suggested to Bulwer’s mind by a picture of the same title. This picture,
he says in his journal, was one of a collection in the Brera Gallery
at Milan, and was “full of genius, imagination and nature. The faces
are fine, the conception grand.” And as the author says in his Preface
to the 1834 Edition, having chosen for his subject the “catastrophe,
the Destruction of Pompeii, it required but little insight into the
higher principles of art to perceive that to Pompeii the story should
rigidly be confined. Placed in contrast with the mighty pomp of Rome,
the luxuries and gaud of the vivid Campanian city would have sunk into
insignificance. Her awful fate would have seemed but a petty and isolated
wreck in the vast seas of the imperial sway.” Bulwer therefore decided
to avoid the temptation “to conduct the characters of his tale ... from
Pompeii to Rome,” leaving “to others the honor of delineating the hollow
but majestic civilization of Rome.” The last part of this quotation is
especially important to us. Bulwer in his preparatory studies spent
much time in Rome, as well as in the vicinity of Pompeii. While the
story of The Last Days of Pompeii does not actually go to Rome, all of
its important elements, save the description of the eruption, could be
transferred to a story of the Imperial City. Thus Bulwer’s novel not
only shows that the novel of Roman life had become firmly established as
a definite type, but it also points forward and shows the way for all
important novels of Roman life since its time. The mingling of Romans
and Italians, with Greeks and other foreigners in Pompeii, suggests the
hybrid population of Rome; the worship of Isis, and her priest, the
Egyptian Arbaces, suggest not only the varied forms of pagan religion at
Rome, but also the important connections of Rome with Alexandria and
the Nile civilization; the early struggles of Christianity (represented
by Olinthus, and his converts) with these pagan superstitions recall
the even greater trials of the Christians at Rome; the witch of the
crater, with her spells and incantations, reminds one of the Sibyl of
Cumæ and the soothsayers who appear at Rome in later novels of Roman
life. The minor incidents of Bulwer’s novel and his descriptions of the
manners of society also are used in novels whose scene is Rome; the
banquets and revels, the life of loungers at the bath and spectators
at the amphitheatre, the habits and haunts of the gladiators, the busy
hum of the forum, are all things which Bulwer showed later novelists
how to portray. He realized that he must not make his characters talk
in the periods of Cicero, and takes without question the opinion of
Scott (voiced in the preface to _Ivanhoe_), that the historical novelist
should “explain ancient manners in modern language.” Bulwer’s method was
somewhat different from that of Scott; but his purpose was essentially
the same. His ideal is fairly stated at the end of the Preface to the
1834 edition, viz., to present a portrait faithful “to the features and
costume of the age which I have attempted to paint. May it be (what is
far more important) a just representation of the human passions and
the human heart, whose elements in all ages are the same.” How well
he achieved his purpose and realized his ideal is amply shown in The
_Last Days of Pompeii_. Writers of the novel of Roman life who have
followed Bulwer have surpassed him in few respects. Their purpose must be
essentially the same as his; their ideal could not be higher.
Before the close of the year 1834, _Valerius_ and _The Last Days of
Pompeii_ are the only two important novels whose scene is laid almost
entirely in or near ancient Rome.[19] This fact is attested by
historians of the novel; but if one is not satisfied without hearing an
opinion of an author’s work expressed by one of his contemporaries, we
have the tribute of Sir Archibald Alison (_History of Europe_, 1815-52,
ch. V). He says in speaking of _Valerius_, “The most successful attempt
which has yet been made to engraft the interest of modern life on ancient
story: its extreme difficulty may be judged by the brilliant genius of
Bulwer having alone rivalled him in the undertaking.” If there is any
other book written before 1834, which deserves in every respect the title
of “novel of Roman life,” I have been unable to trace it, nor do I know
of any one else who claims to have done so. In considering the genesis of
the novel of Roman life, one may be confident that _Valerius_ first marks
out its general outlines, and _The Last Days of Pompeii_ establishes for
it a complete and artistic form.
