of the languages in which it is written, and that, from the nature of the case, it is impossible for us to have that easy mastery of the niceties of a dead language, that knowledge of its peculiar associations and idiosyncracy, possessed by those who spoke it by natural inheritance, it would have been little short of a miracle had Buchanan, handicapped as he was, rivalled Virgil or Horace or Catullus as a writer of Latin verse. All that the Humanist versifiers could do was to imitate as closely as possible their classical models. The closer the imitation in theme, manner of expression and mode of treatment, the greater the supposed triumph. But a truly great poetic triumph, if so far imitative, is less imitative than original. The verses of the Humanists were necessarily more or less artificial and unreal in tone; and indeed Dr. Macmillan defends or excuses, Buchanan's gross erotic verses on the only available ground, that he was merely turning "love ditties after the most approved manner of the ancients". Thus however much eleverness, rhetorical brilliancy and capacity of poetical appreciation and imitation the Latin verses of Buchanan may imply, they afford no warrant for the supposition that he possessed the true magical inspiration and skill of a great poet, that he was a great poet either in esse or posse. The chances are rather all against his power to rival such a vernacular poet as Dunbar. Had he been conscious of the capacity to excel in vernacular poetry he could hardly have avoided the temptation occasionally to essay Scottish verse, for its vogue had not yet passed away; but a significant fact is that in ridiculing the Franciscans he virtually confessed his inferiority even as a satirist to that great master of the art, by utilizing for this purpose one of his pieces, Buchanan's Somnium being, in the words of Dr. Macmillan, "a frank imitation, indeed a free translation into Latin", of Dunbar's poem, "How Dunbar was desyrit to be ane Friar". Nor is it clear that Buchanan has a claim, either as politician, thinker, or historian, to a place in the first rank. Dr. Macmillan doubts if his blood connection with Darnley at all influenced Buchanan's politics. He "can hardly conceive" this in the case of "a man of Buchanan's culture and power of detachment"; but yet strangely enough, he admits that Buchanan's Celtic predilections "unconsciously coloured his Rerum Scoticorum Historia". The truth was that Buchanan's temperament was essentially that of the partisan; and of the excessive character of his partisanship Dr. Macmillan supplies a sufficiently striking instance. Here is one of the anecdotes about Buchanan which, in Dr. Macmillan's opinion, "are so characteristic that one is inclined to accept them". The young Earl of Mar and James engaged in a scuffle about the possession of young Mar's sparrow, in the course of which the poor bird was killed. The affair was reported to Buchanan, who gave the young king a box on the ear, with the remark that "he himself was a true bird of the bloody nest to which he belonged". Who but a bitter and choleric partisan could have so demeaned himself, as thus cruelly to insult his poor unfortunate royal pupil? But the general tenor of Buchanan's life indicates that he was very far from being incapable of allowing personal considerations to colour his judgment. True he may have been a fearless defender of the truth, he may have been incapable of writing what he knew to be false; but the truth about persons probably assumed a different aspect to him, according as they were his friends or his enemies. Sir James Melville tells us, for instance, that Buchanan became Morton's great enemy because Morton had bought a hackney of Buchanan's which had been siezed from Buchanan's servant during the civil troubles and having paid for it and taken a fancy for it, would not give it up to Buchanan. And however that may be, the part taken by Buchanan in the conspiracy against Morton was as politically foolish from his own political point of view as it was morally and legally unjustifiable. Indeed, bitter as Buchanan's personal feelings towards Morton may have been, it can hardly be accounted for on any other supposition than that of Sir James Melville, that so far from being a shrewd man of the world, he "was easily abused, and so facile that he was led with any company that he haunted for the time". -- It is rather remarkable that Dr. Macmillan should omit to quote these particular paragraphs of Sir James Melville about Buchanan, as they afford the most charitable explanation of certain of the more dubious phases of Buchanan's public career. Take, for example, the Detectio. In regard to this characteristic invective, even Dr. Macmillan admits the possibility that "Buchanan did not sufficiently sift his evidence; he may have lent too ready an ear to the gossip of court and street"; but was such a thing in a matter of such vital importance excusable, except either on the supposition that Buchanan had become a blind partisan, or on the supposition of Sir James Melville that he was "so facile that he was easily abused"! True, Dr. Macmillan states that, in any case, Mary's recent champions while they "condemn Buchanan's Detectio for its bitterness and reject many of its details, practically admit its conclusions". But Dr. Macmillan must have read these recent works to very little purpose, if he does not know that their writers admit Buchanan's conclusions in only a very qualified sense. They affirm that Mary was sinned against as well as sinning, that the extenuating circumstances were such as hardly to justify a verdict of murder in the strict sense of that term, and that Buchanan's own party were almost as much responsible for the denth of Darnley as Mary was. In fact, Buchanan, owing to his clan prejudices and his facility of disposition, seems, in this matter, to have been, very much, led by the nose. A similar facility of disposition seems to