CHAPTER IV

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

(1)

With the seventeenth century the great school of imaginative writers

that made glorious the last years of Elizabeth's reign, had passed away.

Spenser was dead before 1600, Sir Philip Sidney a dozen years earlier,

and though Shakespeare and Drayton and many other men whom we class

roughly as Elizabethan lived on to work under James, their temper and

their ideals belong to the earlier day. The seventeenth century, not in

England only but in Europe, brought a new way of thinking with it, and

gave a new direction to human interest and to human affairs. It is not

perhaps easy to define nor is it visible in the greater writers of the

time. Milton, for instance, and Sir Thomas Browne are both of them too

big, and in their genius too far separated from their fellows to give us

much clue to altered conditions. It is commonly in the work of lesser

and forgotten writers that the spirit of an age has its fullest

expression. Genius is a law to itself; it moves in another dimension; it

is out of time. To define this seventeenth century spirit, then, one

must look at the literature of the age as a whole. What is there that

one finds in it which marks a change in temperament and outlook from the

Renaissance, and the time which immediately followed it?

Putting it very broadly one may say that literature in the seventeenth

century becomes for the first time essentially modern in spirit. We

began our survey of modern English literature at the Renaissance because

the discovery of the New World, and the widening of human experience and

knowledge, which that and the revival of classical learning implied,

mark a definite break from a way of thought which had been continuous

since the break up of the Roman Empire. The men of the Renaissance felt

themselves to be modern. They started afresh, owing nothing to their

immediate forbears, and when they talked, say, of Chaucer, they did so

in very much the same accent as we do to-day. He was mediaeval and

obsolete; the interest which he possessed was a purely literary

interest; his readers did not meet him easily on the same plane of

thought, or forget the lapse of time which separated him from them. And

in another way too, the Renaissance began modern writing. Inflections

had been dropped. The revival of the classics had enriched our

vocabulary, and the English language, after a gradual impoverishment

which followed the obsolescence one after another of the local dialects,

attained a fairly fixed form. There is more difference between the

language of the English writings of Sir Thomas More and that of the

prose of Chaucer than there is between that of More and of Ruskin. But

it is not till the seventeenth century that the modern spirit, in the

fullest sense of the word, comes into being. Defined it means a spirit

of observation, of preoccupation with detail, of stress laid on matter

of fact, of analysis of feelings and mental processes, of free argument

upon institutions and government. In relation to knowledge, it is the

spirit of science, and the study of science, which is the essential

intellectual fact in modern history, dates from just this time, from

Bacon and Newton and Descartes. In relation to literature, it is the

spirit of criticism, and criticism in England is the creation of the

seventeenth century. The positive temper, the attitude of realism, is

everywhere in the ascendant. The sixteenth century made voyages of

discovery; the seventeenth sat down to take stock of the riches it had

gathered. For the first time in English literature writing becomes a

vehicle for storing and conveying facts.

It would be easy to give instances: one must suffice here. Biography,

which is one of the most characteristic kinds of English writing, was

unknown to the moderns as late as the sixteenth century. Partly the

awakened interest in the careers of the ancient statesmen and soldiers

which the study of Plutarch had excited, and partly the general interest

in, and craving for, facts set men writing down the lives of their

fellows. The earliest English biographies date from this time. In the

beginning they were concerned, like Plutarch, with men of action, and

when Sir Fulke Greville wrote a brief account of his friend Sir Philip

Sidney it was the courtier and the soldier, and not the author, that he

designed to celebrate. But soon men of letters came within their scope,

and though the interest in the lives of authors came too late to give us

the contemporary life of Shakespeare we so much long for, it was early

enough to make possible those masterpieces of condensed biography in

which Isaak Walton celebrates Herbert and Donne. Fuller and Aubrey, to

name only two authors, spent lives of laborious industry in hunting down

and chronicling the smallest facts about the worthies of their day and

the time immediately before them. Autobiography followed where biography

led. Lord Herbert of Cherbury and Margaret Duchess of Newcastle, as well

as less reputable persons, followed the new mode. By the time of the

Restoration Pepys and Evelyn were keeping their diaries, and Fox his

journal. Just as in poetry the lyric, that is the expression of personal

feeling, became more widely practised, more subtle and more sincere, in

prose the letter, the journal, and the autobiography formed themselves

to meet the new and growing demand for analysis of the feelings and the

intimate thoughts and sensations of real men and women. A minor form of

literature which had a brief but popular vogue ministered less directly

to the same need. The "Character," a brief descriptive essay on a

contemporary type--a tobacco seller, an old college butler or the

like--was popular because in its own way it matched the newly awakened

taste for realism and fact. The drama which in the hands of Ben Jonson

had attacked folly and wickedness proper to no place or time, descended

to the drawing-rooms of the day, and Congreve occupied himself with the

portrayal of the social frauds and foolishnesses perpetrated by actual

living men and women of fashion in contemporary London. Satire ceased

to be a mere expression of a vague discontent, and became a weapon

against opposing men and policies. The new generation of readers were

nothing if not critical. They were for testing directly institutions

whether they were literary, social, or political. They wanted facts, and

they wanted to take a side.

