본문 바로가기
시문학관련

영국 소설의 고대 로마

by 이덕휴-dhleepaul 2022. 8. 14.

영어 역사 소설 연구

저자 : 랜돌프 패리스, 2d

출시일: 팔월 13, 2022 [전자책 #68741]

언어: 영어

제작: Charlene Taylor와 https://www.pgdp.net 의 온라인 분산 교정 팀 (이 파일은 The Internet Archive/Canadian Library에서 관대하게 사용할 수 있는 이미지로 제작되었습니다)

구텐베르크 전자책 고대 로마의 영어 소설 시작 ***

[1]

영국 소설의
고대 로마

영어 역사
소설 연구

펜실베니아
대학 대학원 학부에 철학 박사 학위
에 대한 요구 사항을 부분적으로 이행
하여 발표 된 논문

랜돌프 패리스, 2d

필라델피아
1923년

Lyon & Armor, Printers
124 North 7th Street
Philadelphia

[2]

저작권, 1923,
랜돌프 패리스, 2d, 필라델피아,

파.

[3]

머리말

한동안 나는 "고전적인"소설에 대한 만족스러운 정의, 즉 가치있는 소설을 포함해야하며 가치가 거의 없거나 전혀없는 무수한 소설 작품을 배제해야하는 정의의 필요성을 느꼈습니다. 그러한 정의의 욕구는 문학사학자들이 "고전적인"소설을 언급 한 모호함뿐만 아니라 다른 학생들이 그리스와 로마의 이름을 사용하는 소설 작품으로 간주하는 것처럼 보였다는 사실에서도 분명했습니다. 주제의 명확한 선택을 위해, 나는 펜실베니아 대학의 영어학과의 존 쿠퍼 멘덴홀 (John Cooper Mendenhall) 박사에게 빚을지고 있는데, 그의 관대 한 조언은 내가 가장 감사하게 인정하고 싶고, 문학 형식에 대한 훌륭한 감각이 내 작품에서 나에게 영감을주었습니다. 저는 많은 도움이 되는 제안에 대해 가장 진심으로 감사드리며, 이 강의가 이 연구의 배경을 제공해준 영어학과의 다른 회원들에게 진심으로 감사드립니다. 나는 또한 미시간 대학의 유진 스톡 매카트니 (Eugene Stock McCartney) 박사에게 고대 로마를 다루는 모든 소설 작품 목록을 완성하는 데 물질적으로 도움이되는 타이틀 목록을 자유롭게 제공 해 주신 것에 대해 감사해야합니다.

랜돌프 패리스, 2d.

펜실베니아 대학, 월, 1923.

[4]

목차

    페이지
나는. 필드의 정의 7
  A. 로마 생활의 중요한 소설 14
II. 로마 생활의 소설의 창세기 17
  A. 로마 생활의 첫 번째 진정한 소설 23
  B. 로마 생활의 소설에 대한 "Vathek"의 영향 24
  C. 로마 생활의 소설에 대한 "바이로닉 로맨스"의 영향 25
  D. 완전히 발달 된 형태의 로마 생활의 소설 28
III. 1834 년부터 현재까지 로마 생활 소설 개발의 주요 노선 33
  A. 위대한 설교자들의 학문의 증거를 보여주는 로마 생활의 소설 34[5]
  B. 학문의 철저함, 베커와 같은 독일 학자들의 영향에서 부분적으로 비롯된 베커의 "갈루스" 62
  C. 스콧의 독일 추종자 - 로마 생활의 독일 소설; 영국 소설에 대한 영향 65
  D. 로마 생활의 두 가지 현학적인 소설 73
  E. 그들의 호소를 위해 멜로 드라마에 의존하는 소위 "인기있는"소설가들에 의해 쓰여진 소설; 1843 년부터 현재까지 로마 생활의 "인기있는"소설의 발전 75
  F. 로마 생활의 프랑스 소설의 영향 90
  G. 로마 역사 또는 고전 교사가 쓴 소설 96
  H. 로마의 삶을 심미적 관점에서 묘사한 작가들이 쓴 소설 108
IV. 결론적으로 121
  서지학 124

[6]

[7]

I
필드의 정의

이 연구의 목적은 영국 역사 소설이 고대 로마의 삶에 의해 제공된 풍부하고 풍부한 자료로 만든 용도를 보여주는 것입니다. 이렇게 함으로써 나는 로마 생활의 소설의 기원과 그 발전을 추적하며, 영구적인 가치의 요소들을 특별히 강조할 것이다. 이 후자의 요점에 대한 명확한 인식에 대한 원조로서, 나는 로마 생활의 가장 훌륭한 소설의 신중하게 선택된 목록을 제공하여 위대함에 대한 그들의 주장을 지적 할 것입니다. 내 연구의 끝에서 소설의 형태로 로마의 삶을 제시하는 척하는 모든 책의 전체 목록을 찾을 수 있습니다.

고대 로마는 종종 고전 연구에서 고대 그리스와 관련이 있기 때문에 고대 그리스의 삶을 다루는 소설이 왜 여기에서 고려에서 제외되는지에 대한 질문이 제기 될 수 있습니다. 대답은 비교적 적은 수의 소설이 쓰여졌다는 것입니다. 고대 로마에 대해 글을 쓰는 저자는 소설을 만들 수있는 풍부한 자료를 처분 할 수 있습니다. 고대 그리스의 삶에 대해 글을 쓰는 사람은 그의 출처가 다소 제한적이라는 것을 알게됩니다. 저자에게 영향을 미친 또 다른 고려 사항은 현대 생활이 고대 그리스의 삶보다 고대 로마의 삶과 더 직접적으로 관련되어 있다는 것입니다. 그리스 역사의 고전적인시기는 비교적 짧은 기간이었고, 어떤 의미에서 고대 그리스의 삶은 로마 제국의 삶에 흡수되기 전에도 정체성을 잃었습니다. 고대 로마의 삶은 널리 확장 된 로마 세계의 가장 먼 곳에서 느껴졌습니다. 우리는 고대 그리스가 세계 문화에 기여한 것을 충분히 인정해야하지만, 오늘날 세계에 대한 그녀의 영향력이 로마의 힘에 의해 가려져 있음을 인정해야합니다. 그리스 문화의 이야기보다는 로마의 힘에 대한 이야기는 현대 소설에서 표현을 발견했습니다.

[8]

고대 로마에 대해 글을 쓰는 소설가는 도시 창립의 전통적인 날짜부터 로마가 서부 제국의 수장이되는 것을 중단 한 시점에 이르기까지 로마 역사의 모든 기간을 다룰 수 있습니다. 우리가 (1) 제국 이전의 로마, (2) 제국 아래의 로마에 대해 말할 때 편리한 분열이 이루어집니다. 제국 이전의 로마는 비교적 적은 소설에 대한 영감을 제공했습니다. 그러나 이들 중 일부는 큰 장점이 있기 때문에 로마의 초기 역사에서 그들이 연결된 부분을 조사하는 것이 좋을 것입니다. 하나의 훌륭한 소설[1]은 선사 시대 이탈리아와 로마 사물의 첫 번째 희미한 시작을 다룬다. 그녀의 존재의 전설적인 기간 직후, 로마는 주로 이탈리아 이웃과의 투쟁에 관심이있었습니다. 이러한 투쟁은 영어로 된 위대한 소설에 영감을 불어 넣지 못했지만 소년들을위한 몇 가지 좋은 책이 그들에 대해 쓰여졌습니다. 로마와 카르타고의 필사적 인 갈등은 강한 호소력의 소설을위한 자료를 제공합니다. 그러나 후기 공화국의 감동적인 시대는 제국 이전의 로마 소설을위한 최고의 분야를 제시합니다. [2] 그러나 로마가 세계의 확실한 여주인이었던 제국의 시대는 고대 로마를 쓰는 대부분의 소설가들에게 호소 한 시대입니다.

로마의 삶을 배경으로 사용하는 소설이나 소설로 가장하는 책의 수는 많습니다. 이 중 많은 사람들이 그들이 아닌 것이라고 주장합니다. 따라서 전체 숫자의 작은 부분이라도 검토하면 대부분이 아니더라도 많은 사람들이 문학이나 다른 가치있는 것이 아니라는 것이 분명해진다. 소설의 한 부류가 있는데, 그 목적은 주로 고대 로마의 삶을 대표하는 것이 아니라 인공 채색을 추가하여 다른 작품을 매력적으로 만드는 것입니다. 소설에서 그러한 피상적 인 원조를 사용하는 것은 거의 항상 심각한 목적이 없음을 보여줍니다. 이러한 진지함의 부족은 라이더 해가드 경의 작품에 의해 잘 설명됩니다.[9] 클레오 파트라 (Cleopatra)와 펄 메이든(Pearl Maiden)과 같은 유사 역사 소설. 진정으로 "역사적"인 것에 조금 더 가까워 보이는 소설은 남작 부인 오크지가 카이사르에게 쓴 것입니다. 그러나 더 자세히 살펴보면,이 책은 우리가 논의하고있는 "인위적"수업에 속하는 것으로 밝혀졌습니다. 그것은 칼리굴라의 삶에서 몇 가지 놀라운 사실을 사용합니다. 그러나 이러한 사실들과 성경의 인용문들의 깊은 의의는 전체 권에 퍼져 있는 가볍고 값싼 감상성 때문에 완전히 사라졌다. 의사 신성에 대한 또 다른 예는 살로메 공주 Burris Jenkins 박사의 최근 출판 된 소설에서 볼 수 있습니다. [3] 환상적이고 불가능한 이야기가 소설의 역사적 인물을 중심으로 짜여질 때; 또는 심각한 작품에 대한 경솔한 가장으로 소설가를 돕기 위해 깊은 역사적 중요성을 지닌 사실이 만들어질 때; 결과는 작은 공로를 가진 작품이 될 것입니다. 로마 생활의 가정된 배경이 단지 열등한 작품을 감추고 매력적으로 보이게 하는 소설은 이 연구에서 고려되지 않을 것이다.

주요 목적이 고대 로마에서의 삶을 묘사하는 것이 아니라 일종의 종교적 선전 인 두 번째 부류의 책이 있습니다. 그들은 허구의 형태로 제시했으며, 신약 성경의 기록에서 영감을 얻은 이야기, 또는 교회 역사의 연대기에서 가져온 이야기입니다. 이 모든 책들이 소설이라고 불리는 것은 아니지만, 대량으로 제작되었으며, 우리가 고려하고있는 소설의 종류와 중요한 관련이 있습니다. 초기 그리스도인들, 특히 무대의 순교자들에 대한 많은 이야기들은 로마의 삶을 매우 부적절하게 묘사하는 방식으로 전해질 수 있다. 그들은 종종 이교도의 관점을 무시하고, 대부분의 경우 의도적으로 그것을 잘못 표현합니다. 와이즈먼 추기경의 파비올라 (Fabiola, 1855)와 같은 책에서 황제와 그의 병사들은 권력과 악의 추상적 인 대표자 일뿐입니다. 그리스도인들은 인위적으로 미덕과 순교를 의인화합니다. J. B. Peploe 부인의 작품[10] 웹은 폼포니아(Pomponia)로 잘 표현되어 있으며,[4] 종교적 경험으로 추정되는 도덕적 이야기이다. 그러한 많은 책들은 1850 년 이래로 쓰여졌으며 종교 출판 단체에 의해 출판되었습니다. 그들은 보통 일부 기독교 순교자의 성격에 대한 고정 관념의 분석 만 제시하는 반면, 역사의 조각은 독자를 계몽하기보다는 눈을 가리는 데 사용됩니다. 고대 로마의 삶을 진정으로 묘사하는 소설은 초기 기독교인들의 삶을 그 범위 내에 포함시킬 수도 있지만, 우리는 의도적으로 기독교인이나 이교도를 거짓 빛으로 제시하는 책들을 고려하지 않을 것입니다. [5]

역사 교사에게 특별한 관심은 소설 형태의 소년을 위해 쓰여진 로마 역사에 대한 청소년 이야기입니다.이 중 많은 부분이 고대 로마의 삶의 일부를 진정으로 묘사하기 때문입니다. 그러나 소년을위한 책은 장로를 위해 쓰여진 소설에 두지 않는 몇 가지 제한 사항이 있음을 관찰해야합니다. 알프레드 제이 교회(Alfred J. Church)와 G. A. 헨티 목사(G. A. Henty)와 같은 소년들을 위한 책의 저명한 저자들은 그들이 소년들에게 특히 호소할 영웅을 제시해야 하며, 이 영웅은 학교 책의 역사를 보여주는 모험을 가져야 한다는 것을 인식했다. 교회의 책 이천 년 전에서 스파르타쿠스는 진정으로 고귀한 인물로 표현되며, 젊은 카르타고에서 헨티는 한니발을 진정한 영웅으로 만듭니다. 그러나이 책들 각각에있는 기술적 인 영웅은 하나의 흥미 진진한 모험에서 다른 모험으로 달려가는 이상화 된 청소년입니다. 더욱이 교회와 헨티는 소년들이 가장 좋아하는 역사책의 사건들을 소설에 소개함으로써 역사 연구를 교훈적으로 만들려고 노력했다. 그 결과 소년들을 위한 그들의 소설은 역사가 너무 무거워졌다. 일반적인 비판은 또한 소년을위한 그러한 책으로 만들어 질 수 있으며, 군인과 병사의 삶을 너무 많이 사용합니다.[11] 검투사, 로마 생활에서 다른 요소들을 배제하는 것. 그러나 교사의 관점에서 볼 때 소년을위한 일부 책에는 로마 생활에 대한 상당히 정확한 묘사가 있습니다. 그러한 책들은 주일학교 유형의 종교적 이야기와 혼동되어서는 안되며, 우리의 주제와 분명한 연관성을 가지고 있습니다.

