he calls -Thomson's "cold" tropical landscape, for the purpose of contrasting it -unfavourably with Tennyson's picture in _Enoch Arden_, give us instead -the Summer morning-- - - "At first faint gleaming in the dappled East - ... Young day pours in apace, - And opens all the lawny prospect wide, - The dripping rock, the mountain's misty tops - Swell on the sight, and brighten with the dawn, - Blue through the dusk the smoking currents shine," - -or - - "The clouds that pass, - For ever flushing round a summer sky"; - -or the rainbow in the _Lines to the Memory of Sir Isaac Newton_? Dyer -may be somewhat prosaic, but he is not a poet to be despatched in a -treatise on descriptive poetry, without citation, in a few contemptuous -lines: how vivid is his picture of a calm in the tropics!-- - - "The dewy feather, on the cordage hung, - Moves not; the flat sea shines, like yellow gold - Fused in the fire"; - -or his - - "Rocks in ever-wild - Posture of falling"; - -or the charming landscape in _Grongar Hill_ with such touches as these: - - "The windy summit wild and high - Roughly rushing on the sky"; - -or - - "Rushing from the woods the spires - Seem from hence ascending fires." - -As Wordsworth said, "Dyer's beauties are innumerable and of a high -order." It is very surprising that nothing should have been said about -Shenstone and the Wartons, about Scott of Amwell, Jago, Crowe and -Bowles, all of whom are, in various ways, remarkable as descriptive -poets. And certainly Mr. Palgrave does scant justice to Cowper; his -touch may be prosaic, but he always had his eye on the object, and his -landscape lives. Surely, by the way, Mr. Palgrave is mistaken in -supposing that Shelley apparently understood Alastor to mean a -"wanderer"; he understood it, as the preface shows, to mean, what it -means so often in Greek, "one under the spell of an avenging deity." - -Here we must break off. Mr. Palgrave's is an important work, and it is -the duty, therefore, of a critic to review it seriously, in the hope -that, should it reach a second edition, which may be confidently -anticipated, Mr. Palgrave may be disposed to do a little more justice to -his most interesting subject. - - Since this article was written Mr. Palgrave's lamented death - has unhappily rendered all hope of what was anticipated in the - last paragraph, vain. But the review has been reprinted, and - with some additions, in the hope that it may not be - unacceptable as a contribution, however slight and imperfect, - to a subject of great interest to lovers of poetry. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 32: See Bergk, Poet. Lyr. _Carm._ Pop. xxix.] - -[Footnote 33: Nauck, _Trag. Grc. Frag._, p. 473.] - - - - -AN APPRECIATION OF PROFESSOR PALGRAVE - - -A familiar figure in literary circles, a fine critic, a graceful and -scholarly minor poet, and one whose name will long be held in -affectionate remembrance by lovers of English poetry, has passed away in -the person of Francis Turner Palgrave. It would be absurd to place him -beside Matthew Arnold--to whose genius, to whose characteristic -accomplishments, to whose authority and influence, he had no pretension. -And yet it may be questioned whether, after Arnold, any other critic of -our time contributed so much to educate public taste where, in this -country, it most needs such education. If, as a nurse of poets and in -poetic achievement, England stands second to no nation in Europe, in no -nation in the world has the standard of popular taste been so low, has -the insensibility to what is excellent, and the perverse preference of -what is mediocre to what is of the first order, been so signally, so -deplorably, conspicuous. The generation which produced Wordsworth -preferred Moore, and no less a person than the author of _Vanity Fair_ -wrote:--"Old daddy Wordsworth may bless his stars if he ever gets high -enough in Heaven to black Tommy Moore's boots." While the readers of -Keats might have been numbered on his fingers, Robert Montgomery's -_Satan_ and _Omnipresence of the Deity_ were going through their twelfth -editions. During many years, for ten readers of Browning's poems there -were a hundred thousand for Martin Tupper's _Proverbial Philosophy_, -while the popularity of Mrs. Browning was as a wan shadow to the -meridian splendour of Eliza Cook. Whoever will turn to the criticism of -current reviews and magazines forty years ago will have no difficulty in -understanding the diathesis described by Matthew Arnold as "on the side -of beauty and taste, vulgarity; on the side of morality and feeling, -coarseness; on the side of mind and spirit, unintelligence." Whoever -will turn to nine out of the ten Anthologies, most in vogue before 1861, -will understand, that the same instinct which in the Dark Ages led man -to prefer Sedulius and Avitus to Catullus and Horace, Statius to Virgil, -and Hroswitha to Terence, led these editors to analogous selections. - -Making every allowance for the co-operation of other causes, it would -hardly be an exaggeration to say that the appearance of the _Golden -Treasury of Songs and Lyrics_ in 1861 initiated an era in popular taste. -It remains now incomparably the best selection of its kind in -existence. Its distinctive feature is the characteristic which -differentiates it from all the anthologies which preceded or have -followed it. It was to include nothing which was not first-rate; there -was to be no compromise with the second-rate; if its gems varied, as -gems do in value, each was to be of the first water. With patient and -scrupulous diligence, the whole body of English poetry, from Surrey to -Wordsworth, was explored and sifted. After due rejections, each piece in -the residue was considered, weighed, tested. And here Mr. Palgrave had -assistance, more invaluable than any other anthologist in the world has -had--that of the illustrious poet to whom the volume was dedicated. It -may be safely said of Tennyson that nature and culture had qualified him -for being as great a critic as he was a poet. His taste was probably -infallible; his touchstones and standards were derived not merely from -the masters who had taught him his own art, but from a wonderfully -catholic and sympathetic communion with all that was best in every -sphere of influential artistic activity. The consequence is, that a book -like the _Golden Treasury_, especially when taken in conjunction with -the notes, which form an admirable commentary on the text, may be said -to lay something more than the foundation of a sound critical education. -What the _Golden Treasury_ is to readers of a maturer age the -_Children's Treasury_ is to younger readers. It is a great pity that -such inferior works as many which we could name are allowed, in our -schools, to supplant such a work as Palgrave's. The same exquisite taste -and nice discernment mark his other anthologies, his selections from -Herrick, and Tennyson, and, though perhaps in a less degree, his -_Treasury of English Sacred Poetry_, and his recently published -supplement to the _Golden Treasury_. It is probably impossible to -over-estimate the salutary influence which these works have exercised. - -There is no arguing on matters of taste, and exception might easily be -taken, sometimes, to his dicta as a critic. But this at least must be -conceded by everybody, that in the best and most comprehensive sense of -the term he was a man of classical temper, taste, and culture, and that -he had all the insight and discernment, all the instincts and -sympathies, which are the result of such qualifications. He had no taint -of vulgarity, of charlatanism, of insincerity. He never talked or wrote -the cant of the cliques or of the multitude. He understood and clung to -what was excellent; he had no toleration for what was common and second -rate; he was not of the crowd. He belonged to the same type of men as -Matthew Arnold and William Cory, a type peculiar to our old Universities -before things took the turn which they are taking now. It will be long -before we shall have such critics again, and their loss is -incalculable. - -As a scholar Palgrave was rather elegant than profound or exact, and, to -judge from a series of lectures delivered by him as Professor of Poetry -at Oxford, on _Landscape in Classical Poetry_, and afterwards published -in a work which is here reviewed, his acquaintance with the Greek and -Roman poets was, if scholarly and sympathetic, somewhat superficial. But -he was getting old, and perhaps he had lost his memory or his notes. As -a poet he was the author of four volumes, the earliest, published in -1864, entitled _Idylls and Songs_, and the latest, published in 1892, -_Amenophis; and other Poems_. But his most ambitious effort appeared in -1882, _Visions of England_, written with the laudable purpose of -stirring up in the young the spirit of patriotism. His poetry may be -described, not inaptly, in the sentence in which Dr. Johnson sums up the -characteristics of Addison's verses:--"Polished and pure, the production -of a mind too judicious to commit faults, but not sufficiently vigorous -to attain excellence." Perhaps they served their end in procuring for -him the honourable appointment which he filled competently for ten -years--that of the Professorship of Poetry at Oxford. It may be said of -him as was said of Southey, he was a good man and not a bad poet, or of -Agricola, _decentior quam sublimior fuit_. But as a critic of Belles -Lettres he was excellent. - - - - -ANCIENT GREEK AND MODERN LIFE[34] - -[Footnote 34: _Some Aspects of the Greek Genius._ By S. H. Butcher, -Litt. D., LL.D. London.] - - -That a second edition of Professor Butcher's essays on _Some Aspects of -the Greek Genius_ should have been called for so soon is assuredly a -very significant fact. And it is significant in more ways than one. It -not only goes far to refute Lord Coleridge's theory that Greek has lost -its hold on modern life, but it furnishes one of the many proofs, which -we have recently had, that people are beginning to understand what is -now to be expected from classical scholars, if classical scholars are to -hold their own in the world of to-day, and that scholars are, in their -turn, aware that they no longer constitute an esoteric guild for -esoteric studies. The task of the purely philological labourer has been -accomplished. During more than four centuries, succeeding schools of -literal critics have been toiling to furnish mankind with the means of -unlocking the treasures of classical Greece. Till within comparatively -recent times, the power of reading the Greek classics with accuracy and -ease was an accomplishment beyond the reach of any but specialists. -Unless a student was prepared to grapple with the difficulties of -unsettled and often unintelligible texts, to make his own grammar--nay, -his own dictionary--to choose between conflicting and contradictory -interpretations, and, in a word, to possess all that now would be -required in a classical editor, it would be impossible for him to read, -with any comfort, a chorus of schylus or Sophocles, an ode of Pindar, -or a speech in Thucydides. But now all these difficulties have vanished. -Excellent lexicons, grammars, commentaries, and translations, with -settled texts, and editions of the principal Greek classics so -satisfactory that practically they leave nothing to be desired, have -rendered what was once the monopoly of mere scholars common property. -The power of reading Greek with accuracy and comfort is now, indeed, -within the reach of any person of average intelligence and industry. - -But prescription and tradition are tenacious of their privileges. Greek -has so long been regarded as the inheritance of philologists, that they -are not prepared to resign what was once their exclusive possession, -without a struggle. It is useless to point out to them that, if Greek is -to maintain its place in modern education, it can only maintain it by -virtue of its connection with the humanities, by virtue of its -intrinsic value as the expression of genius and art, and of its -historical value as the key to the development and characteristics of -the classics of the modern world; by virtue, in fine, of its relation to -life, and its relation to History and Criticism. The revival, indeed, of -the _trivium_ and _quadrivium_ of the Middle Ages would not be an -absurder anachronism than it is to draw no distinction between the -functions and aims of classical scholarship, when it was, necessarily, -confined to philologists and specialists, and its functions and aims at -the present day. It has been the obstinate determination on the part of -academic bodies not to recognise this distinction, but to preserve Greek -as the monopoly of those who approach it only on the side of -philological specialism, which has led to its complete dissociation in -our scholastic system from what constitutes its chief, almost its sole -title to preservation. At Cambridge, for example, it has been expressly -excluded from the only School in which the study of Literature has been -organized, and an attempt to substitute Modern Languages in its -place--for a degree in arts--was only defeated by the intervention of -non-resident members of the University. At Oxford a scheme for a "School -of Literature," in which Greek was to have no place, might, not long ago -have been carried, and the casting vote of the proctor alone saved the -University from this disgrace, and Greek from a crushing blow.[35] But, -fortunately for the cause of Greek, there is every indication that a -reaction, too strong for academic bodies to resist, is setting in. -Scholars are beginning to see that what Socrates did for Philosophy must -now be done for Greek, if Greek is to hold its own. Thus, it has -preserved, and no doubt may preserve, its esoteric side; but that which -constitutes its chief, its real importance--which justifies its -retention in modern education--is not what appeals, and can only appeal, -in each generation, to a small circle of "specialists"--its philological -interest, but what appeals to liberal intelligence, to men as men, to -the poet, to the philosopher, to the orator, to the critic. To this end, -to what may be described as the vitalization of Greek, all the labours -of the late Professor Jowett were directed; and by his means Plato, -Thucydides, and Aristotle are brought into influential relation with -modern life. What he effected for them Professor Jebb has effected for -Sophocles, and not only has this unrivalled Greek scholar placed within -the reach of any person of average intelligence all that is necessary -for the elucidation of the language, art, and philosophy of the -Shakespeare of the Athenian stage, but he has not disdained to furnish a -popular manual of Homeric study, and a popular elementary guide-book to -Greek literature. Professor Lewis Campbell has laboured in the same -field and in the same cause. Great also have been the services rendered -to the popularization of Greek by Mr. Andrew Lang, Mr. Ernest Myers, Mr. -Walter Leaf, and many other distinguished scholars, all of whom have -shown, both by their published works and as lecturers, that the -masterpieces of ancient Greece may become as intelligible and -influential in the world of to-day as they were more than two thousand -years ago. - -We welcome with joy the advent of Professor Butcher among these -prophets. Few names stand higher than his in the roll of modern -scholars, and assuredly few modern scholars possess, in so large a -measure, the power of applying scholarship to the purposes of liberal -criticism and exegesis. He has written a delightful book, in a pleasant -style, full of learning, suggestive, stimulating, a book which no -student of Greek literature can lay down without a hearty feeling of -gratitude to the author. Porson said of Bentley that more might be -learned from his work when he was in error than from the work of a rival -scholar when he was in the right. We shall not presume to accuse -Professor Butcher of error, but we are bound to say that there is much -in his book which appears to us very questionable, and much also from -which we entirely dissent. - -Professor Butcher discusses, for example, at great length, the leading -characteristics of the Greek temper, but, in drawing his conclusions, he -has not sufficiently distinguished between what was more or less -accidental and what was essentially peculiar. The fact is that nothing -is so easy as generalisations of this kind, if the deduction of half -truth be our aim; and nothing so difficult if whole truth, or truth -which may be accepted without reserve, is to be the result. The most -mobile, plastic, Protean people who have ever lived, their activity, -within the strict limits of classical literature, extended over about -six centuries, and, if we protract it to the point included in Professor -Butcher's illustrations, to more than nine centuries. Of their -literature, though we appear to have the best of it, not a third part -has survived. By an adroit use of illustration, it is, therefore, easy -to predicate anything of them. Go to serious epic, to serious as -distinguished from passionate lyric, to tragedy, to threnody, and they -were, if you please, the gravest people on earth's face; go to -Aristophanes and to the poets of the Old Comedy, and they were the -merriest; go to the Ionic Elegists and to the fragments of the New -Comedy, and they were the saddest and most cynical; go to Thucydides, -Plato, and Aristotle, and they were, like Dante's sages, _ni tristi ni -lieti_. We do not quarrel with Professor Butcher's general position in -his Essay on the melancholy of the Greeks, or question that there -existed in certain moods a profound melancholy and dissatisfaction with -life in the Greek temper. But of what intelligent and reflective people -or individual who have ever existed is this not equally true? Where we -do quarrel with Professor Butcher is on the following point, the point -on which he chiefly rests in proving that the Greeks were pre-eminently -distinguished by pessimistic melancholy--an assertion that we deny _in -toto_. He tells us that, with one notable exception, to which he -subsequently adds three others, the Greeks regarded hope not as a solace -and support in life, but as a snare and a delusion, not as a power to -cling to, but as an influence fraught with mischief. Nothing surely can -be more erroneous. The wisest people who have ever lived are not likely -to have confounded baseless and flighty desires or aspirations with what -is implied in hope, though Professor Butcher has done so in the -illustrations advanced by him in support of his theory. All through -Greek literature, from Hesiod to Theocritus--not to go further--the -importance and wisdom of cherishing hope, as one of the chief supports -of life, are emphatically dwelt on. Professor Butcher has surely -misrepresented--certainly schylus and the Greeks generally did not -interpret it in the sense in which he has done--the fable of Pandora's -chest. It was not "as part of the deadly gift of the goddess" that hope -was there; it was as the one blessing amid the crowd of ills. "As long -as a man lives," says Theognis, "let him wait on hope.... Let him pray -to the gods; and to Hope let him sacrifice first and last" (1143-1146). -Pindar, if he warns man against baseless, wild, or extravagant -expectation, is emphatic on the wisdom of cherishing hope. It is "the -sweet nurse of the heart in old age," "the chief helmsman of man's -versatile will." (_Fragment_, 233.) "A man should cherish good hope." -(_Isth._, vii. 15.) "It is the wing on which soaring manhood is -supported." (Pythian, viii. 93.) "The wise," says Euripides, "must -cherish hope." (_Frag. of Ino._) Again: "Prudent hope must be your stay -in misfortune." (_Id._) Life, he says in the _Troades_ (628), is -preferable to death, in that it has hopes. A sentiment repeated by -Euripides again in the _Hercules Furens_ (105-6): "That man is the -bravest who trusts to hope under all circumstances; to be without hope -is the part of a coward." So Menander: "Hold before yourself the shield -of good hope." (_Incert. Frag._ xlvii.) The passages quoted by Professor -Butcher from Thucydides are not to the point. It would have been much -more to the point had he quoted the passage in which Pericles eulogizes -those who "committed to hope the uncertainty of success" (II. 42), or -the passage (I. 70) in which the superiority of the Athenians to the -Lacedmonians in civil and military efficiency is largely attributed to -their reliance on hope. Again, what, according to Cephalus, in the -_Republic_, is the chief solace of old age?