III
PRINCIPAL LINES OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE NOVEL OF ROMAN LIFE FROM 1834 TO
THE PRESENT DAY
In considering the principal lines of development which the novel of
Roman life has followed in its development from the time of Bulwer’s
novel to the present day, one fact seems fairly obvious, but cannot be
overemphasized. No important novel of Roman life has been written by an
author who lacks classical scholarship of a very high order. Needless
to say, such scholarship implies the possession of a highly cultivated
intellect, and stands far above mere book-learning or pedanticism. In a
general survey of the field it very soon appears that scholarship of this
kind was possessed by the great scholar and preacher, Charles Kingsley,
and is finely exemplified in his _Hypatia_, in spite of what pedantic
critics have said concerning his “history.” After Kingsley, other great
scholars, who were also preachers, made the novel of Roman life a vehicle
for the presentation of universal truths. Besides such preachers, Ebers,
Eckstein, and other followers of Scott in Germany,—whose classic novels
constitute the most important influence from abroad on the English novel
of Roman life before the time of _Quo Vadis_ (1896),—showed the value of
absolute thoroughness in matters of scholarship. While they sometimes
were led in their careful research to place undue emphasis on minute
particulars, they often succeeded in giving to their work an atmosphere
of universal truth. Novelists, whose principal purpose seems to have
been to tell a “rattling good story” or to present a series of gorgeous
pictures of Roman life, soon came to realize the necessity of scholarly
accuracy, if they would attain to realistic effect. This was true of
Whyte-Melville, the author of _The Gladiators_ (1863), and of General Lew
Wallace, who wrote _Ben Hur_ (1880), though it must be admitted that the
latter was somewhat more of a scholar, and had a more serious purpose.
The success of men who have made a business of scholarship speaks for
itself in the more recent and really fine work of Mr. William Stearns
Davis in _A Friend of Caesar_ (1900), and of Mr. Edward Lucas White in
_Andivius Hedulio_ (1921). But the finest fruits of the true scholarly
mind have ever pointed toward the intellectual, the æsthetic, the
beautiful in thought and expression. The beauty of thought and expression
of Walter Pater’s _Marius, the Epicurean_ (1885), has perhaps never been
surpassed in English prose fiction. Some approach to the quality of
Pater’s work, however, is seen in that of George Gissing, in _Veranilda_
(1904), and an even greater similarity to it appears in parts of _Pan and
the Twins_ (1922), by Mr. Eden Philpotts. Novelists such as these seek
not merely to portray life as it appears to the average observer, but to
make possible a fine appreciation of many things, which exist only for
those who are seeking truth and beauty beneath the surface.
A. NOVELS OF ROMAN LIFE WHICH SHOW EVIDENCE OF THE SCHOLARSHIP OF GREAT
PREACHERS
Let us consider first that phase of the development of the novel of
Roman life, which is seen in novels showing unmistakable evidence of
the scholarship of great preachers. A significant proportion of the
limited list of the best novels of Roman life previously given consists
of novels written by preachers. Now in defining the novel of Roman life,
those books were excluded, which make use of Roman life merely as an
artificial background for religious instruction. But it would certainly
be a needless restriction to deny to the novel of Roman life, or indeed
to any form of the historical novel, the liberty to present, directly
or indirectly, any valuable sort of teaching. It is impossible truly to
portray the life of ancient Rome, without teaching many things of lasting
value. Moreover, there is a grave error in supposing that those important
novels of Roman life which are written by preachers have as their sole
purpose the preaching of Christianity; nor do they endeavor to portray
the life of the Christians alone, and to deny a fair representation to
the Pagan life which all but overwhelmed Christianity. A fairer statement
of the case would be to say that preachers of scholarly attainments have
been eminently fitted to write of Roman life through their study of
that period of the world’s history, which is marked by the formation of
the Roman Empire and the beginning of Christianity. Consequently they
have produced novels in which the life of the early Christians appears
naturally as an essential part of the life of ancient Rome. To include
the life of the Christians in the novel of Roman life is not absolutely
necessary, though all of our preacher-authors have done so; but it is
more natural to do so in a novel, the story of which is laid after the
time of Christ, and nearly all authors of such novels have appeared to
recognize this. Finally the scholarly preacher has proven to be the
best qualified of all men not only to present something of the dramatic
struggle between Christianity and the pagan world; but also to portray
the life of Rome in such a way as to bring home to his readers universal
truths far above the level of mere didacticism. Unless such truths are
sensed and illustrated by an author, no portrayal of the past can attain
to an entire completeness of realistic effect.
