An offence punishable with imprisonment is, in this language, an offence

"which produces incarceration." To be starved to death is "to sink from

inanition into nonentity." Sir Isaac Newton is "the developer of the

skies in their embodied movements;" and Mrs. Thrale, when a party of

clever people sat silent, is said "to have been provoked by the dulness

of a taciturnity that, in the midst of such renowned interlocutors,

produced as narcotic a torpor as could have been caused by a dearth the

most barren of all human faculties." In truth, it is impossible to look

at any page of Madame D'Arblay's later works without finding flowers of

rhetoric like these. Nothing in the language of those jargonists at whom

Mr. Gosport laughed, nothing in the language of Sir Sedley Clarendel,

approaches this new Euphuism.

It is from no unfriendly feeling to Madame D'Arblay's memory that we

have expressed ourselves so strongly on the subject of her style. On the

contrary, we conceive that we have really rendered a service to her

reputation. That her later works were complete failures is a fact too

notorious to be dissembled; and some persons, we believe, have

consequently taken up a notion that she was from the first an overrated

writer, and that she had not the powers which were necessary to maintain

her on the eminence on which good luck and fashion had placed her. We

believe, on the contrary, that her early popularity was no more than the

just reward of distinguished merit, and would never have undergone an

eclipse, if she had only been content to go on writing in her mother

tongue. If she failed when she quitted her own province, and attempted

to occupy one in which she had neither part nor lot, this reproach is

common to her with a crowd of distinguished men. Newton failed when he

turned from the courses of the stars, and the ebb and flow of the ocean,

to apocalyptic seals and vials. Bentley failed when he turned from Homer

and Aristophanes, to edit the Paradise Lost. Inigo failed when he

attempted to rival the Gothic churches of the fourteenth century.

Wilkie failed when he took it into his head that the Blind Fiddler and

the Rent Day were unworthy of his powers, and challenged competition

with Lawrence as a portrait painter. Such failures should be noted for

the instruction of posterity; but they detract little from the permanent

reputation of those who have really done great things.

Yet one word more. It is not only on account of the intrinsic merit of

Madame D'Arblay's early works that she is entitled to honorable mention.

Her appearance is an important epoch in our literary history. Evelina

was the first tale written by a woman, and purporting to be a picture of

life and manners, that lived or deserved to live. The Female Quixote is

no exception. That work has undoubtedly great merit, when considered as

a wild satirical harlequinade; but, if we consider it as a picture of

life and manners, we must pronounce it more absurd than any of the

romances which it was designed to ridicule.

Indeed, most of the popular novels which preceded Evelina were such as

no lady would have written; and many of them were such as no lady could

without confusion own that she had read. The very name of novel was held

in horror among religious people. In decent families, which did not

profess extraordinary sanctity, there was a strong feeling against all

such works. Sir Anthony Absolute, two or three years before Evelina

appeared, spoke the sense of the great body of sober fathers and

husbands when he pronounced the circulating library an evergreen tree of

diabolical knowledge. This feeling, on the part of the grave and

reflecting, increased the evil from which it had sprung. The novelist

having little character to lose, and having few readers among serious

people, took without scruple liberties which in our generation seem

almost incredible.

Miss Burney did for the English novel what Jeremy Collier did for the

English drama; and she did it in a better way. She first showed that a

tale might be written in which both the fashionable and the vulgar life

of London might be exhibited with great force, and with broad comic

humor, and which yet should not contain a single line inconsistent with

rigid morality, or even with virgin delicacy. She took away the reproach

which lay on a most useful and delightful species of composition. She

vindicated the right of her sex to an equal share in a fair and noble

province of letters. Several accomplished women have followed in her

track. At present, the novels which we owe to English ladies form no

small part of the literary glory of our country. No class of works is

more honorably distinguished by fine observation, by grace, by delicate

wit, by pure moral feeling. Several among the successors of Madame

D'Arblay have equalled her; two, we think, have surpassed her. But the

fact that she has been surpassed gives her an additional claim to our

respect and gratitude; for, in truth, we owe to her not only Evelina,

Cecilia, and Camilla, but also Mansfield Park and The Absentee.

