Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/afternoonlectureOOunse LECTURES ON ENGLISH LITERATURE. r 1 f V* >“«< f BMW# COLlEtff U|#ARY iMtSTNUT MILL, MASS. THE AFTERNOON LECTURES ON ENGLISH LITERATURE. DELIVERED IN THE THEATRE OF THE MUSEUM OF INDUSTRY, S. STEPHEN’S GREEN, DUBLIN, IN MAY AND JUNE, 1863. LONDON: BELL AND DALDY, 186, FLEET STREET. DUBLIN : HODGES and SMITH, and M C GEE. 1863. 1 AFTERNOON LECTURES ON LITERATURE. PRESIDENT. The Right Hon. Maziere Brady, Lord Chancellor of Ireland. Sir Bernand Burke, Ulfter King-at-Arms. The Hon. Judge Berwick. The Solicitor General for Ireland. Evory Kennedy, Eso., M.D. John Edw. Walsh, Q JC. Sir Robert Kane. Digby P. Starkey, Eso. Maziere J. Brady, Esq. Edward Gibson, Esq. Francis T. L. Dames, Eso. Percy Fitzgerald, Esq. COMMITTEE. R. H. Martley, R. Denny Urlin, j* Hon. Secretaries. A 2 CONTENTS. Preface Page LECTURE I. On the Influence of the National Character on Eng- lish Literature. By the Rev. James Byrne , M.A , , formerly Fellow and Donnellan Ledturer, Trin. Coll. Dublin i LECTURE II. On the Classical and Romantic Schools of English Literature as reprefented by Spenfer, Dryden, Pope, Scott, and Wordfworth. By William Rujhton , M.A . , Profeffor of Hiftory and Englifh Literature, Queen’s Coll. Cork 41 LECTURE III. On Shakespeare. By John K. Ingram , LL.D. y Fellow and Profeffor of Oratory and Englifli Literature, Trin. Coll. Dublin 93 LECTURE IV. On the English Drama. By Arthur Houfton, M. A ., Pro- feffor of Political Economy, Trin. Coll. Dublin . . . . 133 CONTENTS . viii LECTURE V. On the Life and Writings of the late John Foster, the Essayist. By the Rev. Edward Whately , M. A. . 1 8 1 LECTURE VI. On the Ballad and Lyrical Poetry of Ireland. By Randal W. McDonnell Efq., Ex-Schol. Trin. Coll. Dublin. 205 PREFACE. HE fpecial value of ledtures has been well fhown for fome years paft in the hiftory and fuccefs of large affocia- tions in our cities and towns, con- lifting for the mo ft part of young men whofe daily purfuits fhut them out from the ordinary means of mental improvement. Experience has fhown that books are often laid afide by thofe to whom oral teaching is very acceptable ; and while the libraries of Mechanics’ Inftitutions have been comparatively negledled, the evening lectures of u Young Men’s Societies” have been thronged. No city has witneffed more happy refults from thefe le&ures than Dublin ; and they have been eagerly liftened to by many for whom they were not exactly defigned, while large numbers have had reafon to regret that the hour and the place have been fuch as pradtically to exclude them. In May 1863 it occurred to the minds of a few lovers of literature that a courfe of lec- X PREFACE . tures might advantageoufly be organized, which fhould be acceffible to many who, for va- rious reafons, are debarred from the meetings of the “ Metropolitan Hall.” Some of the conditions of the projected courfe of le£tures were as follows : — They were to be given on important fubje£ts conne£ted with Englifh Litera- ture, and by the beft lecturers whofe aid could be fecured. It was confidered efTential that the new le£tures fhould be delivered in fome fuitable building of unfedtarian or neutral character, on the fouth fide of the city, and at an hour when ladies could conveniently attend, and when the daily occupations of perfons engaged in the law courts and the public offices fhould have ceafed. A Committee was formed for the pur- pofe of carrying out thefe obje£ts ; and the Lord Chancellor of Ireland at once permitted his name to be prefixed as Chairman, and alfo fignified his intention of prefiding as frequently as poffible at the lectures. One of the main difficulties in the way was furmounted through the kind exertion of Sir Robert Kane, who forwarded, and cordially fup- ported, an application to the central authorities for the ufe of the theatre of the Mufeum of Induftry. A favourable reply at once placed at the difpofal of the Committee the moft fuitable edifice in Dublin for their purpofe — perhaps PREFACE. xi the only one exa£Hy fulfilling the conditions already referred to. The feafon was far ad- vanced, but promifes of alliftance were fo readily given, that the Committee felt juftified in ifluing a programme of a fhort courfe of leisures. The time did not admit of any long preparation, or of any arrangement as to the fequence of fub- je&s ; but, notwithftanding thefe drawbacks, the Committee believe that the fix Ie£tures of the courfe are fully worthy of the reputation of the lefturers, and alfo believe that the publica- tion of the ledlures in a collected form will not only be gratifying as a memento to all who liftened to