« AnteriorContinuar »
its authenticity are guided not taking. He employed the best by knowledge but by the engravers he could come by, strange ill-will they bear the among them Holar, a man of poet. They declare, what is genius, and he has left us many perfectly true, that the monu- a record, drawn and written, ment as it exists bears little for which the world will ever resemblance to the ill-drawn owe him a debt of gratitude. representation of it printed But he and his staff knew in Dugdale's 'Warwickshire.' nothing, fortunately, as we Wherefore, they argue, the
the think, of photographic accumonument, like the man whom racy. They did not travel with it portrays, is a sham. The cameras. They depended for truth cannot be so easily stated the effect which they produced as that. Or, to quote Mr on their skill and their memory, Spielmann, “as the Shakespeare and in skill and memory they monument we know does not were sometimes deficient. We agree with Dugdale, it has been are ready to believe even that innocently assumed and as- the beautiful views of London serted in fact by persons un
which Hollar drew for Lord familiar with the ways of the Arundel are not precise and earlier engravers, that the Strat- exact in their delineation. Their ford monument as we know it precision does not matter greatis another, a different monu- ly. They possess a beauty to ment, and not the original which no photograph can ever -inasmuch as the proportions, attain, and they do not give as well as the details, are us the less pleasure because wholly different, and the bust they might not be put in as presents no similarity what- infallible evidence in a court ever. This belief pathetically of law. Mr. Spielmann, then, recalls the peasant's faith in is perfectly justified in giving the printed word, and because examples of gross inaccuracy it is in the papers.'
in the engravers of the time, In other words, they accept and he may justly conclude Dugdale as infallible. The bust that the drawing in Dugdale's at Stratford, as it may be seen Warwickshire 'cannot be used to-day, does not resemble the to throw a doubt upon the drawing in Dugdale's history. authenticity of Shakespeare's Therefore, the bust is a com- monument. Here is his own paratively recent forgery. It description of it: “We see at does not occur to them that once the lamentable properties the draughtsman employed by of the monument as here misDugdale may himself have been represented, while the
the style at fault. Now Dugdale was a inclines to Baroque — a style man of his time. He was in- some twenty or thirty years dustrious, accurate in the loose later than Shakespeare's death, fashion of the age, and pains- but already sprung into exist
ence when the Warwickshire' friend. It is well to recall was published. It therefore them once moregives itself the lie. We see the poor design of the shield and It was for gentle Shakespeare cut;
“This Figure, that thou here seest put, mounting, the ridiculous boys Wherein the Graver had a strife cut off their mounds and With Nature, to outdo the life : perched insecurely on the edge
0, could he but have drawn his wit
As well in brass, as he hath hit of the cornice, little architec- His face, the Print would then surpass tural in sentiment — the one All that was ever writ in brass. holding aloft a spade, the other
But, since he cannot, Reader, look
Not on his Picture, but his Book.” an hour-glass, as shown, totally unsculptural in effect. The These lines are written in arch is of a different form, scorn neither of the poet nor perhaps to allow the wide
wide of his portrait. The “gentle space necessary for the un- Shakespeare " receives his meed authentic stuck-out elbows of of praise, and so does Droethe figure. The portrait is no shout. And though Ben Jonportrait at all; it shows us
son was not upon oath when he a sickly decrepit old gentleman, wrote “the Graver had a strife with a falling moustache, much With Nature, to outdo the life, more than fifty-two years old.” Droeshout's portrait of ShakeSuch as it is, it has served as speare has been most unjustly a a model to many bungling decried. It is the work of a engravers, and has remained
young man not the master of for many a long year-in tra- his craft, and there is a certain vesty—the familiar portrait of clumsiness in the drawing. But Shakespeare. However, Mr we are content to believe that Spielmann has at last proved, it gives us something of the by illustration, the faulty aspect and the character of methods of the engravers of Shakespeare. Some good the seventeenth century, and judges at any rate have praised the inaccuracy of the anti- it. A. van Huelle, for instance, quaries, and we cannot think quoted by Mr Spielmann in that Dugdale's drawing will his life of Houbraken, while any longer bring comfort to highly praising the Dutch enthe haters and baiters of Shake- graver's plate in the Chandos speare,
Shakespeare, says: “I greatly So we arrive at Droeshout's prefer to this romanticised bust portrait, which has also aroused the engraving of Martin Droehostile critics to mirth, but shout. There indeed we find which cannot wholly please the features which characterise those for whom Stratford is the author of 'Romeo ' as well a word of obloquy. The verses as of him who wrote Julius which stand beneath the por- Cæsar.' What nobility in that trait are written by Ben Jon- forehead! With what feeling
was Shakespeare's is rendered the pensive and
penetrating expression of the affirmed, with genuine if whimeyes and of the smile, of sical sincerity, he is exactly which the irony is softened like the old engraving which by the sweetness of soul !' is said to be a bad one. I That praise is ungrudging, and think it very good.'” Blake (as we think) deserved. Nor thought it very good, and does it stand alone. When when Shakespeare appeared to Stéphane Mallarmé, the dis- him in a vision, it was in the tinguished French poet, first guise of Droeshout's portrait. saw Droeshout's portrait of So we need not despair of Shakespeare, he exclaimed : recapturing a living image of “Quelle securité !" A sound Shakespeare, with the last at criticism of both poet and Stratford and Droeshout's porportrait.