--"The abiding presence of -sweet hope." But it would be easy to multiply indefinitely from the -Greek classics what Professor Butcher calls "rare examples of hope in -the happier aspect." - -The most important chapters in Professor Butcher's work--indeed they -occupy nearly one half of it--are those dealing with Aristotle's theory -of fine art and poetry. On no subject in criticism have there been so -many misconceptions current and influential even among scholars, -originating for the most part from mistranslations and misunderstandings -of the treatise in which they find their chief embodiment--the -_Poetics_. This has unfortunately come down to us in a very imperfect -and corrupt state, and, what is more unfortunate still, it became a -classic in criticism long before it was properly understood. Thus, in -the clause in the famous definition of tragedy, where Aristotle -describes it as +di' eleou kai phobou perainousa tn tn toioutn -pathmatn katharsin+, "through pity and fear effecting the purgation of -these emotions," the French and English critics of the seventeenth and -eighteenth centuries, ignoring the words +tn toioutn+, have -totally misinterpreted the passage, and given it a meaning which was not -only not intended by Aristotle, but which has falsified his whole theory -of the scope and functions of tragedy. An unsound text, the insertion -of +alla+ before the clause, sent Lessing on a wrong track. From -the misinterpretation of another passage in the treatise (V. 4) has been -deduced the famous doctrine of the Unities. The mistranslation of -+spoudaios+ in the definition of Tragedy, and of the same word in -the comparison between Poetry and History, has led to misconceptions on -other points. The scholars who did most in England to place the study of -this treatise on a sound footing were Twining and Tyrwhitt. In the -present century it has received exhaustive illustration from -Saint-Hilaire, Stahr, Susemihl, Vahlen, Teichmller, Ueberweg, Reinkens, -Jacob Bernays, and others; while such works as E. Mller's _Geschichte -der Theorie der Kunst bei den Alten_ have thrown general light on the -question of Greek sthetics. That Professor Butcher has not been able to -advance anything new in these essays is very creditable to him, for the -simple reason that, as all that is worth saying has been said, his sole -resource, had he attempted to be original, would have been paradox and -sophistry. With regard to the question of the _Katharsis_, it will -probably be, for all time, a case of "quot homines tot sententi"; and -we have certainly no intention of accompanying Professor Butcher into -this labyrinth. We entirely agree with him and Bernays that the passage -in the _Politics_ (V. viii. 7) settles conclusively at least one part of -the meaning, but we differ from Bernays, in contending that the -"lustratio" is included, and from Professor Butcher, in contending that -the "lustratio" is not effected merely by the relief. Professor Butcher -seems here indeed to be a little confused, or at all events confusing. -He first explains "katharsis" as "a purging away of the emotions of pity -and fear," and then explains it as "a purifying of them"; but it is -neither easy to understand how "purging away" is "purifying," nor why we -should "purify" what we "purge away." Surely it is better--but we speak -with all submission--to take the word in two different meanings, the one -signifying the immediate effect of tragedy in its direct appeal to the -passions referred to, the other not to its immediate, but to its -ulterior and total effect in educating the passions thus excited. - -Professor Butcher, who appears to belong to the Pater School, dwells -with great complacency on the fact that Aristotle "attempted to separate -the function of sthetics from that of morals," that "he made the end of -art reside in a pleasurable emotion," that he says "nothing of any moral -aim in poetry," and that though he often takes exception to Euripides as -an artist, "he attaches no blame to him for the immoral tendency in some -of his dramas," so severely censured by Aristophanes. If Professor -Butcher implies, as he seems to imply by this, that Aristotle would lend -any countenance to the modern art-for-art's-sake doctrine, and -proceeded on the assumption that there was no necessary connection -between sthetics and morals, he does Aristotle very great injustice, -and is refuted by the _Poetics_ themselves. In the fifth chapter -Aristotle lays stress on the fact that tragedy is, like epic, a -representation of "superior or morally good characters" (+mimsis -spoudain+)--that the characters are to be good (+chrsta+). In -the twenty-fifth chapter he says that nothing can excuse the exhibition -of moral depravity (+mochthria+), unless it be one of the things -implicit in the plot; and that among the most serious objections which -can be brought against a drama is that it is likely to do moral harm -(+blabera+). In the thirteenth chapter he shows,--and on moral -grounds,--why the protagonist in a tragedy should not be a perfectly -good man or a perfectly bad man. Indeed, the very definition of tragedy -refutes Professor Butcher's statement. It may be said, no doubt, that -Aristotle maintains that the end of poetry is pleasure, but it must be -"the proper pleasure," and in the proper pleasure moral satisfaction is -implied.[36] It is only by a quibble that Professor Butcher's theory can -be supported, and it is a pity to quibble on subjects which may be so -mischievously misunderstood. Aristotle was, we suspect, very much nearer -to Ben Jonson and Milton than to Mr. Pater in his conception of the -functions and scope of poetry. - -In the interesting essay on Sophocles there are two statements which -appear to us very questionable. It is surely not true to say that -Sophocles was "the first of the Greeks who has clearly realized that -suffering is not always penal." Who could have expressed this truth more -forcibly than schylus? To say nothing of the well-known passage in the -_Agamemnon_, 167-171:-- - - +Zna ... - ton phronein brotous hodsanta, ton pathei mathos - thenta kyris echein. - stazei d' en th' hypn pro kardias - mnsipmn ponos, kai par' akontas lthe sphronein+,-- - -the doctrine of which is repeated in 241-2 of the same play, and in -other passages in his dramas, notably in _Choephoroe_, 950-955, and in -_Eumenides_, 495, +sympherei sphronein hypo stenei+. The fact -that suffering and calamity have resulted in blessing is emphasized as -strongly in the concluding drama of the Orestean Trilogy, the -_Eumenides_, as it is in the _Oedipus Coloneus_. Again, when Professor -Butcher says that "in Sophocles the divine righteousness asserts itself -not in the award of happiness or misery to the individual, but in the -providential wisdom which assigns to each individual his place and -function in a universal moral order," he says what it is very difficult -to understand. Surely in the case of each one of the protagonists in -Sophocles, to employ the word in its non-technical sense, their deserts -are very exactly meted out. Antigone deliberately courts her fate by -setting the law at defiance, though she knew what the penalty was, and -falls, but has her compensation in the applause of her own conscience -and "in the faith that looks through death." Ajax paid the penalty, as -the poet emphasizes, for brutality and impious insolence; Oedipus -suffers for his impetuosity and intemperance, but, his punishment -exceeding the offence, the balance is adjusted for him in final triumph -over the sons who had wronged him, in procuring blessings for his -protector, in the peace of the soul, and in a glorious death. -Clytemnestra and gisthus well deserve their fate, as, in addition to -committing their crime, they continue ostentatiously to glory in it. In -the _Trachini_ Hercules is punished for a base and cowardly murder, -followed by an act of cruel and indiscriminate vengeance, retribution -coming on him through the sister of the man thus murdered, and the -daughter of the prince on whom this iniquitous vengeance had been -wreaked, as Deianeira, but for Iole, would not have sent the poisoned -tunic. Sophocles has even altered the legend to emphasize the guilt of -Hercules. The _Philoctetes_, indeed, is the only play which lends any -support to Professor Butcher's statement. Here the gods undoubtedly -condemn a man to a life of torture that their designs, irrespective of -the individual, may be fulfilled, and that Troy may not fall before the -appointed time; but how fully, how nobly is he compensated! It seems to -us that the award of happiness and misery to the individual, in -accordance with desert, is as conspicuous in the ethics of Sophocles as -it is in the ethics of Shakespeare. And it is the more conspicuous, when -we remember the hampering conditions under which Sophocles had to work, -the limitations conventionally imposed on the treatment of the legends. - -We wish we had space to comment on Professor Butcher's admirable, though -somewhat defective, chapter on the dawn of Romanticism in Greek poetry, -but we must forbear, and repeat our thanks to him for a book full of -interest and instruction, not the least of its charms being the lively -and graceful style in which it is written. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 35: This blow has, since these words were written, been -inflicted. See _supra_ pp. 45-75.] - -[Footnote 36: So he says, _Poet._, xxvi., of epic and tragedy, that each -ought not to produce any chance pleasure, but the pleasure proper to it -(+dei gar ou tn tychousan hdonn poiein autas alla tn -eirmenn+, _i.e._ +oikeian+).] - - - - -THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICISM[37] - -[Footnote 37: _The Principles of Criticism. An Introduction to the Study -of Literature._ By W. Basil Worsfold. London: Allen.] - - -Bishop Warburton said that there were two things which every man thought -himself competent to do, to manage a small farm and to drive a whisky. -Had Warburton lived in our time, he would probably have added a -third--to set up for a critic. What the author of the best critical -treatise in the Greek language pronounced to be the final fruit of long -experience, culture, and study, directed and illumined by certain -natural qualifications, has now come to be represented by the idle and -irresponsible gossip of any one who can gossip agreeably. Agreeable -gossip and good criticism are, as Sainte-Beuve and others have shown, -far from being incompatible, the misfortune is that they should be -confounded; but confounded they are, and the confusion is the curse of -current literature. We have recently observed, with concern, that the -rubbish which used formerly to be shot into novels and poems is now -being shot into criticism, and that there appears to be a growing -impression that the accomplishments which qualify young men for spinning -cobwebs in fiction and manufacturing versicles can, with a little -management, serve to set them up as critics. There is not much more -difficulty in forming an opinion about a book than there is in reading -it, and as criticism in the hands of these fribbles becomes little more -than the dithyrambic expression of that opinion, the profession of -criticism is one in which it is delightfully easy to graduate. It -requires neither learning nor knowledge, neither culture nor discipline. -It is neither science nor art; it is the gift of nature, a sort of -"lyric inspiration." With principles, with touchstones, with standards, -it has nothing whatever to do. Its business is to declaim, to coin -phrases, to juggle with fancies and to say "good things." - -A writer, therefore, who tries to recall criticism to a sense of its -responsibilities and true functions deserves all sympathy and -encouragement. It is refreshing to turn from the sort of thing to which -we have referred to such a work as Mr. Worsfold has given us. His design -is "to present an account of the main principles of literary criticism," -which he professes to trace from Plato to Matthew Arnold. Mr. Worsfold's -thesis simply stated is that criticism--and he deals with criticism -chiefly in its application to poetry--has passed successively through -five stages. With the Greeks it concerned itself principally with form. -"The first question it asked with them was not, as with us, What is the -thought? but What is the form?" By Addison--for here Mr. Worsfold makes -a prodigious leap over some twenty centuries--it was furnished with a -new test, and it asked, How does a given poem affect the imagination? By -Lessing a return was made to the formal criticism of the ancients, but -he adopted also Addison's criterion, and added definiteness to it. -Victor Cousin followed in 1818 with his lectures, entitled, _Du Vrai, du -Beau, et du Bien_, and enlarged the boundaries of the science by a -complete theory of beauty and art, developed mainly out of Plato. Lastly -came Matthew Arnold, who extended the realm still further, by the -addition of certain other important touchstones of poetic excellence. At -the present time a gradual limitation of the scope of its rules, and a -gradual extension of the scope of its principles, are the tendencies -most discernible in criticism. "An enlightened criticism no longer aims -at directing the artist by formulating rules which, if they were valid, -would only tend to obliterate the distinction between the fine and the -technical arts. It allows him to work by whatever methods he may choose, -and it is content to estimate his merit not by reference to his method -but by reference to his achievement, as measured by principles of -universal validity." - -All this is exceedingly ingenious, and has in it a measure of truth, -but, like most generalisations on vast and complicated subjects, it is -more plausible than sound. The stages in the progress of criticism are -not so sharply defined as Mr. Worsfold would have us believe. If Greek -criticism were represented only by Plato and the extant works of -Aristotle, English by Addison and Matthew Arnold, German by Lessing, and -French by Victor Cousin, what Mr. Worsfold postulates might, after a -manner, pass muster. But by far the greater portion of Greek criticism -has perished; it exists only in fragments, and to the most important and -remarkable work on this subject which has come down to us from -antiquity, the _Treatise on the Sublime_, Mr. Worsfold does not even -refer. If he had done so, and had he considered what is scattered -fragmentarily through the Greek writers, or may be gathered from the -titles of treatises which are lost, he would have seen that much which -he supposes to mark development in criticism has long been old. -Innumerable passages in the minor Greek critics, in Plutarch and in the -Scholia, especially if we add what is to be found in Roman writers, -derived no doubt from Greek sources, amply warrant doubt whether, after -all, it is not with criticism as it is, to use Goethe's expression, with -wit, "Alles Gescheidte ist schon gedacht worden, man muss nur -versuchen, es noch einmal zu denken." At all events, it is a great -mistake to suppose that Greek criticism, in its application to poetry, -is represented by Plato and Aristotle. It would be almost as absurd to -go to Plato for typical Greek criticism on poetry as it would be to go -to Henry More or the Puritan Divines for typical English criticism. He -approached it only as such a philosopher would be likely to approach it. -He regarded art and letters generally simply as means of educational -discipline and culture, or as mere playthings, of which the best to be -expected was harmless pleasure. He despised poetry not only as an -appeal, and a perturbing appeal, to the senses and the passions, but as -representing the shadows of shadows. It may be pronounced with -confidence that, had he seriously applied himself to literary and -artistic criticism, he would have been one of the subtlest and -profoundest critics who ever lived, and would probably have anticipated, -so far as principles are concerned, all that Mr. Worsfold attributes to -Addison, to Lessing, and to Victor Cousin; but, like our own Ruskin, he -was wilful and fanatical. - -Still less is Greek criticism represented by Aristotle. It is in the -highest degree misleading to generalize from such a work as the -_Poetics_. It is not merely a fragment, but a fragment deformed by -desperate corruption, hopeless interstices and contemptible -interpolations. If it confines itself, or in the main confines itself, -to formal criticism, it is simply because it was designed to deal with -that particular department of criticism, not because its author supposed -that the chief question which concerned criticism was form. Again, if by -form Mr. Worsfold understands, as he appears to do, expression and -structure, he very much misrepresents the Treatise. Aristotle's -criterion of poetry is not its formal expression, for he distinctly -declares that it is not metre which makes a poem, and even seems to -maintain that a poem may be composed without metre. In Aristotle's -definition and conception of poetry as the concrete expression of the -universal, in his definition of the scope and functions of tragedy, and -in innumerable occasional remarks we have the germs of much, and of very -much, which Mr. Worsfold would attribute to the later developments of -criticism. - -Aristotle, it is true, derived his canons from an analysis of the -masterpieces of Greek poetry, but it is doing him great injustice to -say, that he would make all epics Homeric, and all plays Sophoclean, and -most erroneous to assume that modern criticism commenced at this point. -Aristotle distinctly questions whether tragedy had as yet perfected its -proper types or not (_Poet._, IV. 11), and in discussing the proper -length of tragedy he makes a remark which shows that such a plot as the -plot of _Hamlet_ or the plot of _Lear_ would have been quite compatible -with his canons.[38] The truth is that Mr. Worsfold has gone too far; he -has confounded the various aspects of criticism with stages in its -development. Aristotle dealt mainly with form, because it was his -business to deal with form. Plato approached poetry from a particular -point of view, because it was from that particular point of view that it -concerned him. - -Had Mr. Worsfold taken his stand in his review of ancient criticism on -the treatise attributed to Longinus, he would have seen that what he so -strangely attributes to Addison and later writers had long been -anticipated. This remarkable work which, since its translation into -French by Boileau in 1674, has had more influence on criticism both in -England and on the Continent than any other work that could be named, -would alone show how much we owe to the Greeks. It has analyzed and -defined, for all time, the essential virtues and the essential vices of -diction and style, and has traced them to their sources. It has -furnished us with infallible criteria in judging rhetoric and poetry. -Take its analysis of the "grand style," which is described -comprehensively as +megalophrosyns apchma+, "the echo of a -great soul"; it has, the Treatise tells us, five -characteristics--richness and grandeur of conception (+to peri -tas noseis hadrepbolon+); vehement and inspired passion (+to -sphodron kai enthousiastikon pathos+), the due formation of figures, -which are twofold--first those of thought, and secondly those of -expression (+h poia tn schmatn plasis dissa de pou tauta, ta -men noses, thatera de lexes+); noble diction (+h gennaia, -phrasis+); dignified and elevated composition (+h en aximati -kai diarsei synthesis+). Nothing could be more masterly than its -detailed analysis of each of these qualities, and of the pseudo forms -which they assume, as the result of stimulated enthusiasm. How -admirable, too, is its test of the sublime in the seventh chapter; its -criticism of Sappho, generalizing what constitutes the charm and power -of lyric, in the tenth chapter; its analysis of the eloquence of -Demosthenes, again generalizing the characteristics of oratory in -perfection (chap. xvii.); its demonstration of the inferiority of -correct mediocrity to the faulty irregularities of inspired genius; its -admirable remarks about the relation of Art to Nature. Like the -_Poetics_, it has come down to us in a very mutilated form, and has -evidently been interpolated by some inferior hand, which no doubt -accounts for the exasperating triviality of some of the sections. Here, -as elsewhere, we have references to the many losses which Greek -criticism has sustained, the author referring to treatises written by -him on Xenophon, on Composition, and on the Passions. - -It is impossible to give an adequate account of the evolution of -criticism without a very careful survey of the chief contributors to -criticism in each generation, and such a survey Mr. Worsfold has not -attempted. To Latin criticism he never even refers. And yet it has had -great influence on critical literature. The Romans, it is true, -contributed scarcely anything new to criticism, except that which -pertains to oratory. We know enough of Varro, with whom Roman criticism -may be said to begin, to feel confident that he could have had no -pretension to the finer qualities of the critic. Of the five treatises -composed by him, only one, the +peri charaktrn+, appears to -have been purely critical, and it almost certainly drew largely on Greek -sources. Horace derived the material of the _Ars Poetica_ from a Greek -writer, Neoptolemus of Parium. Much of Quinctilian's criticism is -demonstrably a compilation from Greek writers. The best critic of poetry -among the Romans is undoubtedly to be found in Petronius, occasional and -scanty though his remarks are. But of prose literature Rome produced two -really great critics--the one was Cicero, the other was Tacitus. The -_Brutus_ and the _Dialogus de Oratoribus_ are masterpieces, equal to -anything which has come down to us from the Greeks. One of the most -important critical principles ever enunciated we owe to Cicero. He was -the first to demonstrate that the test of excellence in oratory lay, in -its appealing equally to the multitude and to the most fastidious of -connoisseurs. The most consummate rhetorician which the world has ever -seen, he was at the same time a consummate critic of his art. This -department of criticism has, indeed, for nearly two thousand years, been -practically his monopoly; it may be questioned whether anything can be -added, so far as the technique of rhetoric is concerned, to what may be -traced to his writings. The interest of the _Dialogus de Oratoribus_ is -largely historical, but never have the causes which inspire and nourish, -or depress and starve, eloquence been more eloquently and brilliantly -explained. Nor must it be forgotten that it was through the medium of -the Latin critics that Greek criticism became influential on modern -literature. - -Mr. Worsfold has very properly drawn attention to the fine passage about -poetry in the second book of Bacon's _Advancement of Learning_, but he -says not a word about Sidney's remarkable treatise, one of the most -charming contributions to the criticism of poetry which has ever been -made, or about the admirable remarks in Ben Jonson's _Discoveries_. The -interest of Elizabethan criticism, as represented by these works--and -they are the only works on this subject of any value produced during the -Elizabethan period--lies partly in its return to Aristotelian canons, -and partly in the importance which, in accordance with the ancients, it -attaches to the didactic element in poetry. This is expressed very -eloquently in Ben Jonson's dedication of the _Fox_:-- - - "If men will impartially and not asquint look toward the - offices and function of a poet, they will easily conclude to - themselves the impossibility of a man's being the good poet - without being first the good man,--he that is able to inform - young men to all good discipline, inflame young men to all good - virtues, keep old men in their best and supreme state, or, as - they decline to childhood, recover them to their