them, but will be acceptable to the general public. The prefent volume is therefore iffued in the belief that it will not only be an addition of fome value to the literary criticifm of the year, but will alfo affift in gaining for the metropolis of Ireland a more diftin£t pofition in literature than {he has hitherto attained. The publication will ferve to {how that the ftudies purfued in this portion of the Empire are likely to leave per- manent refults, and will afford an earneft of other, and yet riper, fruits to be gathered in time to come. R. Denny Urlin, 1 R. H. Martley, J Hon. Secs . THE INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL CHARACTER ON ENGLISH LITERATURE. BY THE REV. JAMES BYRNE, M.A., FORMERLY FELLOW, AND DONNELLAN LECTURER, TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN. r B THE INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL CHARACTER ON ENGLISH LITERATURE. HE laft and nobleil of the fciences is the fcience of human fociety, which has for its objed to inveftigate the caufes of all that human fociety is and of all that it accomplilhes. There are no inquiries which can rival thefe in dignity, for their fubjed is nothing lefs than the growth of the fpirit of our fpecies, and the pro- grefs of man’s dominion over nature ; none which can rival them in utility, for their eftablifhed conclulions when tranflated into the language of pradice would be rules for the advancement and amelioration of fociety in every direction. It is in the fpirit of fuch a fcience that I would propofe to make fome general obfervations on the literature which has been given to the world in the Englilh language. Not that I can hope within the limits of this ledure, even were it polfible in the pre- fent hate of our knowledge, to eftablifh with regard to the caufes of our literature anything which could de- ferve the name of fcience. But it may be within the 4 THE INFLUENCE OF fcope even of a fingle leXure to catch fuch a general view of the main features of our national character on the one hand, and of our literature on the other, as by their correfpondence to each other will indicate a con- nexion of caufe and effeX, although that connexion may not be fcientifically demonftrated or reduced to its fimple laws. The people of this United Kingdom have fprung from two fources diftinX in race and in charaXer. The great mafs of the Englifh and of the Lowland Scotch are of a Germanic origin ; the majority of the Irifh, Welfh, and Highland Scotch of a Celtic origin. It is neceffary, therefore, in order to form a diftinX idea of the cha- raXer of the national mind, that we fhould notice the diftinXive features of thefe two elements. We may, however, leave out of account the Welfh and the Highland Scotch, as thefe have never pofTeffed fuch a diftinX national exiftence, as is neceffary to maintain a diftinX national charaXer ftrong enough to make itfelf felt in Englifh literature. In general, then, it may be ftated that Germanic thought is flow, Celtic thought quick. Whence this difference has arifen it is not poffible to fay with any degree of affurance. All that can be faid is that the fouthern or tropical races of men think quickly, the northern flowly, and that it is probable that the cha- raXer of the Celt was formed and fixed under fouthern influences, that of the German in the north of Europe. For it would appear from the earlieft accounts which we have of the Celts, that they had brought with them from their original Afiatic abodes a matured national NATIONAL CHARACTER . 5 life, of which the German tribes, though fprung from the fame original llock, were comparatively deftitute. However this may be, the fad feems to be unqueftion- able that Germanic thought is flow, Celtic thought quick. I have faid that the Irifh people are princi- pally Celts. The fame may be faid of the French. And whether we compare French or Irifh thought with Germanic thought we fhall find that this is the moll obvious and fundamental diftindion between them. I may mention one indication of this which will alfo illuftrate it. The Germanic nations accentuate their words flrongly, the French hardly at all. Now the accentuation of the words indicates the ftrength of each feparate thought, and this is proportional to the atten- tion which is devoted to it. The Germanic nations, therefore, dwell on the feparate thoughts which the words exprefs ; the French pafs lightly and quickly over them. It may be obferved alfo that the French accentuate or at leaf! dwell on the end of a fentence or claufe. The true Irifh alfo pafs quickly over the parts of a fentence and dwell with an acutenefs of voice on its conclufion, though with them this