trait to help us—and Mr SpielThere remains the testi. mann assures that the bony mony of Blake, who, when at structure is the same in bust Felpham, saw in vision and portrait ; nor need we
the sands peopled by a host be shaken in our confidence of souls — majestic shadows." by those who believe in DugSome of them he painted- dale's drawing as the simpleHomer, Shakespeare, Milton, minded believe in print, or Dante ; and claimed,” as Mr by the rash critics who find Spielmann says, “to have had Droeshout's portrait "puddingconverse with Shakespeare, and faced."
Printed in Great Britain by
In the long roll of the cele- the Continental General Staffs, brated captains of war, few blinded by the brilliance of careers have been so overlooked Napoleon, regarded his first by military historians as that campaign of 1796 as the year of Maurice, Count of Saxony, one of modern military history, better known perhaps as Mar- and affected a contempt for shal Saxe. This omission is all his predecessors because of the more curious, because Saxe the contrast between their less lives not only in his deeds but decisive methods and the “absoin his words; for as a military lute war waged by Napoleon. thinker and prophet his out- In a world exhausted-like look was so original, his ex- France in 1815—through the pression so unfettered by con- attempt to copy slavishly the vention, that his writings en. Napoleonic method, the present joy a perennial freshness and may be a fitting moment to appeal to the modern spirit of revive the study of a comscientific inquiry.
mander in some respects 80 The reasons for the neglect akin to that great master, and are probably twofold: first, in others so strongly contrastthat the wider political interest ing. of Frederick the Great's almost In its human interest, few contemporary career focussed careers and fewer minds are on the latter the attention of more arresting than that of the general historian ; second, this natural son of Augustus that the historical sections of II. of Saxony, for Saxe was
man built on the large broken series of successes until scale-in his physique, in his the end of the war saw Tuintellect, in his outlook, and renne's old title of “Marshalin his excesses.
General of the King's camps A year after his birth, in and armies revived for him, 1696, his father was elected but two years later he died at King of Poland, but owing to Chambord of
Chambord of “a putrid fever."
” the unsettled state of the coun- He left several illegitimate chiltry, Saxe spent his youth mainly dren, among them one whose in other lands. At the tender great-granddaughterwas George age of twelve he was present Sand. at Malplaquet with the army Seven
his of Prince Eugene, and two 'Reveries on the Art of War years later his impetuous cour- were published posthumously age was so reckless as to call -a military classic that forms upon him the friendly reproof the subject of this study. The of this famous leader. In 1711 reader may judge whether Carhe received the formal recogni- lyle's extraordinary criticism of tion of his father and the rank it as "a strange military farof count. After serving under rago, dictated, as I should Peter the Great against the think, under opium,” has any Swedes, and later against the justification. Turks, he went, when twenty- That Marshal de Saxe was three, to Paris to study mathe- very different in outlook to matics, and there took a com- that type of traditional soldier mission in the French Army. who regards his profession as Brilliant service here, tempor a sacred mystery, beyond the arily interrupted by an adven- lay comprehension, is well ture in Courland, found him a shown by his Preface, in which ,
, lieutenant-general when the he declares with regard to war War of the Austrian Succession as a science that custom and opened in 1741. His night prejudice, confirmed by ignorsurprise and capture of Prague ance, are its sole foundation made him famous, and the and support. All other sciences fact of his exploits being the are established upon fixed prinonly redeeming feature of this ciples . . . while this alone reunsuccessful invasion of Austria mains destitute." led to his being made Marshal Nearly two centuries have of France. After being ap- passed since he wrote this, and pointed in 1744 to command yet it is only since the Great the expedition intended to in- War that our official Field vade England on behalf of the Service Regulations have, for Young Pretender, which, how- the first time, attempted to ever, was abortive, he turned define what are the principles to the Netherlands, where he of war-and even then with won his memorable victory the sketchiness and dubiousover the British and their ness that denote the ploughing allies at Fontenoy. An un- of virgin soil. Writers on war