단순히 다른 작품을 매력적으로 만들기 위해 또는 종교 교육을위한 인위적 배경으로 로마의 삶을 사용하는 소설을 배제 한 후에, 우리는 여전히 로마의 삶을 묘사하려고 시도하지만 성공하지 못한 상당한 숫자가 남아 있음을 발견합니다. 소설가는 장학금 부족, 주제의 본질적인 가치에 대한 감사의 욕구, 또는 독자들에게 직접 호소 할 수없는 무능력으로 인해 자신의 목표에 미치지 못할 수 있습니다. 공공 도서관의 선반, 많은 소설이있을 수 있습니다.이 소설에서는 캐릭터가 로마 이름을 가지고 있으며 고대 로마에 살기로되어 있습니다. 그러나이 소설들 중 많은 부분이 로마의 삶을 전혀 묘사하지 않습니다. 그들 중 일부는 확립 된 명성의 책을 모방하기 위해 미약하게 에세이를하고, 매우 가난한 모방으로 판명되었습니다. 본 연구는 주로 그 자체의 본질적인 관심을 위해 고대 로마의 삶을 진지하게 묘사하는 소설에 관심을 가질 것입니다.

우리는 고대 로마의 삶을 묘사하는 역사 소설의 형태를 다루고 있습니다. 역사 소설은 역사적 인물과 사건을 이야기의 필수적인 부분으로 활용하는 소설의 형태로 정의 될 수 있습니다. 이 정의에 대한 충분한 지원은 Waverly Novels에 대한 그의 소개에서 최초의 위대한 영국 역사 소설가 인 월터 스콧 경의 항상 솔직한 말에서 찾을 수 있습니다. 봉우리에 대한 페베릴에게 보낸 예비 서한에서, 그는 익명의 "Waverly의 저자"가 "나 자신과 같은 가난한 동료는 자신의 불모지와 제한된 상상력을 샅샅이 뒤지는 것에 지쳐서, 모든 종류의 예를 제시하는 거대하고 무한한 역사 분야에서 일반적인 주제를 바라 봅니다. 또는 상황의 일부 조합,[12] 또는 그가 가상의 내러티브의 기초로 유리하게 사용될 수 있다고 생각하는 매너에 대한 몇 가지 놀라운 특성, ... 서로 가장 잘 대조되는 성격의 색조로 투자하고, 아마도 그가 자신의 서비스에 자유롭게 밀어 넣을 수있는 원래의 일화나 상황이 약간의 스케치 만 제공하는 생동감 넘치는 가상의 그림을 제시 할 수 있다면 대중에게 봉사했을 것이라고 생각합니다. " 다시 말하지만, The Abbot에 대한 소개에서 스콧은 "나는 자연스럽게 역사 소설에 가장 적합하다고 생각했던 것처럼 그러한 구성 원리에주의를 기울였다"고 말하면서 유명한 역사적 인물을 주제로 선택하는 것이 가장 어렵지만 즉각적인 성공을위한 가장 쉬운 방법이라는 것을 분명히했을 때. 애벗 (The Abbot)에 대한 소개에 대한 메모에서 그는 "주문이나 매력과 같은 독특한 역사적 인물이 모든 나라에서 일어나는데, 이는 그들이 속한 땅에 조금이라도 관심이있는 모든 사람들이 많은 것을 들었고 더 많이 듣기를 갈망하기 때문에 호기심을 자극하고 관심을 끌기 위해 주권자입니다." 유명한 역사적 사건을 바탕으로 한 주제의 중요성, 역사 소설에 대한 중요성은 스콧이 레드 건틀릿에 대한 소개에서 증명합니다. 여기서 그는 "열여덟 번째 세기의 자코바이트 열의, 특히 1745년의 반란 동안, 실제 또는 가능성 있는 사건에 기초한 가상의 구성을 위해 선택될 수 있는 가장 훌륭한 주제들을 제공했다"고 말한다. 우드스탁에 대한 소개에서 스콧은 "실제로 실제 사건보다 더 확실한 것은 없으며, 허구와 같은 성격의 작품 (역사 소설)에서 무한한 이점을 보존한다"고 말했다. 과거의 이야기를 전하는 모든 소설이 진정한 역사 소설은 아닙니다. 그것은 진정으로 역사적인 것으로 간주되기 위해서는 역사적 인물과 사건을 필수적으로 사용해야합니다.

그러나 역사 소설의 기능은 가르치는 것이 아닙니다.[13] 학교 책에서 가르치는 역사. 그것은 오히려 독자들이 더 넓은 의미에서 역사에 대한 동정적인 인식, 즉 현재의 삶과 모든 중요한 관계와 함께 과거의 삶을 드러내는 역사로 돕는 것입니다. 스콧이 설명했듯이, "지식에 대한 사랑은 시작을 원하지만 - 기차가 제대로 준비되면 최소한의 불꽃이 불을 붙일 것입니다. 그리고 역사적 시대와 인물에 기인 한 가상의 모험에 관심이 있었기 때문에 독자는 사실이 실제로 무엇인지, 소설가가 얼마나 정당하게 표현했는지 알기 위해 옆에서 불안해하기 시작합니다. " [7] 더욱이 최고의 역사 소설의 목적은 현재를 벗어나 독자를 과거로 되돌려 놓는 것이 아니라 현재와 과거를 대면하는 것입니다. "열정, 즉 (감정과 매너가) 모든 수정에서 생겨나야하는 근원은 일반적으로 모든 계급과 조건, 모든 국가와 연령대에서 동일합니다. 물론 사회의 독특한 상태에 의해 영향을 받더라도 의견, 사고 습관 및 행동은 여전히 전체적으로 서로 강하게 닮아야한다는 것을 알 수 있습니다. " [8] 역사소설은 위대하다.―그것이 위대할 때―왜냐하면, 과거의 삶을 연구할 때, 그것은 오늘날의 삶에 가치를 부여하는 동일한 자질들을 보여주기 때문이다. 역사 소설에서 위대함에 대한 진정한 시험은 과거를 현실적인 효과로 묘사하는 성공의 시험으로 즉시 정의 될 수 있습니다.

이 시험을 염두에두고, 나는 가장 철저한 조사가 밝혀 낸 로마 생활의 모든 소설을 검토하면서 다음과 같은 질문을 던졌습니다 : 로마의 삶을 현실적인 효과로 묘사하는 데 어느 정도의 성공을 거둘 수 있습니까? 이것은 다양한 수준의 공로를 가진 수많은 소설에서 얻기 위해 수행되었으며, 이는 에서 수행 된 가장 훌륭하고 중요한 작업을 나타내는 표준입니다.[14] 로마 생활의 소설. 이 기준에 따라 판단 할 때, 로마 생활의 가장 훌륭하고 가장 대표적인 소설은 다음 목록에 나오는 소설입니다. 나는 로마 생활의 소설 분야에서 영국과 미국 작가의 성취에 관한 나의 공제를 근거로이 목록을 만들었습니다.

A. 로마 생활의 중요한 소설

발레리우스, 로마 이야기: 존 G. 록하트, (1821)

에피쿠리아: 토마스 무어, (1827)

사탈리엘, 불멸자: 조지 크롤리, (1829)

폼페이의 마지막 날들: E. G. Bulwer-Lytton 경, (1834)

제노비아: 윌리엄 웨어, (1836)

아틸라: G. P. R. 제임스, (1837)

프로버스—훗날 아우렐리안: 윌리엄 웨어(William Ware, 1838)라고 불린다.

줄리안, 유대의 장면: 윌리엄 웨어, (1841)

안토니나: 윌키 콜린스, (1850)

히파티아: 찰스 킹슬리, (1853)

로마 반역자: 헨리 허버트, (1853)

칼리스타: 존 헨리 뉴먼, (1855)

검투사: G. J. Whyte-Melville, (1863)

벤 허: 루이스 월러스 장군, (1880)

마리우스 에피쿠리아: 월터 패터, (1885)

어둠과 새벽: 프레드릭 윌리엄 패러 대집사, (1892)

구름을 모으는 것: 프레드릭 윌리엄 패러 대집사, (1895)

십자가의 표징: 윌슨 바렛, (1897)

페르페투아: S. 배링굴드 목사, (1897)

도미티아: S. 배링굴드 목사, (1898)

카이사르의 친구: 윌리엄 스턴스 데이비스, (1900)

베르길리우스, 그리스도의 오심 이야기: 어빙 바첼러, (1904)

사이키: 월터 S. 크램프, (1905)

베라닐다: 조지 기싱, (1904)

제국의 후계자: 월터 S. 크램프, (1913)

[15]

보라 여자: T. 에버렛 해레, (1916)

내키지 않는 베스탈: 에드워드 루카스 화이트, (1918)

에반더: 에덴 필포츠, (1919)

안디비우스 헤둘리오: 에드워드 루카스 화이트, (1921)

판과 쌍둥이: 에덴 필포츠, (1922)

위의 목록은 로마 생활의 가장 중요한 소설에 대한 나의 선택을 나타냅니다. 그러나 선택 과정은 여전히 더 수행될 수 있다; 그리고 이전과 같은 기준을 사용하여, 나는이 목록에서 나머지 소설보다 눈에 띄는 수십 편의 소설을 선택했으며, 로마 생활의 소설 중에서 절대 최고로 간주되어야합니다. 이 추가 선택 목록은 다음과 같습니다.

1. The Last Days of Pompeii: Bulwer, (1834)

2. Hypatia: Charles Kingsley, (1853)

3. The Gladiators: G. J. Whyte-Melville, (1863)

4. Ben Hur: Lew Wallace, (1880)

5. Marius, the Epicurean: Walter Pater, (1885)

6. Darkness and Dawn: F. W. Farrar, (1892)

7. Domitia: S. Baring-Gould, (1898)

8. A Friend of Caesar: William Stearns Davis, (1900)

9. Vergilius, a Tale of the Coming of Christ: Irving Bacheller, (1904)

10. Veranilda: George Gissing, (1904)

11. Andivius Hedulio: Edward Lucas White, (1921)

12. Pan and the Twins: Eden Philpotts, (1922)

These twelve novels are of permanent value. None of them are either obsolete or obsolescent. But for the benefit of those who raise the cry: “Of what practical good is anything which does not satisfy the present popular taste?” I wish to make an interesting comparison. After deciding upon the above list of twelve novels, I came upon A Classified List of the Best Modern Novels that are in ACTIVE USE in the Public Libraries of the United States. This was compiled with infinite pains by Mr. William Alanson Borden, not with any scholarly purpose, but with a view to ascertaining what novels were most read. While his list of novels of Roman life stops at the year 1910, it can be seen[16] that it closely corresponds with the one I have just given. His list of novels of Roman life, written in English, is as follows:

The Last Days of Pompeii: Bulwer

Hypatia: Charles Kingsley (given under “Alexandria,” not “Rome”)

Ben Hur: Lew Wallace

Marius, the Epicurean: Walter Pater

Domitia: Baring-Gould

A Friend of Caesar: W. S. Davis

Vergilius: I. Bacheller

*Aurelian: William Ware

*The Son of the Swordmaker: Opie Read

*The Sign of the Cross: Wilson Barrett

Of the novels marked with an asterisk, Aurelian was excluded from my list, as being somewhat too “gloomy” for modern taste. The Son of the Swordmaker and The Sign of the Cross were novels of widespread, but transient popularity. This may be said also of Vergilius, but to a less extent. The three novels on Mr. Borden’s list which I have marked with an asterisk are the only ones which do not appear of my list of the twelve best. On the whole, Mr. Borden’s list of the best confirms my own, and the twelve novels given in the first of the two lists will receive our chief attention.[9]

[17]

II
Genesis of the Novel of Roman Life

We have indicated what novels are to be given an important place in the field of the novel of Roman life; but before considering so fully developed a form as Bulwer’s Last Days of Pompeii, let us see what the soil was, from which such a form grew. Since the novel of Roman life is a definite variety of the historical novel, we must first consider the origin of the historical novel as such. The true historical novel, it has been said, portrays the past with realistic effect. Since the time of Scott, historical fiction has in the main followed the example which he set in his historical novels, and it is largely due to this fact that some authors have attained notable success in portraying the life of the past with realistic effect. Before Scott’s time historical romances existed, often taking such a form as to point directly toward Scott’s work, and even attaining much of his success in such a realistic portrayal of life. Yet in 1785, Clara Reeve had somewhat arbitrarily said: “The Romance, in lofty and elevated language, describes what never happened, nor is likely to happen.”[10] This definition does not seem to allow that the historical romance had achieved realistic effect at all, and so does not fairly represent the facts. But it must be remembered that the definition applied not only to the historical romance, but also to another form of the romance, which has been called the “Gothic” romance. While Scott’s work in the historical novel is, in a sense, a continuation of the historical romance, the “Gothic” romance better represents the school of fiction which Scott supplanted. For this reason it seems better to dispose of the “Gothic” romance before we discuss more fully the early development of the historical romance.