FOOTNOTES:

[7] Diary and Letters of Madame D'Arblay. Five vols. 8vo. London: 1842.

[8] There is some difficulty here as to the chronology. "This

sacrifice," says the editor of the Diary, "was made in the young

authoress's fifteenth year." This could not be; for the sacrifice was

the effect, according to the editor's own showing, of the remonstrances

of the second Mrs. Burney; and Frances was in her sixteenth year when

her father's second marriage took place.

THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF ADDISON[9]

_The Edinburgh Review_, July, 1843

Some reviewers are of opinion that a lady who dares to publish a book

renounces by that act the franchises appertaining to her sex, and can

claim no exemption from the utmost rigor of critical procedure. From

that opinion we dissent. We admit, indeed, that in a country which

boasts of many female writers, eminently qualified by their talents and

acquirements to influence the public mind, it would be of most

pernicious consequence that inaccurate history or unsound philosophy

should be suffered to pass uncensured, merely because the offender

chanced to be a lady. But we conceive that, on such occasions, a critic

would do well to imitate the courteous Knight who found himself

compelled by duty to keep the lists against Bradamante. He, we are told,

defended successfully the cause of which he was the champion; but,

before the fight began, exchanged Balisarda for a less deadly sword, of

which he carefully blunted the point and edge.[10]

Nor are the immunities of sex the only immunities which Miss Aikin may

rightfully plead. Several of her works, and especially the very pleasing

Memoirs of the Reign of James the First, have fully entitled her to the

privileges enjoyed by good writers. One of those privileges we hold to

be this, that such writers, when, either from the unlucky choice of a

subject, or from the indolence too often produced by success, they

happen to fail, shall not be subjected to the severe discipline which it

is sometimes necessary to inflict upon dunces and impostors, but shall

merely be reminded by a gentle touch, like that with which the Laputan

flapper roused his dreaming lord, that it is high time to wake.

Our readers will probably infer from what we have said that Miss Aikin's

book has disappointed us. The truth is, that she is not well acquainted

with her subject. No person who is not familiar with the political and

literary history of England during the reigns of William the Third, of

Anne, and of George the First, can possibly write a good life of

Addison. Now, we mean no reproach to Miss Aikin, and many will think

that we pay her a compliment, when we say that her studies have taken a

different direction. She is better acquainted with Shakespeare and

Raleigh, than with Congreve and Prior; and is far more at home among the

ruffs and peaked beards of Theobald's, than among the Steenkirks and

flowing periwigs which surrounded Queen Anne's tea table at Hampton. She

seems to have written about the Elizabethan age, because she had read

much about it; she seems, on the other hand, to have read a little about

the age of Addison, because she had determined to write about it. The

consequence is that she has had to describe men and things without

having either a correct or a vivid idea of them, and that she has often

fallen into errors of a very serious kind. The reputation which Miss

Aikin has justly earned stands so high, and the charm of Addison's

letters is so great, that a second edition of this work may probably be

required. If so, we hope that every paragraph will be revised, and that

every date and fact about which there can be the smallest doubt will be

carefully verified.

To Addison himself we are bound by a sentiment as much like affection as

any sentiment can be, which is inspired by one who has been sleeping a

hundred and twenty years in Westminster Abbey. We trust, however, that

this feeling will not betray us into that abject idolatry which we have

often had occasion to reprehend in others, and which seldom fails to

make both the idolater and the idol ridiculous. A man of genius and

virtue is but a man. All his powers cannot be equally developed; nor can

we expect from him perfect self-knowledge. We need not, therefore,

hesitate to admit that Addison has left us some compositions which do

not rise above mediocrity, some heroic poems hardly equal to Parnell's,

some criticism as superficial as Dr. Blair's, and a tragedy not very

much better than Dr. Johnson's. It is praise enough to say of a writer

that, in a high department of literature, in which many eminent writers

have distinguished themselves, he has had no equal; and this may with

strict justice be said of Addison.