The first significant novel of Roman life by such an author, was the work
of the Rev. William Ware, a Unitarian preacher of Boston, and thorough
classical scholar. In 1837, three years after _The Last Days of Pompeii_
appeared, he published _Zenobia, or The Fall of Palmyra_. Ware was no
doubt led to write a novel of Roman times by the work of Bulwer and
other novelists of the British Isles, who had done so; though in his
work there is none of the Byronism which had appeared in the work of
Croly, the only other preacher whose novel has been discussed so far in
this study. Just what influenced Ware in his choice of title and subject
is not quite so clear. As far back as 1814 there had been published in
London a work by a certain Miss O’Keefe, entitled _Zenobia, Queen of
Palmyra, a Narrative founded on History_. This combines slow-moving
dialogue with narration of the style of a school history book, and can
hardly be classed as a genuine novel. While it is fairly accurate in its
history, it does not appear to be of sufficient merit to have influenced
Ware in his far superior work, even if he knew of it. A much more likely
supposition is that Ware was first attracted in the course of his reading
by the life-story of the famous queen who dared to lead her army against
the hosts of the Roman empire; he then found further encouragement to
write the novel from the popularity of historical fiction and from his
familiarity with the sources from which the facts of Zenobia’s story are
readily derived. In any case, _Zenobia_, among novels so far considered,
(when published) had been equaled only by Croly’s _Salathiel_ in the
accurate and abundant use of historical facts derived from original
historical sources. Pollio, the biographer of Zenobia, Vopiscus, the
biographer of Aurelian, and other historians, are accurately quoted to
establish important points; and when there is evidence on both sides of a
question, Ware weighs it very carefully. On the other hand, he does not
make the mistake of crowding his pages with notes. These are condensed
within the space of a few pages at the end of each of the two volumes.
_Zenobia_ is written in the letters of L. Manlius Piso, an imaginary
personage who is supposed to have been in Palmyra at the time of its
fall, and who writes to a friend at Rome. Since the first letter
describes to his friend how he left Rome, the scene may be said to open
at Rome, and it returns to Rome when Zenobia has been made a captive by
Aurelian. Moreover, the character of Piso is distinctly Roman, and the
cruel, stern emperor, Aurelian, appears as a true Roman. The military
operations of the Romans before the walls of Palmyra, and the Emperor’s
triumph at Rome with Zenobia as his captive, are well described. There
is thus much of Roman life in _Zenobia_. Its so-called “epistolary” or
“Richardsonian” style, is heavily descriptive, but the general effect
is one of soundness, and the novel is impressive, not dull. In fact,
_Zenobia_ possesses a brightness of coloring and an atmosphere of reality
which seem superior to anything in Ware’s later books. While the minor
characters do not stand out strongly, they are nevertheless real and
human enough. Any deficiencies shown by the other characters are atoned
for in Ware’s presentation of Zenobia, whom the author successfully
portrays as a real woman and a proud queen. Ware is also true to history
in recording that Zenobia had heard much of Christianity, but did not
finally decide to become a Christian. Though a preacher, he preferred to
state the probable truth, rather than to change the facts for the sake
of preaching. In this he points the way for other preacher-authors who
followed him in writing the novel of Roman life. _Zenobia_ was widely
read on its first publication and attained equal success when it was
posthumously published in 1869.
The success of _Zenobia_ led its author to publish a sequel in the
following year, 1838. This was called _Aurelian, Emperor of Rome_, when
it was republished shortly afterward, and goes by that title, though its
original title was _Probus_. The scene of this novel is laid entirely
in Rome, and the supposed narrator speaks as though he had survived
Aurelian, had seen something of the persecution of Diocletian, and
finally enjoyed safety under Constantine. Like _Zenobia_, _Aurelian_ is
written in the form of letters; these letters are supposed to have been
collected by a freedman of one of the characters. While it contains the
story of a conversion to Christianity, _Aurelian_ is not to be classed
as propaganda of any sort. Whatever preaching there is in it consists
merely of a realistic portrayal of the sufferings of the Christians under
persecution. The scenes in which Christians are submitted to various
forms of torture are by no means overdrawn, and the martyrdom of some
of them in the arena is described in a convincing manner. Over-emphasis
on the place of Christianity in Roman life is to some extent avoided
by making the Emperor a more important figure than any one of the
Christians. _Aurelian_ is a book of one important character, the Emperor
being the dominant figure. Ware’s second novel may truly be called a
novel of Roman life, since it portrays faithfully some aspects of life at
Rome in the time of Aurelian. But even in these terrible times there were
other things in the life of Rome than the persecution of the Christians;
and a more complete effect would have been obtained by including some
of these in the picture. The fault is not overemphasis of one element
so much as the omission of others. The author was careful in his study
of life at Rome, but limited that study too much to a single phase of
Roman life. One of his contemporaries, Miss Mitford, in her _Literary
Recollections_, said of _Aurelian_, that it showed “not a trace of modern
habits or modes of thinking;” but this is a purely negative compliment.
The novel does portray something of ancient Roman habits and modes of
thinking; its psychology is good in the case of the Christians and
their persecutors. While not making quite the same use of the larger
facts of history as appears in _Zenobia_, Ware showed his scholarship
in _Aurelian_ especially well in his minutely detailed description of
the Roman system of espionage, and of the traits of character which were
exhibited in the Roman masters of the world. Though its tone is too
sinister for present-day taste, _Aurelian_ made a great impression in
its day, and takes an important place in the development of the novel of
Roman life.