In the distinct and separate realm of poetry a revolution no less

remarkable took place. Spenser had been both a poet and a Puritan: he

had designed to show by his great poem the training and fashioning of a

Puritan English gentleman. But the alliance between poetry and

Puritanism which he typified failed to survive his death. The

essentially pagan spirit of the Renaissance which caused him no doubts

nor difficulties proved too strong for his readers and his followers,

and the emancipated artistic enthusiasm in which it worked alienated

from secular poetry men with deep and strong religious convictions.

Religion and morality and poetry, which in Sidney and Spenser had gone

hand in hand, separated from each other. Poems like _Venus and Adonis_

or like Shakespeare's sonnets could hardly be squared with the sterner

temper which persecution began to breed. Even within orthodox

Anglicanism poetry and religion began to be deemed no fit company for

each other. When George Herbert left off courtier and took orders he

burnt his earlier love poetry, and only the persuasion of his friends

prevented Donne from following the same course. Pure poetry became more

and more an exotic. All Milton's belongs to his earlier youth; his

middle age was occupied with controversy and propaganda in prose; when

he returned to poetry in blindness and old age it was "to justify the

ways of God to man"--to use poetry, that is, for a spiritual and moral

rather than an artistic end.

Though the age was curious and inquiring, though poetry and prose tended

more and more to be enlisted in the service of non-artistic enthusiasms

and to be made the vehicle of deeper emotions and interests than perhaps

a northern people could ever find in art, pure and simple, it was not

like the time that followed it, a "prosaic" age. Enthusiasm burned

fierce and clear, displaying itself in the passionate polemic of Milton,

in the fanaticism of Bunyan and Fox, hardly more than in the gentle,

steadfast search for knowledge in Burton, and the wide and vigilant

curiousness of Bacon. Its eager experimentalism tried the impossible;

wrote poems and then gave them a weight of meaning they could not carry,

as when Fletcher in _The Purple Island_ designed to allegorize all that

the physiology of his day knew of the human body, or Donne sought to

convey abstruse scientific fact in a lyric. It gave men a passion for

pure learning, set Jonson to turn himself from a bricklayer into the

best equipped scholar of his day, and Fuller and Camden grubbing among

English records and gathering for the first time materials of scientific

value for English history. Enthusiasm gave us poetry that was at once

full of learning and of imagination, poetry that was harsh and brutal

in its roughness and at the same time impassioned. And it set up a

school of prose that combined colloquial readiness and fluency,

pregnancy and high sentiment with a cumbrous pedantry of learning which

was the fruit of its own excess.

The form in which enthusiasm manifested itself most fiercely was as we

have seen not favourable to literature. Puritanism drove itself like a

wedge into the art of the time, broadening as it went. Had there been no

more in it than the moral earnestness and religiousness of Sidney and

Spenser, Cavalier would not have differed from Roundhead, and there

might have been no civil war; each party was endowed deeply with the

religious sense and Charles I. was a sincerely pious man. But while

Spenser and Sidney held that life as a preparation for eternity must be

ordered and strenuous and devout but that care for the hereafter was not

incompatible with a frank and full enjoyment of life as it is lived,

Puritanism as it developed in the middle classes became a sterner and

darker creed. The doctrine of original sin, face to face with the fact

that art, like other pleasures, was naturally and readily entered into

and enjoyed, forced them to the plain conclusion that art was an evil

thing. As early as Shakespeare's youth they had been strong enough to

keep the theatres outside London walls; at the time of the Civil War

they closed them altogether, and the feud which had lasted for over a

generation between them and the dramatists ended in the destruction of

the literary drama. In the brief years of their ascendancy they produced

no literature, for Milton is much too large to be tied down to their

negative creed, and, indeed, in many of his qualities, his love of music

and his sensuousness for instance, he is antagonistic to the temper of

his day. With the Restoration their earnest and strenuous spirit fled to

America. It is noteworthy that it had no literary manifestation there

till two centuries after the time of its passage. Hawthorne's novels are

the fruit--the one ripe fruit in art--of the Puritan imagination.