As a man, he may not have deserved the adoration which he received from

those who, bewitched by his fascinating society, and indebted for all

the comforts of life to his generous and delicate friendship, worshipped

him nightly, in his favorite temple at Button's. But, after full inquiry

and impartial reflection, we have long been convinced that he deserved

as much love and esteem as can be justly claimed by any of our infirm

and erring race. Some blemishes may undoubtedly be detected in his

character; but the more carefully it is examined, the more will it

appear, to use the phrase of the old anatomists, sound in the noble

parts, free from all taint of perfidy, of cowardice, of cruelty, of

ingratitude, of envy. Men may easily be named, in whom some particular

good disposition has been more conspicuous than in Addison. But the just

harmony of qualities, the exact temper between the stern and the humane

virtues, the habitual observance of every law, not only of moral

rectitude, but of moral grace and dignity, distinguish him from all men

who have been tried by equally strong temptations, and about whose

conduct we possess equally full information.

His father was the Reverend Lancelot Addison, who, though eclipsed by

his more celebrated son, made some figure in the world, and occupies

with credit two folio pages in the Biographia Britannica. Lancelot was

sent up, as a poor scholar, from Westmoreland to Queen's College,

Oxford, in the time of the Commonwealth, made some progress in learning,

became, like most of his fellow students, a violent Royalist, lampooned

the heads of the University, and was forced to ask pardon on his bended

knees. When he had left college, he earned a humble subsistence by

reading the liturgy of the fallen Church to the families of those sturdy

squires whose manor houses were scattered over the Wild of Sussex. After

the Restoration, his loyalty was rewarded with the post of chaplain to

the garrison of Dunkirk. When Dunkirk was sold to France, he lost his

employment. But Tangier had been ceded by Portugal to England as part of

the marriage portion of the Infanta Catharine; and to Tangier Lancelot

Addison was sent. A more miserable situation can hardly be conceived. It

was difficult to say whether the unfortunate settlers were more

tormented by the heats or by the rains, by the soldiers within the wall

or by the Moors without it. One advantage the chaplain had. He enjoyed

an excellent opportunity of studying the history and manners of Jews and

Mahometans; and of this opportunity he appears to have made excellent

use. On his return to England, after some years of banishment, he

published an interesting volume on the Polity and Religion of Barbary,

and another on the Hebrew Customs and the State of Rabbinical Learning.

He rose to eminence in his profession, and became one of the royal

chaplains, a Doctor of Divinity, Archdeacon of Salisbury, and Dean of

Lichfield. It is said that he would have been made a bishop after the

Revolution, if he had not given offence to the government by strenuously

opposing, in the Convocation of 1689, the liberal policy of William and

Tillotson.

In 1672, not long after Dr. Addison's return from Tangier, his son

Joseph was born. Of Joseph's childhood we know little. He learned his

rudiments at schools in his father's neighborhood, and was then sent to

the Charter House. The anecdotes which are popularly related about his

boyish tricks do not harmonize very well with what we know of his riper

years. There remains a tradition that he was the ringleader in a barring

out, and another tradition that he ran away from school and hid himself

in a wood, where he fed on berries and slept in a hollow tree, till

after a long search he was discovered and brought home. If these stories

be true, it would be curious to know by what moral discipline so

mutinous and enterprising a lad was transformed into the gentlest and

most modest of men.

We have abundant proof that, whatever Joseph's pranks may have been, he

pursued his studies vigorously and successfully. At fifteen he was not

only fit for the University, but carried thither a classical taste and a

stock of learning which would have done honor to a Master of Arts. He

was entered at Queen's College, Oxford; but he had not been many months

there, when some of his Latin verses fell by accident into the hands of

Dr. Lancaster, Dean of Magdalene College. The young scholar's diction

and versification were already such as veteran professors might envy.

Dr. Lancaster was desirous to serve a boy of such promise; nor was an

opportunity long wanting. The Revolution had just taken place; and

nowhere had it been hailed with more delight than at Magdalene College.