first state, - that comes forth the interpreter and arbiter of nature, a - teacher of things divine no less than human." - -This was precisely Spenser's conception of one of the chief functions of -poetry. Thus the Elizabethan critics, who were followed afterwards by -Milton, if they did not formally discuss the relation of sthetic to -ethic, insisted on their essential connection in the higher forms of -poetry. Even in the succeeding age, when poetry lost all its high -seriousness and much of its moral dignity, criticism, if it did not -always insist on the application of this test, still retained it. Dryden -could write, "I am satisfied if verse cause delight, for delight is the -chief, if not the only end, of poesy"; but in adding "instruction can be -admitted but in the second place, for poesy only instructs as it -delights," he half corrected his former statement, and, indeed, simply -reverted to what Aristophanes, Ben Jonson, and Milton would have been -the first to admit. - -But to return to Mr. Worsfold. A very serious defect in his work is his -omission of all notice of Boileau and Dryden, and of the critics -contemporary with them in France and England. The consequence is, that -much is attributed to Addison which belongs to them, and Addison's -importance as a critic is much overrated. Again, of the many memorable -contributions to this branch of literature in England, in France, in -Italy, and in Germany, which were made between the appearance of the -Abb Dubos's _Rflexions critiques sur la posie et la peinture_ in -1719, and the lectures of Coleridge and Schlegel about 1812, all that is -said is represented by what is said of Lessing. Though a long chapter is -given to Matthew Arnold, Matthew Arnold's master, Sainte-Beuve, is, if -we remember rightly, not so much as named. - -Dr. Johnson divided critics into three classes--those who know the rules -and judge by them, those who know no rules but judge entirely by natural -taste, those who know the rules but are above them. This has been true -in all ages, and sufficiently disposes of Mr. Worsfold's hypothesis -about the stages through which criticism has passed. All that can be -said is, that at certain times there has been a tendency, determined of -course by the character of the particular age, towards the predominance -of a particular critical method and of particular points of view. -Further than this it would be perilous to go. It has been the task of -the present age to develop each of these methods to the full, and the -most authoritative critics of the last twenty years might easily be -ranged under one of those classes. - -The soundest and most valuable part of Mr. Worsfold's book is the part -dealing with the criticism of the last few years. His chapter on Matthew -Arnold, in particular, is admirable, and his remarks on the functions of -criticism at the present time, deduced as they have been from -Wordsworth, Arnold and Ruskin, are in a high degree instructive and -interesting. In pointing out that criticism should not confine itself -merely to the investigation of technical excellence, and to all that is -implied in the doctrine of Art for Art's sake, but should recognise that -there are limits beyond which the artist should not exercise his -technical skill, he recalls us to principles which it is well that -criticism should not forget. We quite agree with him that there is now -an increasing tendency to recognise these limits, and to lay most stress -on the interpretation of the ideal element in literature and art. That -is certainly the modern note. We have expressed our reasons for -dissenting from Mr. Worsfold's historical view of the evolution of -criticism, but his book is full of interest, and will amply repay the -attention of serious readers. It is a book which does not deserve to be -lost in the crowd. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 38: +ho de kat' autn tn physin tou pragmatos horos, -aei men ho meizn mechri tou syndlos einai kallin esti kata to -megethos. hs de hapls diorisantas eipein, en hos megethei kata to -eikos to anankaion ephexs gignomenn symbainei eis eutychian ek -dystychias, ex eutychias eis dystychian metaballein, hikanos horos -estin tou megethous+. (_Poet._, vii. 7.)] - - - - -WOMEN IN GREEK POETRY[39] - -[Footnote 39: _Antimachus of Colophon and the Position of Women in Greek -Poetry._ By E. F. M. Benecke.] - - -The editor of this book cannot be congratulated either on his competence -or on his discretion. To hurry into the world a work which is not merely -a fragment, but which cries for revision, suppression, and correction in -almost every page, is a literary crime of the first magnitude, and -deserves the severest castigation. Of the author of the work, who -appears to have been a young man of some attainments and of much -promise, we desire to speak with all gentleness; we wholly absolve him -from blame, for we have no right to assume that he would himself have -given to the world what his editor admits was _intra penetralia Vest_, -and what we hope and believe he would himself have committed -_emendaturis ignibus_, had he arrived at years of discretion. But the -dissemination of error is no light thing, especially in relation to -subjects which are of great interest, and, from an historical and -literary point of view, of great importance. When we think of the many -amiable and industrious tutors at Oxford and Cambridge who, unless they -are put on their guard, will unsuspiciously fill their note-books with -the nonsense of this volume, and impart it, by degrees, to the listening -credulity of youth, we feel we have no alternative but to perform a -plain, if painful, duty. We repeat, we absolve the author from all -blame; the sole culprit is the editor. - -That Solomon was the author of the _Iliad_, Poggio the author of the -_Annals_ of Tacitus, and Bacon the author of Shakespeare's plays, are -hypotheses scarcely less monstrously absurd than the thesis propounded -in this volume. Mr. Benecke's main contentions are "that a pure love -between man and woman seemed to the early Greeks" (that is, to those who -lived before the latter end of the Peloponnesian War) a sheer -impossibility; that "in extant Greek poetry there is no trace of -romantic love poetry addressed to women prior to the time of Asclepiades -and Philetas"; that "in the works of these writers this element suddenly -appears not in the nature of an experiment but as a leading motive"; -that the appearance of this element was due to the influence of -Antimachus, "who was the first man who had the courage to say that a -woman was worth loving, and who may thus be regarded as the originator -of the romantic element in literature." As we have not space to refute -this nonsense in detail, we will give some examples of the way in which -it is supported. First come misrepresentations and blunders. To -emphasize the degradation of women, passages in translation are twisted -and perverted almost beyond recognition. - -Thus the couplet of Catullus-- - - "Tunc te dilexi, non tantum ut vulgus amicam, - Sed pater ut natos diligit et generos"-- - -is actually paraphrased "I loved you, not as a man loves a woman, but as -a man loves a youth." The couplet in which Antigone says, "If my husband -died, I could get another, and were I deprived of him too, I could be a -mother by another man"-- - - +posis men an moi, katthanontos, allos n - kai pais ap' allou phtos, ei toud' mplakon+-- - -is translated "If my husband had died, I could have married another, if -he had failed to get me children, I could have committed adultery." The -"main motive of the Iliad," we are informed, (p. 76), "is the love of -Achilles for Patroclus." The interest of the _Ajax_ "is meant to centre -on Teucer, the _amasius_ of the dead Ajax." That the _Alcestis_ may not -be pressed into the service of those who would maintain that the Greeks -knew how to respect women, the key to it is to be found "in the relation -existing between Admetus and Apollo"(!) The revolting coarseness and -flippant vulgarity which mark the book, and, which do very little credit -to Oxford training, are illustrated by the remarks employed to disparage -these types of womanhood which the writer well knows would refute his -theory. Thus of Nausicaa, "she is always regarded as a charming type of -woman; but, after all, how one naturally thinks of her is (_sic_) as a -charming type of washerwoman"; of Penelope, "she longs for the return of -her husband, no doubt; but what really grieves her about the suitors is -not their suggestions as to his death, but the quantity of pork they -eat." On a par with this sort of thing is the remark about a play of -Sophocles, which, by the way, is not extant, that "it merely drew the -usual picture of the gods playing shove-halfpenny with human souls" (p. -47); or flippant vulgarity like the following--Admetus expresses "his -deep regret that he cannot accompany Alcestis, as Charon does not issue -return tickets." If this is the humour of young Oxford, the progress of -which we hear so much has been purchased at a heavy price. - -But to continue. On page 27 we are confronted with the astounding -statement that "it is in Anacreon that we find for the first time -love-poetry addressed to a woman." Why, Hermesianax (15, 16) distinctly -states that Musus wrote love-poetry to his wife or mistress, Antiope, -and that Hesiod wrote many poems in honour of his love, Eoia (_Id._ -22-24). Alcus notoriously wrote love-poems to Sappho, as we need go no -further than the first book of Aristotle's _Rhetoric_ to know; both -Alcman, the lover of Egido and Megalostrate, and, probably Ibycus also -wrote love-poetry to women. It is mere special pleading to contend that -Mimnermus did not write poetry to the mistress of his affections, to -whom, according to Strabo, his erotic poetry was addressed. Hermesianax -distinctly states that Mimnermus was passionately in love with Nanno, -and certainly implies that his love-poetry was addressed to her (35-38). -It is true that two of the fragments of Archilochus are ambiguous, but -one is not; and, if we may judge by a single line (Fr. 71), his love for -Neobule expressed itself in a manner indistinguishable from Petrarch's -vein--"Would that I might touch Neobule's hand": +ei gar hs emoi -genoito cheira Neobouls thigein+. It is clear that women had a -prominent place in the poetry of Stesichorus, and in his poem entitled -_Calyce_ we seem to have had an anticipation of the modern love romance. -And yet, in spite of all this, we are informed that the Greeks had no -love-poetry addressed to, or concerning women, before Anacreon. - -The methods adopted for minimizing or disguising the importance of women -in the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_ are very amusing. "The Trojan war was the -work of a woman; but how very little that woman appears in the _Iliad_." -She appears quite as frequently and imposingly as the action admits, -and she and Andromache are painted as elaborately as any of the -_dramatis person_ in the poem. Indeed, it would not be too much to say -that, with the exception of Achilles and Agamemnon, they leave the -deepest impression on us. "A woman has been managing the affairs of -Odysseus for twenty years in an exemplary fashion; but the hero of the -_Odyssey_ on his return prefers to associate with the swineherd." -Comment is superfluous. Nothing could be more striking than the -prominence which is given to women both in the _Iliad_ and in the -_Odyssey_. To cite such writers as Simonides of Amorgus, Phocylides and -Theognis, as authorities on the position of women, is as absurd, in -Sancho Panza's phrase, as to look for pears on an elm. - -The Greek Tragedies are treated after the same fashion as the _Iliad_ -and the _Odyssey_. We are told that the remarkable prominence given in -Sophocles's plays to the affection between brother and sister affords -conclusive proof that the nature of modern love between man and woman -was unknown to him; and we are also informed, that the relations between -Electra and Orestes, and Antigone and Polynices "are absolutely those of -modern lovers." It would be difficult to say which is more absurd, the -deduction or the statement. What love could be more loyal and more -passionate than Hmon's love for Antigone? The prominence given by -Sophocles to the love between brother and sister has its origin from the -same cause as the very small part played by lovers in the Greek -tragedies generally. In the first place, a poet who took his plot from -the fortunes of the houses of Pelops or Laius could only work within the -limits of tradition; in the second place, love romances, unless -involving deep tragical issues as in the _Trachini_, the _Medea_, and -the _Hippolytus_, were totally incompatible with the Greek idea of -tragedy. But we must hurry to the grand discovery made by the author of -this volume. - -Somewhere about 405 B.C. flourished Antimachus, of Colophon, the author -of a voluminous epic, and of several other poems. He had the misfortune -to lose his wife Lyde, and, to beguile his sorrow, he composed a long -elegy in her honour. Of the far-reaching consequences of this act let -our author speak. "When Antimachus first sat down in his empty house at -Colophon to write an elegy to his dead wife, consciously or -unconsciously he was initiating the greatest artistic revolution that -the world has ever seen." Asclepiades and Philetas followed him as -imitators, and the thing was done. Woman was at last "connected with -'romance.'" Our author admits the difficulty of supposing that "any one -man could invent and popularize an entirely new emotion"; but suggests -that if we regard it as "simply due to the readjustment of an already -existing emotion," that is +paiderastia+, such a supposition is -"no longer absurd." It is not only absurd but monstrous. - -The truth almost certainly is, that the love between man and woman in -ancient Greece differed very little from the love between man and woman -as it exists now. Marriage was, it is true, purely a matter of business; -most wives aspired to nothing more than the management of the nursery -and the household, and most women being without education, and living in -seclusion, could scarcely associate, intellectually at least, on equal -terms with their husbands or lovers. But this proves nothing more than -_mariages de convenance_, and love based on the fascination exercised by -sensuous attraction prove now. Then, as in our own time, there were -marriages and marriages, liaisons and liaisons. The story which Plutarch -tells of Callias (_Cimon._ iv.) shows that marriage was often based on -love. The pictures given of Hector and Andromache in the _Iliad_, of -Alcinous and Arete, of Ulysses and Penelope, of Menelaus and Helen in -the _Odyssey_, the charming account of Ischomachus and his young wife in -the _Oeconomics_ of Xenophon, the noble and pathetic story of Pantheia -and Abradatas in the _Cyropdeia_, the story which, in his life of -Agis,[40] Plutarch tells of Chilonis, and, in the _Morals_, of -Camma,[41] and innumerable other legends, traditions, and anecdotes, -prove that women could inspire and return as pure and as chivalrous a -love as any of the heroines of chivalry. The poet who could write about -marriage as Homer does in the Sixth Odyssey would have had little to -learn from modern refinement.[42] The love which Critobulus describes -himself as having for Amandra, in the _Symposium_ of Xenophon, and the -remarks made by Socrates in that dialogue embody the most exalted -conceptions of the passion of love between the sexes. The sentiments of -Plutarch on this subject are indistinguishable from the most refined -notions of the modern world, as is abundantly illustrated in the -_Amatorius_, the _Conjugalia Prcepta_, and in the remarks on marriage -in the eighth chapter of the Essay on Moral Virtue. If Ajax and Hercules -became brutes, Tecmessa and Deianeira were not the only women who have -discovered that men are, too often, May when they woo, and December when -they wed. It is ridiculous to suppose that a people whose popular poetry -could present such types of womanhood as Arete, Antigone, Alcestis, -Deianeira, Electra, Macaria, Iphigenia, Evadne, and Polyxena, who could -boast such poetesses as Sappho, Erinna, Corinna, Myrtis, and Damophila, -and whose society was graced by such women as Aspasia, Diotima, -Gnathna, Herpyllis, Metaneira, and Leontium, should have given -expression to passion, sentiment, and romance only in +paidikoi -hymnoi+. - -What the author of this book, and what others who are fond of -generalizing about the Greeks, forget, is, that of a once vast and -voluminous literature we have only fragments. That portion of their -poetry which would have thrown light on the subject here discussed has -perished. It is certain, for example, that of their lyric poetry a very -large portion was erotic, of that portion exactly one poem has survived -in its entirety, while a few hundred scattered lines, torn from their -context, represent the rest that has come down to us. We know, again, -that in some hundreds of their dramas, in the Middle and New Comedy that -is to say, the plots turned on love--of these dramas not a single one is -preserved. But the reflection of some twenty of them in Terence and -Plautus, and several scattered fragments, clearly indicate, that the -passion between the sexes involved as much sentiment and romance as it -does in our Elizabethan dramatists. In what respect do Charinus and -Pamphilus in the _Andria_ and Antipho in the _Phormio_--mere replicas, -of course, of Greek originals--differ from modern lovers? What could be -more romantic than the love story which formed the plot of the _Phasma_ -of Menander? It is fair to our author to say that he fully admits this, -in the only tolerably satisfactory part of his book, the chapter on -Women in Greek Comedy. The great blot on Greek life, to which Mr. -Benecke gives so much prominence, has probably had far too much -importance attached to it, partly, perhaps, owing to its accentuation in -the writings of Plato, and partly owing to that rage for scandalous -tittle-tattle, so unhappily characteristic of ancient anecdote-mongers -from Ion to Athenus. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 40: Agis, xvii., xviii.] - -[Footnote 41: De Mulierum Virtutibus.] - -[Footnote 42: See particularly lines 180-185.] - - - - -MR. STEPHEN PHILLIPS' POEMS[43] - -[Footnote 43: _Poems._ By Stephen Phillips. London and New York John -Lane.] - - -The accent here is unmistakable, it is the accent of a new and a true -poet. Mr. Phillips gives us no mere variations on familiar melodies, no -clever copies of classical archetypes, and what is more, he has not -employed any illegitimate means of attracting attention and giving -distinction to his work. An audacious choice of subjects, the adoption -of the stones which the builders have rejected, and, it may be added, -disdained, has, when coupled with elaborate affectations and -eccentricities of treatment and style, often enabled mediocrity to pass, -temporarily at least, for genius, and the specious counterfeit of -originality for the thing itself. But these poems are marked by -simplicity, sincerity, spontaneity. If a discordant note is sometimes -struck, here in an over-strained conceit, and there in an incongruous -touch of preciosity or false sentiment, this is but an accident; in -essentials all is genuine. Nature and passion affect to be speaking, and -nature and passion really speak. A poet, of whom this may be said with -truth, has passed the line which divides talent from genius, the true -singer from the accomplished artist or imitator. He has taken his place, -wherever that place may be, among authentic poets. To that high honour -the present volume undoubtedly entitles Mr. Phillips. It would now, -perhaps, be premature to say more than "Ingens omen habet magni clarique -triumphi," but we may predict with confidence that, if fate is kind and -his muse is true to him, he has a distinguished future before him. It -may be safely said that no poet has made his _dbut_ with a volume which -is at once of such extraordinary merit and so rich in promise. - -Mr. Phillips is not a poet who has "one plain passage of few notes." He -strikes many chords, and strikes them often with thrilling power. The -awful story narrated in _The Wife_ is conceived and embodied with really -Dantesque intensity and vividness; it has the master's suggestive -reservation, smiting phrase, and clairvoyant picture wording, as "in the -red shawl _sacredly_ she burned," "smiled at him with her lips, not with -her eyes"; while "Mother and child that food together ate" is, in -pregnancy of tragic suggestiveness, almost worthy to stand with the -"poscia, pi che il dolor, pot il digiuno." Equally distinguished, -though on another plane of interest, is _The woman with the dead Soul_, -the soul which could once "wonder, laugh, and weep," but over which the -days began to fall "dismally, as rain on ocean blear," till-- - - "Existence lean, in sky dead grey - Withholding steadily, starved it away." - -If the pathos in these poems is almost "too deep for tears," it is -gentler in the second and third of the lyrics, which are as exquisite as -they are affecting. The idea in the lines _To Milton Blind_, is worthy -of Milton's own sublime conceit, that the darkness which had fallen on -his eyes was but the shadow of God's protecting wings. The whole poem, -indeed, is a beautiful paraphrase of the noble passage in the _Second -Defence of the People of England_: "For the Divine law"--we give it in -the English translation--"not only shields me from injury, but almost -renders me too sacred to attack, not indeed so much from the privation -of my sight as from the overshadowing of those heavenly wings which seem -to have occasioned this obscurity; and which, when occasioned, he is -wont to illuminate with an interior light more precious and more pure." - -In _The Lily_, which is a little obscure--a fault against which Mr. -Phillips would do well to guard, for he frequently offends in this -respect--we have the note of Petrarch, but Petrarch would not have ended -the poem so flatly. Tennyson is recalled, too nearly perhaps, in "By the -Sea," but it is a poem of great charm and beauty. _The New De Profundis_ -is, unhappily, the key to Mr. Phillips' characteristic mood; it