is obfcured by the oppofite principle of intonation, which is proper to the Englifh language. This peculiarity arifes from the quicknefs of the Celt. He thinks the elements of a fad with quicknefs and facility, fo that the attention devoted to the fad is lefs engroffed by the parts, and is rather expended, after the parts have been thought, in contemplating the whole. Germanic thought is expended on the parts, by reafon of its flownefs in conceiving them, and it has lefs force left to contem- 6 THE INFLUENCE OF plate the whole. We fhall find that this exadlly cor- refponds to one great charadteriftic difference between Germanic and Celtic literature, namely, that the former elaborates the parts more but has lefs fenfe of general effedl than the latter. But I mention it here merely as an indication of the flownefs of Germanic thought and the quicknefs of Celtic. We muft, however, take into account another quality of thought, before we can have a diftindl idea of the character of mind from which our literature has fprung. Some minds prefer to occupy themfelves with external things, the material objedls of fenfe about them ; others take pleafure in mufing on their own ideas. I will call the former outer minds, the latter inner , and it will be found important to obferve this diftindlion in forming an eflimate of national charadter. Among the Ger- manic nations, the Anglo-Saxon had an outer mind, the German has an inner. Among the Celtic nations, the French have an outer mind, the Irifh an inner. Perhaps, but it is only an hypothefis, thefe national differences arofe from the different degrees in which the refpedtive nations were occupied with induftry or with adventure when their national charadter was forming. For there was nothing in primitive induftry to furnifh matter for mufing thought ; it fixed the mind on external things. It was adventure with all its ftirring memories and unlimited hopes which turned thought inward, and made it luxury to mufe. It would feem, I think, from the account which Tacitus gives of the German tribes, that thofe which occupied the lowlands of the north-weft of Germany, and alfo NATIONAL CHARACTER . 7 thofe in Sweden, were comparatively fettled, peaceful, and, judging by their affluence, induflrious. Thofe who occupied the higher lands of the South were more unfettled and adventurous ; indeed, the vaft forefls mull have made them hunters and kept up this unfettled charadler. The Anglo-Saxons came from the more fettled Northern or low German flock, and as foon as they entered England their adventures ceafed. They had indeed to fight their way continually with an ever- prefent enemy till they had effe&ually driven the Britons from England into Wales, but this was a prac- tical neceffity needing conflant adlion, unlike the wild and occafional adventures in unknown regions, which furnifhed endlefs matter for romantic mufings and ro- mantic tales. When once the Britons were expelled, the Saxons had nothing to do but to repel the encroach- ments of flrangers and of each other ; and during their long fettlement of about 500 years prior to the Norman invafion, they feem to have acquired a particularly outer and material chara£ler. Of this, two indications may be mentioned, their fenfuality and their want of the fagas or tales which preferved the memory of heroic adventures. In this they differed from the Scandina- vian, whofe life of bold adventure wherever his fhip would carry him maintained a fpirit of adventure which was fed continually by mufings on the glories of the pafl and the chances of the future. Now the Lowland Scotch have come principally from the Scandinavian flock, and they have a more inner mind than the Anglo- Saxon. From the fame bold and hardy flock, the Scotch probably derived that rude boldnefs and inde- 8 THE INFLUENCE OF pendent flrength, which we hear fo plainly in their national accent, and may trace fo clearly in their literary produdions. Still more inner is the modern German mind, which has come from the flock of the Southern or High German, who was always adventurous, and in whom this charader was kept up by the boundlefs field for adventure opened to him in the rich provinces of the Roman Empire. Nothing can be more clearly marked than the inner character of the German mind compared with the outer charader of the Anglo-Saxon. The former loves fpeculation, the latter pradice ; the former would evolve truth out of the depths of his own confcioufnefs, the latter from external obfervation ; the former is never content with fads till he can convert them into principles, nor the latter with principles till he can convert them into fads. The Scotchman is in thefe