The “Gothic” romance begins with Horace Walpole’s Castle of Otranto (1764), which has no real historical background,[18] though the events are supposed to have happened in the twelfth or thirteenth century. Walpole had built a supposed “Gothic” castle, which he called “Strawberry Hill,” and the castle became a part of the “Gothic” romance. Walpole supplied this form of the romance with its familiar supernatural machinery, its ghost, creaking doors, subterranean caverns, etc., which need not be described here. It is well to note, however, at this point, that Scott, who adopted some of the saner elements of the Gothic romance, used the supernatural as something inseparable from many of the real Scotch characters, whom he described. Clara Reeve’s Champion of Virtue (1777), later called The Old English Baron, is to be noted, since it contains both Gothic and historical incidents. The Gothic romance was further developed by Mrs. Radcliffe, “Monk” Lewis, and others. Mrs. Radcliffe especially influences Scott and the later novel. She develops the description of those aspects of nature which later impressed Byron, and is undoubtedly the creator of the “Byronic hero.” Her “Schedoni” is in all essentials Byron’s “Lara,” an individual apart from other men, with a certain nobility of his own and a “vital scorn of all.” Lord Byron and his school reproduced certain elements of the “Gothic” romance, and in turn had an influence on the novel. The “Byronic hero” and the Byronic passion for the terrible aspects of nature will appear in the novel of Roman life and assume a prominent position. The Gothic romance continued to exist after the time of Mrs. Radcliffe; it took various forms, such as the detective story and the fantasy, as well as the tale of terror, with its superstitious elements. Down to 1850 it remained the fashion for almost any novelist to arouse his readers from time to time by a narration of marvelous or terrible events. The Gothic romance served to show that literature is not merely utilitarian; even in its wildest forms, it retained certain marks of the realistic novel, and added testimony to the fact that realism and romance are, after all, inseparable. While not making a thorough study of mediæval times, it pointed the[19] way for Scott, in dealing with this period of the past. It also had an important effect on the novel of Roman life in its formative stage, as will be seen.

The so-called “Oriental” romance is really a development of the Gothic. It originates with the work of William Beckford in Vathek, an Arabian Tale. This was a consummate piece of art of its kind, and had a tremendous influence on the writing of the time. Beckford built in Wiltshire, an enormous mansion with mysterious halls and galleries, in which he tried to realize his dreams of Oriental luxury. Vathek was written in French and published in France in 1787. It was translated from the French manuscript by Samuel Henley, an English scholar, and published in London in 1786, without Beckford’s consent. Among other things, Vathek is noteworthy for its descriptions of Oriental “magic,” and its employment of what may be called the “labyrinth motive.” This motive appears in the stories of all ages, its classic example being the story of the labyrinth at Crete (which was, perhaps, really a palace). It is used in some of Scott’s novels (notably Woodstock), and in many novels of Roman life, in which the characters have to pass through a series of dark and intricate passages in the catacombs at Rome, or cut in the rock near some city of Egypt. The use of Eastern magic is sometimes combined with this motive and so appears in more than one novel of Roman life. The influence of Vathek and the “Oriental” romance, considered apart from other varieties of the Gothic romance, on the novel of Roman life, is considerable.

The true historical romance is even more important in its relation to our subject. In tracing its development before Scott, the first important example is found to be Longsword, Earl of Salisbury, an Historical Romance (1762), attributed to the Rev. Thomas Leland, of Dublin. This romance reproduces feudal scenes such as are found in Shakespeare’s historical plays, and anticipates many of the elements of Scott’s historical romances. While the story is told, however,[20] with the detail of an authentic historical document, it lacks historical perspective. Longsword stood alone for a time, except for Clara Reeve’s Old English Baron (1777): this romance of Clara Reeve’s combined historical and “Gothic” incidents, as already mentioned, and had the effect of adding historical details to the customary castle and ghost in the Gothic romance. But in 1783 appeared The Recess, which is the first of a series of historical romances down to Scott, and marks a closer approach to the true historical novel. Its theme is the same as that of Kenilworth; and may owe something to Shakespeare’s Anthony and Cleopatra, as Kenilworth does. Many of this series of romances do, in fact, derive their history from Shakespeare’s historical dramas. They show an increasing attention to the facts of history, which culminates in the romances of Jane Porter. Jane Porter’s imaginative treatment of history far surpasses any previous attempts. Her Thaddeous of Warsaw is almost wholly historical, though deficient in characterization and plot; while in preparing to write The Scottish Chiefs she actually visited the places which she intended to describe.

Jane Porter may fairly be given the credit for developing the use of historical background to a point of perfection, and so preparing the way for Scott. Moreover, Scott, with all his romantic imagination, owes something to the “Gothic” romancers, who preceded him. What, then, did Scott himself add to the historical novel? Bearing in mind our definition of the historical novel, two points are to be considered essential in our answer: He added (1) the realistic sketch of the manners of the past; (2) characters who are real beings, who represent human nature. These two points are suggested by Scott in his General Preface to the Waverly Novels. It is clear that while he is speaking of two circumstances which led him to finish Waverly, his words are to be applied to the whole series of the Waverly novels. The circumstance which led Scott to undertake to reproduce faithfully the manners of the past was his completion,[21] in 1808, of the unfinished romance of the antiquarian, Joseph Strutt. This romance was called Queen-hoo-Hall, and described the time of Henry the Sixth; it attempted to give a “pleasing representation of the manners and amusements of our forefathers.” (Strutt’s Preface.) Scott perceived that the reason for its failure was the author’s “rendering his language too ancient, and displaying his antiquarian knowledge too liberally”; and resolved to avoid the mistake “by rendering a similar work more light and obvious to general comprehension.”[11] Strutt showed that the historical novelist should attempt an exact reproduction of the past; but Scott further made it clear that the manners of the past cannot be reproduced with realistic effect, if the author relies solely on antiquarian knowledge, or if he fails to bring his description home to readers of the present, in terms intelligible to the majority of them.

역사 소설에서 더욱 중요한 것은 스코틀랜드 사람들을 위해 스코틀랜드의 사람들을 위해 한 일, 미스 에지워스가 아일랜드 사람들을 위해 한 일, 즉 모든 계급과 사회의 조건을 가진 스카치 사람들을 독자들 앞에 데려 와서 그의 페이지에서 인간의 삶을 묘사하려는 스콧의 결심이었습니다. 스콧은 특히 비천한 삶에서 가져온 캐릭터를 다룰 때 현실 주의자입니다. 그러나 그의 현실주의는 일부 비평가들이 우리에게 믿게 할 것처럼 비천한 삶에만 국한되지 않습니다. 그의 위대한 역사적 인물은 사실이며, 종종 낭만적이고 문학적 대우를받습니다. 그러나 그들조차도 인간의 손길이 부족하지 않으며, 어쨌든 충분히 인간적인 인물을 포함시킴으로써 적절한 균형이 유지됩니다. 스콧의 소설을 견뎌야 할 가치로 만든 것은 인간 본성에 대한 그의 충실한 표현이다. 몇 년 전 영국이나 미국을 다루든, 고대 로마의 외딴 시대를 다루든, 어떤 위대한 역사 소설에 대해서도 똑같은 말을 할 수 있습니다. 역사 소설을 쓰는 스콧의 계획은 실제 인간의 모든 속성을 지닌 상상의 인물을 창조하고 그것을 역사적 속에 배치하는 것이 었습니다.[22] 배경, 몇 가지 역사적인 문자가 포함되어 있습니다. 이 계획은 주로 로마의 삶을 쓰는 사람들을 포함하여 그의 시대부터 성공적인 역사 소설가들에 의해 이어졌으며 과거의 삶을 현실적인 효과로 묘사하는 데 가장 잘 적응한 것으로 보입니다.

이제 로마의 삶이 "역사 소설"이라고 불릴 수있는 것에 처음 그려 졌을 때 질문 될 수 있습니다. 스콧이 그 형태의 글쓰기에서 표준과 패션을 똑같이 설정 한 기간 전에 이것에 대한 증거가 발견되어야하는지 여부. 고전적 주제는 많은 형태의 영국 문학에서 큰 자리를 차지해 왔지만, 소설이 아닌 다른 형태의 문학에서 가져온 예를 제시하는 것은 적절하지 않다는 것을 기억해야합니다. 고전 주제에 대한 메디발 전설의 초기 번역과 재 작업은 말할 것도없고, Chaucer는 고전적인 주제를 풍부하게 사용하며 그의 Troilus와 Cressida는 구절로 쓰여 졌음에도 불구하고 거의 모든면에서 현대 역사 소설에 접근한다는 것을 기억하는 것이 좋습니다. 우리가 현대 산문 소설로 이어지는 형태로 로마 생활의 초기 프리젠 테이션을 찾고 있다면, 우리는 열일곱 세기의 우화적인 준 역사적 로맨스로 전환해야합니다. 영국에 대해 주장 될 수있는 그들 중 하나는 존 바클레이 (John Barclay)의 아르제니스 (Argenis, 1621)입니다. 스카치 아버지와 프랑스 어머니 중 프랑스에서 태어난 바클레이는 영국에서 한동안 살았고 마침내 이탈리아로 가서 라틴어로 아르제니스를 썼다. 그것은 자신의 시대의 중요한 역사적 인물을 묘사하지만 고전적인 이름으로 묘사합니다. 그 장면은 고전 국가에 배치되며 이야기는 로마의 삶과 관습의 관점에서 이야기됩니다. 결혼은 주노와 루시나에게 헌정된 성전에서 행해지고, 대제사장들은 예식을 행하며, 신부 일행은 하이멘과 아폴로를 기른다. 바클레이는 영국에서 유행했던 일련의 프랑스 로맨스를위한 길을 열었습니다. 이것은 로저 보일 (Roger Boyle)이 속한 문학 사회의 형성으로 이어졌다. 그의 파르테니사 (Parthenissa, 1654)는 바클레이 (Barclay)와 같은 또 다른 역사적 우화입니다. 그것은 몇 가지 위대한 로마 전쟁을 혼란스럽게하여 한니발과 스파르타쿠스를 데려옵니다.[23] 같은 장면으로. [12] 그러한 로맨스는 소설의 형태로 로마 생활의 어떤 것을 보여 주지만, 현대 역사 소설에서 어떤면에서는 멀리 떨어져 있습니다. 그리고 우리가 스콧 시대로 돌아가서 역사 소설의 완전히 발전된 형태로 로마 생활의 묘사를 찾는 것이 가장 좋을 것입니다.

A. 로마 생활의 첫 번째 진정한 소설

고대 로마가 번성했던 과거의 삶을 현대 소설의 형태로 묘사하려는 영어의 첫 번째 중요한 시도는 로마 이야기 인 발레리우스 (Valerius)에 나타납니다. 그 저자가 월터 스콧 경의 사위인 존 G. 록하트였다는 것은 단순한 우연의 일치로 간주되어서는 안 된다. 처음 출판 된 1821 년은 케닐 워스와 해적의 출현으로 표시되었습니다. 케닐워스에서 스콧은 셰익스피어의 안토니우스와 클레오파트라에게 많은 빚을 졌는데, 이는 고전적 주제를 가진 연극이다. 스콧이 소설에서 과거를 어떻게 제시할 수 있는지를 보여주고 있는 동안, 고전 학자인 록하트가 이런 형태로 고전 자료를 사용하기로 결정한 것은 당연한 일이었다. 고전 시대는 다른 형태의 글쓰기에서 풍부한 자료와 진정한 영감을 제공했습니다. 발레리우스는 위대한 소설은 아니지만 영구적 인 가치의 특정 요소를 가지고 있습니다. 그것은 매우 철저하고 학문적 인 작품이며, 균형이 잘 잡히고 정확합니다. 기독교와 이교도의 캐릭터는 상당히 잘 수행되었으며, 그 장면은 어느 정도의 사실주의, 원형 극장, 로마의 혼잡 한 거리, 법원 및 교외 빌라를 나타냅니다. 기독교가 지나치게 강조되지는 않지만, 기독교인이 된 늙은 군인 트라소의 순교는 진정한 파토스로 묘사됩니다. 이 이야기는 잔인한 폭군이 아닌 대중적인 통치자로 정당하게 대표되는 트라야누스 시대에 펼쳐진다. 관습적인 사용은 플리니가 트라야누스와 교인에 대한 서신, 즉 그리스도인들에 대한 대우에 관한 서신으로 이루어진다. 이 책은 그렇지 않습니다.[24] 유머가 없다면, 일반적인 음색은 진지하고 철학이 너무 많이 포함되어 있습니다. 그것은 Bulwer의 폼페이 마지막 날 다음 해인 1835 년에 다시 출판되었습니다. 발레리우스는 로마 생활의 첫 번째 소설로 간주 될 수 있습니다. 이것은 뉴먼 추기경이 수년 후 칼리스타의 서문에서 그것을 언급했던 것에 의해 암시된 것으로 보인다.

