Shakspeare's admirable description of poetic genius, one of its noblest attributes is, that it glances from earth to heaven. Nowhere has this been more finely exemplified than in his own "Chronicle-Plays." If the Greek drama was controlled by Destiny,-the despotism of a blind, inexorable Fate,-the Christian historical drama has a Providence for its leading idea. In the periods of history which I propose to examine and illustrate by the English historical plays of Shakspeare, it will be seen that, while he embodies a great variety of human character and passions, he shows it all as an agency in the providential government of the world. After disposing of the early history, I hope to be able to show to those who may accompany me in this course of lectures, how the guilt that hung over the usurpation of King John brought not only retribution on himself, but unmerited misery upon the innocent Arthur-how the giddy tyranny and the frailties of the second Richard found sad expiation in a tragic death. We may there trace the fortunes of the Lancastrian kings, from the elevation of Bolingbroke, onward, through the martial glories of his son's reign, to the disastrous civil wars of the Roses. In the last of these historical dramas, we shall see one of the noblest tragic representations of the mutability of earthly power; and we may contemplate the sublime, historical impartiality with which the poet has portrayed the splendid and haughty career of England's Great Cardinal.

As a per contra to Lord Brougham's excessive panegyric on Hume, the student is referred to an admirable article entitled "Hume and his Influence on History," in vol. lxxiii. p. 536, of the Quarterly Review. W. B. R.

In conclusion, let me say, that, apart altogether from the mode of treating it, I cannot, for one moment, distrust the intrinsic interest of the subject of this course of lectures. It is a subject of ample magnitude; and of this I have become more deeply sensible the more I have dwelt upon it since I first proposed it to my mind. It is, therefore, with no affectation of modesty that I assure you I have a strong feeling that these lectures must be very inadequate to a subject which grows in my thoughts as I work upon it. The subject is a new one, too—I mean, as to the mode of treating it; and it will demand much care and study to keep the historic and poetic elements in just proportions. In this, I have no authority or example to guide me.

I will endeavour to give the subject an interest and value in the minds of those who will accompany me in the course; but if I should not succeed in this, remember what I tell you now, the fault is in me, and not in my subject.

LECTURE II.*

The Legendary Period of Britain: King Lear.

Legendary period prior to the Roman invasion-Julius Cæsar-Malone's comment-Fabulous antiquity of British kings-Brutus of Troy-Authentic ancient history limited to Southern EuropeBritain out of the path of the ancient world-Faber's idea of the Mediterranean-Milton's History of England-Faith in ancient legends-Claim of Edward the First to the sovereignty of Scotland -The Papal reference-Difference of British and classical legends -Grote on Greek legends-Minstrelsy and romance-Washington, in our sense, a legendary idea in America-Lives of the saintsSymbolical legends-Popular faith in legends-Identified with reverence for ancestry-Sir Robert Walpole's false idea of history— Niebuhr-Modern colonies-King Lear a dramatic legend-Filial relation-Illustrations appropriate to paganism-Lear's invocation of heathen gods-Charles Lamb's criticism on Lear.

IN the examination of the period of history, which forms the subject of these lectures, I shall follow chronological order as the most natural arrangement. I am, therefore, now led back into that dim, or rather dark, region of historical knowledge, which may be fitly described as the legendary period of British history. Amid the multitude of stories or fables which belong to these times, one found its way to the heart of Shakspeare; and, by the wondrous alchemy of his genius, it was transmuted into, perhaps, the most impressive and

*December 15th, 1846.

awful tragedy in the whole range of dramatic literature. The obscure and neglected legend lives, by transmigration, in that imperishable drama, which shows us the royal and the parental misery of the breaking heart of King Lear.

The legendary period of British history is to be understood as embracing those ages, which, beginning in a distant and indefinite antiquity, end with the opening of authentic annals. That authentic history begins under the unfavourable circumstances of observation which is limited and prejudiced, for it is found in the military narrative of a Roman soldier, who met the Britons in bloody warfare. The scanty information to be derived from Julius Cæsar's memoirs of his campaigns is, at best, the description of an enemy and a Roman; and, in judging of the value of such testimony, it should be borne in mind, that, whatever were the virtues of the Roman character, and whatever praise there may be in calling a man, now-a-days, an "old Roman," there was found among that people little of veracity or magnanimity in their dealings with their enemics. Still, though the narrative by Cæsar is not entitled to entire confidence, it does give the first solid footing for English history to stand upon. We learn certain facts from it, distorted and coloured though they be by the medium through which they have come to us. We can believe that the great triumvir, after having led his legions in victory from one province of Gaul into another, found a new adversary, when the Britons crossed the narrow channel of the sea to help the kindred people who dwelt in Armorica-there where, at this present time, their descendants are found, I mean, that very peculiar race who occupy the north-western corner of France, the

province of Brittany. When the subjugation of Gaul was completed, Cæsar, revolving, perhaps, his plans against the freedom of the republic, looked round and beheld on one side the dark and impenetrable forests of Germany, and on the other what appeared the more accessible and easy conquest of the almost unknown land of the Britons. He looked to the white cliffs of these shores, perhaps with a revengeful eye against the confederates of his Gallic enemy-perhaps impelled to continued war by the fire of that lust of conquest, which burned in the heart of Roman soldiers for eight centuries and more-burned until it was quenched, not only by exhaustion, but by the fulfilment of providential purposes. Whatever was the impulse-whether these, or the improbable and meaner one, which has been imputed to Cæsar by one of his own countrymen, the coveting of British pearls-the invasion of Britain added nothing to Roman power or pride.* The eagles were fluttered in their flight; and, when thanks were given at Rome to the gods, it may well be questioned, as Milton intimates in his History of England, whether it was for a conquest or an escape-whether it was for an exploit done or for a discovery made. At the end of the campaigns, the conqueror of Britain was not master of one foot of British ground; not a Roman colonist was left in the land; and Julius Cæsar, at his return to Rome, dedicated to the goddess Venus a corslet of these British pearls-a gift, which

*Tacitus, Vit. Agricolæ cap. xii. Cicero ad Att. iv. 16. Ad Fam. vii. 7. Lingard, ch. i. The authority alluded to in the text was, doubtless, Suetonius, C. Julius Cæsar s. 47:-" Britanniam petîsse, spe margaritarum, quarum amplitudinem conferentem, interdum suâ manû exegisse pondus " W. B. R.