refpeds intermediate between the German and the Anglo-Saxon. A fimilar diflindion within the Celtic family feparates the Irifh from the French. The Irifh are defcended from the oldell ofF-fhoot of the Indo-European flock, the firft wave of emigration which paffed over Europe from that centre. If, as I have conjedured, the Celtic charader was formed in a Southern climate, it is vain to look for any trace of the caufes, which may have given to the Irifh mind an inner charader, to the French an outer. Thofe caufes had aded before the Gael firfl, and after him the Gaul had left their Afiatic abodes. But that this diflindion between the Irifh and French is real and fundamental will appear, I think, to any one who will analyfe their refpedive charaders. NATIONAL CHARACTER. 9 The Frenchman, though quick, is moft definite; his whole mind is concentrated in the glance which he diredts to an objedt, and in which he takes in its ex- ternal relations. Hence his clearnefs of thought, his quicknefs and precifion of contrivance. No objedt, however, which does not admit of this definite concep- tion, which requires that we fhould mufe over it and ponder it that we may think of it at all, is fuited to his genius. If we add to this that the Frenchman wants fenfibility, and is deficient in ltrength and depth of principle, we fhall have before us the image of a quick outer character of mind. The Irifhman on the other hand has fomewhat of an inner mufing nature. The outer objedt often fails to engage his fall attention. Hence his ideas are apt to be indefinite, becaufe liable to be mingled with another train of thought not diredtly connedted with them. Hence his careleffnefs, his inattention to appearance, his difregard of confequence, all implying a want of concentrated attention to his adtions. If, however, his mind be fully concentrated, he is capable of more depth of thought than the Frenchman. He loves the myltery on which he can mufe ; hence bis fondnefs for religious thought. His fenfibilicy is ftrong and impulfive. He is capable of principles which centuries of perfecution cannot fhake : witnefs his devotion to his religion and his country. It may be obferved that the Irifh, Scotch, and German, all have a national mufic, and that this is in accordance with their inner charadter. For mufic has lefs in it that is external to ourfelves than any of the arts. Its produdtions have no exigence but in our io THE INFLUENCE OF fenfations, and they ceafe with thefe. It is therefore of an inner nature, and is moll congenial to this cha- racter of national mind. Such, then, are the main features of the national character. The Englifh indeed received from the Norman conquelt an infuflon of French character, which gave to the Englifh mind a certain amount of French quicknefs and outernefs, and made it more bright and objective than it was originally. Still, the Anglo-Saxon is the main element in it, and the Englifh mind may ftill be defcribed as flow and outer, the Scotch flow, more inner, and more forcible — the Irifh quick and inner. Let us turn now from the national mind to its lite- rature. In doing fo we turn from the ordinary many to the gifted few, from the multitude to its chiefs; for it is from genius that literature fprings. But if fo, how can we underfland its origin or hope to difcover the influences which affeCl it ? Who can account for genius and explain its aClion ? Who can enter that fanCluary and divulge its myfleries? — that facred temple on whole altar the fires of invention, of fentiment, of paf- flon are ever burning, within whofe ample bounds the harmonies of nature are ever founding, where the uni- verfe is mirrored, yea, created anew, where truth and beauty are ever honoured with rapturous worfhip. None can tell what pafles there, but he in whofe foul it has been ereCted by his God, and he can give but a poor and partial account of all he fees and all he feels. Yet while we acknowledge the peculiar and individual charaCler of genius, and do homage to its exaltation NATIONAL CHARACTER . n above all around it, we lhould greatly err if we fup- poled it to be fo elevated, as to be unaffected by the multitude in the midft of whom it arifes. On the contrary, genius is commonly molt fufceptible of focial influences, enters with deepefl: fympathy into human fellowfhip, throws itfelf with leaf! referve into the human life that is bufy around it; and, above all, is nurtured by the hopes of the applaufe of its fellows in whofe hearts it afpires to be enthroned. No doubt there have been cafes in which genius has by unfavour- able circumilances been doomed to ifolation, in which it has had to rely with faith on the confcioufnefs