B. 로마 생활의 소설에 대한 "바텍"의 영향

1827년 토마스 무어는 《에피쿠리아》를 출판했다. 이것은 로맨스로 분류되며, 아라비아 이야기 인 Vathek의 William Beckford의 작품과 유사하고 영감을 얻었습니다. 무어의 The Epicurean은 Vathek에서 이집트 마술에 대한 설명과 "미로 동기"의 사용을 취합니다. [13] 이것들은 Bulwer의 폼페이 마지막 날 (1834)에서 수정 된 형태로 나타나는 것들입니다. 그러나 에피쿠리아는 환상적인 성격에도 불구하고 디오클레티아누스 치하의 아프리카에서 기독교인들의 박해에 대한 현실적인 묘사와 기독교와 이교도의 철학 체계(에피쿠레아니즘)의 대조를 담고 있다. 그 이야기가 독자를 로마로 데려 가지 않지만, Epicurean은 로마의 통치하에 그리스와 이집트의 삶을 대표하며, 로마 생활의 소설의 기원에서 한 걸음 내딛는 단계로 간주되어야합니다. 그것은 발레리우스에서 발견되지 않는 새로운 요소를 대표하지만, 로마 생활의 후기 소설에서 자주 나타납니다. 무어가 그의 모델이라고 말한 Vathek은 "동양"로맨스로 언급되었으며, 이런 종류의 로맨스는 다양한 "고딕"입니다. 그리고 "동양적"로맨스의 특정 요소가이 초기 시대의 로마 생활의 소설에 나타날 때, 그들이 단지 에피쿠리아 인에서 왔다고 말하는 것보다 바텍의 영향에 그들의 존재를 돌리는 것이 더 논리적입니다. 그러나 우리는이 시점에서 Vathek의 영향뿐만 아니라 그 시대의 다른 문헌과는 완전히 별개의 것으로 간주해야합니다.[25] 에피쿠리안의 영웅은 래드클리프 부인과 바이런 부인과 관련하여 이미 언급된 "바이로닉 영웅"이기 때문이다. 이 저자들에게 호소했던 자연의 끔찍한 측면은 이집트의 "마술"과 결합 된 에피쿠레아 (Epicurean)에 나타납니다. 입문이라는 신비를 통과하는 영웅은 울부짖는 바람과 돌진하는 물에 둘러싸여 있습니다. 따라서 에피쿠리아는 첫 번째 계급보다 훨씬 낮은 것으로 보이지만,[14] 고딕 양식의 로맨스가 다양한 발전과 함께 로마 생활의 초기 소설에 미친 영향을 보여주기 때문에 중요합니다.

C. "바이로닉 로맨스"가 로마 생활의 소설에 미치는 영향

1829년에[15] 조지 크롤리에 의해 처음으로 출판되었는데, 살라티엘(Salathiel)이라고 불리는 과거, 현재, 미래의 이야기이다. 그것은 폭 넓은 인기를 즐겼으며 영국과 미국 모두에서 호의적으로 검토되었습니다. 살라티엘, 불멸자, 또는 방황하는 유대인과 같은 제목의 변형과 함께 다른 시간에 발행되었습니다. 마침내 그것은 1901 년에 Tarry Thou, Till I Come, 또는 Salathiel, Wandering Jew라는 제목으로 사후에 개정되고 재출판되었습니다. 이 마지막 판은 T. de Thulstrup에 의해 풍부한 소개와 부록, 그리고 아름답게 정확한 삽화와 함께 다소 정교한 스타일로 출판되었습니다. 특히 주목할만한 것은 루이스 월러스 장군의 입문 편지인데, 그는 여섯 편의 가장 위대한 영국 소설을 훌륭하게 선택하면서 "Hypatia와 Croly의 로맨스"를 포함합니다. "여섯 가지 가장 위대한 것"에 대한 그의 선택은 드문 일이지만, 그는 Tarry Thou, Till I Come에 대한지지에 대한 매우 건전한 이유를 제시합니다. 월리스 장군, 누가 최고인가[26] 그의 벤 허 (Ben Hur)로 유명한 그는 또한 무슬림 시대의 유대인의 방황을 묘사하면서 방황하는 유대인의 주제를 다루는 인도 왕자 (The Prince of India)를 저술했습니다.

Croly는 더블린에서 1780 년에 태어 났으며 1860 년에 사망했습니다. 살라티엘에서 그는 어린 시절에 지배적이었던 바이런 (Byron)과 무어 (Moore)의 학교를 따른다. 이 책의 스타일은 색칠의 따뜻함으로 특징 지어지며 Croly는 강력한 상황을 다루는 데 탁월합니다. 영원한 어둠에 둘러싸여 있고 다른 사람들로부터 자랑스러운 혐오감을 보여주는 살라티엘의 성격은 "바이로닉 영웅"의 많은 것을 가지고 있습니다. 자연의 끔찍한 측면은 또한 이야기 전반에 걸쳐 바이로닉 방식으로 많은 효과를 발휘합니다. Croly는 한 장에서 이런 종류의 작업에서 최선을 다하고 있습니다.이 장에는 병든 마음의 방황이라는 제목이 주어졌으며 Salathiel의 상상의 시련의 현실을 나타냅니다. 이 장에서 화산 폭발에 대한 설명은 몇 년 후 폼페이의 마지막 날들에서 Bulwer가 만든 비슷한 설명을 암시합니다. 살라티엘의 장면은 로마에서 열리지 않지만, 처음부터 독자는 로마 권력에 대한 유대인의 증오의 강도를 느낍니다. 타락한 유대의 로마 총독 제시우스 플로루스는 강탈자와 폭군에 대한 그의 능력으로 잘 묘사되어 있다. 그는 살라티엘을 로마로 보내며, 이야기의 이 시점에서 우리는 네로의 시대를 다루는 로마 생활의 소설에서 많은 중요한 요소들을 짧은 공간에 부여받는다. 고문의 죽음으로 침착하게 유죄 판결을받은 죄수가 있으며, 황제는 거짓말쟁이에 대한 연습을 가장합니다. 로마에서의 불은 강력하게 묘사되고, 그것이 끝났을 때, 그것에 대한 비난은 기독교인들에게 붙어 있습니다. 기독교인들은 원형 극장에서 고문을 당하거나 야수들에게 찢겨져 죽는다. 그들은 네로의 정원에서 살아있는 횃불 역할을하도록 만들어졌습니다. 그리고 마침내 박해가 중단됩니다. 비록 그의 이름이 언급되지는 않았지만, 성 바오로의 순교는 죽음에 직면한 그의 불굴의 정신과 용기를 묘사하는 방식으로 전해진다.

나머지 이야기의 장면은 다시 유대에 놓여 있으며, 사건의 이야기는 포착으로 절정에 이릅니다.[27] 로마 군대에 의해 예루살렘의 요셉은 요세푸스에서 빼앗긴다. [16]이 책의 이 부분에서 로마인은 왕자와 사령관 티투스의 모습과 로마 군대의 병사들과 장교들에 의해 가장 잘 표현된다. 로마 군대의 분열은 위대한 사실주의로 묘사되며, 태양 아래 거의 모든 부족과 국가에서 온 것처럼 모집됩니다. 성벽 밖에서 로마인과 유대인 사이의 치열한 투쟁은 필사적 인 싸움의 가장 훌륭한 그림이 어떤 소설에서도 발견 될 수있는 기회를 제공합니다. 스토리 텔링에서 가장 오래된 동기 중 하나 인 "미로 동기"는 살라티엘의 후반부에서 여러 번 사용됩니다. 그것은 비밀 지하 통로에 의해 마사다 요새로 들어가는 그의 입구에 대한 설명에서 많은 독창성으로 사용됩니다. 그리고 다시, 감옥에서 탈출했을 때, 그는 해적 동굴의 비밀 뒷 입구에서 실수를 저질렀다는 것을 알게됩니다.

살라티엘은 고귀한 언어가 주제의 웅장함에 적합한 진정으로 위대한 로맨스입니다. "로맨스"는 책 전체를 묘사하기에 적절한 단어이지만, 개별 구절은 발레리우스 또는 에피쿠레아의 페이지에서 어떤 것도 훨씬 능가하는 현실적인 효과를 나타냅니다. 더욱이, 그것은 Croly가 진정한 학습, 고전 [17] 및 다른 사람의 사람이었기 때문에 역사적인 기초에서 건전합니다. 다른 한편으로는, 그가 큐레이터 였기 때문에, 그가 종교적 선전을 전파하려는 의도로 살라티엘을 썼다고 가정해서는 안됩니다. 감옥에 갇히고 십자가에 못 박히기를 기다리는 그리스도인들이 최고의 신앙을 보이는 장면은 엄청난 의미 중 하나입니다. 그러나 이것은 책의 다른 많은 장면들에 대해 말할 수 있습니다. 비록 그것이 관심을 흡수하는 이야기가 아니더라도, 살라티엘은 위대한 삽화로 인해 소설에서 높은 지위를 차지할 자격이 있을 것이다.[28] principles in life, and its powerful revelation of eternal truths.

D. THE NOVEL OF ROMAN LIFE IN A FULLY DEVELOPED FORM

In 1834 was published Bulwer’s[18] Last Days of Pompeii, which probably has been as widely read, and for as long a period as any other historical novel. Men still live who consider Bulwer among the greatest of English novelists; and if one were to select only one book for which he is especially remembered, I believe The Last Days of Pompeii would have equal claims with such a novel as The Last of the Barons, to which critics usually assign a higher place. The Last Days of Pompeii was a new thing of its kind; it represents a new departure in the historical novel, and in the novel of Roman life. It is true that there remain in it certain elements of the Byronism, which was still so prevalent in the novel of the day, but these elements cannot merely be dismissed as defects. There is the Byronic passion for the terrible in nature, which reaches its height in the unsurpassed description of the eruption of Vesuvius, and its terrible effects. The “Byronic hero,” moreover, can easily be seen in the disguise of Arbaces, the Egyptian, who is surrounded by an air of mystery, and has a lofty scorn of the common herd of mankind. Moreover, Arbaces, to secure his ends, has recourse to Egyptian “magic,” the intricacy and subtlety of which had been well represented in The Epicurean. Such motives as these, however, have already been discussed, together with their relation to the novel of Roman life. Let us see what Bulwer added to this particular variety of the historical novel.

It will be recalled that Scott (who must be considered Bulwer’s most important predecessor in the field), in writing his historical novels, always made use of historical characters and events, as well as of purely imaginary characters and events. Bulwer departed from this program, in the[29] first instance, by reducing the number of historical events,—the eruption being the only important one. Moreover, he succeeded, with no loss of effect, in replacing the “historical” characters, which are usually necessary to the historical novel, by imaginary characters such as he perceived would be in harmony with the time he described. This omission of “historical” characters is to be accounted for by Bulwer’s choice of scene. Having chosen Pompeii (and not Rome) for his scene, and finding there were no “historical” characters suitable for a novel portraying the life of this brilliant Campanian city, he decided to make up for their absence by lending an almost “historical” reality to his imaginary characters. Scott had made his imaginary characters appear to be real men and women by reproducing real men and women whom he had observed; Bulwer, in writing The Last Days of Pompeii, undertook the more difficult task of representing men and women who might well have lived in the times of ancient Rome,—and succeeds rather well. Around these characters he decided to weave a narrative which would reproduce exactly the life of the time,—and in this he succeeds admirably. Scott had been warned by the mistake made by the antiquary, Joseph Strutt, in a misuse of antiquarian details. Bulwer was an antiquarian of an entirely different sort; he revelled in the use of details, but in putting them into his story, made the whole conduce toward realistic effect. He had read widely in Latin and Greek literature; he climbed Mt. Vesuvius and learned all he could by actual observation, filing every detail in huge commonplace books; he studied Roman antiquities, and compared the results of his study with the manners of modern Italians. In short, he realized in his imagination the decadent life of Pompeii as it had actually been just before the eruption of Vesuvius, and reproduced it in the pages of The Last Days of Pompeii. While Bulwer, therefore, did not reproduce historical characters and events in quite the same way that Scott did, he makes an even more concrete use, than Scott did, of that life of the past which[30] is not recorded in formal history. He views the past from the standpoint of the philosopher as well as from that of the student of human nature. Moreover, he seeks for permanent truths in human nature, rather than for merely picturesque elements.