(2)

If the reader adopts the seventeenth century habit himself and takes

stock of what the Elizabethans accomplished in poetry, he will recognize

speedily that their work reached various stages of completeness. They

perfected the poetic drama and its instrument, blank verse; they

perfected, though not in the severer Italian form, the sonnet; they

wrote with extraordinary delicacy and finish short lyrics in which a

simple and freer manner drawn from the classics took the place of the

mediaeval intricacies of the ballad and the rondeau. And in the forms

which they failed to bring to perfection they did beautiful and noble

work. The splendour of _The Fairy Queen_ is in separate passages; as a

whole it is over tortuous and slow; its affectations, its sensuousness,

the mere difficulty of reading it, makes us feel it a collection of

great passages, strung it is true on a large conception, rather than a

great work. The Elizabethans, that is, had not discovered the secret of

the long poem; the abstract idea of the "heroic" epic which was in all

their minds had to wait for embodiment till _Paradise Lost_. In a way

their treatment of the pastoral or eclogue form was imperfect too. They

used it well but not so well as their models, Vergil and Theocritus;

they had not quite mastered the convention on which it is built.

The seventeenth century, taking stock in some such fashion of its

artistic possessions, found some things it were vain to try to do. It

could add nothing to the accomplishment of the English sonnet, so it

hardly tried; with the exception of a few sonnets in the Italian form of

Milton, the century can show us nothing in this mode of verse. The

literary drama was brought to perfection in the early years of it by the

surviving Elizabethans; later decades could add nothing to it but

licence, and as we saw, the licences they added hastened its

destruction. But in other forms the poets of the new time experimented

eagerly, and in the stress of experiment, poetry which under Elizabeth

had been integral and coherent split into different schools. As the

period of the Renaissance was also that of the Reformation it was only

natural a determined effort should sooner or later be made to use poetry

for religious purposes. The earliest English hymn writing, our first

devotional verse in the vernacular, belongs to this time, and a Catholic

and religious school of lyricism grew and flourished beside the pagan

neo-classical writers. From the tumult of experiment three schools

disengage themselves, the school of Spenser, the school of Jonson, and

the school of Donne.

At the outset of the century Spenser's influence was triumphant and

predominant; his was the main stream with which the other poetic

influences of the time merely mingled. His popularity is referable to

qualities other than those which belonged peculiarly to his talent as a

poet. Puritans loved his religious ardour, and in those Puritan

households where the stricter conception of the diabolical nature of all

poetry had not penetrated, his works were read--standing on a shelf, may

be, between the new translation of the Bible and Sylvester's translation

of the French poet Du Bartas' work on the creation, that had a large

popularity at that time as family reading. Probably the Puritans were as

blind to the sensuousness of Spenser's language and imagery as they were

(and are) to the same qualities in the Bible itself. _The Fairy Queen_

would easily achieve innocuousness amongst those who can find nothing

but an allegory of the Church in the "Song of Songs." His followers made

their allegory a great deal plainer than he had done his. In his poem

called _The Purple Island_, Phineas Fletcher, a Puritan imitator of

Spenser in Cambridge, essayed to set forth the struggle of the soul at

grip with evil, a battle in which the body--the "Purple Island"--is the

field. To a modern reader it is a desolating and at times a mildly

amusing book, in which everything from the liver to the seven deadly

sins is personified; in which after four books of allegorized

contemporary anatomy and physiology, the will (Voletta) engages in a

struggle with Satan and conquers by the help of Christ and King James!

The allegory is clever--too clever--and the author can paint a pleasant

picture, but on the whole he was happier in his pastoral work. His

brother Giles made a better attempt at the Spenserian manner. His long

poem, _Christ's Victory and Death_, shows for all its carefully

Protestant tone high qualities of mysticism; across it Spenser and

Milton join hands.

It was, however, in pastoral poetry that Spenser's influence found its

pleasantest outlet. One might hesitate to advise a reader to embark on

either of the Fletchers. There is no reason why any modern should not

read and enjoy Browne or Wither, in whose softly flowing verse the

sweetness and contentment of the countryside, that "merry England" which

was the background of all sectarian and intellectual strife and labour,

finds as in a placid stream a calm reflection and picture of itself. The

seventeenth century gave birth to many things that only came to maturity

in the nineteenth; if you care for that kind of literary study which

searches out origins and digs for hints and models of accented styles,

you will find in Browne that which influenced more than any other single

thing the early work of Keats. Browne has another claim to immortality;

if it be true as is now thought that he was the author of the epitaph on

the Countess of Pembroke:

"Underneath this sable hearse

Lies the subject of all verse,

Sidney's sister, Pembroke's mother.

Death, ere thou hast slain another

Fair and learned and good as she,

Time shall throw a dart at thee."

then he achieved the miracle of a quintessential statement of the spirit

of the English Renaissance. For the breath of it stirs in these slow

quiet moving lines, and its few and simple words implicate the soul of a

period.