of its own powers in the midft of depreciation and contempt, to look out into the pail for fellowfhip with departed genius, and into the future for the glorious vifion of univerfal fame. In fuch cafes the marks of local and national character are in a correfponding degree abfent from its works, and thefe found as if they had iffued from fome central fpirit of all humanity. But in general, genius will not thrive unlefs its own tendencies and impulfes are in harmony with thofe of fociety around it. It is mod mighty when feconded by them ; or rather, I fhould fay, when it adds its own impulfe to theirs fo as to fhoot far beyond them, but ftill in the fame direction. When it thinks and feels in unifon with its fellows it is ftrengthened by their fympathy, and elevated by their applaufe ; and we may expeCl to find that its greateft works reveal this unifon, and are confequently marked with the features of the national mind. Let us fee whether this is fo in faCt in the rnofl confpicuous monuments of our own literature. In THE INFLUENCE OF I 2 making this comparative furvey it will be neceffary to confider feparately the contributions which have been made to our literature by England, Scotland, and Ire- land ; and with regard to the firft it may be convenient to ftate generally the charadteriftic excellences and de- fers of the literature, and then prove and illurtrate thele general flatements by a more fpecial appreciation of particular authors. What then are the general features of Englifh genius ? In the firft place I would fay, that Englifh genius is charadterifed by ftrong and diftindt conception of detail. There is no literature in the world which fhows fuch a fenfe of charadter as that which has iffued from the Englifh mind, none in which all the minute traits and many fides of individual man are photographed with fuch life and truth. Nor is this diftindtnefs of delineation confined to man. Nature too is pidtured with fimilar accuracy and vividnefs. This diftindt conception of detail reveals a flow and careful habit of mind. It correfponds to that diftindt accentuation of each word which I have already noticed as diltinguifh- ing Germanic from Celtic fpeech. It correfponds alfo to the careful and truthful elaboration of details which diftingui fhes the early Germanic fchools of painting. The mental character revealed in all thefe cafes is the fame, namely, that which does not readily pa fs from one objedt to another, but devotes more time to each, and accomplifhes its proceffes flowly. Thought which thus dwells on its objedt goes beneath the furface, and hence arifes much of that vividnefs with which Englifh genius pourtrays man and nature. There is much NATIONAL CHARACTER . 13 more in it than mere accuracy. In every trait there is charader or fentiment or paflion, and it is the force and truthfulnefs of thefe fubjacent fpiritual elements in which Englifh excellence confifts. In its ftrong and diftind conception of detail the Englifh mind mingles feeling with the objed on which it dwells in thought, but as it thus fpiritualifes nature, it ftill keeps clofe to nature. A flow and inner mind as it dwelt on the objed would by the feelings which the objed called forth be led away from it into mufings of its own which would impair the diftindnefs of the impreflion, but the Englifli mind is flow and outer. The objed is paramount in its attention, the feeling is thus kept true and made definite, fo as to animate the objed with poetic life without either diftorting its form or reducing its fub- fiantial reality to a mere abftradion. Hence arife the peculiar force and richnefs of Englifh imagination, for w r hen the fentiment or paflion aflo- ciated with an objed is ftrong becaufe it has been dwelt on, and definitely appropriate becaufe the objed has been paramount in the combination, an image is fur- nifhed which can revive the feeling with almoft all the brightnefs of its original colours. Hence alfo arifes another prominent feature of Eng- lifli genius, its humour. The incongruities which are ludicrous hardly exift at all outfide human nature. Human charader is the great field which produces them, and humour therefore naturally accompanies a ftrong and penetrating fenfe of charader. It is probable that thefe excellences of Englifh genius derived fome of their brightnefs and vividnefs from the H THE INFLUENCE OF infufion of French influence at the Norman conqueft. Yet it would appear that this influence was not very confiderable. For ftill the charaderiftic excellences of Englifh genius are quite different from thofe of Celtic genius, and the ftrong points of the Celt are the weak ones of the Englifhman. I allude to