폼페이의 마지막 날들의 제목과 주제는 처음에는 같은 제목의 그림으로 불워의 마음에 구체적으로 제안되었다. 그는 일기장에서 밀라노의 브레라 갤러리 (Brera Gallery)의 컬렉션 중 하나였으며 "천재, 상상력 및 자연으로 가득했습니다. 얼굴은 괜찮아요, 개념이 웅장합니다." 그리고 저자가 1834 년 판 서문에서 말했듯이, 그의 주제에 대해 "재앙, 폼페이의 파괴"를 선택했기 때문에 폼페이에게 이야기가 엄격하게 제한되어야한다는 것을 인식하기 위해서는 예술의 더 높은 원칙에 대한 통찰력이 거의 필요하지 않았습니다. 로마의 강력한 화려함과 대조적으로, 생생한 캄파니아 도시의 사치품과 가우드는 무의미하게 가라 앉았을 것입니다. 그녀의 끔찍한 운명은 제국의 광활한 바다에서 사소하고 고립 된 난파선처럼 보였을 것입니다. " 따라서 Bulwer는 "그의 이야기의 캐릭터를 지휘하는 유혹을 피하기로 결정했습니다 ... 폼페이에서 로마에 이르기까지, "다른 사람들에게 로마의 공허하지만 장엄한 문명을 묘사하는 영광을 남겼다." 이 인용문의 마지막 부분은 우리에게 특히 중요합니다. Bulwer는 준비 연구에서 로마뿐만 아니라 폼페이 (Pompeii) 근처에서 많은 시간을 보냈습니다. 폼페이의 마지막 날의 이야기가 실제로 로마로 가지 않지만, 분출에 대한 설명을 제외하고 모든 중요한 요소는 제국 도시의 이야기로 옮겨 질 수 있습니다. 따라서 Bulwer의 소설은 로마 생활의 소설이 명확한 유형으로 확고하게 확립되었음을 보여 줄뿐만 아니라 그 시대 이래로 로마 생활의 모든 중요한 소설을위한 길을 제시하고 보여줍니다. 로마인과 이탈리아인, 폼페이의 그리스인 및 다른 외국인들의 혼합은 로마의 하이브리드 인구를 암시한다. 이시스와 그녀의 사제인 이집트 아르바세스에 대한 경배는 로마에서 다양한 형태의 이교도 종교를 시사할 뿐만 아니라,[31] 또한 로마와 알렉산드리아와 나일 문명의 중요한 연결; 이러한 이교도의 미신들과 함께 기독교의 초기 투쟁 (올린투스와 그의 개종자들로 대표됨)은 로마에서 기독교인들의 훨씬 더 큰 시련을 회상한다. 분화구의 마녀는 주문과 선동으로 쿠마의 시빌 중 한 명과 로마 생활의 후기 소설에서 로마에 등장하는 달래는 사람들을 생각 나게합니다. Bulwer의 소설의 사소한 사건과 사회의 매너에 대한 그의 묘사는 또한 장면이 로마인 소설에서 사용됩니다. 연회와 환희, 목욕탕에서의 안락 의자와 원형 극장에서의 관중들의 삶, 검투사의 습관과 유령, 포럼의 바쁜 윙윙 거리는 소리는 Bulwer가 나중에 소설가들에게 묘사하는 방법을 보여준 모든 것입니다. 그는 키케로 시대에 자신의 인물을 이야기하게해서는 안된다는 것을 깨달았고, 역사 소설가가 "현대 언어로 고대 매너를 설명해야한다"는 스콧 (Ivanhoe의 서문에서 표명 됨)의 의견을 의심의 여지없이 받아들입니다. Bulwer의 방법은 스콧의 방법과 다소 달랐습니다. 그러나 그의 목적은 본질적으로 동일했다. 그의 이상은 1834 년 판 서문 끝에 공정하게 명시되어 있습니다., viz., "내가 그리려고 시도한 시대의 특징과 의상에"충실한 초상화를 제시합니다. 그것이 (훨씬 더 중요한 것은) 모든 시대의 요소들이 동일한 인간의 열정과 인간의 마음을 공정하게 표현하는 것이기를 바랍니다." 그가 자신의 목적을 얼마나 잘 달성하고 자신의 이상을 깨달았는지는 폼페이의 마지막 날들에서 충분히 보여진다. Bulwer를 따라온 로마 생활의 소설 작가들은 몇 가지 측면에서 그를 능가했습니다. 그들의 목적은 본질적으로 그의 목적과 동일해야합니다. 그들의 이상은 더 높을 수 없습니다.

1834 년이 끝나기 전에 발레리우스와 폼페이의 마지막 날은 거의 전적으로 고대 로마 또는 그 근처에 장면이 놓여있는 유일한 두 가지 중요한 소설입니다. [19] 이[32] 사실은 소설의 역사가들에 의해 입증된다; 그러나 동시대 인 중 한 명이 표현 한 저자의 작품에 대한 의견을 듣지 않고 만족하지 못하면 Archibald Alison 경 (유럽의 역사, 1815-52, ch. V)의 찬사를 받았습니다. 그는 발레리우스에 대해 "고대 이야기에 현대 생활의 관심을 불러 일으키기 위해 아직 만들어진 가장 성공적인 시도 : 극단적 인 어려움은 Bulwer의 뛰어난 천재성이 사업에서 그와 경쟁했다는 것에 의해 판단 될 수있다"고 말했다. 1834년 이전에 쓰여진 다른 책이 있다면, 모든 면에서 "로마 생활의 소설"이라는 칭호를 받을 자격이 있다면, 나는 그것을 추적할 수 없었고, 그렇게 했다고 주장하는 다른 어떤 책도 알지 못한다. 로마 생활의 소설의 기원을 고려할 때, 발레리우스가 먼저 일반적인 윤곽을 표시하고, 폼페이의 마지막 날은 완전하고 예술적인 형태를 확립한다고 확신 할 수 있습니다.

[33]

III
1834 년부터 현재까지 로마 생활의 소설 개발의 주요 노선

불워의 소설 시대부터 현재까지 로마 생활의 소설이 발전하면서 따라온 주요 발전 노선을 고려할 때, 한 가지 사실은 상당히 명백하게 보이지만 지나치게 강조 될 수는 없습니다. 로마 생활에 대한 중요한 소설은 매우 높은 수준의 고전적 학문이 부족한 저자에 의해 쓰여지지 않았습니다. 말할 필요도없이, 그러한 학문은 고도로 재배 된 지성의 소유를 의미하며, 단순한 책 학습 또는 현학주의보다 훨씬 뛰어납니다. 이 분야에 대한 일반적인 조사에서 이런 종류의 학문은 위대한 학자이자 설교자 인 찰스 킹슬리 (Charles Kingsley)에 의해 소유되었으며, 현학적인 비평가들이 그의 "역사"에 관해 말한 것에도 불구하고 그의 히파티아에서 정교하게 예시 된 것으로 보인다. 킹슬리 이후, 설교자이기도 했던 다른 위대한 학자들은 로마 생활의 소설을 보편적 진리를 제시하는 수단으로 만들었다. 그러한 설교자들 외에도, 에베르스, 에크슈타인, 그리고 독일의 스콧의 다른 추종자들 - 그의 고전 소설은 Quo Vadis (1896) 시대 이전의 로마 생활의 영국 소설에 해외에서 가장 중요한 영향을 미쳤으며, 장학금 문제에서 절대적인 철저함의 가치를 보여주었습니다. 그들은 때때로 세부적인 사항에 지나치게 중점을 두기 위해 신중한 연구를 이끌었지만, 종종 보편적 인 진리의 분위기를 그들의 작품에 제공하는 데 성공했습니다. "덜컹거리는 좋은 이야기"를 말하거나 로마 생활의 화려한 그림을 연달아 제시하는 것이 주된 목적이었던 소설가들은 현실적인 효과를 얻을 수 있다면 곧 학문적 정확성의 필요성을 깨닫게되었습니다. 이것은 검투사 (1863)의 저자 인 Whyte-Melville과 Ben Hur (1880)를 저술 한 Lew Wallace 장군에게 사실이지만, 후자는 다소 학자였으며 더 심각한 목적을 가지고 있음을 인정해야합니다. 이[34] 장학금 사업을 한 남성의 성공은 카이사르의 친구 (1900)의 윌리엄 스턴스 데이비스 (William Stearns Davis)와 Andivius Hedulio (1921)의 에드워드 루카스 화이트 (Edward Lucas White)의 최근의보다 최근의 훌륭한 작품에서 그 자체로 말해줍니다. 그러나 참된 학문적 마음의 가장 훌륭한 열매는 이제까지 지적인 것, 무신론자, 생각과 표현의 아름다운 것을 가리켜 왔다. 월터 패터의 마리우스 (Marius, Epicurean, 1885)의 생각과 표현의 아름다움은 아마도 영국 산문 소설에서 결코 능가되지 않았을 것입니다. 그러나 Pater의 작품의 품질에 대한 몇 가지 접근법은 Veranilda (1904)의 George Gissing에서 볼 수 있으며, Eden Philpotts의 Pan and the Twins (1922)의 일부에서 더 큰 유사성이 나타납니다. 이와 같은 소설가들은 평범한 관찰자에게 보이는 삶을 묘사 할뿐만 아니라 표면 아래에서 진리와 아름다움을 추구하는 사람들에게만 존재하는 많은 것들에 대한 훌륭한 인식을 가능하게하려고합니다.

A. 위대한 설교자들의 학문의 증거를 보여주는 로마인의 삶의 소설

먼저 위대한 설교자들의 학문에 대한 명백한 증거를 보여주는 소설에서 볼 수있는 로마 생활의 소설 발전의 단계를 생각해 봅시다. 이전에 주어진 로마 생활의 최고의 소설의 제한된 목록 중 상당 부분은 설교자가 쓴 소설로 구성됩니다. 이제 로마 생활의 소설을 정의 할 때, 그 책들은 배제되었으며, 로마 생활을 종교 교육을위한 인위적인 배경으로 만 사용합니다. 그러나 로마 생활의 소설, 또는 실제로 어떤 형태의 역사 소설, 직간접적으로 어떤 가치있는 종류의 가르침을 제시 할 수있는 자유를 부인하는 것은 분명히 불필요한 제한 일 것입니다. 영원한 가치를 지닌 많은 것들을 가르치지 않고서는 고대 로마의 삶을 진정으로 묘사하는 것은 불가능합니다. 더욱이, 설교자들이 쓴 로마 생활의 중요한 소설들이 그들의 유일한 목적으로서 기독교의 설교를 가지고 있다고 가정하는 데에는 중대한 오류가 있다. 그들은 또한[35] 오직 그리스도인들만으로도, 그리고 기독교를 압도했던 이교도의 삶에 대한 공정한 대표성을 부정하는 것이다. 이 사건에 대한 더 공정한 진술은 학문적 성취의 설교자들이 로마 제국의 형성과 기독교의 시작으로 특징 지어지는 세계 역사의 그 기간에 대한 연구를 통해 로마 생활에 대한 글을 쓰는 데 탁월하게 적합하다고 말하는 것입니다. 결과적으로 그들은 초기 그리스도인들의 삶이 고대 로마의 삶의 필수적인 부분으로 자연스럽게 나타나는 소설을 제작했습니다. 로마의 삶의 소설에 그리스도인들의 삶을 포함시키는 것이 절대적으로 필요한 것은 아니지만, 우리의 모든 설교자 - 저자가 그렇게했습니다. 그러나 그리스도의 시대 이후에 펼쳐진 이야기인 소설에서 그렇게 하는 것이 더 자연스럽고, 그러한 소설의 거의 모든 저자들이 이것을 인식하는 것처럼 보였다. 마침내 학문적 설교자는 기독교와 이교도 세계 사이의 극적인 투쟁의 어떤 것을 제시할 뿐만 아니라 모든 사람들 중에서 가장 훌륭한 자격을 갖춘 사람임이 입증되었다. 또한 로마의 삶을 단순한 교훈주의의 수준보다 훨씬 높은 보편적 인 진리를 독자들에게 집으로 가져 오는 방식으로 묘사합니다. 그러한 진리가 저자에 의해 감지되고 설명되지 않는 한, 과거에 대한 어떤 묘사도 현실적인 효과의 전체 완성도에 도달 할 수 없습니다.