By the end of the first quarter of the century the influence of Spenser

and the school which worked under it had died out. Its place was taken

by the twin schools of Jonson and Donne. Jonson's poetic method is

something like his dramatic; he formed himself as exactly as possible on

classical models. Horace had written satires and elegies, and epistles

and complimentary verses, and Jonson quite consciously and deliberately

followed where Horace led. He wrote elegies on the great, letters and

courtly compliments and love-lyrics to his friends, satires with an air

of general censure. But though he was classical, his style was never

latinized. In all of them he strove to pour into an ancient form

language that was as intense and vigorous and as purely English as the

earliest trumpeters of the Renaissance in England could have wished. The

result is not entirely successful. He seldom fails to reproduce classic

dignity and good sense; on the other hand he seldom succeeds in

achieving classic grace and ease. Occasionally, as in his best known

lyric, he is perfect and achieves an air of spontaneity little short of

marvellous, when we know that his images and even his words in the song

are all plagiarized from other men. His expression is always clear and

vigorous and his sense good and noble. The native earnestness and

sincerity of the man shines through as it does in his dramas and his

prose. In an age of fantastic and meaningless eulogy--eulogy so amazing

in its unexpectedness and abstruseness that the wonder is not so much

that it should have been written as that it could have been thought

of--Jonson maintains his personal dignity and his good sense. You feel

his compliments are such as the best should be, not necessarily

understood and properly valued by the public, but of a discriminating

sort that by their very comprehending sincerity would be most warmly

appreciated by the people to whom they were addressed. His verses to

Shakespeare and his prose commentaries on him too, are models of what

self-respecting admiration should be, generous in its praise of

excellence, candid in its statement of defects. They are the kind of

compliments that Shakespeare himself, if he had grace enough, must have

loved to receive.

Very different from his direct and dignified manner is the closely

packed style of Donne, who, Milton apart, is the greatest English writer

of the century, though his obscurity has kept him out of general

reading. No poetry in English, not even Browning, is more difficult to

understand. The obscurity of Donne and Browning proceed from such

similar causes that they are worth examining together. In both, as in

the obscure passages in Shakespeare's later plays, obscurity arises not

because the poet says too little but because he attempts to say too

much. He huddles a new thought on the one before it, before the first

has had time to express itself; he sees things or analyses emotions so

swiftly and subtly himself that he forgets the slower comprehensions of

his readers; he is for analysing things far deeper than the ordinary

mind commonly can. His wide and curious knowledge finds terms and

likenesses to express his meaning unknown to us; he sees things from a

dozen points of view at once and tumbles a hint of each separate vision

in a heap out on to the page; his restless intellect finds new and

subtler shades of emotion and thought invisible to other pairs of eyes,

and cannot, because speech is modelled on the average of our

intelligences, find words to express them; he is always trembling on the

brink of the inarticulate. All this applies to both Donne and Browning,

and the comparison could be pushed further still. Both draw the

knowledge which is the main cause of their obscurity from the same

source, the bypaths of mediaevalism. Browning's _Sordello_ is obscure

because he knows too much about mediaeval Italian history; Donne's

_Anniversary_ because he is too deeply read in mediaeval scholasticism

and speculation. Both make themselves more difficult to the reader who

is familiar with the poetry of their contemporaries by the disconcerting

freshness of their point of view. Seventeenth century love poetry was

idyllic and idealist; Donne's is passionate and realistic to the point

of cynicism. To read him after reading Browne or Jonson is to have the

same shock as reading Browning after Tennyson. Both poets are salutary

in the strong and biting antidote they bring to sentimentalism in

thought and melodious facility in writing. They are the corrective of

lazy thinking and lazy composition.

Elizabethan love poetry was written on a convention which though it was

used with manliness and entire sincerity by Sidney did not escape the

fate of its kind. Dante's love for Beatrice, Petrarch's for Laura, the

gallant and passionate adoration of Sidney for his Stella became the

models for a dismal succession of imaginary woes. They were all figments

of the mind, perhaps hardly that; they all use the same terms and write

in fixed strains, epicurean and sensuous like Ronsard, ideal and

intellectualized like Dante, sentimental and adoring like Petrarch. Into

this enclosed garden of sentiment and illusion Donne burst passionately

and rudely, pulling up the gay-coloured tangled weeds that choked

thoughts, planting, as one of his followers said, the seeds of fresh

invention. Where his forerunners had been idealist, epicurean, or

adoring, he was brutal, cynical and immitigably realist. He could begin

a poem, "For God's sake hold your tongue and let me live"; he could be

as resolutely free from illusion as Shakespeare when he addressed his

Dark Lady--

"Hope not for mind in women; at their best,

Sweetness and wit they're but mummy possest."