reminds -us of the curse imposed on the worldling in Browning's _Easter Day_, -before he has learned the use of life and doubt. - -Mr. Phillips' two most ambitious poems are _Christ in Hades_ and -_Marpessa_. In _Christ in Hades_ he fails, as Mrs. Browning failed in -_The Drama of Exile_. He attempts a theme--a stupendous theme--to which -his genius is not equal, and which could only have been adequately -treated by such poets as Dante and Milton, in the maturity of their -powers. It has neither basis nor superstructure. It is what the Greeks -would call "meteoric" as distinguished from "sublime." It is a weird, -wild, and chaotic dream; and yet for all this its appeal to the heart -and the imagination is piercing and direct. Like Tennyson, Mr. Phillips -has the art of unfolding the full significance of a few suggestive words -in a great classic; and nothing could be more effective than the use to -which he has applied the famous lines which Homer places in the mouth of -Achilles. Poetry has few things more pathetic than Homer's picture of -Hades and the dead, and that pathos Mr. Phillips has given us in -quintessence, as few would question after reading the lines which -describe Persephone yearning for her return to the spring-illumined -world, the speech of the Athenian ghost, and the woman's address to -Christ. If the world depicted has something of Horace's artistic -monster, or, to change the image, something of the anarchy of dreams in -its composition, the vividness and picturesqueness with which particular -figures and scenes are flashed into light and definition is -extraordinarily impressive. It is so with the central figure, Christ; -it is so with Prometheus; and the contrast between these martyrs for man -has both pathos and grandeur. - -There is more originality, more power in _Christ in Hades_ than in -_Marpessa_, but _Marpessa_ has more balance, more sanity, more of the -stuff out of which good and abiding poetry is made, than its -predecessor. The one savours of the spasmodic school, the productions of -which have rarely been found to have the principle of life, however rich -they may have been in promise; the other is a return to a school in -which most of those who have gained permanent fame have studied. And we -are glad to find a young poet there. - -But it would be doing Mr. Phillips great injustice not to note that, -though he has had many predecessors in the semi-classical, semi-romantic -re-treatment of the Greek myths, notably Keats in _Hyperion_, Wordsworth -in _Dion_ and _Laodamia_, Landor in his _Hellenics_, and Tennyson in -_none_ and _Tithonus_, he has treated his theme with a distinction -which is all his own, and has impressed on it an intense individuality. -In comparison with these masters he may be _pauper_, but he is _pauper -in suo re_. - -It would be easy to point to faults in Mr. Phillips' work. His sense of -rhythm, even allowing for what are plainly deliberate experiments in -discord, seems often curiously defective. How stiff and limping, for -example, is the following:-- - - "O pity us, - For I would ask of thee only to look - Upon the wonderful sunlight and to smell - Earth in the rain. Is not the labourer - Returning heavy through the August sheaves - Against the setting sun, who gladly smells - His supper from the opening door--is he - Not happier than these melancholy kings? - How good it is to live, even at the worst! - God was so lavish to us once, but here - He hath repented, jealous of His beams." - -Lines, again, like "Pierced her, and odour full of arrows was," -"Realizes all the uncoloured dawn," "Yet followed a riddled memorable -flag," are, no doubt, extreme instances, but they are typical of many -bad lines. Occasionally he falls flat on some harsh prosaic phrase, like -"beautiful indolence _was on our brains_." Nor is he always happy in his -attempts at novelty in phraseology, as in his employment of the words -"liable," "inaccurate," "pungent"; and these faults in rhythm and -diction are the more remarkable, as the really subtle mastery over -rhythmic expression which he exhibits at times, and his singularly -felicitous epithets, turns, and phrases are among his most striking -gifts. Take a few out of very many: "A bleak magnificence of endless -hope," "That common trivial face, of endless needs," "The mystic river, -floating wan," "And the moist evening fallow, richly dark," "That palest -rose sweet on the night of life." How noble is the rhythm and imagery of -the following:-- - - "All the dead - The melancholy attraction of Jesus felt: - And millions, like a sea, wave upon wave, - Heaved dreaming to that moonlight face, or ran - In wonderful long ripples, sorrow-charmed. - Toward him, in faded purple, pacing came - Dead emperors, and sad, unflattered kings; - Unlucky captains, listless armies led: - Poets with music frozen on their lips - Toward the pale brilliance sighed." - -And it would be easy to multiply illustrations from _Marpessa_ and _By -the Sea_. Occasionally there is a certain incongruity between the form -and the matter. A poem so essentially, so intensely realistic as _The -Wife_ should not have such quaintnesses as "pald in her thought." Nor -should we have - - "The constable, with lifted hand, - Conducting the orchestral Strand"; - -nor should a railway station be described as a "moond terminus." -Nothing is so disenchanting as affectation. - -One cannot but add that these poems, welcome as they are, would have -been more welcome still, had they been less profoundly melancholy. Their -monotonous sadness, the persistency with which they dwell on all those -grim and melancholy realities which poetry should help us to forget, or -cheer us in enduring, is not merely their leading, but their pervading -characteristic. This note will, we hope, change. Leopardi is immortal, -and could not be spared; but one Leopardi is enough for a single -century. - - - - -THE ILLUSTRIOUS OBSCURE[44] - -[Footnote 44: _West Country Poets: Their Lives and Works, etc._ -Illustrated with Portraits. By W. H. Kearley Wright, F.R.H.S. London: -Elliot Stock. 1896.] - - -Some nineteen hundred years ago Horace observed that there was one thing -which neither gods, nor men, nor bookstalls would tolerate in a -poet--and that was mediocrity. The verdict of gods, men, and the -bookstalls is probably still what it was then; but to such tribunals the -rhymesters of our time can afford to be quite indifferent. Paper and -printing are cheap; small poets and small critics are now so numerous -that they form a world, and a populous world, in themselves; and, well -understanding the truth of the old proverb, "Concordi, parv res -crescunt," they mutually manufacture the wreaths with which they crown -each other's modest vanity. There are hundreds of "poets" and "critics" -of whom the great world knows nothing, who are thus enabled, in their -little day, to taste all the sweets of fame, and "walk with inward glory -crown'd." To wage serious war against such a tribe as this would be as -absurd as to break butterflies upon a wheel; but we really think it high -time that some protest should be made against the indefinite -multiplication of the rubbish for which these people and their patrons -are responsible, and still more against its importation into what -purports to be a contribution to serious literature. As long as these -geniuses confine themselves to their proper sphere, the poets' corners -of provincial newspapers, we have nothing to say. But it becomes quite -another matter when the skill of an ingenious projector enables--we are -really sorry to have to speak so harshly--a rabble of poetasters to -figure side by side with poets of classical fame, and to appear in all -the dignity of contributors to a national anthology. Yet such is the -design of this volume, which was, it seems, published by subscription, -the subscribers being for the most part the various candidates for -poetical fame, who have obligingly sent their portraits and their -biographies for insertion in Mr. Kearley Wright's "monumental work." As -Mr. Kearley Wright's collection begins with the fifteenth century, and -includes the really eminent poets who happen to have been born in the -West of England, many of his worthies are naturally _apud plures_, but -the majority, in whose honour the anthology appears to have been -compiled, adorn the living. And very gratifying it must be for these -gentlemen, and for Mr. Kearley Wright himself--for he also has a -niche--to find themselves side by side with Sir Walter Raleigh, Herrick, -Gay, and Coleridge. - -Mr. Kearley Wright's "company of makers" is certainly a motley one. -First comes among his living bards an inspired porter at the Teignmouth -railway station, who asks in rapture,-- - - "Along the glitt'ring streets of gold, - Amid the brilliant glare, - Shall we God's banner there unfold, - His righteous helmet wear?" - -At no great distance follows, with a portrait looking intensely -intellectual, "the manager of the Bristol and South Wales Railway Waggon -Company, Limited," whose poems are described as "lacking here and there -logical sequence and literary method," but "evincing undoubtedly a great -poetical disposition and philosophical drift." The two poems which -illustrate this poet's genius afford very little proof either of "a -great poetical disposition" or of "a philosophical drift," but painfully -conclusive proof that much more is lacking than "logical sequence and -literary method," the lack of which may certainly be conceded as well. -Next comes Mr. Jonas Coaker, "the landlord of the Warren House Inn," -whose verses "disclose a poetic spirit, and, had he possessed the -advantages of education, would doubtless have attracted some attention." -Mr. Coaker is in the main autobiographical. - - "I drew my breath first on the moor, - There my forefathers dwelled; - Its hills and dales I've traversed o'er, - Its desert parts beheld. - - * * * * * - - It's oft envelop'd in a fog, - Because it's up so high." - -And Mr. Coaker continues in the same strain further than we care to -transcribe. Then we have Mr. John Goodwin, "formerly a coach-guard, who -sung of the days when there was such a thing, if we may so phrase it, as -the poetry of locomotion." In his poetry, we are told, "there is a -genuine ring," as here, for example:-- - - "I mind the time, when I was guard, - The lord, the duke, or squire - Would travel by the old stage-coach, - Or post-chaise they would hire." - -Mr. Charles Chorley, who is, we are informed, submanager of the Truro -Savings Bank, in verses which are presumably a parody of Sir William -Jones' _Imitation of Alcus_, inquires, not without a certain propriety, -"What constitutes a mine?" On a par with all these are the verses of the -bard who "in summer hawked gooseberries and in winter shoelaces," and -those of the "uneducated journeyman woolcomber." - -Now, we need hardly say that the humble vocations of these poets are -neither derogatory to them nor in any way detrimental to merit where -merit exists; but there is no merit whatever in the poems assigned to -them in this volume; they are simply such poems as hawkers, woolcombers, -railway porters, and submanagers of provincial banks--"who pen a stanza -when they should engross"--might be expected to write. The same may be -said of almost every copy of verses, produced by amateurs, to be found -in this collection. We have scarcely noticed a single poem which rises -above mediocrity; a very large proportion are below even a mediocre -standard--they are simply rubbish. In one poet only, among those whose -names were not before known to us, do we discern genius, and that is in -Mr. John Dryden Hosken, whose poem, entitled _My Masters_, is really -excellent. - -The editor of this anthology is plainly incompetent, both in point of -taste and critical discernment, and in point of knowledge, for the task -which he has undertaken. The first is proved by the extracts which he -has selected from the works of well-known poets. Coleridge, for example, -is represented by two comparatively inferior poems, _The Devil's -Thoughts_ and _Fancy in Nubibus_; Thomas Carew, by two short poems, one -of which is probably the worst he ever wrote; Herrick, by two of his -very worst; Praed, by two of the feeblest and least characteristic of -his poems; Walcot, by mere trash. It is quite possible that their less -illustrious brethren may have suffered from the deplorable inability of -this editor to discern between what is good and what is bad. Certainly -Capern, who was a poet with a touch of genius, suffers, for the lyric -given is very far indeed from representing or illustrating his best or -even his characteristic work. In giving an account of Alexander Barclay, -who, by the way, is called Andrew in the Preface, Mr. Wright says -nothing about his most important poems--his Eclogues. If Eustace Budgell -is included among the poets, why are not his poems specified and -represented? Of Aaron Hill it is observed that "neither his reputation -as a poet nor his connexion with the county of Devon is sufficient to -warrant more than a mere notice of his name." Aaron Hill was the author -of more than one poem of conspicuous merit. The verses attributed on -page 488 to Sir William Yonge were written by Lady Mary Wortley Montagu. -But these are trifles. What we wish to protest against is the foisting -of such volumes as these on our libraries; and it is appalling to learn -that it is the intention of Mr. Kearley Wright, if he is sufficiently -encouraged by subscribers, to follow this with another similar -collection. If poets like these wish to gratify their vanity, let them -not gratify it to the detriment of serious literature; for, if the few -can discriminate, the many cannot, and the multiplication of works like -these must infallibly tend to lower the standard of current literature, -by furthering the disastrous "cult of the average man." In our opinion -criticism can have no more imperative duty than to discountenance and -discourage in every way such projectors as Mr. Kearley Wright and such -poets as those for whose merits he and critics like him stand sponsors. - - - - -VIRGIL IN ENGLISH HEXAMETERS[45] - -[Footnote 45: _The Eclogues of Virgil._ Translated into English -Hexameter Verse by the Right Hon. Sir George Osborne Morgan, Bart., -Q.C., M.P. London.] - - -Sir George Osborne Morgan has served his generation in much more -important capacities than those of a scholar and a translator of Virgil, -and had this little work, therefore, been less meritorious than it is, -no critic with a sense of the becoming would deal harshly with it. But -it challenges and deserves serious consideration, not only as an attempt -to solve a problem of singular interest to students of classical poetry, -but as a somewhat ambitious contribution to the literature of -translation. Sir Osborne Morgan is, however, mistaken in supposing that -in translating Virgil into his own metre he "has undertaken a task which -has never been attempted before." In 1583 Richard Stanihurst published a -translation of the first four books of the _neid_ in English -hexameters; and, if Sir Osborne will turn to Webbe's _Discourse of -English Poetrie_, published as early as 1586, he will find versions in -English hexameters of the First and Second Eclogues, while Abraham -Fraunce, in a curious volume, entitled _The Countess of Pembroke's Ivy -Church_, which appeared in 1591, has, among the other hexameters in the -collection, given a version of the Second Eclogue in this measure. But -Sir Osborne Morgan has been more immediately anticipated in his -experiment. In 1838 Dr. James Blundell published anonymously, under the -title of _Hexametrical Experiments_, versions in hexameters of the -First, Fourth, Sixth, and Tenth Eclogues, and to this translation he -prefixed an elaborate preface, vindicating the employment of the -hexameter in English, and explaining its mechanism to the unlearned. -Indeed, Blundell arrived at the same conclusion as Sir Osborne Morgan, -that the proper medium for an English translation of hexametrical poems -in Greek and Latin is the English hexameter. We may, however, hasten to -add that Sir Osborne has little to fear from a comparison with his -predecessors, who have, indeed, done their best to refute by example -their own theory. It may be observed, in passing, that the translations -of Virgil into rhymed decasyllabic verse are far more numerous than Sir -Osborne Morgan seems to suppose. He is, he says, acquainted only with -two--the version by Dryden and Joseph Warton--not seeming to be aware -that Warton translated only the _Georgics_ and _Eclogues_, printing -Pitt's version of the _neid_. The whole of Virgil was translated into -this measure by John Ogilvie between 1649-50, and by the Earl of -Lauderdale about 1716, while versions of the _neid_, the _Georgics_, -and the _Eclogues_, in the same metre, have abounded in every era of our -literature, from Gawain Douglas's translation of the _neid_ printed in -1553, to Archdeacon Wrangham's version of the _Eclogues_ in 1830. - -It is no reproach to Sir Osborne Morgan that, in the occupations of a -busy political life, his scholarship should have become a little rusty, -but it is a pity that he should so often have allowed himself to be -caught tripping, when a little timely counsel in the correction of his -proof sheets might have prevented this. In the First Eclogue the line - - "Non insueta graves temptabunt pabula fetas" - -is translated - - "Here no unwonted herb shall tempt the travailing cattle." - -What it really means is, no change of fodder, no fodder which is strange -to them, shall "infect" or "try" the pregnant cattle, "insueta" being -used in exactly the same sense as in Eclogue V. 56, "_insuetum_ miratur -limen Olympi," and "temptare" as it is used in Georg. III. 441, and -commonly in classical Latin. It is, to say the least, questionable -whether in the couplet-- - - "Pauperis et tuguri congestum cspite culmen, - Post aliquot, mea regna videns, mirabor aristas?"-- - -the last line can mean - - "Gaze on the straggling corn, the remains of what once was my kingdom." - -"Aristas" is much more likely to be a metonymy for "messes," _i.e._ -"annos," like +arotou+ in Sophocles' _Trachini_, 69, +ton -men parelthont' aroton+, a confirmative illustration which seems to have -escaped the commentators; but it is difficult to say, and Sir Osborne -has, it must be owned, excellent authority for his interpretation. In -Eclogue III. the somewhat difficult passage - - "pocula ponam - Fagina.... - Lenta quibus torno facili superaddita vitis - Diffusos hedera vestit pallente corymbos"-- - -_i.e._ "where the limber vine wreathed round them by the deft graving -tool is twined with pale ivy's spreading clusters,"--is translated: - - "Over whose side the vine by a touch of the graving tool added - Mantles its clustering grapes in the paler leaves of the ivy." - -This is quite wrong. "Corymbos" cannot possibly mean clusters of grapes, -but clusters of ivy berries, "heder pallente" being substituted, after -Virgil's manner, for "heder pallentis." In Eclogue IV. 24 there is no -reason for supposing that the "fallax herba veneni" is hemlock; it is -much more likely to be aconite. In line 45 "sandyx" should be translated -not "purple" but "crimson," vague as the colour indicated by "purple" -is. In Eclogue V. - - "Si quos aut Phyllidis ignes, - Aut Alconis habes laudes, aut jurgia Codri" - -is not - - "Phyllis's fiery loves you would sing or the quarrels of Codrus," - -but "your passion for Phyllis, your invectives against Codrus," "ignes" -being used far more becomingly for a man's love than for a woman's. So, -again, "pro purpureo narcisso" cannot mean what nature never saw, -"purple daffodil," but the white narcissus. In Eclogue VIII. "Sophocleo -tua carmina digna cothurno" is turned by what is obviously a _lapsus -calami_, "worthy of Sophocles' sock." A scholar like Sir Osborne Morgan -does not need reminding that the "sock" is a metonymy for Comedy, as -Milton anglicizes it in _L'Allegro_, "if Jonson's learned sock be on." -In the exquisite passage in Eclogue VIII. 41-- - - "Jam fragiles poteram ab terr contingere ramos"-- - -to translate "fragiles" as "frail" is to miss the whole point of the -epithet. What Virgil means is, "I could just reach the branches from the -ground and _break them off_"; if it is to be translated by one epithet, -it must be "brittle." Again in the Ninth Eclogue the words - - "qu se subducere colles - _Incipiunt_, mollique jugum demittere clivo," - -do not mean "where the hills with gentle depression steal away into the -plain," but the very opposite: _i.e._ "Where the hills begin to draw -themselves up from the plain," the ascent being contemplated from below. -In Eclogue IX., in turning the couplet - - "Nam neque adhuc Vario videor, nec dicere Cinn - Digna, sed argutos inter strepere anser olores," - -the translator has no authority for turning the last verse into "a -cackling goose in a chorus of cygnets," for there is no tradition that -cygnets sang, and goose should have been printed with a capital letter -to preserve the pun, the allusion being to a poetaster named Anser. -Unfortunately for the English translator, our literature can boast no -counterpart to "Anser" _totidem literis_, but Goose printed with a -capital is near enough to preserve, or suggest the sarcasm. There is -another slip in Eclogue X.: "Ferulas" is not "wands of willow" but -"fennel." - -Occasionally a touch is introduced which is neither authorized by the -original, nor true to nature. There is nothing, for instance to warrant, -in Eclogue I. 56, the epithet "odorous" as applied to the willow, nor -does "salictum" mean a "willow" but a "willow-bed or plantation." To -translate "ubi tempus erit" by "when the hour shall have struck" reminds -us of Shakespeare's famous anachronism in _Julius Csar_ and is as -surprising in the work of a scholar as the lengthening of the -penultimate in arbutus, "Sweet is the shower to the blade, To the newly -weaned kid the arbutus." As a rule, the translator turns difficult -passages very skilfully, but this is not the case with the couplet which -concludes the "Pollio":-- - - "Incipe, parve puer: cui non risere parentes - Nec deus hunc mens, dea nec dignata cubili est"; - -that is, the "babe on whom the parent never smiled, no god ever deemed -worthy of his board, no goddess of her bed"--in other words, he can -never enjoy the rewards of a hero like Hercules; but there is neither -sense nor skill, and something very like a serious grammatical error, in - - "Who knows not the smile of a parent, - Neither the board of a god nor the bed of a goddess is worthy." - -But to turn from comparative trifles. No one who reads this version of -the _Eclogues_ can doubt that Sir Osborne Morgan has proved his point, -that the English hexameter, when skilfully used, is the measure best -adapted for reproducing Virgil's music in English. The following passage -(_Ec._ VII. 45-48) is happily turned; let us place the original beside -the translation:-- - - "Muscosi fontes et somno mollior herba, - Et qu vos rar viridis tegit arbutus umbr, - Solstitium pecori defendite: jam venit stas - Torrida, jam lto turgent in palmite gemm." - - "Moss-grown fountains and sward more soft than the softest of slumbers, - Arbutus tree that flings over both its flickering shadows, - Shelter my flock from the sun. Already the summer is on us, - Summer that scorches up all! See the bud on the glad vine is swelling." - -Again (_Ec._ X. 41-48):-- - - "Serta mihi Phyllis legeret, cantaret Amyntas: - Hic gelidi fontes, hic mollia prata, Lycori, - Hic nemus: hic ipso tecum consumerer vo. - Nunc insanus amor duri me Martis in armis - Tela inter media atque adversos detinet hostes: - Tu procul a patri--nec sit mihi credere tantum!