그러한 저자에 의한 로마 생활의 첫 번째 중요한 소설은 보스턴의 유니타리안 설교자이자 철저한 고전 학자 인 윌리엄 웨어 (William Ware) 목사의 작품이었습니다. 폼페이의 마지막 날이 등장한 지 3년이 지난 1837년, 그는 제노비아 또는 팔마이라의 몰락을 출판했다. 도자기는 의심 할 여지없이 Bulwer와 영국 제도의 다른 소설가들의 작품에 의해 로마 시대의 소설을 쓰게되었습니다. 그의 작품에는 Croly의 작품에 등장 한 Byronism이 없지만,이 연구에서 지금까지 소설이 논의 된 유일한 다른 설교자입니다. Ware가 제목과 주제를 선택할 때 영향을 미친 것은 그리 명확하지 않습니다. 1814 년까지 런던에서 오키프 (O'Keefe) 양에 의한 작품이 출판되었습니다. 제노비아, 팔마이라의 여왕, 내러티브 설립[36] 역사에. 이것은 천천히 움직이는 대화와 학교 역사 책의 스타일에 대한 내레이션을 결합하며 진정한 소설로 분류 될 수 없습니다. 역사에서 상당히 정확하지만, 그가 그것을 알고 있다고해도 Ware가 훨씬 우수한 작업에 영향을 미쳤을 정도로 충분한 공로가 없어 보입니다. 훨씬 더 가능성있는 추측은 도자기가 로마 제국의 무리에 대항하여 군대를 감히 이끌었던 유명한 여왕의 인생 이야기에 의해 그의 독서 과정에서 처음으로 끌렸다는 것입니다. 그런 다음 그는 역사 소설의 인기와 제노비아의 이야기의 사실이 쉽게 도출되는 출처에 대한 친숙함에서 소설을 쓰도록 격려를 받았다. 어쨌든, 제노비아는 지금까지 고려된 소설 중에서 (출판되었을 때) 원래의 역사적 출처에서 파생 된 역사적 사실을 정확하고 풍부하게 사용하는 데있어 Croly의 Salathiel에 의해서만 동등했습니다. Pollio, Zenobia, Vopiscus, Aurelian의 전기 작가 및 기타 역사가의 전기 작가는 중요한 요점을 확립하기 위해 정확하게 인용됩니다. 질문의 양쪽에 증거가있을 때, Ware는 그것을 매우 조심스럽게 평가합니다. 반면에, 그는 노트로 자신의 페이지를 혼잡하게하는 실수를하지 않습니다. 이것들은 두 권의 각 끝에있는 몇 페이지의 공간 내에서 응축됩니다.

제노비아는 L. Manlius Piso의 편지로 쓰여져 있는데, 그는 가을에 팔마이라에 있었던 것으로 추정되는 상상의 인물이며, 로마의 친구에게 편지를 쓴다. 첫 번째 편지는 그의 친구에게 그가 로마를 떠난 방법을 묘사하기 때문에, 그 장면은 로마에서 열린다고 말할 수 있으며, 제노비아가 아우렐리안에게 포로가 되었을 때 로마로 돌아온다. 더욱이, 피소의 성격은 분명히 로마인이며, 잔인하고 엄격한 황제 인 아우렐 리안 (Aurelian)은 진정한 로마인으로 나타납니다. 팔마이라 성벽 앞에서의 로마인들의 군사 작전과 제노비아를 포로로 삼아 로마에서 황제가 승리한 것은 잘 묘사되어 있다. 따라서 제노비아에는 로마의 삶이 많이 있습니다. 소위 "서신"또는 "리차드슨 (Richardsonian)"스타일은 무겁게 묘사적이지만 일반적인 효과는 건전함 중 하나이며 소설은 인상적입니다.[37] 둔하지 않습니다. 사실, 제노비아는 채색의 밝기와 Ware의 후기 책에서 어떤 것보다 우월한 현실의 분위기를 가지고 있습니다. 사소한 캐릭터가 강하게 눈에 띄지는 않지만, 그럼에도 불구하고 그들은 충분히 현실적이고 인간적입니다. 다른 캐릭터들이 보여준 모든 결함은 Ware의 제노비아 프리젠 테이션에서 속죄되며, 저자는 진정한 여성과 자랑스러운 여왕으로 성공적으로 묘사합니다. 도자기는 제노비아가 기독교에 대해 많이 들었지만 마침내 기독교인이되기로 결정하지 않았다는 것을 기록하는 역사에도 사실입니다. 설교자였지만, 그는 설교를 위해 사실을 바꾸기보다는 가능한 진리를 진술하는 것을 더 좋아했다. 이 글에서 그는 로마 생활의 소설을 쓰면서 그를 따랐던 다른 설교자-저자들의 길을 가리킨다. 제노비아는 첫 번째 출판물에서 널리 읽혀졌으며 1869 년에 사후에 출판되었을 때 동등한 성공을 거두었습니다.

제노비아의 성공으로 저자는 다음 해인 1838년에 속편을 출판하게 되었다. 이것은 로마의 황제 아우렐리안(Aurelian)이라고 불렸는데, 그 직후에 다시 출판되었고, 원래 제목은 프로버스였음에도 불구하고 그 제목으로 진행된다. 이 소설의 장면은 전적으로 로마에 놓여 있으며, 추정되는 내레이터는 마치 아우렐리안에서 살아남았고, 디오클레티아누스의 박해를 보았고, 마침내 콘스탄티누스 밑에서 안전을 누린 것처럼 말한다. 제노비아와 마찬가지로 아우렐리안은 편지 형태로 쓰여진다. 이 편지들은 캐릭터 중 한 명의 자유인에 의해 수집 된 것으로 추정됩니다. 기독교로의 개종에 관한 이야기가 담겨 있지만, 아우렐리안은 어떤 종류의 선전으로도 분류되어서는 안 된다. 그 안에 어떤 설교가 있든 간에, 박해 아래 있는 그리스도인들의 고통을 현실적으로 묘사하는 것에 불과하다. 기독교인들이 다양한 형태의 고문에 복종하는 장면은 결코 과장되지 않으며, 경기장에서 그들 중 일부의 순교는 설득력있는 방식으로 묘사됩니다. 로마 생활에서 기독교의 위치에 대한 과도한 강조는 황제를 기독교인 중 어느 누구보다 더 중요한 인물로 만듦으로써 어느 정도 피할 수 있습니다. 오렐리안[38] 황제가 지배적 인 인물 인 한 가지 중요한 인물의 책입니다. 웨어의 두 번째 소설은 오렐리안 시대의 로마에서의 삶의 일부 측면을 충실하게 묘사하기 때문에 진정으로 로마 생활의 소설이라고 불릴 수 있습니다. 그러나 이 끔찍한 시대에도 로마의 삶에는 그리스도인들에 대한 박해 외에 다른 것들이 있었다. 그리고 그림에 이들 중 일부를 포함시킴으로써보다 완전한 효과를 얻었을 것입니다. 잘못은 다른 요소의 누락만큼 한 요소를 지나치게 강조하지 않습니다. 저자는 로마에서의 삶에 대한 그의 연구에 신중했지만, 그 연구를 로마 생활의 단일 단계로 너무 많이 제한했다. 그의 동시대 인 중 한 명인 미스 미트포드 (Miss Mitford)는 그녀의 문학 회고록에서 아우렐리안 (Aurelian)에 대해 "현대 습관이나 사고 방식의 흔적이 아니다"라고 말했지만 이것은 순전히 부정적인 칭찬입니다. 이 소설은 고대 로마의 습관과 사고 방식을 묘사합니다. 그 심리학은 그리스도인들과 그들의 박해자들의 경우에 좋다. 제노비아에 나타난 것처럼 역사의 더 큰 사실들을 아주 똑같이 사용하지는 않았지만, 도자기는 로마의 간첩 체계에 대한 그의 세밀한 묘사와 세계의 로마 주인들에게 전시 된 성격의 특성에 대한 그의 오렐리안에서의 그의 학문을 특히 잘 보여주었습니다. 그 음색이 오늘날의 취향에 비해 너무 불길하지만, 아우렐리안은 그 시대에 큰 인상을 남겼으며 로마 생활의 소설 발전에 중요한 역할을합니다.

1841년에 출판된 웨어의 세 번째 소설은 줄리안(Julian)이라고 불렸다. 유대의 장면들. 이것은 또한 편지의 형태로 작성됩니다. 그리고 그 이야기는 부유 한 젊은 유대인의 말로 전해지는데, 그는 로마를 떠나 머물렀던 곳을 떠나 고향으로 돌아갑니다. 율리우스는 로마의 삶에 대한 소설이라고 할 수 없는데, 그 이유는 대체 제목에서 알 수 있듯이 대부분의 행동은 유대에서 일어나기 때문이다. 그리고 그것은 로마인에 대한 묘사보다는 유대인의 국가 생활에 대한 묘사에서 오히려 탁월합니다. 그러나 로마 제국의 웅장함과 범위에 대한 훌륭한 개념은 젊은 유대인의 여행에 대한 묘사에 의해 제공됩니다. 현실적인 터치는 다음과 같습니다.[39] 아시아 도시의 위엄있는 건물과 경기장에서 게임을 위해 선적되는 야생 동물의 사진에 추가되었습니다. 더욱이 로마 총독 빌라도와 유대에 있는 로마 병사들의 묘사는 훌륭한 스트로크로 이루어진다. 그러나 로마의 삶의 소설의 발전과 관련하여 줄리안에서 중요한 것은 그것이 그 유형에 접근하는 첫 번째 소설이라는 것인데, 그것은 중심 주제에 대해 예수 그리스도의 삶의 이야기를 가지고 있습니다. 신약성경의 영감받은 서사의 힘의 절반으로 이 이야기를 전하는 것은 어떤 소설가의 힘을 넘어서는 것이지만, 심지어 미약하게 되돌렸을 때조차도, 그것과 관련하여 만들어진 로마의 삶에 대한 묘사는 무의미하게 창백해질 것이 확실할 정도로 엄청난 의미를 지닌다. 줄리안은 주로 로마의 삶을 묘사하려는 소설이 그리스도의 삶을 중심 주제로 삼을 수 없다는 것을 결정적으로 증명했다. 웨어 목사의 세 편의 소설은 미국과 영국에서 매우 인기가 있었을 뿐만 아니라 독일어와 다른 외국어로 번역되었다. 그들은 현대 비평가들에 의해 매우 호의적으로 받아 들여졌습니다. 줄리안을 검토하면서, 그것이 나타난 직후, R. W. Griswold 박사는 "도자기 씨의 로맨스는 고대인들의 문명에 대한 친숙함을 배반하며, 우아하고 순수하며 화려한 스타일로 쓰여졌다"고 말한다. 미국의 어떤 소설도 Lew Wallace 장군의 Ben Hur (1880)가 출판되기 전에 로마 생활의 소설 개발에 중요한 도자기의 소설을 능가하지 못합니다.

웨어(Ware) 목사의 줄리안(Julian)은 설교자가 썼든 아니든 간에 어떤 소설도 그리스도의 삶을 중심 주제로 삼으면서 로마의 삶을 성공적으로 묘사할 수 없다는 사실을 보여주는 예증으로 언급되어 왔다. 아우렐리안은 또한 소설에서 로마의 삶을 묘사 할 때 그리스도인의 삶이 과도하게 두드러져서는 안된다는 더 일반적인 진리를 설명하기 위해 언급되었습니다. 웨브 부인의 나오미 (1841),[20] 는 직후에 시작되는 이야기이다.[40] 그리스도의 때이지만, 그리스도의 생애의 대부분은 늙은 베다니 마리아와 아직도 살아 있는 그분의 제자들의 말씀에 의해 들어옵니다. 더욱이, 로마인들의 삶과 대조되는 그리스도인들의 삶은 지나치게 두드러진다. 나오미는 사실 이 연구의 첫 번째 부분에서 언급되었으며, 오히려 종교적 경험에 대한 이야기이기 때문에 로마 생활의 소설로서 고려에서 제외되었다. 이 책이 이때부터 쓰여진 매우 많은 종교 서적 중 첫 번째로 중요한 책이라는 것을 상기시키기 위해 다시 언급되었습니다. 다시 말해, 1841 년은 가능한 한 종교 교육 이야기가 갈라지고 로마 생활의 소설과는 완전히 다른 것이되는 정확한 시점을 표시합니다. 웨어 목사의 줄리안과 아우렐리안은 어떤 의미에서도 종교 가르침에 대한 이야기는 아니지만, 종교 활동에 관심이 있는 다른 설교자들과 사람들에게 그러한 이야기를 쓸 가능성을 제안했다. 따라서 종교적 가르침에 관한 이야기는 로마 생활의 초기 소설의 부산물이었다. 그러나 그것은 뚜렷한 형태로 계속 존재했고, 로마 생활의 소설의 발전에 차례로 영향을 미쳤다. 종교적 가르침에 관한 이야기가 로마 생활의 소설이 피해야 할 일만큼 무엇을해야하는지 많이 보여주지 않았음에도 불구하고이 영향을 명심하는 것이 중요합니다.