And where the sonneteers pretended to a sincerity which was none of

theirs, he was, like Browning, unaffectedly a dramatic lyrist. "I did

best," he said, "when I had least truth for my subject."

His love poetry was written in his turbulent and brilliant youth, and

the poetic talent which made it turned in his later years to express

itself in hymns and religious poetry. But there is no essential

distinction between the two halves of his work. It is all of a piece.

The same swift and subtle spirit which analyses experiences of passion,

analyses, in his later poetry, those of religion. His devotional poems,

though they probe and question, are none the less never sermons, but

rather confessions or prayers. His intense individuality, eager always,

as his best critic has said, "to find a North-West passage of his

own,"[2] pressed its curious and sceptical questioning into every corner

of love and life and religion, explored unsuspected depths, exploited

new discovered paradoxes, and turned its discoveries always into poetry

of the closely-packed artificial style which was all its own. Simplicity

indeed would have been for him an affectation; his elaborateness is not

like that of his followers, constructed painfully in a vicious desire to

compass the unexpected, but the natural overflow of an amazingly fertile

and ingenious mind. The curiosity, the desire for truth, the search

after minute and detailed knowledge of his age is all in his verse. He

bears the spirit of his time not less markedly than Bacon does, or

Newton, or Descartes.

[Footnote 2: Prof. Grierson in _Cambridge History of English

Literature_.]

The work of the followers of Donne and Jonson leads straight to the new

school, Jonson's by giving that school a model on which to work, Donne's

by producing an era of extravagance and absurdity which made a literary

revolution imperative. The school of Donne--the "fantastics" as they

have been called (Dr. Johnson called them the metaphysical poets),

produced in Herbert and Vaughan, our two noblest writers of religious

verse, the flower of a mode of writing which ended in the somewhat

exotic religiousness of Crashaw. In the hands of Cowley the use of

far-sought and intricate imagery became a trick, and the fantastic

school, the soul of sincerity gone out of it, died when he died. To the

followers of Jonson we owe that delightful and simple lyric poetry which

fills our anthologies, their courtly lyricism receiving a new impulse in

the intenser loyalty of troubled times. The most finished of them is

perhaps Carew; the best, because of the freshness and varity of his

subject-matter and his easy grace, Herrick. At the end of them came

Waller and gave to the five-accented rhymed verse (the heroic couplet)

that trick of regularity and balance which gave us the classical school.

(3)

The prose literature of the seventeenth century is extraordinarily rich

and varied, and a study of it would cover a wide field of human

knowledge. The new and unsuspected harmonies discovered by the

Elizabethans were applied indeed to all the tasks of which prose is

capable, from telling stories to setting down the results of speculation

which was revolutionizing science and philosophy. For the first time

the vernacular and not Latin became the language of scientific research,

and though Bacon in his _Novum Organum_ adhered to the older mode its

disappearance was rapid. English was proving itself too flexible an

instrument for conveying ideas to be longer neglected. It was applied

too to preaching of a more formal and grandiose kind than the plain and

homely Latimer ever dreamed of. The preachers, though their

golden-mouthed oratory, which blended in its combination of vigour and

cadence the euphuistic and colloquial styles of the Elizabethans, is in

itself a glory of English literature, belong by their matter too

exclusively to the province of Church history to be dealt with here. The

men of science and philosophy, Newton, Hobbes, and Locke, are in a like

way outside our province. For the purpose of the literary student the

achievement of the seventeenth century can be judged in four separate

men or books--in the Bible, in Francis Bacon, and in Burton and Browne.

In a way the Bible, like the preachers, lies outside the domain of

literary study in the narrow sense; but its sheer literary magnitude,

the abiding significance of it in our subsequent history, social,

political, and artistic as well as religious, compel us to turn aside to

examine the causes that have produced such great results. The Authorized

Version is not, of course, a purely seventeenth century work. Though the

scholars[3] who wrote and compiled it had before them all the previous

vernacular texts and chose the best readings where they found them or

devised new ones in accordance with the original, the basis is

undoubtedly the Tudor version of Tindall. It has, none the less, the

qualities of the time of its publication. It could hardly have been done

earlier; had it been so, it would not have been done half so well. In it

English has lost both its roughness and its affectation and retained its

strength; the Bible is the supreme example of early English prose style.

The reason is not far to seek. Of all recipes for good or noble writing

that which enjoins the writer to be careful about the matter and never

mind the manner, is the most sure. The translators had the handling of

matter of the gravest dignity and momentousness, and their sense of

reverence kept them right in their treatment of it. They cared

passionately for the truth; they were virtually anonymous and not

ambitious of originality or literary fame; they had no desire to stand

between the book and its readers. It followed that they cultivated that

naked plainness and spareness which makes their work supreme. The

Authorized Version is the last and greatest of those English

translations which were the fruit of Renaissance scholarship and

pioneering. It is the first and greatest piece of English prose.