be implied in Buchanan allowing himself to become the tool of Knox, by identifying himself so closely with the Kirk, as to consent to become its moderator. Dr. Macmillan admits that Buchanan had no belief in the distinctive doctrines of the Kirk. His external conformity to the Kirk was of course much more excusable than that of the false professors of the present day, for external conformity was then the law of the land; but is was not incumbent on him to identify himself with the Kirk to the extent of becoming its moderator - except, of course, from a certain regard to his worldly welfare, which Dr. Macmillan, perhaps too rashly, affirms never for a moment entered into his calculations as a motive for his public conduct. Buchanan's political or personal partisanship necessarily deforms, to some extent, his political and historical writings, notwithstanding their various admirable characteristics as literature. In what way, or to what extent they do so, considerations of space forbids me here to discuss. It must suffice to state that while his "History" has, as Dr. Macmillan affirms, "to be taken account of by every author who attempts to tell the story of the Scottish nation", it is apart from its delightful introductory chapters descriptive of the social condition and the habits and customs of the Scotland of his time mainly valuable for the indirect light it casts on the character, temper and aims of Buchanan's own political party, than as a carefully sifted narrative; and that his chief work in so-called political philosophy, the De Jure regno apud Scotos, so well-qualified, and at the same time so friendly, a critic as Dr. Hume Brown, does not rank "very high as a scientific discussion of the important subject with which it deals". The real fact is that it is a very jejune performance so far as its thinking is concerned. True, Dr. Macmillan tells us that "it ought to be remembered that Buchanan's tract was written for a special purpose"; but surely we are not bound to believe that, but for this, he would have written a much better book. We can attribute to Buchanan only the powers that he manifested; and, judging from his actual writings, he must be pronounced rather a brilliantly virulent party-pamphleteer than a great political thinker or a classical historian. London. T. F. Henderson. The Complete Dramatic and Poetic Works of William Shakespeare. Edited from the Text of the early Quartos and the First Folio by William Allan Neilson. (The Cambridge Edition of the Poets.) Boston and New York; Houghton, Mifflin & Co. (The Riverside Press, Cambridge.) 1906. London, Constable & Co. Preis $3,00 12 S. 6 d. net. Die vorliegende einbändige ausgabe von Shakespeare's sämtlichen werken gehört der von Bliss Perry herausgegebenen amerikanischen Cambridge Edition of the Poets an. Dem allgemeinen plan der sammlung entsprechend, hat der herausgeber dieses Shakespearebandes, W. A. Neilson, auf die herstellung eines sorgfältigen und zuverlässigen textes auf grund der alten quartos und der ersten folio grosses gewicht gelegt. In einer kurzen einleitung zu jeder dichtung wird über datum, autorschaft, quellen und textgrundlage berichtet. Schreibung und interpunktion sind modernisiert. Alte und moderne bühnenanweisungen sind äusserlich scharf geschieden; ebenso sind stellen, die einer andern als der im übrigen zugrunde gelegten ausgabe entnommen sind, durch klammern kenntlich gemacht beides nachahmenswerte massregeln. Dem ganzen ist eine kurze biographische skizze vorausgeschickt, ein variantenverzeichnis und glossar angehängt. Leider scheint es uns, dass all diese redliche arbeit des herausgebers verlorene liebesmüh ist. Wer soll das buch benützen? Der druck ist zwar ein wenig grösser als der der Globe Edition, aber doch so polizeiwidrig klein, dass die ausgabe für kursorische lektüre völlig ungeeignet ist. J. Hoops. Albert Eichler, John Hookham Frere, sein leben und seine werke, sein einfluss auf Lord Byron. (Wiener beiträge zur englischen philologie, hrsg. von J. Schipper. 20.) Wien, W. Braumüller, 1905. VIII + 189 ss. Der vorliegenden vorzüglichen arbeit gebührt in bezug auf gründlichkeit und ehrlichkeit die vollste anerkennung. Was die gründlichkeit betrifft, tut der verfasser fast des guten zu viel, und man würde seinem werke an manchen stellen eine kondensiertere form wünschen. Hätte es zb. bei der besprechung der alliterierenden verse nicht genügt, das gesamtergebnis der gewissenhaften untersuchung anzuführen? Musste jede einzelne alliteration abgedruckt werden? Hätte ferner eine kurze inhaltsübersicht der Monks and Giants für die deutlichkeit nicht mehr getan als die 39 seiten umfassende prosaumschreibung dieses gedichtes von 214 stanzen, das so gut wie keinen inhalt hat? Und doch müsste gerade die ausserordentliche dürftigkeit des stoffes dem leser klar zum Bewusstsein gebracht werden, denn sie ist das charakteristische moment, das Frere von seinen italienischen vorbildern unterscheidet und mit seinem grossen nachfolger verbindet. Also in kurzen worten: Während könig Arthur in Carlisle das weihnachtsfest feiert, trifft die nachricht ein, dass riesen einige damen geraubt hätten. Gawein und Tristram treten zu ihrer befreiung vor; jener ein schwerfälliger, ungestümer und unentschlossener charakter, dieser heiter, leichtgemut und selbstsicher beide augenscheinlich die etwas karikierten porträts zeitgenössischer politischer helden, wie Byron obgleich Frere jede persönliche anspielung leugnete, und Eichler sich dadurch abhalten liess, die urbilder zu suchen. Die riesen werden besiegt, und Gawein bringt die damen an den hof zurück. Im dritten gesang befinden wir uns unvermittelt in einem kloster, dessen glockengeläut die riesen aufbringt, die mönche selbst aber jeder andern nützlichen pflicht entfremdet. Nur einer sieht nach dem rechten und liegt seiner lieblingsbeschäftigung, dem angeln, ob. Er wird prior, wehrt. einen angriff der riesen ab und nimmt ihr lager ein, wodurch sie |