fancy, wit, and fenfe of general effed. Fancy and wit conned thoughts with each other by fuperficial analogies, and they are therefore natural to the quick mind which pafles lightly over objeds, noticing principally their fuperficial and external qualities. Senfe of general effed, too, needs, as I have already obferved, that the parts fhall be thought quickly and lightly in order that they may be compre- hended in one conneded whole. In thefe powers accordingly Celtic genius excels by reafon of its quick- nefs, Englifh genius fails by reafon of its flownefs. There was indeed a long period during which French genius dominated over Englifh. When the Reftoration brought with it a fceptical contempt for every form of deep thought and feeling, and the glory and fplendour of Louis XIV. captivated the imagination of Europe, then it was inevitable that French tafte fhould rule in England. But it feems ftrange that the influence fhould have lafted fo long. In Johnfon’s time indeed French influence was very much on the wane, but ftill from Dryden to Cowper and Burns, tafte was wonderfully uniform, and the charader of Englifh genius wonder- fully different from what it had been before or has been fince. It was due probably to the continuance of the readion againft the Commonwealth and the Puritans, which continued to involve as it did at the Reftoration NATIONAL CHARACTER. 15 a diflike for deep thought and earned: feeling of every kind. The Monarchy and the Church and the Uni- verfities were by reafon of their portion of dired an- tagonifm, the firongholds of this fentiment, and the nation went with thefe leaders, for never was there a more exad adaptation than that which exifls between the Englifh mind and the Englifh Church and Monarchy. During moll: of this period wit was the general name for genius, elegance was the quality mofi prized, and nothing was admired but what was light in thought and harmonious and corred in language. The charaderifiic qualities of Englifh genius in its pure development are to be fought outfide this period ; and as my time is limited, I fhall pafs over it all, fo far as England is con- cerned, confining my obfervations to authors who have flourifhed before or fince ; and amongfi them noticing only the poets who have had the greatefi influence in giving a charader to Englifh poetry. Now in pafling thus abruptly from the early to the late poets, we are confcious of a great change in the fubjeds of poetry, and in the mode of their treatment ; and as this might fuggeft the idea, that the national genius had in the interval, in fome degree, changed its charader, it is neceflary to make one or two obferva- tions on what feems to be a natural order of progreflive change in the fubjeds of poetry. Literary genius, on its firA awaking into life, finds fociety fo unfettled that every man has to hold himfelf ready to repel hofiile violence by force, and to defend his rights with his life. At fuch a period, it is adion which moves genius with the deepefi interefi. THE INFLUENCE OF 16 Afterwards fociety becomes more fettled. The civil power quells this internal war, but the fpirit of man is not yet reclaimed. He (till poflefles all his native irregularity of difpofition and paffion, and is to be feen in all his natural variety of character. The principal intereft which is fit to engage the energies of genius is then found, not in adtion, but in man, the adtor. At a fubfequent period the fpirit of man itlelf is reduced to comparative order, and as the turmoil of paffion is quelled, and the need for violent exertion ceafes, fentiment and feeling affume a finer character. Civil order gives perfqtnal fecurity and enables man to expatiate over the face of nature with a mind free to admit all its gentle influences, and to mingle the varied feelings of his own chequered exiftence with its changing afpedts. Then the mild refledlion which it gives of his joys and forrows has power to awaken the infpirations of genius, and nature, the fcene of man’s life, enters as a main element into his literary creations. The fenfe of human charadter and paffion in this period becomes weaker, and thefe need the account of ftirring incident to bring them out. Such incident of itfelf fuggests the charadter to which it may be due, or the feelings which it mull infpire, and thus helps the delineation of them. It is natural, then, that Englifh literature fhould follow this order, and fucceffively idealize adtion, man, and nature, without at all indicating therein any change in the charadler of the national genius. Whether that charadter has continued permanent may appear when we have endeavoured briefly to eftimate the charac- teriflic genius of fome of the principal Englifh poets of NATIONAL CHARACTER . 