[Footnote 3: There is a graphic little pen-picture of their method in

Selden's "Table Talk."]

Its influence is one of those things on which it is profitless to

comment or enlarge simply because they are an understood part of every

man's experience. In its own time it helped to weld England, for where

before one Bible was read at home and another in churches, all now read

the new version. Its supremacy was instantaneous and unchallenged, and

it quickly coloured speech and literature; it could produce a Bunyan in

the century of its birth. To it belongs the native dignity and eloquence

of peasant speech. It runs like a golden thread through all our writing

subsequent to its coming; men so diverse as Huxley and Carlyle have paid

their tribute to its power; Ruskin counted it the one essential part of

its education. It will be a bad day for the mere quality of our language

when it ceases to be read.

At the time the translators were sitting, Francis Bacon was at the

height of his fame. By profession a lawyer--time-serving and

over-compliant to wealth and influence--he gives singularly little

evidence of it in the style of his books. Lawyers, from the necessity

they are under of exerting persuasion, of planting an unfamiliar

argument in the minds of hearers of whose favour they are doubtful, but

whose sympathy they must gain, are usually of purpose diffuse. They

cultivate the gift, possessed by Edmund Burke above all other English

authors, of putting the same thing freshly and in different forms a

great many times in succession. They value copiousness and fertility of

illustration. Nothing could be more unlike this normal legal manner than

the style of Bacon. "No man," says Ben Jonson, speaking in one of those

vivid little notes of his, of his oratorical method, "no man ever

coughed or turned aside from him without loss." He is a master of the

aphoristic style. He compresses his wisdom into the quintessential form

of an epigram; so complete and concentrated is his form of statement, so

shortly is everything put, that the mere transition from one thought to

another gives his prose a curious air of disjointedness as if he flitted

arbitrarily from one thing to another, and jotted down anything that

came into his head. His writing has clarity and lucidity, it abounds in

terseness of expression and in exact and discriminating phraseology, and

in the minor arts of composition--in the use of quotations for

instance--it can be extraordinarily felicitous. But it lacks

spaciousness and ease and rhythm; it makes too inexorable a demand on

the attention, and the harassed reader soon finds himself longing for

those breathing spaces which consideration or perhaps looseness of

thought has implanted in the prose of other writers.

His _Essays_, the work by which he is best known, were in their origin

merely jottings gradually cohered and enlarged into the series we know.

In them he had the advantage of a subject which he had studied closely

through life. He counted himself a master in the art of managing men,

and "Human Nature and how to manage it" would be a good title for his

book. Men are studied in the spirit of Machiavelli, whose philosophy of

government appealed so powerfully to the Elizabethan mind. Taken

together the essays which deal with public matters are in effect a kind

of manual for statesmen and princes, instructing them how to acquire

power and how to keep it, deliberating how far they may go safely in

the direction of self-interest, and to what degree the principle of

self-interest must be subordinated to the wider interests of the people

who are ruled. Democracy, which in England was to make its splendid

beginnings in the seventeenth century, finds little to foretell it in

the works of Bacon. Though he never advocates cruelty or oppression and

is wise enough to see that no statesman can entirely set aside moral

considerations, his ethical tone is hardly elevating; the moral

obliquity of his public life is to a certain extent explained, in all

but its grosser elements, in his published writings. The essays, of

course, contain much more than this; the spirit of curious and restless

enquiry which animated Bacon finds expression in those on "Health," or

"Gardens" and "Plantations" and others of the kind; and a deeper vein of

earnestness runs through some of them--those for instance on

"Friendship," or "Truth" and on "Death."

The _Essays_ sum up in a condensed form the intellectual interests which

find larger treatment in his other works. His _Henry VII._, the first

piece of scientific history in the English language (indeed in the

modern world) is concerned with a king whose practice was the outcome of

a political theory identical with Bacon's own. The _Advancement of

Learning_ is a brilliant popular exposition of the cause of scientific

enquiry and of the inductive or investigatory method of research. The

_New Atlantis_ is the picture of an ideal community whose common purpose

is scientific investigation. Bacon's name is not upon the roll of those

who have enlarged by brilliant conjectures or discoveries the store of

human knowledge; his own investigations so far as they are recorded are

all of a trivial nature. The truth about him is that he was a

brilliantly clever populariser of the cause of science, a kind of

seventeenth century Huxley, concerned rather to lay down large general

principles for the guidance of the work of others, than to be a serious

worker himself. The superstition of later times, acting on and

refracting his amazing intellectual gifts, has raised him to a godlike

eminence which is by right none of his; it has even credited him with

the authorship of Shakespeare, and in its wilder moments with the

composition of all that is of supreme worth in Elizabethan literature.