-- - Alpinas, ah dura, nives et frigora Rheni - Me sine sola vides." - - "Phyllis would gather me flowers and Amyntas a melody chant me; - Cool is the fountain's wave and soft is the meadow, Lycoris; - Shady the grove! Here with thee I would die of old age in the greenwood. - Mad is the lust of war, that now in the heart of the battle - Chains me where darts fall fast, and the charge of the foemen is fiercest, - Far, far away from your home--Oh, would that I might not believe it-- - Lost amid Alpine snows or the frozen desolate Rhineland, - Lonely without me you wander." - -Many other felicitous passages might be quoted; indeed, there is no -Eclogue without them; but the translator is not sure-footed, and, if he -occasionally illustrates the hexameter in its excellence, he -illustrates, unhappily too often, some of its worst defects. Two -qualities are indispensable to the success of this measure in English. -Our language, unlike the classical languages, being accentual and not -quantitative, if the long syllable is not represented where the stress -naturally falls, and the short syllables where it does not fall, the -effect is sometimes grotesque, sometimes distressing, and always -unsatisfactory. Nothing, for example, could be worse in their various -ways than the following:-- - - "Wept when you saw they were given the lad, and had you not managed." - "Let not the frozen air harm you." - "Scatter the sand with his hind hoofs." - "The pliant growth of the osier." - "Worthy of Sophocles' sock, trumpet-tongued through the Universe echo." - "Own'd it himself, and yet he would not deliver it to me." - -A very nice ear, too, is required to adjust the collocation of words in -which either vowels or consonants predominate, and the relative position -of monosyllabic and polysyllabic words, the predominance of the former -in our language increasing enormously the difficulty. No measure, -moreover, so easily runs into intolerable monotony--a monotony which -Clough sought to avoid by overweighting his verses with spondees, and -which Longfellow illustrates by the cloying predominance of the dactylic -movement. Sir Osborne Morgan tells us that he took Kingsley as his -model. Kingsley's hexameters are respectable, but they have no -distinction, and he had certainly not a good ear. Longfellow's are far -better, and are sometimes exquisitely felicitous, as in a couplet like -the following, which, with the exception of one word, is flawless:-- - - "Men whose lives glided on like the rivers that water the woodlands, - Darken'd by shadows of earth, but reflecting an image of Heaven." - -Probably the best hexameters which have been composed in English are -those in William Watson's _Hymn to the Sea_ and those in which Hawtry -translated Iliad III. 234-244, and the parting of Hector and Andromache -in the Sixth Iliad, models--these versions--not merely of translation, -but of hexametrical structure. There are, however, certain magical -effects, particularly in the Virgilian hexameter, produced by an -exquisite but audacious tact in the employment of licences, which can -never be reproduced in English. - -Such would be-- - - "Nam neque Parnassi vobis juga, nam neque Pindi - Ulla moram fecere, neque Aonie Aganippe. - Illum etiam lauri, etiam flevere myric; - Pinifer illum etiam sol sub rupe jacentem - Mnalus et gelidi fleverunt saxa Lyci." - -Milton, and Milton alone among Englishmen, had the secret of this music, -but he elicited it from another instrument. - - - - -THE LATEST EDITION OF THOMSON[46] - -[Footnote 46: _The Poetical Works of James Thomson._ A New Edition, with -Memoir and Critical Appendices, by the Rev. D. C. Tovey. 2 vols. -London.] - - -"Jacob Thomson, ein vergessener Dichter des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts"--a -forgotten poet of the eighteenth century--such is the title of a recent -monograph on the author of _The Seasons_ by Dr. G. Schmeding. Dr. G. -Schmeding is, however, so obliging as to pronounce that, in his opinion, -this ought not to be Thomson's fate; that there remains in his work, -especially in _The Seasons_ merit enough to entitle him to be "enrolled -among poets," and to find appreciation, at all events in schools and -reading societies. Dr. Schmeding may rest assured that Thomson's fame is -quite safe. It has no doubt suffered, as that of all the poets of the -eighteenth century has suffered, by the great revolution which has, in -the course of the last ninety years, passed over literary tastes and -fashions. But during the present century there have been no less than -twenty editions of his poems, to say nothing of separate editions of -_The Seasons_; while his works, or portions of them, have been -translated into German, Italian, modern Greek, and Russian. Only two -years ago M. Lon Morel, in his _J. Thomson, sa vie et ses oeuvres_, -published an elaborate and admirable monograph on this "forgotten poet." -And now Mr. Tovey, who, we are glad to see, has been appointed Clarke -Lecturer at Cambridge, has given us a new biography of him and a new -edition of his works, making, if we are not mistaken, the thirty-second -memoir of him and the twenty-first edition of his works which have -appeared since the beginning of the century. This is pretty well for a -forgotten poet! - -Mr. Tovey's name is a sufficient guarantee for accurate and scholarly -work. But it might naturally be asked, what is there to justify another -edition of this poet, when so many editions are already in the field and -so easily accessible? We have little difficulty in answering this -question. The special features of Mr. Tovey's edition are as important -as they are interesting. In the first place, he has given us a much -fuller biography than has hitherto appeared in English; in the second -place, he has thrown much interesting light on the political bearing of -Thomson's dramas; and, in the third place, he has given, what no other -editor of Thomson has given, a full collation of Thomson's own MS. -corrections, preserved in Mitford's copy, now deposited in the British -Museum. The critical notes have cost him, he says, and we can quite -believe it, much time and labour, and in his preface he half apologizes -for what may seem "a ridiculous travesty of more important labours." -There was no necessity for such an apology: he observes justly that he -has "not spent more pains on Thomson's text than so many of our scholars -bestow upon some Greek and Latin poets whose intrinsic merit is no -greater than Thomson's." - -To serious readers these critical notes will constitute the most -valuable part of Mr. Tovey's labours; they are, in truth, the speciality -of this particular edition, and will make it indispensable to all -students of this most interesting poet. And now Mr. Tovey will, we -trust, forgive us if, with due deference, we point out what seem to us -to be defects in his work. The first thing that might have been expected -from so learned and careful an editor of Thomson was an adequate -discussion of the great problem of the authorship of _Rule Britannia_, -and the second an exposure of one of the most extraordinary -"mare's-nests" to be found in English literature. But nothing, we regret -to say, can be more perfunctory and inadequate than the two notes in -which the first question is hurried over with references to _Notes and -Queries_, and nothing more irritating than the confusion worse -confounded in which Mr. Tovey leaves the second. We shall therefore -make no apology for entering somewhat at length into both these -questions. - -And first for the authorship of _Rule Britannia_. The facts are these. -In 1740 Thomson and Mallet wrote, in conjunction, a masque entitled -_Alfred_, which, on 1st August in that year, was represented before the -Prince and Princess of Wales at Clifden. It was in two acts, and it -contained six lyrics, the last being _Rule Britannia_, which is entitled -an "Ode," the music being by Dr. Arne. In 1745 Arne turned the piece -into an opera, and also into "a musical drama." By this time the lyric -had become very popular, but there is no evidence to show that it had -been definitely attributed to either of the coadjutors. In 1748 Thomson -died. In 1751 Mallet re-issued _Alfred_, but in another form. It was -entirely remodelled, and almost entirely re-written, and, in an -advertisement prefixed to the work, he says: "According to the present -arrangement of the fable I was obliged to reject a great deal of what I -had written in the other: neither could I retain, of my friend's part, -more than three or four speeches, and a part of one song." Now, of the -parts retained from the former work, there were the first three stanzas -of _Rule Britannia_, the three others being excised, and their place -supplied by three stanzas written by Lord Bolingbroke. If Mallet is to -be believed, then, "part of one song" must refer, either to a song in -the third scene of the second act, beginning "From those eternal -regions bright," or to _Rule Britannia_, for these are the only lyrics -in which portions of the lyrics in the former edition are retained. -_Rule Britannia_ is, it is true, entitled "An Ode" in the former -edition, and the other lyric "A Song," so that Mallet would certainly -seem to imply that what he had retained of his friend's work was the -portion of the song referred to, and not _Rule Britannia_. But, as -Mallet was notoriously a man who could not be believed on oath, and was -an adept in all those bad arts by which little men filch honours which -do not belong to them, if he is to be allowed to have any title to the -honour of composing this lyric, it ought to rest on something better -than the ambiguity between the word "Ode" and the word "Song." - -There is no evidence that, while both were alive, either Thomson or -Mallet claimed the authorship; but this is certain, it was printed at -Edinburgh, during Mallet's lifetime, in the second edition of a -well-known song book, entitled _The Charmer_, with Thomson's initials -appended to it. It is certain that Mallet had friends in Edinburgh, and -it is equally certain that neither he nor any of his friends raised any -objection to its ascription to Thomson. In 1743, in 1759, and in 1762 -Mallet published collections of poems, but in none of these collections -does he lay claim to _Rule Britannia_, and, though it was printed in -song-books in 1749, 1750, and 1761, it is in no case assigned to -Mallet. None of his contemporaries, so far as we know, attributed it to -him, and it is remarkable that, in a brief obituary notice of him which -appeared in the _Scots Magazine_ in 1765, he is spoken of as the author -of the famous ballad _William and Margaret_, but not a word is said -about _Rule Britannia_. A further presumption in Thomson's favour is -this: in all probability Dr. Arne, who set it to music, knew the -authorship, and he survived both Thomson and Mallet, dying in 1778. The -song had become very popular and celebrated, so that if Mallet had -desired to have the credit of its composition, it is strange that he -should not have laid claim to it, had his claim been a good one. But if -his claim was not good, he could hardly have ventured to claim the -authorship, as Dr. Arne would have been in his way. It is quite possible -that the ambiguity in the advertisement to the recension of 1751 was -designed; it certainly left the question open, and we cannot but think -there is something very suspicious in what follows the sentence in -Mallet's advertisement, where he speaks of his having used so little of -his friend's work. "I mention this expressly," he adds, "that, whatever -faults are found in the present performance, they may be charged, as -they ought to be, entirely to my account." A vainer and more -unscrupulous man than Mallet never existed; and, while it is simply -incredible that he should not have claimed what would have constituted -his chief title to popularity as a poet, had he been able to do so, it -is in exact accordance with his established character that he should, as -he did in the advertisement of 1751, have left himself an opportunity of -asserting that claim, should those who were privy to the secret have -predeceased him, and thus enabled him to do so with impunity. - -The internal evidence--and on this alone the question must now be -argued--seems to us conclusive in Thomson's favour. The Ode is simply a -translation into lyrics of what finds embodiment in Thomson's -_Britannia_, in the fourth and fifth parts of _Liberty_, and in his -Verses to the Prince of Wales. Coming to details, there can be no doubt -that the third stanza-- - - "Still more majestic shalt thou rise, - More dreadful from each foreign stroke; - As the loud blast that tears the skies - Serves but to root thy native oak"-- - -was suggested by Horace's - - "Duris ut ilex tonsa bipennibus - Nigr feraci frondis in Algido, - Per damna, per cdes, ab ipso - Ducit opes animumque ferro." - -Now, not only was Horace, as innumerable imitations and reminiscences -prove, one of Thomson's favourite poets, but Thomson has, in the third -part of _Liberty_ translated this very passage:-- - - "Like an oak, - Nurs'd on feracious Algidum, whose boughs - Still stronger shoot beneath the rigid axe - By loss, by slaughter, from the steel itself - E'en force and spirit drew." - -He has, elsewhere, two other reminiscences of the same passage, once in -the third part of _Liberty_-- - - "Every tempest sung - Innoxious by, or bade it firmer stand"-- - -and once in _Sophonisba_ (Act V. sc. ii.):-- - - "Thy rooted worth - Has stood these wintry blasts, grown stronger by them." - -The epithet "azure" employed in the first stanza is, with "cerulean" and -"aerial," one of the three commonest epithets in Thomson, the three -occurring at least twenty times in his poetry. A somewhat cursory -examination of his works has enabled us to find that "azure" or "azured" -alone occurs ten times. "Generous," too, in the Latin sense of the term, -is another of his favourite words, it being used no less than sixteen -times in _Britannia_ and _Liberty_ alone. Another of his favourite -allusions is to England's "native oaks." Thus in _Britannia_ he speaks -of-- - - "Your oaks, peculiar harden'd, shoot - Strong into sturdy growth;" - -in the last part of _Liberty_ we find "Let her own naval oak be basely -torn," and in the same part of the poem he speaks of the "venerable -oaks" and "kindred floods." The epithet "manly" and the phrase "the -fair"--"manly hearts to guard the fair"--are also peculiarly Thomsonian, -being repeatedly employed by him, the phrase "the fair" occurring in his -poetry at least six times, if not oftener. "Flame," too, is another of -his favourite words. - - "All their attempts to bend thee down - Will but arouse," etc., - -is exactly the sentiment in _Britannia_. - - "Your hearts - Swell with a sudden courage, growing still - As danger grows." - -The stanza beginning "To thee belongs," etc., is simply a lyrical -paraphrase of the passage in _Britannia_ commencing "Oh first of human -blessings," and of a couplet in the last part of _Liberty_:-- - - "The winds and seas are Britain's wide domain; - And not a sail but by permission spreads." - -The couplet - - "All thine shall be the subject main, - And every shore it circles thine" - -is simply the echo of a couplet in the fifth part of _Liberty_-- - - "All ocean is her own, and every land - To whom her ruling thunder ocean bears." - -The phrase "blessed isle," as applied to England, he employs three -times in _Liberty_. Again, the stanza in which _Rule Britannia_ is -written is the stanza in which the majority of Thomson's minor lyrics -are written, and the rhythm and cadence, not less than the tone, colour -and sentiment, are exactly his. - -Mallet was undoubtedly an accomplished man and a respectable poet, as -his ballad _William and Margaret_, his _Edwin and Emma_, and his _Birks -of Invermay_ sufficiently prove, but he has written nothing tolerable in -the vein of _Rule Britannia_. Neatness, and tenderness bordering on -effeminacy, mark his characteristic lyrics, and, if we except a few -lines in his _Tyburn_ and the eight concluding lines in a poem entitled -_A Fragment_, there is no virility in his poetry at all. Of the -patriotism and ardent love of liberty which pervade Thomson's poems, and -which glow so intensely in _Rule Britannia_, he has absolutely nothing. -Nor are there any analogues or parallels in his poems to this lyric -either in form--for if we are not mistaken, he has never employed the -stanza in which it is written--or in imagery, or phraseology. Like -Thomson, whom, in his narrative blank-verse poems, he servilely -imitates, he is fond of the words "azure" and "aerial"; and the word -"azure" is the only verbal coincidence linking the phraseology of his -acknowledged poems with the lyric in question. It may be added, too, -that a man who was capable of the jingling rubbish of such a masque as -_Britannia_, and who had the execrable taste to substitute Bolingbroke's -stanzas for the stanzas which they supersede, could hardly have been -equal to the production of this lyric. We believe, then, that there can -be no reasonable doubt that the honour of composing _Rule Britannia_ -belongs to Thomson the bard, and not to Mallet the fribble. - -But to return to Mr. Tovey and the "mare's-nest" to which we have -referred. This mare's-nest is the assumption that Pope assisted Thomson -in revising _The Seasons_. Since Robert Bell's edition this has come to -be received as an established fact, but we propose to show that it rests -on a hypothesis demonstrably baseless. - -There is, in the British Museum, an interleaved copy of the first volume -of the London edition of Thomson's works, dated 1738, and the part of -the volume which contains _The Seasons_ is full of manuscript deletions, -corrections, and additions. These are in two handwritings, the one being -unmistakably the handwriting of Thomson, the other beyond all question -the handwriting of some one else. Almost all these corrections were -inserted in the edition prepared for the press in 1744, and now, -consequently, form part of the present text. The corrections in the hand -which is not the hand of Thomson are, in many cases, of extraordinary -merit, showing a fineness of ear and delicacy of touch quite above the -reach of Thomson himself. We will give two or three samples. Thomson -had written in _Autumn_ 290 seqq.:-- - - "With harvest shining all these fields are thine, - And if my rustics may presume so far, - Their master, too, who then indeed were blest - To make the daughter of Acasto so." - -The unknown corrector substitutes the present reading:-- - - "The fields, the master, all, my fair, are thine; - If to the various blessings which thy house - Has lavished on me thou wilt add that bliss, - That dearest bliss, the power of blessing thee!" - -The other is famous. Thomson had written:-- - - "Thoughtless of beauty, she was beauty's self, - Recluse among the woods, if City-dames - Will deign their faith. And thus she went compell'd - By strong necessity, with as serene - And pleased a look as patience can put on, - To glean Palemon's fields." - -For these vapid and dissonant verses is substituted by the corrector, -who very properly retains the first verse, what is now the text:-- - - "Recluse amid the close embow'ring woods, - As in the hollow breast of Apennine, - Beneath the shelter of encircling hills, - A myrtle rises, far from human eyes, - And breathes its balmy fragrance o'er the wild. - So flourished blooming, and unseen by all, - The sweet Lavinia," etc. - -The transformation of a single line is often most felicitous: thus in -_Winter_ the flat line - - "Through the lone night that bids the waves arise" - -is grandly altered into - - "Through the black night that sits immense around." - -Thus, in _Spring_, Thomson had merely written - - "Whose aged oaks and venerable gloom - Invite the noisy rooks;" - -but his corrector alters and extends the passage into - - "Whose aged elms and venerable oaks - Invite the rooks, who high amid the boughs - In early spring their airy city build, - And caw with ceaseless clamour." - -Indeed, throughout _The Seasons_ Thomson's indebtedness to his corrector -is incalculable; many of the most felicitous touches are due to him. -Now, who was this corrector? Let Mr. Tovey answer. "It has long been -accepted as a fact among scholars that Pope assisted Thomson in the -composition of _The Seasons_. Our original authority is, we suppose, -Warton." The truth is that our original authority for this statement is -neither Warton nor any other writer of the eighteenth century, but -simply the conjecture of Mitford--in other words, Mitford's mere -assumption that the handwriting of the corrector is the handwriting of -Pope; and, if we are not mistaken,--for Mitford may have given earlier -currency to it in some other place--the conjecture appeared for the -first time in Mitford's edition of Gray, published in 1814. In his copy -of the volume, containing