That great and opulent corporation had been treated by James, and by his

Chancellor, with an insolence and injustice which, even in such a Prince

and in such a Minister, may justly excite amazement, and which had done

more than even the prosecution of the Bishops to alienate the Church of

England from the throne. A president, duly elected, had been violently

expelled from his dwelling; a Papist had been set over the society by a

royal mandate; the Fellows who, in conformity with their oaths, had

refused to submit to this usurper, had been driven forth from their

quiet cloisters and gardens, to die of want or to live on charity. But

the day of redress and retribution speedily came. The intruders were

ejected; the venerable House was again inhabited by its old inmates;

learning flourished under the rule of the wise and virtuous Hough; and

with learning was united a mild and liberal spirit too often wanting in

the princely colleges of Oxford. In consequence of the troubles through

which the society had passed, there had been no valid election of new

members during the year 1688. In 1689, therefore, there was twice the

ordinary number of vacancies; and thus Dr. Lancaster found it easy to

procure for his young friend admittance to the advantages of a

foundation then generally esteemed the wealthiest in Europe.

At Magdalen Addison resided during ten years. He was, at first, one of

those scholars who are called Demies, but was subsequently elected a

fellow. His college is still proud of his name; his portrait still hangs

in the hall; and strangers are still told that his favorite walk was

under the elms which fringe the meadow on the banks of the Cherwell. It

is said, and is highly probable, that he was distinguished among his

fellow students by the delicacy of his feelings, by the shyness of his

manners, and by the assiduity with which he often prolonged his studies

far into the night. It is certain that his reputation for ability and

learning stood high. Many years later, the ancient Doctors of Magdalen

continued to talk in their common room of his boyish compositions, and

expressed their sorrow that no copy of exercises so remarkable had been

preserved.

It is proper, however, to remark that Miss Aikin has committed the

error, very pardonable in a lady, of overrating Addison's classical

attainments. In one department of learning, indeed, his proficiency was

such as it is hardly possible to overrate. His knowledge of the Latin

poets, from Lucretius and Catullus down to Claudian and Prudentius, was

singularly exact and profound. He understood them thoroughly, entered

into their spirit, and had the finest and most discriminating perception

of all their peculiarities of style and melody; nay, he copied their

manner with admirable skill, and surpassed, we think, all their British

imitators who had preceded him, Buchanan and Milton alone excepted. This

is high praise; and beyond this we cannot with justice go. It is clear

that Addison's serious attention, during his residence at the

University, was almost entirely concentrated on Latin poetry, and that,

if he did not wholly neglect other provinces of ancient literature, he

vouchsafed to them only a cursory glance. He does not appear to have

attained more than an ordinary acquaintance with the political and moral

writers of Rome; nor was his own Latin prose by any means equal to his

Latin verse. His knowledge of Greek, though doubtless such as was, in

his time, thought respectable at Oxford, was evidently less than that

which many lads now carry away every year from Eton and Rugby. A minute

examination of his works, if we had time to make such an examination,

would fully bear out these remarks. We will briefly advert to a few of

the facts on which our judgment is grounded.

Great praise is due to the Notes which Addison appended to his version

of the second and third books of the Metamorphoses. Yet those notes,

while they show him to have been, in his own domain, an accomplished

scholar, show also how confined that domain was. They are rich in

apposite references to Virgil, Statius, and Claudian; but they contain

not a single illustration drawn from the Greek poets. Now, if, in the

whole compass of Latin literature, there be a passage which stands in

need of illustration drawn from the Greek poets, it is the story of

Pentheus in the third book of the Metamorphoses. Ovid was indebted for

that story to Euripides and Theocritus, both of whom he has sometimes

followed minutely. But neither to Euripides nor to Theocritus does

Addison make the faintest allusion; and we, therefore, believe that we

do not wrong him by supposing that he had little or no knowledge of

their works.

His travels in Italy, again, abound with classical quotations, happily

introduced; but scarcely one of those quotations is in prose. He draws

more illustrations from Ausonius and Manilius than from Cicero. Even his

notions of the political and military affairs of the Romans seem to be

derived from poets and poetasters. Spots made memorable by events which

have changed the destinies of the world, and which have been worthily

recorded by great historians, bring to his mind only scraps of some

ancient versifier. In the gorge of the Apennines he naturally remembers

the hardships which Hannibal's army endured, and proceeds to cite, not

the authentic narrative of Polybius, not the picturesque narrative of

Livy, but the languid hexameters of Silius Italicus. On the banks of the

Rubicon he never thinks of Plutarch's lively description, or of the

stern conciseness of the Commentaries, or of those letters to Atticus

which so forcibly express the alternations of hope and fear in a

sensitive mind at a great crisis. His only authority for the events of

the civil war is Lucan.