17 the periods moft pure from foreign influence. Jt is not to be expeCted that each one fhould poflefs every Englifh excellence ; for it is feldom granted to a Angle mind to hold dominion at once over all the faculties of the foul. The queftion to be alked is, whether the excellences and defeats of each author, in his peculiar province, exhibit the features of the national mind. This is moft diftinCtly the cafe with Chaucer, the great father of Englifti fong. Character and humour are his perfections. I fay perfections, for there is furely nothing in literature more abfolutely free from defeCt than his fketches of the pilgrims to Canterbury, nothing which feems more incapable of increafe than the humour of the characters, and of moft of their tales. Indeed, the character and humour that is in Chaucer is of fuch a full and complete kind that you feel as if you could never take it all in, and appreciate all its excel- lence. This arifes from the multitude of charaCteriftic traits, each one of which is neceftary to the complete idea of the character, and from the multitude of hu- morous incongruities which in the humorous charac- ters are involved between each of these traits and the reft. The Englifti particularity of thought and Adelity to nature appears ftrikingly in the idealization that there is in Chaucer’s characters. Each one is the embo- diment of an ideal, but of a very particular ideal. He does not draw the moft perfeCt fpecimen of a foldier, but of a knight, a fquire, and a yeoman ; not of an eccleftaftic, but of a monk, a friar, and a parfon ; and in drawing thefe, though he imagines each as perfeCt, he never goes outfide the fpecial charaCteriftics which c THE INFLUENCE OF are peculiar to each in order to give them a perfection which might as well belong to another. There is here not only the flow mind which dwells with attention on its object fo as to take a deep impreffton, but the outer mind which keeps true to the object, and whofe thoughts are ftridly controlled by it. Alas ! many of Chaucer’s tales are fo immodeft that they cannot be read for very fhame. But they are not all fo, and in fome of them, as well as in others of his poems, there are excellences of a more poetical nature than character and humour. There is not, indeed, much ftrength of genuine palfion. This was not Chaucer’s province. His works are not of that kind that the abfence of it is a defect. The paflion of the “Knight’s Tale” is, indeed, conventional, but it was quite appropriate, and no doubt intended, that the conventional fentiments of chivalry fhould be the governing element of the tale. But, though there may not be much paffion, there is true and touching tendernefs, as in Grifelde’s parting with her children and her meeting with them again. There is fine imagination, too, as in the defcriptions of the temples of Mars, Venus, and Diana, in the “Knight’s Tale,” and the facred rites which are performed in them. And, though much is borrowed, yet the poet’s own imagination is ftill feen adive throughout. Chaucer exhibits, in a remarkable degree, one power which peculiarly correfponds to the charader of Eng- lifh genius, the power of allegory. At firft fight this might feem to be identical with fancy, a faculty which I have afcribed rather to the Celtic mind than to the Englifh. But fancy, at leafl in the fenfe in which I NATIONAL CHARACTER . l 9 ufe the term, confifts in aflociating thoughts together through the medium of a fuperficial refemblance which does not enter deeply into the eflential nature of either. Such is the fancy which fparkles throughout the poetry of Moore. Take, for example, the following, from his defcription of the early love of Zelica and Azim, in the “Veiled Prophet — “ There, on the banks of that bright river born, The flowers that hung above the wave at morn, Blefs’d not the waters as they murmur’d by With holier fcent and luftre than the flgh And virgin-glance of firfl: aft'edlion caft Upon their youth’s fmooth current as it pafs’d.” The flowers looking into the ftream in all their brightnefs, and exhaling over it their frefli morning fragrance, are a beautiful image of the virgin glance and flgh of firfl: affedtion, over the fmooth current of youth. But they do not reprefent youthful love itfelf, they do not pi&ure to us what it is, the refemblance reaches not beyond the furface. Now this, which fancy does not, it is the very purpofe of allegory to do. It takes a mental principle, or an ideal exifience, and gives to it a bodily fhape and fubftance, which fhall reprefent its eflential nature. For this it is neceflary to dwell in