the MS. notes, he bolsters up his statement -by two assertions and references: "That Pope saw some pieces of -Thomson's in manuscript is clear from a letter in Bowles's _Supplement_, -page 194" (an obvious misprint for 294). But on turning to the -references all that we find is--it is in a letter dated February -1738/9--"I have yet seen but three acts of Mr. Thomson's, but I am told, -and believe by what I have seen that it excels in the pathetic"; the -reference is plainly to Thomson's tragedy, _Edward and Eleonora_. Again, -Mitford writes: "On Thomson's submitting his poems to Pope" (see -Warton's edition, vol. viii., page 340), and again we get no proof. All -that Pope says is, "I am just taken up"--he is writing to Aaron Hill -under date November 1732--"by Mr. Thomson in the perusal of a new poem -he has brought me;" this new poem being almost certainly _Liberty_, in -the composition of which Thomson was then engaged. So far from the -tradition having any countenance from Warton, it is as certain as -anything can be, that Warton knew nothing about it. In his _Essay on -Pope_ he gives an elaborate account of _The Seasons_, and he has more -than once referred to Pope and Thomson together; but he says not a word, -either in this Essay or in his edition of Pope's Works, about Pope -having corrected Thomson's poetry. If Pope assisted Thomson, to the -extent indicated in these corrections, such an incident, considering -the fame of Thomson and the fame of Pope, must have been known to some -at least of the innumerable editors, biographers, and anecdotists -between 1742 and 1814. It could hardly have escaped being recorded by -Murdoch, Mallet, or Warburton, by Ruffhead, by Savage or Spence, by -Theophilus Cibber or Johnson. It is incredible that such an interesting -secret should have been kept either by Thomson himself or by Pope. -Again, whoever the corrector was, he had a fine ear for blank verse, and -must indeed have been a master of it. There is no proof that Pope ever -wrote in blank verse; indeed, we have the express testimony of Lady -Wortley Montagu that he never attempted it, and his Shakespeare -conclusively proves that he had anything but a nice ear for its rhythm. -With all this collateral evidence against the probability of the -corrector being Pope, we come to the evidence which should settle the -question, the evidence of handwriting. There is no lack of material for -forming an opinion on this point. Pope's autograph MSS. are abundant, -illustrating his hand at every period in his life. It is amazing to find -Mitford asserting that his friends Ellis and Combe, at the British -Museum, had no doubt about the hand of the corrector being the hand of -Pope. Mr. Tovey candidly admits that, "if the best authorities at the -Museum many years ago were positive that the handwriting was Pope's, -their successors at the present time are equally positive that it is -not." Such is the very decided opinion of Mr. Warner; such, also, as Mr. -Tovey acknowledges, is the opinion of Professor Courthope, and such, we -venture to think, will be the opinion of every one who will take the -trouble to compare the hands. Mr. Tovey himself is plainly very uneasy, -and indeed goes so far as to say that "it has all along been perplexing -to me how the opinion that this was Pope's handwriting could ever have -been _confidently_" (the italics are his) "entertained"; and yet in his -notes he follows Bell, and inserts these corrections with Pope's -initials. - -We search in vain among those who are known to have been on friendly -terms with Thomson for a probable claimant. It could not, as his other -stupid revisions of Thomson's verses sufficiently show, have been -Lyttleton. Mallet's blank verse is conclusive against his having had any -hand in the corrections. Collins and Hammond are out of the question. It -is just possible, though hardly likely, that the corrector was -Armstrong. He was on very intimate terms with Thomson. His own poem -proves that he could sometimes write excellent blank verse, but the -touch and rhythm of the corrections are, it must be admitted, not the -touch and rhythm of Armstrong. - -What has long, therefore, been represented and circulated as an -undisputed fact--namely, that Pope assisted Thomson in the revision of -_The Seasons_--rests not, as all Thomson's modern editors have supposed, -on the traditions of the eighteenth century, and on the testimony of -authenticated handwriting, but on a mere assumption of Mitford. That the -volume in question really belonged to Thomson, and that the corrections -are originals, hardly admits of doubt, though Mitford gives neither the -pedigree nor the history of this most interesting literary relic. It is, -of course, possible that the corrections are Thomson's own, and that the -differences in the handwriting are attributable to the fact that in some -cases he was his own scribe, that in others he employed an amanuensis; -but the intrinsic unlikeness of the corrections, made in the strange -hand, to his characteristic style renders this improbable. In any case -there is nothing to warrant the assumption that the corrector was Pope. - - - - -CATULLUS AND LESBIA.[47] - -[Footnote 47: _The Lesbia of Catullus._ Arranged and translated by J. H. -A. Tremenheere. London.] - - -Perhaps the best thing in this world is youth, and the poetry of -Catullus is its very incarnation. The "young Catullus" he was to his -contemporaries, and the young Catullus he will be to the end of time. To -turn over his pages is to recall the days when all within and all -without conspire to make existence a perpetual feast, when life's lord -is pleasure, its end enjoyment, its law impulse, before experience and -satiety have disillusioned and disgusted, and we are still in Dante's -phrase, "trattando l'ombre come cosa salda." And the poet of youth had -the good fortune not to survive youth; of the dregs and lees of the life -he chose he had no taste. While the cup which "but sparkles near the -brim" was still sparkling for him, death dashed it from his lips. At -thirty his tale was told,--and a radiant figure, a sunny memory and a -golden volume were immortal. - -Revelling alike in the world of nature, and in the world of man, at once -simple and intense, at once playful and pathetic, his poetry has a -freshness as of the morning, an abandon as of a child at play. He has -not, indeed, escaped the taint of Alexandrinism any more than Burns -escaped the taint of the pseudo-classicism of the conventional school of -his day, but this is the only note of falsetto discernible in what he -has left us. It is when we compare him with Horace, Propertius, and -Martial that his incomparable charm is most felt. As a lyric poet, -except when patriotic, and when dealing with moral ideas, Horace is as -commonplace as he is insincere; he had no passion; he had little pathos; -he had not much sentiment; he had no real feeling for nature, he was -little more than a consummate craftsman, to adopt an expression from -Scaliger "ex alienis ingeniis poeta, ex suo tantum versificator." In his -Greek models he found not merely his form, but his inspiration. Most of -his love odes have all the appearance of being mere studies in fancy. -When he attempts threnody he is as frigid as Cowley. Whose heart was -ever touched by the verses to Virgil on the death of Quintilian, or by -the verses to Valgius on the death of his son? The real Horace is the -Horace of the Satires and Epistles, and the real Horace had as little of -the temperament of a poet as La Fontaine and Prior. Propertius had -passion, and he had certainly some feeling for nature, but he was an -incurable pedant both in temper and in habit. Martial applied the -epigram, in elegiacs and in hendecasyllabics, to the same purposes to -which it was applied by Catullus, with more brilliance and finish, but -he had not the power of informing trifles with emotion and soul. What -became with Catullus the spontaneous expression of the dominant mood, -became in the hands of Martial the mere _tour de force_ of the ingenious -wit. Catullus is the most Greek of all the Roman poets; Greek in the -simplicity, chastity and propriety of his style, in his exquisite -responsiveness to all that appeals to the senses and the emotions, in -his ardent and abounding vitality. But, in his enthusiasm for nature, in -the intensity of his domestic affections, and in his occasional touches -of moral earnestness--and we have seldom to go far for them--he was -Roman. His sketches from nature are delightful. What could be more -perfect than the following? Has even Tennyson equalled it?-- - - Hic, qualis flatu placidum mare matutino - Horrificans Zephyrus proclivas incitat undas, - Auror exoriente, vagi sub lumina solis; - Qu tarde primum clementi flamine puls - Procedunt, leviterque sonant plangore cachinni: - Post, vento crescente, magis magis increbescunt, - Purpureque procul nantes a luce refulgent. - - "As in early morning when Zephyr's breath, ruffling the stilly - sea, stirs it into slanting waves up against the glow of the - travelling sun; and at first, while the impelling breeze is - gentle, they move in slow procession, and the plash of their - ripples is not loud; but then, as the breeze freshens, they - crowd faster and faster on, and far out at sea, as they float, - flash back the splendour of the crimsoning day in their front." - -Or, again, in the epistle to Manlius-- - - Qualis in aerii _pellucens_ vertice montis - Rivus _muscoso prosilit e lapide_. - -How vivid is the picture of the rising sun and of early morning in the -Attis, 39-41. - - Ubi oris aurei sol radiantibus oculis - Lustravit thera album, sola dura, mare ferum, - Pepulitque noctis umbras vegetis sonipedibus. - -In his "Asian Myrtle, in all the beauty of its blossom-laden branches, -which the Wood-Nymphs feed with honey dew to be their toy:"-- - - Floridis velut enitens - Myrtus Asia ramulis, - Quos Hamadryades De - Ludicrum sibi roscido - Nutriunt humore.-- - ---who does not recognise Matthew Arnold's "natural magic"? - -Flowers he loved, as Shakespeare loved them. What tenderness there is in -the image of the love that perished-- - - Prati - Ultimi flos, prtereunte postquam - Tactus aratro est, - - (xi. 19-21.) - ---in the beautiful simile, so often imitated in every language in -Europe, where the unmarried maiden is compared to the uncropped flower, -lxii., 39-45; or where in the - - Alba parthenice, - Luteumve papaver, - - (lxi. 194-5.) - -he sees the symbol of maidenhood; or where Ariadne is compared to the -myrtles on the banks of the Eurotas, and to the "flowers of diverse hues -which the spring breezes evoke"; and, again, the exquisite simile -picturing the husband's love binding fast the bride's thoughts, as a -tree is entwined in the clinging clasp of the gadding ivy-- - - Mentem amore revinciens, - Ut tenax hedera huc et huc - Arborem implicat errans. - -Then we have the garland of Priapus with its felicitous epithets (xix., -xx.). - -It may be said of Catullus as Shelley said of his Alastor-- - - Every sight - And sound from the vast earth and ambient air - Sent to his heart their choicest impulses. - -What rapture inspires and informs the lines to his yacht, and to Sirmio, -as well as the _Jam ver egelidos refert tepores_! - -As the author of the _Attis_ Catullus stands alone among poets. There -was, so far as we know, nothing like it before, and there has been -nothing like it since. If it be a study from the Greek, as it is -generally supposed to be, it is very difficult to conjecture at what -period its original could have been produced. There is nothing at all -resembling it which has come down from the lyric period; its theme is -not one which would have been likely to attract the Attic poets. If its -model was the work of some Alexandrian, we can only say that such a poem -must have been an even greater anomaly in that literature than Smart's -_Song to David_ is to our own literature, in the eighteenth century. It -may, of course, be urged that it is equally anomalous in Latin poetry, -and that, if resolved into its elements, it has much more affinity with -what may be traced to Greek than to Roman sources. In its compound -epithets, and more particularly in the singular use of "foro," so -plainly substituted for the Greek +agora+ and its associations, -it certainly reads like a translation from the Greek; and yet, in the -total impression made by it, the poem has not the air of a translation, -but of an original, and of an original struck out, in inspiration, at -white heat. - -Only by an extraordinary effort of imaginative sympathy are we now able -to realize to ourselves the tragedy of the _Attis_, while its rushing -galliambics whirl us through the panorama of its swift-succeeding -pictures. But home to every heart must come the poems which Catullus -dedicates to the memory of his brother, and the poem in which he tries -to soothe Calvus for the death of Quintilia. - - Multas per gentes, et multa per aequora vectus - Advenio has miseras, frater, ad inferias, - Ut te postremo donarem munere mortis, - Et mutum nequidquam alloquerer cinerem: - Quandoquidem fortuna mihi tete abstulit ipsum: - Heu miser indigne frater adempte mihi! - Nunc tamen interea prisco qu more parentum - Tradita sunt tristi munere ad inferias, - Accipe, fraterno multum manantia fletu: - Atque in perpetuum, frater, ave atque vale. - - "Many are the peoples, many the seas I have passed through to - be here, dear brother, at this, thine untimely grave, that I - might pay thee death's last tribute, and greet,--how - vainly,--the dust that has no response. For well I know Fortune - hath bereft me of thy living self--Ah! hapless brother, cruelly - torn from me! Yet here, see, be the offerings which, from of - old, the custom of our fathers hath handed down as a sad - oblation to the grave--take them--they are streaming with a - brother's tears. And now--for evermore--brother, hail and - farewell!" - -Could pathos go further? How exquisite, too, is the following:-- - - Si quidquam mutis gratum acceptumque sepulcris - Accidere a nostro, Calve, dolore potest, - Quum desiderio veteres renovamus amores, - Atque olim amissas flemus amicitias: - Certe non tanto mors immatura dolori est - Quintili, quantum gaudet amore tuo.[48] - -Shakespeare merely unfolded what was included here, when he wrote those -haunting lines:-- - - When to the sessions of sweet silent thought - I summon up remembrance of things past, - I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought, - And with old woes new wail my dear time's waste - Then can I drown an eye, unus'd to flow, - For precious friends hid in death's dateless night, - And weep afresh love's long-since cancell'd woe, - And moan the expense of many a vanish'd sight. - -Never, too, has any poet given such pathetic expression to a sorrow, -which to the young is even harder to bear than the loss inflicted by -death, the perfidy and treachery of friends. The verses to Alphenus -(xxx.), to the anonymous friend in lxviii., and the epigram to Rufus -(lxxvii.), are indescribably touching. What infinite sadness there is -in:-- - - Si tu oblitus es, at Dii meminerunt, meminit Fides, - Qu te ut pniteat postmodo facti faciet tui. - -What passion of grief in:-- - - Heu, heu, nostr crudele venenum - Vit, heu, heu, nostr pestis amiciti! - -But nothing that Catullus has left us equals in fascinating interest, or -exceeds in charm, the poems inspired by the woman who was at once the -bliss and the curse of his life-- - - Lesbia nostra, Lesbia illa, - Illa Lesbia, quam Catullus unam - Plusquam se, atque suos amavit omnes. - -Whether she is to be identified with the sister of P. Clodius Pulcher, -and the wife of Metellus Celer, seems to us, in spite of the arguments -of Schwaber, Munro, Ellis, and Sellar, extremely doubtful. It is a point -which need not be discussed here, and is, indeed, of little importance. -That she was a woman of superb and commanding beauty, a false wife, a -false mistress, and of immeasurable profligacy, Catullus has himself -told us. There could only be one end to a passion of which such a siren -was the object; and, exquisite as the poems are which precede the -breaking of the spell, it is in the poems recording the gradual process -of disenchantment, and the struggle between the old love and the new -loathing, that Catullus touches us most. How piercing is the pathos of -such a poem as the _Si qua recordanti_ (lxxvi.), or the epigram in which -he says that he loves and loathes, but knows not why, only knows that it -is so, and that he is on the rack:-- - - Odi et amo. Quare id faciam, fortasse requiris. - Nescio: sed fieri sentio et excrucior. - -Or where he says that, pest as she is, he cannot curse a love who is -dearer to him than both his eyes:-- - - Credis me potuisse me maledicere vit, - Ambobus mihi qu carior est oculis? - Non potui, nec, si possem, tam perdite amarem. - -And he suffered the more, as he had lavished on her the purest -affections of his heart. His love for her--such was his own -expression--was not simply that which men ordinarily feel for their -mistresses, but such as the father feels for his sons and his -sons-in-law:-- - - Dilexi tum te, non tantum ut vulgus amicam, - Sed pater ut gnatos diligit et generos. - -But shameless as she is, and it is an impossibility for her to be -otherwise, he cannot abandon her. Do what she will he is her slave. His -mind, he says, was so straitened by her frailty, so beggared by its own -devotion, that, even if she became virtuous, he could not love her with -absolute goodwill, and if she stuck at nothing--drained vice to its very -dregs--he could not give her up:-- - - Huc est mens deducta tu, mea Lesbia, culp - Atque ita se officio perdidit ipsa suo, - Ut jam nec bene velle queam tibi, si optima fias, - Nec desistere amare, omnia si facias. - -He compares himself to a man labouring under a cruel and incurable -disease, a disease which is paralysing his energy, and draining life of -its joy:-- - - Me miserum adspicite, et si vitam puriter egi, - Eripite hanc pestem perniciemque mihi, - Qu mihi subrepens imos, ut torpor, in artus - Expulit ex omni pectore ltitias. - -Nearly sixteen hundred years had to pass before the world was to have -any parallel to these poems. And the parallel is certainly a remarkable -one. In the "Dark Lady" of Shakespeare's Sonnets, Lesbia lives again; in -the lover of the dark lady, Lesbia's victim. Once more a false wife and -a false mistress, not indeed beautiful, but with powers of fascination -so irresistible that deformity itself becomes a charm, makes havoc of a -poet's peace. Once more a passion, as degraded as it is degrading, sows -feuds among friends, and "infects with jealousy the sweetness of -affiance." Once more rises the bitter cry of a soul, conscious of the -unspeakable degradation of a thraldom which it is agony to endure, and -from which it would be agony to be emancipated. Compare for instance:-- - - My love is as a fever, longing still - For that which longer nurseth the disease, - Feeding on that which doth preserve the ill, - The uncertain sickly appetite to please. - - * * * * * - - Past cure I am, now reason is past care, - And frantic mad with evermore unrest, - My thoughts and my discourse as madman's are, - - (Sonnet cxlvii.) - -with Catullus, lxxvi. - -And:-- - - Whence hast thou this becoming of things ill, - That in the very refuse of thy deeds - There is such strength and warrantise of skill, - That in my mind thy worst all best exceeds. - Who taught thee how to make me love thee more, - The more I hear and see just cause of hate? - - (Sonnet cl.) - -with Catullus, lxxii., lxxiii., lxxv.; while Sonnet cxxxvii. presents a -ghastly parallel with Catullus, lviii. Again, how exactly analogous is -the adjuration to Quintius in Epigram lxxxii., with what finds -expression in Sonnets xl.