1853년에[21] 찰스 킹슬리의 히파티아가 나타났다. 이것은 위대한 소설이며, 보편적 인 진리를 제시 할 때 어떤 종교 분야의 고정 관념 된 가르침을 훨씬 능가합니다. 그것은 다섯 번째 세기의 기독교와 그리스 철학 사이의 갈등에 대한 강력한 그림입니다. 저자는 기독교의 진정한 정신이 결국 승리해야한다는 것을 보여주기 전에 그리스 철학의 아름다움을 공정하게 제시합니다. 그러나 킹슬리는 또한 그의 여주인공인 히파티아가 대표하는 그리스 철학 학교들의 가르침의 본질적인 허위사실을 보여주었다. 그는 똑같이 설득력있는 방식으로 기독교 교회,[41] 영적 기독교를 거의 전적으로 차단하면서도, 조직이되었고, 그의 주된 목적은 현세적 권력이었다. 이 마지막 사실을 적절한 관계 밖에서 고려함으로써, 킹슬리의 적들은 고의로 그를 오해 할 수 있었지만, 여전히 히파티아를 읽는 사람들은 항상 그를 완벽하게 이해할 수 있습니다. 사실, 킹슬리가 히파티아를 쓰게 된 이유는 종종 잘못 언급되어 왔다. 사실들이 무엇인지, 특히 로마 생활의 소설의 발전에 중요한 영향을 미치기 때문에 그 사실들이 무엇인지 고려하는 것이 좋을 것이다. [22]

히파티아는 컬럼비아 대학의 영어 교수인 윌리엄 T. 브루스터의 말에 따르면, "영적 기독교에 찬성하는 매우 결정적인 설교"이다. 이것은 다섯 번째 세기의 로마 제국에서의 삶에 대한 그의 묘사에서 킹슬리의 목적을 부분적으로 설명합니다. 그러나 히파티아는 우리가 고려해야 할 다른 어떤 소설보다 더 많은 설교를 포함하고 있지만, 공허한 교훈주의로부터 완전히 자유롭다고 바로 여기서 말하자. 그것의 대안적인 제목, 낡은 얼굴을 가진 새로운 적들, 암시하듯이, 킹슬리는 항상 공격당했던 것과 같은 방식으로 기독교를 공격하고 있던 새로운 요소들에 대항하여 영적 기독교의 대의를 지지하고 있었다. 킹슬리가 썼을 때 이러한 요소 중 가장 강력한 요소 중 하나는 영국과 대륙에서 기독교를 대체하려고 시도한 거짓 헬레니즘으로 간주되었습니다. 이러한 형태의 이교주의는 바이로니즘과 불확실한 연관성이 없으며,[42] 그리스 철학을 높이려는 경향은 쉴러의 시 『그리스의 신들』에서 아름답게 표현되어 있었다. 이러한 경향과 싸우려는 킹슬리의 욕망은 그가 알렉산드리아를 선택한 주된 이유 일 수 있습니다. 이 도시에서 다섯 번째 세기에 기독교와 그리스 문명 사이의 극적인 투쟁의 위기를 가장 잘 표현했기 때문에. 그러나 킹슬리가 싸우고 있던 또 다른 중요한 요소, 즉 (그리고 비평가들은 그것이 유일한 것으로 가정하는 실수를 저질렀다) - 영국 교회가 로마를 향한 경향에서 대표된다. 이 운동은 주로 로마 교회로 건너간 존 헨리 뉴먼 (John Henry Newman) 때문이었으며, 칼리스타는 나중에 언급 할 기회가 있습니다. 그러나 킹슬리가 싸웠던 영국 교회를 로마화하려는 음모가 옥스포드를 중심으로 이루어졌다는 점에 주목하는 것은 흥미 롭습니다. 그리고 그 이후로 문학 비평에 의해 지적되었듯이, 옥스포드 운동은 스콧이 대표하는 낭만주의 정신의 증거였습니다. 뉴먼이 로마로 건너가기 오래 전에, 스콧의 중세적 사제는 수많은 영국 독자들의 동정을 받았기 때문이다. [23] 따라서 역사적인 로맨스에서 스콧의 직접적인 추종자 인 킹슬리는 스콧의 독자들이 로맨스와 메디발 카톨릭을 식별하는 경향과 싸워야했다. 스콧의 초기 추종자였던 G. P. R. 제임스는 비록 선전가에 불과하지만, 아틸라(1837)의 로마를 "공화주의, 제국, 성직자로서 세계에서 가장 독재적인 정부의 자리"라고 말했다. 이 말들은 모든 양의 비판을 담고 있으며, 로마 생활의 소설의 또 다른 작가가 로마의 도시를 로마 교회와 어떻게 동일시했는지 보여줍니다. 이것은 킹슬리가 히파티아에서 기독교와 이교도 사이의 투쟁을 묘사하는 장면 때문에 로마가 아닌 알렉산드리아를 선택한 또 다른 이유를 제시한다. 그랬더라면[43] 단지 이 투쟁을 묘사하기를 바랐을 뿐이고, 그는 다른 사람들이 그랬던 것처럼 제국 로마에서 자신의 장면을 놓았을 것이고, 엄청난 효과를 얻었을 것이다. 그러나 그의 반대자들은 로마에 있는 초대 교회를 로마 교회와 동일시해야 한다고 주장했을 것이며, 당시의 상황은 기독교의 승리가 오직 "로마의 영원한 교회"에서만 발견되어야 한다고 주장하는 만족감을 그들에게 허락하는 것을 금지했다. 히파티아 킹슬리에서 초기 교회의 잘못과 위선에 대한 그의 묘사에서 진리의 한계를 결코 넘어서지 못했지만, 그의 반대자들은 그들이 영원하고 완전한 것으로 생각한 것에 대해 말한 진리를 참을 수 없었다 (카톨릭 교회). 로마 제국에서의 삶에 대한 그의 충실한 발표와 과거에 대한 연구에서 파생 된 보편적 인 진리에 대한 그의 발표는 히파티아를 종파 논쟁보다 훨씬 높은 것으로 간주되어야하는 위대한 소설로 계속 읽히게합니다.

히파티아에서 무엇을 하고 싶은지에 대한 킹슬리 자신의 생각은 1851년 1월 16일 에버슬리에서 쓴 F. D. 모리스 목사에게 보낸 편지에서 훌륭하게 표현된다. (그는 재정적 어려움에 대해 글을 씁니다. 이는 펜으로 자신을 지원하도록 강요합니다. 이것이 스콧을 어떻게 회상하는지!) 그는 "나의 현재 개념은 이번 두 해 동안 내 머리 속에서 번식해온 다섯 번째 세기 초의 역사적인 로맨스를 쓰는 것이다. 폭풍이 몰아치면, 당연히 블레셋 사람들과 싸우는 것을 도와야 할 것이다.... 로맨스에 대한 나의 생각은 기독교를 유일한 민주주의 신조로, 철학, 무엇보다도 영성주의, 가장 독점적으로 귀족 신조로 제시하는 것입니다. 그러한 의견은 오랫동안 내 의견이었고, 최근에 읽은 것은 점점 더 그것을 확인시켜줍니다. '철학적' 주교인 시네시우스조차도 키릴 편에서 귀족이다. 그런 책이 지금 당장 선을 행할 수 있는 것 같지만, 서기관과 바리새인, 기독교인과 이교도들이 말하기를, 율법을 알지 못하는 이 백성은 저주를 받는다." 그는 영어 과목에서 "더 풍부하고 그림 같은 삶이있는 새로운 분야로 전환하기를 원했습니다.[44] 나는 오랫동안 골동품을하고 싶었고, 낡은 세계와 새로운 세계의 연결에 대한 나의 생각을 꺼내고 싶었다. 쉴러의 그리스의 신들은 매우 흔한 느낌의 톤을 표현하고 있으며, 현대 신 플라톤주의 - Anythingarianism에서 그 통풍구를 발견합니다. " [24] 킹슬리는 삶과 생각의 중요한 단계에서 "낡은 것과 새로운 것의 연결"을 보여주기를 원했다. 그리고 부수적으로 삶의 묘사에서 생각은 삶의 필수적인 부분으로 간주되어야합니다. 그는 Hypatia를 쓰는 데있어 훌륭하게 성공했습니다.

"낡은 것과 새로운 것의 연결을 보여주고자"하고 "더 풍부하고 그림 같은 삶"을 묘사하려는 그의 욕망에서 킹슬리는 자연스럽게 로마 제국의 시대로 향했다. 왜 그가 그의 장면을 위해 로마의 도시를 선택하지 않았는지는 이미 제안되었습니다. 그럼에도 불구하고 히파티아는 로마의 삶에 대한 소설이라고 불릴 수도 있다. 우선 그 장면은 실제로 로마로 옮겨지는데, 우리가 라파엘 아벤-에즈라를 따라 영원한 도시 바로 근처로 여행할 때이다. 로마의 항구인 오스티아에서 헤라클리안 백작의 패배로 이어지는 장면에서 세계 수도의 존재가 배경에서 느껴진다. 더욱이, 이야기의 나머지 장면은 알렉산드리아에만 국한되지 않고 키레네의 성 아우구스티누스와 시네시우스를 방문하기 위해 하나를 필요로합니다. 콘스탄티노플이 교회와 정부 업무에서 맡았던 강력한 지위에 대한 암시는 느슨하게 조직 된 전체로서의 로마 제국의 인상을 완성시킵니다. 더 많은 고려는 알렉산드리아에서 일어나는 중요한 장면들이 어려움없이 로마로 옮겨지고 로마 생활의 일부로 묘사 될 수 있음을 보여줍니다. 원형 극장에서의 잔인하고 호의적 인 광경, 상류 계급의 허세적인 전시, 때로는 불필요한 유혈 사태로 로마 권위에 의해 억제되는 하층 계급의 무법 폭동, 그리고 그 밖의 많은 것들이[45] 로마 자체가 아닌 다른 곳의 삶의 묘사에서 거의 능가 할 수없는 현실적인 효과. 히파티아가 묘사한 시대에, 로마는 더 이상 세계의 여주인이 아니었지만, 그녀의 이전의 위대함에 대한 만연한 감각이 남아 있다. 알렉산드리아는 비록 그 자체의 독특한 특징을 지닌 도시였지만, 로마의 영향력이라는 보편적인 도장을 피하지 못했다. 킹슬리의 이야기가 열리기 몇 년 전, 알라릭 치하의 고트족은 로마를 약탈했고(서기 410년), 알렉산드리아는 어떤 면에서는 로마 자체보다 쇠퇴하는 로마 제국의 다방면의 삶에 대한 더 나은 예를 제시한다. 요컨대, 알렉산드리아에는 풍부한 "로마 생활"이 있습니다.

히파티아의 알렉산드리아의 장면들이 로마로 옮겨질 수 있다면, 이 책의 어떤 인물들에 대해서도 비슷한 말이 있을 것이다. 가장 진실한 로마 인물은 빅토리아와 헤라클리아의 힘으로 로마 장교였던 그녀의 아버지입니다. 이들은 그 장면이 로마에 가장 가까울 때 이야기에 들어갑니다. 알렉산드리아에서 약한 로마 정부의 군대는 또한 원형 극장에서 검투사로 활동하든, 삶과 느낌의 잔인한 부주의로 거리에서 폭동을 진압하는 데 사용하든 로마의 전형입니다. 알렉산드리아의 로마 총독 인 오레스테스 (Orestes)는 전형적인 로마 공무원으로, 술에 취하지 않을 때 스스로 생각할 수 있으며, 꼭두각시가되어야한다는 것을 인정할만큼 충분히 밝습니다. "총독의 가난하고 비참한 노예"는 자신의 배신이 상황에 의해 그에게 강요 당한다고 느끼는 것처럼 보입니다. 늙은 미리암은 로마에서 시빌과 후대의 달래는 사람들을 암시하는 일종의 마법사로, 로마인들이 속일 준비가 되어 있었고, 그의 예언들이 로마인들의 상상력에 그토록 심오한 영향을 끼쳤다. 그녀의 희생자 중 한 명은 히파티아이며, 알렉산드리아에서 그리스 철학의 마지막 지원과 같은 강한 개성을 지닌 인물이 눈에 띄기 때문에 로마에서 주로 장면이 놓인 소설에서 그녀의 역할을 수행하는 것은 불가능합니다. 그러나 다른 많은 캐릭터들, 메이저 및 마이너,[46] 불이익없이 그러한 소설에 배치 될 수 있습니다. 실제로 그들 중 일부는 이야기가 열릴 때 로마에서 삶의 상당 부분을 보냈습니다. 아르세니우스와 성 아우구스티누스와 같은 인물들은 로마의 세계를 보았고 그 공허함으로부터 피난처를 찾고 있던 사람들을 대표한다. 폭압적인 주교 시릴은 로마나 제국의 다른 중요한 도시에서 교회의 독재적 권력을 보여줄 수 있었던 인물을 구현한다. 이야기의 진정한 영웅 인 필람몬 (Philammon)은 어떤 환경에서도 쉽게 적응할 수 있고 쉽게 로마인으로 만들 수있는 캐릭터입니다. 그는 우리가 전에 언급 한 사실, viz., 역사 소설에는 무엇보다도 인간 인 인물이 포함되어야한다는 사실을 가장 잘 보여줍니다. 필람몬의 본질적으로 인간적인 자질은 독자의 동정심을 즉시 얻습니다. 그리고 그가 한 가지 의심에 의해 유혹을 받을 때, 과거의 사람들은 단지 우리 자신과 같은 인간이었을 뿐이라는 것을 상기시킨다. 로마 제국의 고딕 양식의 침략자들 사이에서, 오래된 울프는 영국인들이 자부심을 가지고 영국 인종의 전형으로 간주 한 자질을 가장 잘 나타냅니다. 펠라기아는 알렉산드리아에서와 같이 로마에 존재했던 유형이다. 작은 포터와 모든 사소한 캐릭터에 대해서도 똑같은 말을 할 수 있습니다. 이와 같은 캐릭터들이 다양한 의미의 장면에서 자신의 역할을 수행함에 따라 킹슬리는 로마 자체의 삶에 대한 묘사와 같을 수있는 당시의 삶에 대한 생생한 파노라마를 제시했습니다. 과도한 세부 사항이나 감각적 인 것을 과도하게 사용하지 않고, 그는 그림의 중요한 요점을 강조하고, 덜 중요한 것을 암시하는 데 성공하여 과거의 삶이 현재의 경험의 명확한 빛 속에서 눈에 띄도록 만들어졌습니다.