It is not necessary to take these delusions seriously. The ignorance of

mediaevalism was in the habit of crediting Vergil with the construction

of the Roman aqueducts and temples whose ruins are scattered over

Europe. The modern Baconians reach much the same intellectual level.

A similar enthusiasm for knowledge and at any rate a pretence to science

belong to the author of the _Anatomy of Melancholy_, Robert Burton. His

one book is surely the most amazing in English prose. Its professed

object was simple and comprehensive; it was to analyze human melancholy,

to describe its effects, and prescribe for its removal. But as his task

grew, melancholy came to mean to Burton all the ills that flesh is heir

to. He tracked it in obscure and unsuspected forms; drew illustrations

from a range of authors so much wider than the compass of the reading

of even the most learned since, that he is generally credited with the

invention of a large part of his quotations. Ancients and moderns, poets

and prose writers, schoolmen and dramatists are all drawn upon for the

copious store of his examples; they are always cited with an air of

quietly humorous shrewdness in the comments and enclosed in a prose that

is straightforward, simple and vigorous, and can on occasion command

both rhythm and beauty of phrase. It is a mistake to regard Burton from

the point of view (due largely to Charles Lamb) of tolerant or loving

delight in quaintness for quaintness' sake. His book is anything but

scientific in form, but it is far from being the work of a recluse or a

fool. Behind his lack of system, he takes a broad and psychologically an

essentially just view of human ills, and modern medicine has gone far in

its admiration of what is at bottom a most comprehensive and subtle

treatise in diagnosis.

A writer of a very different quality is Sir Thomas Browne. Of all the

men of his time, he is the only one of whom one can say for certain that

he held the manner of saying a thing more important than the thing said.

He is our first deliberate and conscious stylist, the forerunner of

Charles Lamb, of Stevenson (whose _Virginibus Puerisque_ is modelled on

his method of treatment) and of the stylistic school of our own day. His

eloquence is too studied to rise to the greatest heights, and his

speculation, though curious and discursive, never really results in deep

thinking. He is content to embroider his pattern out of the stray

fancies of an imaginative nature. His best known work, the _Religio

Medici_, is a random confession of belief and thoughts, full of the

inconsequent speculations of a man with some knowledge of science but

not deeply or earnestly interested about it, content rather to follow

the wayward imaginations of a mind naturally gifted with a certain

poetic quality, than to engage in serious intellectual exercise. Such

work could never maintain its hold on taste if it were not carefully

finished and constructed with elaborate care. Browne, if he was not a

great writer, was a literary artist of a high quality. He exploits a

quaint and lovable egoism with extraordinary skill; and though his

delicately figured and latinized sentences commonly sound platitudinous

and trivial when they are translated into rough Saxon prose, as they

stand they are rich and melodious enough.

(4)

In a century of surpassing richness in prose and poetry, one author

stands by himself. John Milton refuses to be classed with any of the

schools. Though Dryden tells us Milton confessed to him that Spenser was

his "original," he has no connection--other than a general similarity of

purpose, moral and religious--with Spenser's followers. To the

fantastics he paid in his youth the doubtful compliment of one or two

half-contemptuous imitations and never touched them again. He had no

turn for the love lyrics or the courtliness of the school of Jonson. In

everything he did he was himself and his own master; he devised his own

subjects and wrote his own style. He stands alone and must be judged

alone.

No author, however, can ever escape from the influences of his time,

and, just as much as his lesser contemporaries, Milton has his place in

literary history and derives from the great original impulse which set

in motion all the enterprises of the century. He is the last and

greatest figure in the English Renaissance. The new passion for art and

letters which in its earnest fumbling beginnings gave us the prose of

Cheke and Ascham and the poetry of Surrey and Sackville, comes to a full

and splendid and perfect end in his work. In it the Renaissance and the

Reformation, imperfectly fused by Sidney and Spenser, blend in their

just proportions. The transplantation into English of classical forms

which had been the aim of Sidney and the endeavour of Jonson he finally

accomplished; in his work the dream of all the poets of the

Renaissance--the heroic poem--finds its fulfilment. There was no poet of

the time but wanted to do for his country what Vergil had planned to do

for Rome, to sing its origins, and to celebrate its morality and its

citizenship in the epic form. Spenser had tried it in _The Fairy Queen_

and failed splendidly. Where he failed, Milton succeeded, though his

poem is not on the origins of England but on the ultimate subject of the

origins of mankind. We know from his notebooks that he turned over in

his mind a national subject and that the Arthurian legend for a while

appealed to him. But to Milton's earnest temper nothing that was not

true was a fit subject for poetry. It was inevitable he should lay it

aside. The Arthurian story he knew to be a myth and a myth was a lie;

the story of the Fall, on the other hand, he accepted in common with his

time for literal fact. It is to be noted as characteristic of his

confident and assured egotism that he accepted no less sincerely and

literally the imaginative structure which he himself reared on it.