-xlii., and Sonnet cxx. But it would be tedious -as well as superfluous to cite particular parallels where the whole -position--which may be summed up in the two words of Catullus, "Odi et -amo,"--is identical. - -Not the least remarkable thing about Catullus is his range and his -versatility. It is truly extraordinary that the same pen should have -given us such finished social portraits as "Suffenus iste" (xxii.), "Ad -Furium" (xxiii.), "In Egnatium" (xxxix.); the perfection of such serious -fooling as we find in the "Lugete, O Veneres" (iii.), and, if we may -apply such an expression to the most delicious love poem ever written, -the "Acme and Septimius" (xlv.); of such humorous fooling as we find in -the "Varus me meus ad suos amores" (x.), the "O Colonia qu cupis" -(xvii.), the "Adeste, hendecasyllabi," the "Oramus, si forte non -molestum" (lv.); such epic as we have in the "Peleus and Thetis"; such -triumphs of richness, splendour, and grace as we have in the three -marriage poems; such a superb expression of the highest imaginative -power, penetrated with passion and enthusiasm, as we have in the -_Attis_; such concentrated invective and satire as mark some of the -lampoons; such mock heroic as we have in the _Coma Berenices_; such -piercing pathos as penetrates the autobiographical poems, and the poems -dedicated to Lesbia. - -Catullus has been compared to Keats, but the comparison is not a happy -one. His nearest analogy among modern poets is Burns. Both were, in -Tennyson's phrase, "dowered with the love of love, the scorn of scorn," -and, in the poems of both, those passions find the intensest expression. -Both had an exquisite sympathy with all that appeals, either in nature -or in humanity, to the senses and the affections. Both were sensualists -and libertines without being effeminate, or without being either -depraved or hardened. In both, indeed, an infinite tenderness is perhaps -the predominating feature. Both had humour, that of Catullus being the -more caustic, that of Burns the more genial. Both were distinguished by -sincerity and simplicity; both waged war with charlatanry and baseness. -Burns had the richer nature and was the greater as a man; Catullus was -the more accomplished artist. - -But it is time to turn to the book which has recalled Catullus and -Lesbia. Mr. Tremenheere has, with great ingenuity, succeeded in -concocting by a process of elaborate dovetailing a very pretty romance -which he divides into nine chapters, the first being "The Birth of -Love," the second, third and fourth, "Possession," "Quarrels" and -"Reconciliation," the fifth, sixth, and seventh, "Doubt," "A Brother's -Death" and "Unfaithfulness," the last two, "Avoidance" and "The Death of -Love." The chief objection to this is that it is for the most part -fanciful, and is absolutely without warrant, either from tradition or -from probability. Many of the poems pressed into the service of his -narrative by Mr. Tremenheere have nothing whatever to do with Lesbia. -Such would be xiii., "The invitation to Fabullus," xiv., "The Acme and -Septimius." - -The translations are very unequal. Of many of them it may be said in -Dogberry's phrase that they "are tolerable and not to be endured," or to -borrow an expression from Byron "so middling bad were better." Thus the -powerful poem to Gellius (xci.) is attenuated into:-- - - 'Twas not that I esteem'd you were - As constant or incapable - Of vulgar baseness, but that she - For whom great love was wasting me, - The spice of incest lacked for you; - And though we were old friends, 'tis true, - That seem'd poor cause to my poor mind, - Not so to yours. - -Sometimes the versions are detestable. Nothing could be worse than to -turn:-- - - Nulli illum pueri null optavere puell - - No more is she glad to the eyes of a lad, - To the lasses a pride,-- - -or - - Dulcis pueri ebrios ocellos - -as - - Her minion's passion-sodden eyes,-- - -which might do very well for a coarse phrase like "In Venerem putres," -but not for "Ebrios." But sometimes the renderings are very felicitous. -As here:-- - - Quid vis? qulubet esse notus optas - Eris: quandoquidem meos amores - Cum long voluisti amare poen. - - Cost what it may, you'll win renown! - You shall, such longing you exhibit - Both for my mistress--and a gibbet! - -And the following is happy:-- - - Nullum amans vere, sed identidem omnium - Ilia rumpens. - Nec meum respectet, ut ante, amorem - Qui illius culp cecidit; velut prati - Ultimi flos, prtereunte postquam - Tactus aratro est. - - Ah, shameless, loveless lust, sweet, seek no more - To win love back, by thine own fault it fell, - In the far corner of the field though hid, - Touch'd by the plough at last,--the flower is dead. - -The following also is neat and skilful, but how inferior to the almost -terrible impressiveness of the original:-- - - O Di si vostrm est misereri, aut si quibus unquam - Extrem jam ips in morte tulistis opem. - Me miserum adspicite, et si vitam puriter egi, - Eripite hanc pestem perniciemque mihi, - Qu mihi subrepens imos, ut torpor, in artus - Expulit ex omni pectore ltitias. - - Oh God! if Thine be pity, and if Thou - E'en in the jaws of death ere now, - Hast wrought salvation--look on me; - And if my life seem fair to Thee - O tear this plague, this curse away, - Which gaining on me day by day, - A creeping slow paralysis, - Hath driven away all happiness. - -Six love stories stand out conspicuous in the records of poetry--those -which find expression in the _Elegies_ of Propertius, in the _Sonnets -and Canzoni_ of Dante and Petrarch, in the _Sonnets_ of Camoens, in the -_Astrophel and Stella_ of Sidney, in the _Sonnets_ of Shakespeare. But -never has passion, never has pathos, thrilled in intenser or more -piercing utterance than in the poems which that fatal "Clytemnestra -quadrantaria"--to employ the phrase which may actually have been applied -to her--inspired, and in which the rapture and loathing and despair of -Catullus found a voice. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 48: "If the silent dead can feel any pleasure, or solace from -our sorrow, Calvus, when, in wistful regret, we recall past loves, and -weep for the friendships severed long ago, then be sure that Quintilia's -grief for her early death is not so great as the joy she feels in -knowing your love for her."] - - - - -THE RELIGION OF SHAKESPEARE[49] - -[Footnote 49: _The Religion of Shakespeare._ Chiefly from the writings -of the late Mr. Richard Simpson. By Henry Sebastian Bowden. London.] - - -This book, which is partly a compilation from the uncollected writings -of the late Richard Simpson and partly the composition of Father Bowden -himself, is an attempt to show that Shakespeare was a Roman Catholic. It -contains much interesting information; it is well written, and we have -read it with pleasure. With much which we find in it we entirely concur -and are in full sympathy. We take Shakespeare quite as seriously as -Father Bowden does. We believe that the greatest of dramatic poets is -also one of the greatest of moral teachers, that his theology and ethics -deserve the most careful study, and that they have, too frequently, been -either neglected or misinterpreted. We agree with Father Bowden that -nothing could be sounder and more persistently emphasised than the -ethical element in this poet's dramas; that his ethics are, in the -main, the ethics of Christianity, and that so far from Shakespeare being -simply an agnostic and having no religion at all, as Birch and others -have contended, he is, if not formally, at least in essence, as -religious as schylus and Sophocles. - -And now Father Bowden must forgive us if we are unable to go further -with him. We have no prejudice against Roman Catholicism, or against any -of the creeds in which religious faith and reverence have found -expression,--"Tros Rutulusve fuat nullo discrimine agetur." Our sole -wish is, if possible, to get at the truth. It is of comparatively little -consequence now to what form of religion Shakespeare belonged, but it -would be at least interesting, if it could be shown that any particular -sect could legitimately claim him. - -In discussing this question we must bear in mind that in Shakespeare's -time, as in the time of the ancients, religion had two aspects, its -private and its public. In its public aspect it was a part of the -machinery of the state, an essential portion of the political fabric. -Till the Reformation there had been practically no schism and no -difficulty. After the Reformation a most perplexing problem presented -itself. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, in a long and terrible -conflict, struggled for the mastery. At the accession of Elizabeth the -victory had been won, so far as England was concerned, by Protestantism, -and Protestantism was the accepted religion of the nation. As such, it -was the duty of every loyal citizen to uphold it; it became with the -throne one of the two pillars on which the fabric of the state rested. -Roman Catholicism became identified with the political rivals and -enemies of England. Protestantism became identified with her lovers and -upholders. Thus the Church and the Throne became indissoluble, at once -the symbols, centres, and securities of political harmony and union. -This accounts for the attitude of Hooker, Spenser, Shakespeare and Bacon -towards Episcopalian Protestantism on the one hand, and towards -Puritanism on the other. About Shakespeare's political opinions there -can be no doubt at all, for, if we except the Comedies, he preaches them -emphatically in almost every drama which he has left us. They were those -of an uncompromising and intolerant Royalist, in whose eyes the only -security for all that is dear to the patriot lay in implicit obedience -to the will of the sovereign, and in upholding a system to which that -will was law. That he should, therefore, have had any sympathy with the -Roman Catholics is, on _a priori_ grounds, exceedingly improbable. We -turn to his Dramas, and what do we find? It would be no exaggeration to -say, that there is not a line in them which indicates that he regarded -the Roman Catholics with favour. On the contrary, they abound in points -directed against them. Thus he twice goes out of his way, once in -_Henry V._[50] and once in _All's Well that Ends Well_, to observe that -"miracles have ceased." There is a bitter sneer at them in the reference -to the sanctimonious pirate and the commandments, in _Measure for -Measure_.[51] There can be little doubt that the words in the porter's -speech in _Macbeth_, "here's an equivocator that could swear in both the -scales against either scale, who committed treason enough for God's -sake, yet could not equivocate to Heaven," have sarcastic reference to -the doctrine of equivocation avowed by Garnett and popularly associated -with the Jesuits; while the remark about the fitness of "the nun's lip -to the friar's mouth"[52] in _All's Well that Ends Well_ is another -concession to Protestant prejudice. - -In _King John_ such a speech as the following may be dramatic, but who -can doubt that it expressed the poet's own sentiments?-- - - Tell him this tale; and from the mouth of England - Add thus much more,--that no Italian priest - Shall tithe or toll in our dominions; - But, as we under Heaven are supreme head, - So, under Him, that great supremacy, - - Where we do reign, we will alone uphold, - Without the assistance of a mortal hand: - So tell the Pope; all reverence set apart - To him, and his usurp'd authority. - -_King John_ is, indeed, simply the manifesto of Protestantism against -papal aggression. What could be more contemptible than the character of -Pandulph and the part which he plays? Is it credible that Shakespeare -could have had any sympathy with a religion whose minister is one whom -he represents as saying: - - Meritorious shall that hand be called, - Canonized, and worshipped as a saint, - That takes away by any secret course - Thy hateful life. - -In _Henry VIII._, again, we have an elaborate eulogy of the Reformation, -Cranmer being presented in the most favourable light, Gardiner in the -most unfavourable, while Wolsey is almost as detestable as Pandulph. - -It is really pitiable to see the shifts to which the authors of this -book are reduced to make out their theory. They have even pressed into -its service Jordan's palpable and long-exploded forgery of John -Shakespeare's Will, and the fact that John Shakespeare's name is found -on a list of Recusants, when it is, in that very list, expressly stated -that he had absented himself from church, simply from fear of process -for debt. Passages in the dramas are similarly perverted. Shakespeare's -hostility to the Protestants induced him, we are told, to pour contempt -on Oldcastle by depicting him as Falstaff. His delineation of Malvolio, -and his frequent sneers at the Puritans, are attributed to the same -motive. The famous lines in _Hamlet_, placed in the mouth of the Ghost, -are cited to prove his belief in purgatory; the comical penances imposed -on Biron and his friends in _Love's Labour Lost_ to prove his belief in -penance. When in _Lear_ it is said of Cordelia that:-- - - She shook - The holy water from her heavenly eyes. - -we are to see another indication of Shakespeare's religion as "they have -a Catholic ring about them." Sentiments which are common to all sects of -Christians are regarded as peculiar to Roman Catholicism; mere dramatic -utterances are forced into illustrations of supposed personal -convictions. What is habitually and systematically ignored is, that -Shakespeare, being a dramatic poet, must necessarily make his characters -express themselves dramatically, and that, as he was depicting times -preceding the Reformation, his sentiments and expressions very naturally -took the colour of the world in which his characters moved. The wonder -is not that this should have occurred, but that Shakespeare should, in -spite of the gross anachronism of such a process, have so -_Protestantized_ pre-Reformation times. We are quite willing to concede -to Father Bowden that there is enough to warrant us in assuming that -Shakespeare did not regard the Puritans with favour. But his dislike to -them arose not from the fact that they were Protestants, but that they -were not orthodox Protestants. He was opposed to them for the same -reasons that Elizabeth and James, Hooker and Bacon were opposed to them. -Their hostility to his profession, their sanctimonious cant, and the -surly asceticism of their lives, no doubt contributed to his prejudice -against them. - -Nor are we in any way justified in concluding that Shakespeare accepted -the teaching of the Church of Rome in spiritual matters. Nothing could -be more unwarranted than what is assumed by Father Bowden in the -following passage. He is speaking of Shakespeare's attitude in relation -to death. "'Ripeness is all'; and he shows us in all his penitents how -that ripeness is secured, sin forgiven, and heaven won on the lines of -Catholic dogma and by the Sacraments of the Church." - -What are the facts? Shakespeare's reticence about a future state, and -what may await man, in the form of reward and punishment hereafter, is -one of his most striking characteristics. Neither Cordelia nor -Desdemona, neither Constance nor Imogen in their darkest hours expresses -any confidence in the final mercy and justice of Heaven. Othello, -falling by a fate as terrible as it was undeserved, dies without a -syllable of hope. "The rest is silence" are the ominous words with which -Hamlet takes leave of life. When Gloucester believes himself to be -standing on the brink of death, in the farewell which he takes of the -world he has no anticipation of any other; all he contemplates is "to -shake patiently his great affliction off." So die Lear, Hotspur, Romeo, -Antony, Eros, Enobarbus, Macbeth, Beaufort, Mercutio, Laertes. So die -Brutus, Coriolanus, King John. In the Duke's speech in _Measure for -Measure_, where he is preparing Claudio to meet death, death is merely -contemplated as an escape from the pains and discomforts of life. -Macbeth would 'jump' the world to come if he could escape punishment in -this. Prospero suggests no hope of any waking from the "rounding sleep." -Even Isabella, dedicated as she was to religion, in fortifying Claudio -against his fate draws no weapon from the armoury of faith. It is just -the same in the dirge in Cymbeline, in the soliloquy of Posthumus, in -the consolations addressed by the gaoler to Posthumus.[53] - -The last passage is perhaps more remarkable than any, because it shows -the utter ambiguity of the directest expression which the poet has left -on the subject. - - _Gaol._--Look you, sir, you know not which way you go. - - _Post._--Yes, indeed do I, fellow. - - _Gaol._--Your death has eyes in 's head then; I have not seen - him so pictured: you must either be directed by some that take - upon them to know, or take upon yourself, that which I am sure - you do not know; or jump the after inquiry on your own peril; - and how you shall speed in your journey's end, I think you'll - never return to tell one. - - _Post._--I tell thee, fellow, _there are none want eyes to - direct them the way I am going, but such as wink, and will not - use them_. - - _Cymbeline_, V. 4. - -Shakespeare, in truth, never attempts to lift the veil which for living -man can be raised only by Revelation. The silence of his -philosophy,--for we must not confound occasional sentiments and mere -dramatic utterances with what justifies us in deducing that -philosophy,--in relation to a life after this, is unbroken. It is, -indeed, remarkable that he represents such speculations,--the dwelling -on such problems,--as more likely to disturb, perplex, and hamper us, -than to give us any comfort. As Hamlet puts it in the well-known -lines:-- - - The native hue of resolution - Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, - And enterprises of great pith and moment, - With this regard, their currents turn awry, - And lose the name of action. - -Did he believe in the immortality of the soul and in a future state? Who -can say? What we can say is, that if we require affirmative evidence of -such a faith, we shall seek for it in vain. In the Sonnets, where he -seems to speak from himself, the only immortality to which he refers is -the permanence of the impression which his genius as a poet will -leave--immortality in the sense in which Cicero and Tacitus have so -eloquently interpreted the term. But on the other hand, if there is -nothing to warrant a conclusion in the affirmative, there is nothing to -warrant one in the negative. His attitude is precisely that of Aristotle -in the _Ethics_; a life beyond this is neither affirmed nor denied, but -the scale of probability inclines towards the negative, and his moral -philosophy proceeds on the assumption that life is the end of life.[54] - -Goethe has said that man was not born to solve the problems of the -universe, but to attempt to solve them, that he might keep within the -limits of the knowable. And it is within the limits of the knowable that -Shakespeare's theology confines itself. Starting simply, as Gervinus -says, from the point, that man is born with powers and faculties which -he is to use, and with powers of self-regulation and self-determination -which are to direct aright the powers of action, the "Whence we are," -and the "Whither we are going," are problems for which he has no -solution.[55] - - Men must endure - Their going hence e'en as their coming hither: - Ripeness is all. - -And for ripeness or unripeness, man's will is responsible. He would -probably have agreed with the saying of Heraclitus, +thos -anthrp daimn+. Throughout his Dramas all is explicable, with the -single exception of Macbeth, without reference to supernaturalism. -Perfectly intelligible effects follow perfectly intelligible causes; the -moral law solves all. But especially conspicuous is the absence of the -theological element where we should especially have looked for it. "Men -and women," says Brewer, "are made to drain the cup of misery to the -dregs; but, as from the depths into which they have fallen, by their own -weakness, or by the weakness of others, the poet never raises them, in -violation of the inexorable laws of nature, so neither does he put a new -song in their mouths, or any expression of confidence in God's righteous -dealing. With as hard and precise a hand as Bacon does he sunder the -celestial from the terrestrial kingdom, the things of earth from the -things of heaven."[56] - -His theology, indeed, in its application to life, seems to resolve -itself into the recognition of universal law, divinely appointed, -immutable, inexorable, ubiquitous, controlling the physical world, -controlling the moral world, vindicating itself in the smallest facts of -life, and in the most stupendous convulsions of nature and society. In -morals it is maintained by the observance of the mean on the one hand, -and the due fulfilment of duty and obligation on the other. In politics -it is maintained by the subordination of the individual to the state, -and of the state to the higher law. Hooker says of Law, that as her -voice is the harmony of the world, so her seat is the bosom of God. The -Law Shakespeare recognises; of the Law-giver he is silent. As he is dumb -before the mystery of death, so is he equally reticent in the face of -that other mystery. He has nothing of the anthropomorphism of the Old -Testament, of the Homeric poems, and of Milton. Nor has he ever -expressed himself as Goethe has done in the famous passage in _Faust_, -beginning: "Wer darf ihn nennen." In two important respects he seems to -differ from the Christian conception. He represents no miraculous -interpositions of Providence, no suspension of natural laws in favour of -the righteous, and to the detriment of the wicked. He is too reverend to -say with Goethe, that man, so far as direction in action goes, is -practically his own divinity. But he does say and represent--and that -repeatedly--what is expressed in such passages as these:-- - - Our remedies oft in ourselves do lie - Which we ascribe to Heaven: the fated sky - Gives us full scope. - - _All's Well that Ends Well._ - - Men at some time are masters of their fate. - - _Julius Csar._ - - Omission to do what is necessary - Seals a commission to a blank of danger. - - _Troilus and Cressida._ - -And we have no right to expect that Providence will cancel it. If deeds -do not go with prayer, prayer is not likely to be of much avail. So the -Bishop of Carlisle in _Richard II._:-- - - The means that Heaven yields must be embrac'd - And not neglected; else if Heaven would - And we will not, Heav'n's offer we refuse:-- - -while the words which he puts into the mouth of Leonine in _Pericles_ -are, we feel, significant:-- - - Pray: but be not tedious, - For the Gods are quick of ear, and I am sworn - To do my work with haste. - -He has no sympathy with pious recluses. He has depicted no saint or -religious enthusiast, or written a line to indicate that he had any -respect for their ideals. With him,-- - - Spirits are not finely touched - But to fine issues. - - They say best men are moulded out of faults, - And, for the most, become much more the better - For being a little bad. - - Most subject is the fattest soil to weeds - -are typical axioms in his philosophy of life. And the nearest approaches -he has given us to the saintly type of character are the sentimental -pietists, Henry VI. and Richard II., both of whom are failures, and -border closely on moral imbecility. On the spiritual and moral efficacy -of faith, he has nowhere laid stress. In his innumerable reflections on -life and man, in his maxims and precepts, there is, as a rule, scarcely -any flavour of Christian theology. They are just such as might be -expected from a pure rationalist. Such is the philosophy of Hamlet, of -Jacques, of the Duke in _Measure for Measure_, and of Prospero. Even -Friar Laurence, though an ecclesiastic, reasons and advises just as a -Stoic philosopher might have done. The friars in _Much Ado about -Nothing_, and in _Measure for Measure_, the Bishop of Carlisle in -_Richard II._, and the Archbishops of Canterbury and York in _Henry IV._ -and _Henry V._, and Cardinal Beaufort in _Henry VI._, act and speak like -mere men of the world. A bulky volume would scarcely sum up the ethical -and political reflections scattered up and down his plays; a few pages -would comprise all that could be put down as exclusively theological. -This complete subordination of the theological element to the ethical is -the more conspicuous when we compare his dramas with the Homeric Epics, -and with the tragedies of schylus and Sophocles. - -And yet if a thoughtful person, after going attentively through the -thirty-six plays, were asked what the prevailing impression made on him -was, he would probably reply the profound reverence which Shakespeare -shows universally for religion--his deep sense of the mysterious -relation which exists between God and man. We feel that his silence on -transcendental subjects springs not from indifference, but from awe. The -remarkable words which he places in the mouth of Lafeu, in _All's Well -that Ends Well_ (Act II. 3), merely sum up what we hear _sotto voce_ in -various forms of expression throughout his dramas; "we have our -philosophical persons, to make modern and familiar, things supernatural -and causeless. Hence it is that we make trifles of terrors, ensconcing -ourselves into seeming knowledge, when we should submit ourselves to an -unknown fear." And the same reverence and humility find a voice in the -verses in which, in all probability, he took leave of the world of -active life. - - Now my charms are all overthrown, - And what strength I have's mine own, - Which is most faint. - ... Now I want - Spirits to enforce, art to enchant, - And my ending is despair - Unless I be relieved by prayer, - Which pierces so that it assaults - Mercy itself, and frees all faults. - -No poet has dwelt more on the duty and moral efficacy of prayer, on the -omnipresence of God, and on the fact that in conscience we have a -Divine monitor. - -Of the respect which Shakespeare entertained for Christianity as a -creed, of his conviction of its competency to fulfil and satisfy all the -ends of religion in men of the highest type of intelligence and ability, -we require no further proof than his Henry V. Henry V. is undoubtedly -his ideal man, as Theseus in the _Oedipus Coloneus_ is the ideal man -of Sophocles. And Henry V. is pre-eminently a Christian. Wherever -Shakespeare refers to the person and to the teachings of Christ, it is -always with peculiar tenderness and solemnity. His ethics are in one -respect essentially Christian, and that is in their emphatic insistence -on the virtues of mercy and forgiveness of injuries. In _Measure for -Measure_, he stretched the first as far as the Master Himself stretched -it, at the eleventh hour, to the penitent thief. And in the _Tempest_, -that play which seems to embody in allegory Shakespeare's mature and -final philosophy of life, who does not recognise the symbol of Him who -rules, not merely in justice and righteousness, but in benevolence and -mercy, when Prospero, with sinners and traitors and foes in his power, -proclaims-- - - The rarer action is - In virtue than in vengeance: they being penitent, - The sole drift of my purpose doth extend - Not a frown further. - -He struck this note in one of the earliest of his plays:-- - - Who by repentance is not satisfied, - Is nor of heaven, nor earth: for these are pleas'd. - By penitence th' Eternal's wrath's appeas'd.