thought on the ideal objedl in order to form a full and ftrong conception of it ; and this needs a flow and careful habit of mind. And as ideal objedls are apt to be fliadowy and indiftind, there is further needed a mind which will be faithful to its objedl, and not mingle with it any mufings or abftradlions of its own, one which by its outer tendency can tranfport the 20 THE INFLUENCE OF ideal into the material. Allegory, then, of this full and minute kind, belongs properly to the flow outer mind, and Chaucer’s fuccefs in this province in his “ Vifion of the Temple of Fame ” is in harmony with the chara&er of Englifh thought. Indeed, the fir 11 confpicuous effort of Englifh genius which preceded the works of Chaucer, the “ Vifion of Piers Ploughman,” was an allegory too, chara&erized apparently by Englifh humour and fhrewdnefs of ob- fervation. And the great poet Spenfer who fucceeded him after a long interval has exhibited in the fame form all the highefl gifts of Englifh genius. How various and interefling the incidents, how pic- turefque and beautiful the forms in which Spenfer, in his “ Fairy Queen,” embodies the various moral prin- ciples, and the viciffitudes of their hiftory. What purity and elevation of moral feeling, what profound wifdom and deep view of human life is in the fubftance and meaning of his Allegory. That inner fubftance is the element in his immortal poem which is mod pecu- liarly his own. The external form in which it is em- bodied is due in a confiderable degree to that Romance literature, which, created by the Gallic genius of the Trouveres for the entertainment of their Germanic mailers, gave a French brightnefs of obje&ivity to the deep motives and pleafures of Germanic adventure, and fo was qualified to fire the fouthern genius of Taffo and Ariofto, as well as to flrike deep into the Englifh foul of Spenfer. We are to look for the individual cha- racter of his genius, not fo much to this romantic ele- ment which was the common property of Europe, as NATIONAL CHARACTER . 21 to the peculiar treatment which it received in his hands, and to all that fpiritual fiory which is entirely his own. Judging him in this way, we may obferve that though Spenfer is fo admirably fuccefsful in the image or outer part of the allegory, yet his thoughts are more occupied throughout with the inner meaning. This indicates fuch a flownefs of mind as gives depth, becaufe it loves to dwell on an objeCt till it takes it all in, with all its meaning. The quick mind keeps nearer to the furface ; and, accordingly, if we compare the “ Fairy Queen,” or that other eminently Englifh allegory, the “ Pilgrim’s Progrefs,” with Swift’s admirable allegory, the “Tale of a Tub,” we fhall find this charaCteriltic difference illuftrated. Swift was by birth and early education an Irifhman, and he wrote during the period when French influence was predominant. We may expeCt in him the fuperficial characters of the quick mind, and accord- ingly it may, I think, be faid with truth that Swift thinks rather more of the image than of the meaning; the humour lies rather in Peter, Martin, and John; Spenfer and Bunyan fix their intereil rather in Truth, Temperance, Faith, Hope. This, indeed, is eflentially connected with that which moft ftrikes one in Spenfer, his wonderful and admir- able elaboration of details. Every feature in his cha- racters, every movement in their adventures is full of deep fpiritual meaning. Now this is not at all a neceflary or univerfal quality in allegory. It is the treatment of allegory which we fliould expeCt from the flow and outer Englifh mind, but we fhould not ex- peCt it nor do we find it in Swift’s allegory. His 22 THE INFLUENCE OF types are not of this minute kind. They are all prin- cipal incidents in his ftory, and it may be added that that ftory moves rapidly, and the characters are fketched with a free hand in a few touches. But in Spenfer every detail is fully brought out. His is a Germanic picture, but how beautiful are the colours with which it glows ! What richnefs of that poetic fentiment with which Englifh genius by reafon of its depth and truth can animate nature ! What beauty of language, what admirable propriety of epithet, what harmony of verfe 1 True, the very fulnefs of the fpiritual meaning, and a certain deficiency of human intereft arifing from the predominance of the inner fubflance of the allegory over its outer form, makes it perhaps heavy to read through and regard as a whole. True it is alfo that as I have obferved of Englifh genius in general, there is perhaps in Spenfer’s genius a deficient fenfe of general effeCE Indeed there is properly fpeaking no totality either in the