All the best ancient works of art at Rome and Florence are Greek.

Addison saw them, however, without recalling one single verse of Pindar,

of Callimachus, or of the Attic dramatists; but they brought to his

recollection innumerable passages of Horace, Juvenal, Statius, and Ovid.

The same may be said of the Treatise on Medals. In that pleasing work we

find about three hundred passages extracted with great judgment from the

Roman poets; but we do not recollect a single passage taken from any

Roman orator or historian; and we are confident that not a line is

quoted from any Greek writer. No person, who had derived all his

information on the subject of medals from Addison, would suspect that

the Greek coins were in historical interest equal, and in beauty of

execution far superior, to those of Rome.

If it were necessary to find any further proof that Addison's classical

knowledge was confined within narrow limits, that proof would be

furnished by his Essay on the Evidences of Christianity. The Roman poets

throw little or no light on the literary and historical questions which

he is under the necessity of examining in that Essay. He is, therefore,

left completely in the dark; and it is melancholy to see how helplessly

he gropes his way from blunder to blunder. He assigns, as grounds for

his religious belief, stories as absurd as that of the Cock-Lane ghost,

and forgeries as rank as Ireland's Vortigern, puts faith in the lie

about the Thundering Legion, is convinced that Tiberius moved the senate

to admit Jesus among the gods, and pronounces the letter of Agbarus,

King of Edessa, to be a record of great authority. Nor were these errors

the effects of superstition; for to superstition Addison was by no means

prone. The truth is that he was writing about what he did not

understand.

Miss Aikin has discovered a letter, from which it appears that, while

Addison resided at Oxford, he was one of several writers whom the

booksellers engaged to make an English version of Herodotus; and she

infers that he must have been a good Greek scholar. We can allow very

little weight to this argument, when we consider that his fellow

laborers were to have been Boyle and Blackmore. Boyle is remembered

chiefly as the nominal author of the worst book on Greek history and

philology that ever was printed; and this book, bad as it is, Boyle was

unable to produce without help. Of Blackmore's attainments in the

ancient tongues, it may be sufficient to say that, in his prose, he has

confounded an aphorism with an apothegm, and that when, in his verse, he

treats of classical subjects, his habit is to regale his readers with

four false quantities to a page.

It is probable that the classical acquirements of Addison were of as

much service to him as if they had been more extensive. The world

generally gives its admiration, not to the man who does what nobody else

even attempts to do, but to the man who does best what multitudes do

well. Bentley was so immeasurably superior to all the other scholars of

his time that few among them could discover his superiority. But the

accomplishment in which Addison excelled his contemporaries was then, as

it is now, highly valued and assiduously cultivated at all English seats

of learning. Everybody who had been at a public school had written Latin

verses; many had written such verses with tolerable success, and were

quite able to appreciate, though by no means able to rival, the skill

with which Addison imitated Virgil. His lines on the Barometer and the

Bowling Green were applauded by hundreds, to whom the Dissertation on

the Epistles of Phalaris was as unintelligible as the hieroglyphics on

an obelisk.

Purity of style and an easy flow of numbers are common to all Addison's

Latin poems. Our favorite piece is the Battle of the Cranes and Pygmies;

for in that piece we discern a gleam of the fancy and humor which many

years later enlivened thousands of breakfast tables. Swift boasted that

he was never known to steal a hint; and he certainly owed as little to

his predecessors as any modern writer. Yet we cannot help suspecting

that he borrowed, perhaps unconsciously, one of the happiest touches in

his voyage to Lilliput from Addison's verses. Let our readers judge.

"The Emperor," says Gulliver, "is taller by about the breadth of my nail

than any of his court, which alone is enough to strike an awe into the

beholders."

About thirty years before Gulliver's Travels appeared Addison wrote

these lines:--

Critical and Historical Essays, Volume III (of 3) · 第 32 / 60 段