However that may be, the solid fact about him is that in this

"adventurous song" with its pursuit of

"Things unattempted yet in prose or rhyme,"

he succeeded in his attempt, that alone among the moderns he contrived

to write an epic which stands on the same eminence as the ancient

writings of the kind, and that he found time in a life, which hardly

extended to old age as we know it, to write, besides noble lyrics and a

series of fiercely argumentative prose treatises, two other masterpieces

in the grand style, a tragedy modelled on the Greeks and a second epic

on the "compact" style of the book of Job. No English poet can compare

with him in majesty or completeness.

An adequate study of his achievement is impossible within the limits of

the few pages that are all a book like this can spare to a single

author. Readers who desire it will find it in the work of his two best

critics, Mark Pattison and Sir Walter Raleigh.[4] All that can be done

here is to call attention to some of his most striking qualities.

Foremost, of course, is the temper of the man. From the beginning he

was sure of himself and sure of his mission; he had his purpose plain

and clear. There is no mental development, hardly, visible in his work,

only training, undertaken anxiously and prayerfully and with a clearly

conceived end. He designed to write a masterpiece and he would not start

till he was ready. The first twenty years of his life were spent in

assiduous reading; for twenty more he was immersed in the dust and toil

of political conflict, using his pen and his extraordinary equipment of

learning and eloquence to defend the cause of liberty, civil and

religious, and to attack its enemies; not till he was past middle age

had he reached the leisure and the preparedness necessary to accomplish

his self-imposed work. But all the time, as we know, he had it in his

mind. In _Lycidas_, written in his Cambridge days, he apologizes to his

readers for plucking the fruit of his poetry before it is ripe. In

passage after passage in his prose works he begs for his reader's

patience for a little while longer till his preparation be complete.

When the time came at last for beginning he was in no doubt; in his very

opening lines he intends, he says, to soar no "middle flight." This

self-assured unrelenting certainty of his, carried into his prose essays

in argument, produces sometimes strange results. One is peculiarly

interesting to us now in view of current controversy. He was unhappily

married, and because he was unhappy the law of divorce must be changed.

A modern--George Eliot for instance--would have pleaded the artistic

temperament and been content to remain outside the law. Milton always

argued from himself to mankind at large.

[Footnote 4: "Milton," E.M.L., and "Milton" (Edward Arnold).]

In everything he did, he put forth all his strength. Each of his poems,

long or short, is by itself a perfect whole, wrought complete. The

reader always must feel that the planning of each is the work of

conscious, deliberate, and selecting art. Milton never digresses; he

never violates harmony of sound or sense; his poems have all their

regular movement from quiet beginning through a rising and breaking wave

of passion and splendour to quiet close. His art is nowhere better seen

than in his endings.

Is it _Lycidas_? After the thunder of approaching vengeance on the

hireling shepherds of the Church, comes sunset and quiet:

"And now the sun had stretch'd out all the hills,

And now was dropt into the western bay;

At last he rose, and twitched his mantle blue:

To-morrow to fresh woods and pastures new."

Is it _Paradise Lost_? After the agonies of expulsion and the flaming

sword--

"Some natural tears they drop'd, but wip'd them soon;

The world was all before them where to choose

Their place of rest, and Providence their guide;

They hand in hand with wandering steps and slow,

Through Eden took their solitary way."

Is it finally _Samson Agonistes_?

"His servants he with new acquist,

Of true experience from this great event,

With peace and consolation hath dismist,

And calm of mind all passion spent."

"Calm of mind, all passion spent," it is the essence of Milton's art.

He worked in large ideas and painted splendid canvases; it was

necessary for him to invent a style which should be capable of sustained

and lofty dignity, which should be ornate enough to maintain the

interest of the reader and charm him and at the same time not so ornate

as to give an air of meretricious decoration to what was largely and

simply conceived. Particularly it was necessary for him to avoid those

incursions of vulgar associations which words carelessly used will bring

in their train. He succeeded brilliantly in this difficult task. The

unit of the Miltonic style is not the phrase but the word, each word

fastidiously chosen, commonly with some air of an original and lost

meaning about it, and all set in a verse in which he contrived by an

artful variation of pause and stress to give the variety which other

writers had from rhyme. In this as in his structure he accomplished what

the Renaissance had only dreamed. Though he had imitators (the poetic

diction of the age following is modelled on him) he had no followers. No

one has been big enough to find his secret since.

English Literature: Modern · 第 4 / 10 章