[57] - -and the note vibrates through his works. It is the crowning moral of -_Measure for Measure_; it is one of the dominant notes in _Cymbeline_. -He also reflects Christianity in the beautiful optimism which discerns -in evil the agent of good, and in calamity and sorrow the benevolence -and mercy of God. This is the philosophy which penetrates what were -probably his last three dramas, _The Winter's Tale_, _Cymbeline_, and -_The Tempest_. - -In these respects, then, it may fairly be maintained that Shakespeare is -Christian. For the rest his dramas might, so far as their philosophy is -concerned, have come down to us from classical antiquity. Nothing can be -more Greek than the main basis on which his ethics rest--the observance -of the mean, and the recognition of the relation of virtue to the -becoming. When Claudio says:-- - - As surfeit is the father of much fast, - So every scope by the immoderate use - Turns to restraint; - -when Norfolk says:-- - - The fire that mounts the liquor till 't o'erflow - In seeming to augment it wastes it; - -when Friar Laurence tells us that:-- - - Virtue itself turns vice, being misapplied, - And vice sometime 's by action dignified; - -and Portia that - - There is no good without respect, - -we have not only the keys to his ethics but the texts for sermons which -find living illustrations in the fall of Angelo, of Coriolanus, of -Timon, and of many others of his protagonists. Thus do his ethics temper -and readjust for the sphere of working life, those of the Divine -Enthusiast who legislated, in some respects, too exclusively perhaps, -for a kingdom which is not of this world. - -And so, his 'religion' being, to borrow an expression of his own, "as -broad and general as the casing air," it has come to pass, that -Shakespeare has been claimed as an orthodox Protestant by Knight, Bishop -Wordsworth, and Trench; as an orthodox Roman Catholic by M. Rio, Mr. -Simpson, and Father Bowden; and as a simple agnostic by Gervinus, -Kreysig, and Professor Caird. - -"He hath," says Sir Thomas Browne speaking of himself, "one common and -authentic philosophy which he learnt in the schools, whereby he reasons -and satisfies the reason of other men: another more reserved and drawn -from experience whereby he satisfies his own." It may be, it may quite -well be, for he has left nothing to justify conclusion to the contrary, -that the words of Shakespeare's Will--mere formula though they be--are -the expression of what he "reserved" to satisfy himself, and that he -accepted the Christian Revelation. It may be, that what we are -_certainly_ warranted in concluding about him, represents all that can -be concluded, namely, that:-- - - He at least believed in soul, was very sure of God. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[Footnote 50: Act I. Sc. i. This is a very pointed reference, but in the -second instance, in _All's Well that Ends Well_, Act II. Sc. i., "They -say miracles are past," he gives a turn to the expression which converts -it into a rebuke of Rationalism.] - -[Footnote 51: Act I. Sc. ii.] - -[Footnote 52: Act II. Sc. ii.] - -[Footnote 53: In opposition to these may, it is true, be cited Othello's -words to Desdemona--_Othello_, V. 2: the Duke's remark about putting the -unrepentant Barnardine to death--_Measure for Measure_, IV. 3: the dying -speeches of Buckingham and Catharine in _Henry VIII._, II. 1; IV. 2: -Laertes on Ophelia,--_Hamlet_, V. 1. But these passages, and others like -them, cannot be cited as evidence to the contrary; they are merely -dramatic utterances.] - -[Footnote 54: Cf. _Ethics_, I. x. 11, and III. vi. 6.] - -[Footnote 55: _Shakespeare Commentaries_, Vol. II. 620-1.] - -[Footnote 56: Article on Shakespeare, _Quarterly Review_ for July, 1871, -p. 46.] - -[Footnote 57: _Two Gentlemen of Verona_: V. 4.] - - - - -INDEX - - - ACCIUS quoted, 244 - - ADDISON, 15: 272: 281 - - SCHYLUS, 59; - quoted, 62; - his descriptions of Nature, 241; - his theology, 267: 261: 364 - - ALCUS, 287 - - ALCMAN quoted, 240 - - ALAMANNI, 123 - - ANACREON, 286 - - ANTHOLOGY, Greek, 116: 117: 243 - - ANTIMACHUS of Colophon, his Poems, 289 - - ANTIPATER of Sidon, 116 - - APOLLONIUS RHODIUS, 78; - beauty of his descriptions, 242-3 - - ARCHILOCHUS quoted, 287 - - ARIOSTO quoted, 79; - his _Orlando_, 113 - - ARISTOPHANES, 242: 260: 280; - his censure of Euripides, 265 - - ARISTOTLE, 63: 67; - influence on Spenser, 120-1; - style, 122; - his doctrine of the +katharsis+, 264-5; - his sthetics, 265-6; - Poetics, 274-6; - his _Rhetoric_, 287 - - ARMSTRONG, Dr. John, his connection with Thomson, 333 - - ARNOLD, Matthew, 63; - quoted, 21: 105: 106: 194: 272-3 - - ATHENUS, 293 - - AUSONIUS, his _Ros_, 246 - - AVITUS, 251 - - - BACON, Lord, his _Sylva Sylvarum_, 114; - his Latin style, 122; - quoted, 182; - on poetry, 279 - - BARCLAY, his _Argenis_, 129 - - BARNUM, the late Mr., on Advertisement, 158 - - BEACONSFIELD, Lord, quoted, 219 - - BENECKE, Mr. E. F. M., his _Antimachus of Colophon_ and - _Position of Women in Greek Poetry_ reviewed, 255-93 - - BENTLEY, Richard, 156 - - BERNAYS, Prof., on the +katharsis+ of Aristotle, 265 - - BOILEAU, 125 - - BOLINGBROKE, Lord, 119: 321 - - BOSWELL, James, 134 - - BOWDEN, Rev. H. Sebastian, his _Religion of Shakespeare_ reviewed, 351-69 - - BREWER, Rev. Prof., quoted, 361 - - BROWN, Mr. J. T. T., his _Authorship of - the Kingis Quair_ reviewed, 172-82 - - BROWNE, Sir Thomas, his _Hydriotaphia_, 102; - quoted, 368 - - BROWNING, Robert, on the Comparative Study of Ancient and - Modern Classical Literature, 64 - - BROWNING, Mrs., 297 - - BURKE, Edmund, 71: 100-1: 125: 126 - - BURNS, Robert, 145; - Comparison with Catullus, 347 - - BUTCHER, Prof. S. H., his _Some Aspects of - the Greek Genius_ reviewed, 255-69 - - BUTLER, Bishop, quoted, 214 - - BUTLER, Mr. Samuel, on Shakespeare's Sonnets, 222-4 - - - CDMON quoted, 95 - - CAINE, Mr. Hall, 28 - - CALLIMACHUS, 242 - - CAMOENS, 350 - - CAMPBELL, Prof. Lewis, 259 - - CAREW, Thomas, 305 - - CATULLUS, his descriptions of Nature, 245: 336-9; - quoted, 285; - characteristics of his genius, 335; - his _Attis_, 339-40; - his pathos, 337-8; - his connection with Lesbia, 342-5; - parallel between Poems to Lesbia and Shakespeare's Sonnets, 345-6; - his versatility, 346; - comparison with Burns, 347; - Mr. Tremenheere's version of the Love Poems, 347-9 - - CAWTHORN, John, 60 - - CHAUCER, 53: 8: 122-3 - - CHURCHILL, Charles, quoted, 159 - - CICERO, influence on English prose, 61; - as a critic of rhetoric, 278-9; - on immortality, 360 - - CLARENDON, 123 - - CLASSICS, influence of the Greek and - Roman Classics on English Literature, 58-63; - exclusion of from Schools of Literature - by the English Universities, 45-64; - effects of this illustrated, 76-83 - - CLAUDIAN quoted, 246 - - COLVIN, Mr. Sidney, his edition of Stevenson's Letters reviewed, 165-71 - - COLERIDGE, S. T., 127: 130: 281 - - COLERIDGE, the late Lord, on Greek, 255 - - CORY, William, 253 - - COUSIN, Victor, his theory of beauty and art, 272 - - CRITICISM, reasons of present degraded state of, 13-26; - characteristics of current criticism described, 26-30: 270-1; - effects on literature generally, 31-4; - refusal of the Universities to train critics and men of letters, 38-44; - lethargy and indifference of scholars, - progressive degradation of literature the certain result, 43-44 - - CRITICS, characteristics of popular, 27-31: 93-109: 110-32: 151-7 - - CROWE, William, 249 - - CYNEWULF, 95 - - - DANTE, 49; - quoted, 335; - his _Sonnets and Canzoni_, 350 - - DE QUINCEY, Thomas, characteristics of, 203-4; - his comparative failure, 305; - Mr. Hogg's recollections of, 203-10 - - DOUGLAS, Gavin, his translation of Virgil, 96-7 - - DRAYTON, Michael, 60 - - DRYDEN, his _Discourse on Epic Poetry_, 65; - quoted, 153; - on the functions of poetry, 280; - his translations, 148 - - DUBOS, the Abb, 281 - - DUNBAR, William, 176; - Mr. Smeaton's _Life of_, reviewed, 183-92; - characteristics of his poetry, 190-1 - - DYER, John, his descriptive poetry, 248 - - - EARLE, Prof., on relation of Classics to English Literature, 59 (note) - - EARLE, John, his _Microcosmographie_, 129 - - EDITORS, their relation to current literature, 22; - in no way responsible for the present condition - of current literature, 23-24 - - ENNIUS, 59 - - EURIPIDES, 82; - his fine pictures of Nature, 242; - quoted, 262; - his _Alcestis_ quoted, 286 - - - FELTHAM, Owen, his _Resolves_, 129 - - FLACCUS, Valerius, 246 - - FLETCHER, Phineas, 101 - - FOOTE, Samuel, quoted, 205 - - FOX, John, his _Book of Martyrs_, 113 - - FRAUNCE, Abraham, his _Countess of Pembroke's Ivy Church_, 309 - - FROUDE, James Anthony, on the effect of discouraging - the study of the Classics, 65 - - - GARNETT, Father, 354 - - GEOFFREY of Monmouth, 102 - - GERVINUS, Prof., quoted, 360 - - GLANVILLE, Joseph, 104 - - GIBBON, Edward, 125: 150: 198 - - GOETHE, 49: 86; - quoted, 273: 360: 362 - - GOLDSMITH quoted, 247 - - GOSSE, Edmund, his _Short History of Modern - English Literature_ reviewed 110-32 - - GOSSING, analysis of the accomplishment, 115; - compared with Euphuism, id. - - GOWER, John, 124; - _Confessio Amantis_, 196 - - GRAY, Thomas, on Lydgate, 98 - - GREENE, Robert, 14 - - - HALL, William, Mr. Sidney Lee on, 216 - - HAMPOLE, Richard of, his _Pricke of Conscience_, 179 - - HARRISON, Mr. Frederic, 35 - - HAWES, Stephen, his _Pastime of Pleasure_, 200 - - HERACLITUS quoted, 361 - - HERMESIANAX quoted, 287 - - HILL, Aaron, 331 - - HOCCLEVE, Thomas, 198 - - HOGG, Mr. James, his _Recollections of De Quincey_ reviewed, 203-10 - - HOMER quoted, his fine descriptions of Nature, 237-9; - his women, 286: 288; - his description of Hades, 297 - - HOOKER quoted, 362 - - HORACE, influence of his Epistles and Satires on English poetry, 60; - quoted, 151: 297: 301; - deficient in poetic sensibility, 336 - - HROSWITHA, 251 - - HUXLEY, Prof., on Merton Chair at Oxford, 38 - - - IBYCUS, 240 - - - JAGO, Richard, 249 - - JAMES I. of Scotland, his _Kingis Quair_, 172; - its genuineness vindicated, 174-82 - - JAPP, Dr. Alexander, _Life of De Quincey_, 209 - - JEBB, Prof., his services to Greek Literature, 258 - - JOHNSON, Dr., quoted, 152 - - JONSON, Ben, on Poetry, 280 - - JOWETT, Prof., quoted, 64 - - JUSSERAND, M., his _Literary History of - the English People_ reviewed, 193-202 - - - KEATS, John, 127: 298: 347 - - - LANDOR, W. S., 298 - - LANG, Mr. Andrew, 259 - - LAUDERDALE, 310 - - LEAF, Mr. Walter, 259 - - LEE, Mr. Sidney, his _Life of Shakespeare_ reviewed, 211-8; - on Shakespeare's Sonnets, 229-30 - - LE GALLIENNE, Mr. Richard, his _Retrospective Reviews_ reviewed, 151-7 - - LEOPARDI quoted, 20: 300 - - LESBIA and CATULLUS, 335-50 - - LESSING, on Philologists, 86; - his _Laocoon_, 41; - his _Hamburgishe Dramaturgie_, 67 - - LOG-ROLLING, its pernicious effects, 133-44 - - LONGINUS, the Treatise attributed to, discussed, 276-8; - quoted, 270 - - LYDGATE, his style and versification, 98; - id., 115; - characteristics of his poetry, 198-9 - - - MACAULAY, Lord, 145: 151 - - MALLET, David, claim to authorship of _Rule Britannia_ discussed, 321-4 - - MALORY, Thomas, 201 - - MANNYNG, his _Handlying of Synne_, 195 - - MARLOWE, Christopher, 14 - - MARTIAL, his epigrams, 337 - - MAX MLLER, Prof., 52 - - MELEAGER, his Anthology, 116-7; - quoted, 243 - - MENANDER quoted, 262 - - MIMNERMUS, his love poetry to Nanno, 287 - - MILTON quoted, 41 (note): 62; - his apology for _Smectymnuus_, quoted, 103; - on poetry, 267; - quoted, 212; - music of his verse, 317 - - MITFORD, Rev. J., on the corrections in Thomson's _Seasons_, 330-4 - - MONTAGUE, Lady Mary Wortley, 125: 306 - - MOREL, M. Lon, his Monograph on Thomson, 319 - - MORE, Sir Thomas, his Utopia, 101 - - MORE, Henry, 274 - - MORGAN, Sir George Osborne, his _Translation - of Virgil's Eclogues_ reviewed, 308-17 - - MORLEY, Mr. John, 63; - quoted, 64 - - MYERS, Mr. Ernest, 259 - - MLLER, Prof. E., his _Geschichte der Theorie - der Kunst bei den Alten_, 264 - - - OGILVIE, John, 310 - - OVID, 60: 177: 178: 246 - - - PACUVIUS, his _Dulorestes_ quoted, 244 - - PALGRAVE, Francis Turner, his _Landscape in Poetry_ reviewed, 236-49; - an appreciation of, 250-4 - - PATER, Walter, 62: 152: 265: 267 - - PECOCK, Reginald, his _Repressor_, 128-9 - - PETRARCH, 287: 296 - - PERSIUS quoted, 15 - - PHILLIPS, Mr. Stephen, his poems reviewed, 294-300 - - PINDAR quoted, 262; - his word pictures, 240 - - PLATO, his Symposium, 78-9; - quoted, 263; - his theory of poetry, 274: 276 - - PLUTARCH, his pictures of women, 290 - - POMFRET, John, his _Choice_, 101 - - POPE quoted, 84; - on Philologists, 86; - quoted, 139; - his _Satires_ and _Epistles_, 125; - his alleged revision of Thomson's _Seasons_ discussed, 328-32 - - PROPERTIUS quoted, 246 - - PUBLISHERS, honourable character of the leading, 23 - - - QUARTERLY REVIEW, article on _From Shakespeare to Pope_, 40 - - QUINTILIAN as a critic, 278 - - - RAFFETY, Mr. Frank W., his _Books worth Reading_ reviewed, 145-50 - - ROSSETTI, Dante Gabriel, quoted, 173 - - ROSSETTI, William Michael, his edition of Shelley's _Adonais_, 76-83 - - RUCELLAI, his dramas and his _L'Api_, 124 - - - SAINTE-BEUVE, his essays, 41; - on Philologists, 86; - his criticism, 270; - the master of Matthew Arnold, 281 - - SAINTSBURY, Prof., his _Short History - of English Literature_ reviewed, 93-109 - - SALLUST, 61 - - SCHILLER, 41 - - SCHICK, Dr., on Lydgate's versification, 99 - - SCHIPPER, Dr. J., on Dunbar, 183 - - SCHMEDING, Dr. G., his Monograph on Thomson, 318 - - SCHOOL OF ENGLISH LITERATURE AT OXFORD, - its deplorable organization, 45-72; - how this may be remedied, 73-5 - - SCOTT OF AMWELL, 249 - - SCOTT, Sir Walter, on Dunbar, 186 - - SELF-ADVERTISEMENT, its organization and effects, 158-64 - - SENECA, influence on English prose, 61 - - SEDULIUS, 251 - - SHAFTESBURY, third Earl of, his style, 117-9 - - SHAKESPEARE, 62: 81-2; - Clarendon Press edition of his _Hamlet_, 84-92; - quoted, 154: 158; - Mr. Lee's _Life of_, 211-8; - scantiness of traditions of, 213; - his sonnets, various theories, 219-20; - about difficulties of supposing them autobiographical, 225-6; - his relations with Southampton and Pembroke, 228-34; - story in the Sonnets probably fictitious, 235; - religion of Shakespeare, 351-69; - his politics, 352-3; - not a Roman Catholic, 352-6; - on death, 357-8; - silence about a future life, 359, - and about metaphysical questions, 360; - comparison in this respect with Aristotle, 360; - his theology, 362-4; - on prayer, 365; - on conscience, 366; - his attitude to Christianity, 366; - when his ethics are Christian, 368; - his religious ideas summed up, 368-9 - - SHARP, Archbishop, quoted, 218 - - SHELLEY, his _Adonais_, 76-83; - absurd criticism of his style, 126 - - SHENSTONE, William, 249 - - SIDNEY, Sir Philip, 131 - - SIMPSON, Richard, 351: 368 - - SMART, Christopher, his _Song to David_, 340 - - SMEATON, Mr. Oliphant, his life of Dunbar reviewed, 183-92 - - SOPHOCLES, 242; - his ethics, 267-9; - quoted, 285; - his ideal man, 366 - - SPENSER, Edmund, 112: 113; - influence of Greek and Latin Classics on, 120-1; - influence of, on Milton, 121; - on the functions of poetry, 280 - - STANIHURST, Richard, 308 - - STEPHEN, Mr. Leslie, 35 - - STESICHORUS, his _Calyce_, 287 - - STEVENSON, R. L., _Letters_ reviewed, 165-71 - - STRABO quoted, 287 - - SWIFT, Jonathan, his _Sentiments of a Church of England Man_, 113; - _Tale of a Tub_, 144 - - - TACITUS quoted, 20: 192: 254; - as a critic, 278-9; - on immortality, 360 - - TALLEYRAND quoted, 210 - - TENNYSON, Lord, 62: 162-3: 245: 247: 298: 337; - as a critic, 252 - - TERENCE, women of, 292 - - TEXT-BOOKS on English Literature, specimens of, 76-150 - - THACKERAY on Wordsworth and Moore, 250 - - THEOCRITUS, 243 - - THEOGNIS quoted, 262 - - THOMSON, James, 243; - quoted, 248; - claim to the authorship of _Rule Britannia_ vindicated, 321-8; - corrections in the _Seasons_ discussed, 328-34 - - THORPE, Thomas, 216: 227: 235 - - TOVEY, Rev. D. C., his edition of Thomson's poems reviewed, 318-34 - - TREMENHEERE, Mr. J. H. A., his version of Catullus' Love Poems, 335-50 - - TRISSINO, his _Sofonisba_, 123 - - THUCYDIDES, 258: 260; - on hope, 262 - - TUPPER, Martin, 251 - - TYLER, Mr. Thomas, on Shakespeare's Sonnets, 228 - - TYRWHITT, Thomas, 223: 234 - - - UNIVERSITIES, their indifference to - the interests of literature, 38-40: 45-50; - effects of the exclusion of the Greek and Roman Classics from - the so-called Schools of Literature at Oxford and Cambridge, 55-71 - - - VARRO, as a critic, 278 - - VIRGIL, his beautiful descriptions of Nature, 245-6; - his Eclogues, 308-17 - - VOLTAIRE on Philologists, 86 - - - WALTERS, Cuming, on Shakespeare's Sonnets, 220-1 - - WARBURTON, Bishop, 205; - quoted, 270 - - WARTON, Dr. Joseph, on Thomson's poetry, 330 - - WARTON, Thomas, on Lydgate, 98 - - WATSON, Mr. William, great beauty of his English hexameters, 317 - - WHARTON, Dr., his _Sappho_, 148 - - WILLMOTT, Rev. Aris, his _Gems from English Literature_, 163-4 - - WILLOUGHBY, his _Avisa_, 101: 225 - - WORDSWORTH, William, 153; - on Dyer's poetry, 248; - his poems on classical legends, 298 - - WORSFOLD, Mr. Basil, his _Principles of Criticism_ reviewed, 270-82 - - WRANGHAM, Archdeacon, 310 - - WRIGHT, Dr. Aldis, his edition of Shakespeare's _Hamlet_, 84-92 - - WRIGHT, Mr. W. H. Kearley, his _West Country Poets_ reviewed, 301-7 - - WYNTOWN, his _Chronicle_, 180-1 - - - XENOPHON on women, 290 - - - YOUNG, Edward, quoted, 87 - - -Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. - - - - --------------------- -Corrections: - - - Page 81 "Hamlet, act iv. sc .1" should be sc. 5 (There is pansies) - - -The following errors have been corrected in the text. - - - Page 8 changed 'Jasserand' to 'Jusserand' (done M. Jusserand - grave injustice) - - Page 63 added space (Addington Symonds) - - Page 90 added single quotes (The rest is silence.' 'O, O,) - - Page 90 changed 'than' to 'that' (it would be more natural that) - - Page 96-7 moved double quotes from (evicit gurgite moles,") - to end of last line (armenta trahit.") - - Page 97 added opening double quotes ("Not sa fersly) - - Page 101 added double quotes (Lord_, 1790." _A Letter to) - - Page 107 changed '")' to ')"' (teeth of its subject)". "His voluminous) - - Page 184 added comma (and the few outsiders, whether) - - Page 205 added single quote (Warburton on Shakespeare.'") - - Page 212 added comma (every alley green,) - - Page 252 changed 'charactistic' to 'characteristic' (distinctive - feature is the characteristic) - - Page 321 changed comma to period (both these questions.) - - Page 326 changed period to semicolon (Britain's wide domain;) - - -The following inconsistencies have been left as printed. - - 'bookmaker' vs. 'book-maker' vs. 'book maker' - - 'notebooks' vs. 'note-books' - - 'overestimated' vs. 'over-estimated' - - 'overestimation' vs. 'over-estimation' - - 'rodomontade' vs. 'rhodomontade' - - 'Wriothesley' vs. 'Wriothesly' - - 'analysed' vs. 'analyzed' - - 'Mort d'Arthur' vs. 'Morte d'Arthur' - - 'Quinctilian' vs. 'Quintilian' - ('Quintilia' (Latin 'Quintili') is a different person) --------------------- - - -End of Project Gutenberg's Ephemera Critica, by John Churton Collins - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EPHEMERA CRITICA *** - -***** This file should be named 34370-0.txt or 34370-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/3/4/3/7/34370/ - -Produced by Juliet Sutherland, Hannah Joy Patterson and -the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at -http://www.pgdp.net - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - diff --git a/old/34370.zip b/old/34370.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 83ee5a1..0000000 --- a/old/34370.zip +++ /dev/null |