Ware’s third novel, published in 1841, was called _Julian; Scenes in
Judea_. This is also written in the form of letters; and the story is
told in the words of a wealthy young Jew, who leaves Rome, where he has
been staying, and returns to his native land. _Julian_ can hardly be
called a novel of Roman life, since, as the alternative title implies,
most of the action takes place in Judea; and it excels rather in its
portrayal of the Jewish national life, than in its description of the
Romans. A fine conception, however, of the grandeur and extent of the
Roman Empire is afforded by the description of the travels of the young
Jew. Realistic touches are added in pictures of the stately buildings
of Asiatic cities and of wild animals, which are being shipped for the
games in the arena. Furthermore the delineation of the Roman governor
Pilate and of Roman soldiers in Judea is made with masterful strokes. But
the significant thing in _Julian_ in relation to the development of the
novel of Roman life, is that it is the first novel approaching that type,
which has for its central theme the life-story of Jesus Christ. Though it
is beyond the power of any novelist to tell this story with one-half the
power of the inspired narrative of the New Testament, even when feebly
retold, it is of such tremendous meaning, that any portrayal of Roman
life made in connection with it is sure to pale into insignificance.
_Julian_ proved conclusively that a novel which is intended primarily to
portray Roman life, cannot make the life of Christ its central theme. The
Rev. Mr. Ware’s three novels were not only very popular in America and
in England, but were translated into German and other foreign languages.
They were very favorably received by contemporary critics. In reviewing
_Julian_, shortly after it appeared, Dr. R. W. Griswold says, “The
romances of Mr. Ware betray a familiarity with the civilization of the
ancients, and are written in a graceful, pure, and brilliant style.” No
novel in America surpasses the novels of Ware in their importance in the
development of the novel of Roman life before the publication of Gen. Lew
Wallace’s _Ben Hur_ (1880).
The Rev. Ware’s _Julian_ has just been mentioned as an illustration
of the fact that no novel, whether written by a preacher or not, can
successfully portray Roman life, while making the life of Christ its
central theme. _Aurelian_ was also spoken of, to illustrate the more
general truth that in a portrayal of Roman life in a novel, the life of
the Christians should not be given undue prominence. Mrs. Webb’s _Naomi_
(1841),[20] is a story which begins immediately after the time of
Christ, but much of the life of Christ is brought in by the words of the
aged Mary of Bethany and others of His disciples who are still living.
Moreover, the life of the Christians, as contrasted with that of the
Romans, is given undue prominence. _Naomi_ has, in fact, been mentioned
in the first section of this study, and was excluded from consideration
as a novel of Roman life, since it is rather a story of religious
experience. It is now mentioned again to remind one that it is the first
important one of a very great number of religious books that were written
from this time on. In other words, the year 1841 marks, as nearly as
possible, the exact point at which the story of religious instruction
branches off and becomes an entirely different thing from the novel of
Roman life. The Rev. Ware’s _Julian_ and _Aurelian_ are not in any sense
stories of religious instruction, but they suggested to other preachers
and people interested in religious work the possibility of writing such
stories. Thus the story of religious instruction was a by-product of the
early novel of Roman life; but it continued to exist as a distinct form,
and to have an influence in turn on the development of the novel of Roman
life. It is important to bear this influence in mind, even though the
story of religious instruction showed not so much what the novel of Roman
life should do, as what it should avoid.
In 1853[21] appeared Charles Kingsley’s _Hypatia_. This is a great
novel, which in its presentation of universal truths far surpasses the
stereotyped instruction of any religious tract. It is a powerful picture
of the conflict between Christianity and Greek philosophy in the fifth
century. Its author fairly presents the beauty of Greek philosophy,
before showing that the true spirit of Christianity must triumph in the
end. But Kingsley also showed the essential falsity of the teachings of
the Greek schools of philosophy, which his heroine, Hypatia, represented;
and he pointed out in an equally convincing way, that the Christian
Church, while almost entirely shutting out spiritual Christianity,
had become an organization, whose chief end was temporal power. By
considering this last fact outside of its proper relation, Kingsley’s
enemies were enabled to wilfully misunderstand him, although those who
still read _Hypatia_ for its own sake are always able to understand him
perfectly. In fact, the reasons which led Kingsley to write _Hypatia_,
have frequently been misstated. It will be well to consider what the
facts were, especially since they have an important bearing on the
development of the novel of Roman life.[22]