보편적 진리에 비추어 과거의 삶을 묘사함으로써. 킹슬리는 고정 관념의 설교없이 이교도에 대한 기독교의 승리를 보여줄 수있었습니다. 그리스 철학은 로마의 소위 "민족적" 종교에 의해 충당되고 동일시되었으며, 헬레니즘 도시에서 가장 큰 거점을 찾았다.[47] 알렉산드리아. 히파티아 자신은 그녀의 이름이 킹슬리의 소설의 제목을 만들 자격이 있습니다. 그녀는 기독교에 반대하는 이교도의 마지막 지지자를 대표하는 것으로 올바르게 제시됩니다. 그녀의 성격의 힘은 승려들의 불일치와 비교하여 그녀의 말의 진실에 있습니다. 그리고 가짜 기독교를 대표하는 야만적 인 승려들은 히파티아의 몸을 파괴 할 뿐이며 그녀의 영혼을 이기기 위해 시도조차하지 않았다는 이야기의 본질적인 요점으로 간주되어야합니다. 필람몬이 히파티아를 처음 만났을 때, 그녀 자신에 대한 그녀의 믿음과 그녀의 메시지는 최고이며 흔들리지 않는다. 킹슬리 자신의 말은 그녀가 젊은 승려에게 첫인상을 남긴 것을 묘사하면서, 어떤 불일치에도 불구하고 그 메시지에 담긴 진정한 진실과 아름다움의 세균을 보여줍니다.

매우 아름다운! 그에게 너무 평온하고 자비로운! 고귀한 모든 것에 대해 너무 열정적이었습니다! 그녀 역시 그리스도인이 그랬듯이 보이지 않는 세상, 불멸의 희망, 육체를 다스리는 영의 정복에 대해 말하지 않았을까? 그들 사이의 걸프가 그렇게 무한했을까? 그렇다면, 왜 그녀의 열망은 자신의 마음 속에 메아리를 일깨웠으며, 로라가 깨어나기 위해 사용했던 기도와 교훈과 같은 메아리도 일어섰을까? 열매가 그렇게 같다면, 뿌리도 같아야 하지 않겠습니까?—그것이 위조품이 될 수 있겠습니까? 빛의 천사의 예복을 입은 사탄의 사역자가 그랬습니까? 빛은 적어도 순결, 단순함, 용기, 진지함, 부드러움, 눈, 입술, 몸짓에서 번쩍였다.

The essence of sham Christianity, which pervaded all parts of the later Empire, and was not confined to the great cities of Rome and Alexandria, is shown by contrast in the description of the impression the monks had made upon the young Philammon:

The men were coarse, fierce, noisy, so different from her! Their talk seemed mere gossip,—scandalous too, and hard judging most of it; about that man’s private ambition, and that woman’s proud looks; and who had stayed for the Eucharist the Sunday before, and who had gone out after the sermon; and how the majority who did not stay, could possibly dare to go, and how the minority who did not go could possibly dare to stay.... Endless suspicions, sneers, complaints ... what did they care for the eternal glories and the beatific vision? Their one test for all men and things, from the patriarch to the prefect, seemed to be,—did he or it advance the cause of the Church?—which Philammon soon discovered to mean their own cause, their influence, their self-glorification.

[48]

Criticism such as this the Church of Rome in Kingsley’s day took to itself, and resented. But Kingsley’s criticism was directed against sham Christianity, wherever it existed, (not solely against the Church of Rome). Moreover, Hypatia is not so much against sham Christianity as for true Christianity. Let us return to Kingsley’s heroine. Hypatia, the beauty of whose thought has been suggested in a preceding paragraph, does not remain resolute to the end. Her attempt to prove that all that is noble and beautiful has its source somewhere in the old pagan system of philosophy, is as fine an attempt as could be made. But she has undertaken the impossible, and her failure is certain. Her pathetic subjection to the hypnotism and magic of old Miriam seems in a way to portend her tragic death. Her weakness at the end makes it appear that the author did not intend determination to be her most striking virtue. Why is it that, even in her martyrdom, Hypatia does not arouse the reader’s sympathy as some of the other characters do? It would seem that her position on a pedestal above the ordinary run of mankind deprives her of the sympathy she would otherwise deserve. But is this all? Her aloofness from the multitude, her contempt for the rabble seem almost justified; but are they, in a final analysis of the truth? Recall Kingsley’s words, “My idea is to set forth Christianity as the only really democratic creed, and philosophy, above all spiritualism, as the most aristocratic creed.” Let us apply the last part of this statement to Hypatia. She denies entirely the salvation of her aristocratic creed to the common herd, and to such as Pelagia, the harlot. This is what finally repulses Philammon, in what forms the climax of the story. Moreover, Hypatia as a last resort has been forced to a belief in the “spiritualism”, (for such it is), which old Miriam offers, but does not herself accept. This part of the story shows the aristocratic nature of philosophy as a creed, and especially the sham of spiritualism.

And now let us consider the first part of the quotation[49] just made. How does Kingsley set forth the value of true Christianity “as the only really democratic creed”? He starts by portraying the simplicity of life in the Laura and of Philammon’s early training. When Philammon reaches Alexandria, he does not scruple to risk his life for an unfortunate negress, and he lives with the little porter on the most democratic terms. Moreover, the generous care of the sick shown in the daily visitations of Cyril, Peter the Reader, and the parabolani, entirely overbalances the inconsistency, or even vindictive cruelty, which they tolerate in the name of the Church. But the most striking evidence of Christianity as a democratic creed, is seen in the character of Raphael Aben-Ezra, the converted Jew. If one is assiduous in seeking parallels, it is possible to see in the early life of Raphael traces of the Byronic hero. But just as Kingsley shows the falsity of “Egyptian magic”, which had been made important in earlier novels, so he shows the falsity of any touches of Byronism which the character of Raphael may display. He brings this character out of the mazes of self-conceit and skepticism into something higher and nobler. Raphael, though born to luxury and aristocratic ease, has drained the cup of pleasure to the dregs, and is willing to exchange aristocratic ease for democratic poverty. He has also exhausted the resources of philosophy, and has been thus prepared to appreciate more fully the higher truth of Christianity. If one is to draw an inference from biography, Kingsley has portrayed something of the early doubts of his own mind, in the mental struggles of Raphael. Raphael Aben-Ezra is perhaps as well-done as any character in the novel. His calm reflections on life in general make possible for us a more detached view and a clearer interpretation of the life of the time. The “philosophic” coolness, (to use a word which he himself despised), with which he exchanges the role of prince for that of beggar, gives evidence that he is genuine and sincere. The depths of his character do not really come to light, however, until in Italy he gets the first faint[50] ray of genuine hope, a hope which grows stronger from that time on. He is enabled to consider this hope as legitimate and consistent with the words of God, whether Christian or Hebrew, by the kindly advice of Synesius. But Raphael’s real conversion takes place as he listens to the inspiring words of St. Augustine, who is preaching not only to but for the rough Roman legionaries. What wonder that he was able to win them, heart and soul, when, as Raphael says: “He has been speaking to these wild beasts as to sages and saints; he has been telling them that God is as much with them as with prophets and psalmists.... I wonder if Hypatia with all her beauty, could have touched their hearts as he has done.” There is in this passage the whole essence of Christianity as a democratic creed. The conversion of Raphael prepares the way for his intellectual triumph over Hypatia, whom he all but convinces of the truth of his new creed. And the conclusion of the story, portraying the humble Christian self-sacrifice of Philammon, his sister and the other important characters, completes the truthful presentation of Christianity as a democratic creed.

Kingsley’s Hypatia possesses a depth of insight and a richness of instruction which are equalled in few novels, historical or otherwise. But what Kingsley achieved in Hypatia may be summed up, for one who is studying the novel of Roman life, as follows: First, he gave a complete picture of life in the Roman Empire in an accurate historical setting. Secondly, in portraying the climax of the struggle between Christianity and the Roman world, he showed the intimate connection and universal relations, of life in the time of the Roman Empire, with life in the ages which precede and follow it. In the first of these achievements, no novelist has really surpassed Kingsley; in the second, no one has come near equalling him. In regard to the first achievement, Kingsley’s faithfulness to history and to the life of the fifth century, it can be said that his “history” has been criticised, for its alleged inaccuracy,[51] by pedants of the malignant school of criticism, for whom history exists only as a means for tripping up their betters. The hollow sham of such criticism is apparent, if we merely allow to Kingsley the freedom accorded to any historical novelist. He has in every respect lived up to the promise of his masterful preface, in which he says: “I have in my sketch of Hypatia and her fate, closely followed authentic history, especially Socrates’ account of the closing scenes, as given in Book III, Sec. 15, of his Ecclesiastical History.” He also follows authentic history in all other parts of the story where this is essential, adopting the wise method, already discussed, of mingling historical characters and events with imaginary characters and events. When he is not making use of history, he is nevertheless true to the spirit of history. His faithfulness to the life of the times is all that he promises in these words of the Preface: “I have labored honestly and industriously to discover the truth, even in its minutest details, and to sketch the age, its manners and its literature as I found them,—altogether artificial, slipshod, effete, resembling far more the times of Louis Quinze than those of Sophocles and Plato.” In regard to Kingsley’s second achievement in Hypatia, it may be said that in portraying “the last struggle between the young Church and the Old World,” (Preface), he showed the significance of a short period of history, when fitted into the larger scheme of universal history. In the conclusion of Hypatia, he says, “I have shown you New Foes under an Old Face—your own likeness in toga and bonnet.... There is nothing new under the sun. The thing which has been, it is that which shall be.” Other writers of the novel of Roman life have shown with consummate art the thing which has been,—Christian and Pagan; none have equalled Kingsley in showing that it is also the thing which shall be. And even those who refuse to draw a moral from any piece of fiction, may read with infinite profit and pleasure the great novel which[52] Kingsley’s scholarly insight into the life of the Roman Empire enabled him to write.

John Henry Newman was a churchman, who became a bitter opponent of Kingsley; his scholarship was profound, and his early religious training, received from his French Huguenot mother, was along Calvinistic lines. He knew the Bible, it is said, almost by heart. He was led to go over to the Church of Rome by his own studies, since he came to believe that they furnished arguments in support of the Church of Rome, rather than against it. He came to feel with conviction, that the argument that “antiquity was the true exponent of the doctrines of Christianity,” really supported the Church of Rome. In this he was directly opposed to Kingsley. It is commonly stated that Newman’s novel Callista, (1855), was written in answer to Kingsley’s Hypatia, and this is probably correct. The climax of the public controversy between Kingsley and Newman, however, did not come until 1864, almost ten years later. In his Postscript to Callista, Newman refers to Lockhart’s Valerius in such a way as to imply that it is the only other important novel of Roman life, which presents the struggles of Christianity in a philosophical light. He thus intentionally disregards Kingsley’s recently published Hypatia. Callista is the story of a martyr in the African Church, under the Decian persecution. Its scene is laid in Sicca Veneria, near Carthage, and its portrayal of life in the Roman Empire is accurate and realistic. The heartlessness of the Roman magistrates,—both in their persecution of the Christians and in their characteristic strokes of policy in dealing with the mob,—reveals the spirit of Roman life. Local color is especially good, the description of the plague of locusts being the best that exists anywhere in literature, (not excepting even the Bible). Newman follows Kingsley in making his heroine a girl of Greek descent, whose ideas of the beauty which she saw in paganism led her to be repulsed by the religion of the Crucified God. But unlike Hypatia, Callista becomes entirely converted.

[53]

The finest piece of writing in Newman’s novel, however, is the scene between Callista and Agellius, in which she repudiates Christianity. St. Cyprian, who had been mentioned by Kingsley, is brought into Callista; and others high in the Church play a part in the story. Cyprian says the discipline of the Church had become less firm in the interval before the Decian persecution. The author is thus enabled to show that the Church was strengthened by this persecution. To mention familiar elements, magic appears in Callista, in the spells and herbs of a witch, which result in her victim being possessed of a demon; the labyrinth motive also appears in the description of the secret passages, by which Callista escapes and which enable the Christians to remain concealed. In any final analysis Callista cannot be compared with Kingsley’s Hypatia. In spite of some very fine passages, it is lacking in uniform excellence. In its portrayal of life in the Roman empire, and in its handling of Christianity it falls short of the deep significance intended. There is indeed too much theological discussion. While Callista is a novel of Roman life, and can be read as such, it leans somewhat in the direction of the story of religious instruction, a kind of fiction we have mentioned as an offshoot of the novel of Roman life. Here we may recall that Fabiola by Cardinal Wiseman, had appeared the year before Callista; Fabiola represents the story of religious instruction par excellence. Cardinal Wiseman had been for a number of years Professor of Oriental languages at Roman University in Rome, and it is likely that his study of Roman antiquities at Rome would have enabled him to make Fabiola a novel of Roman life; instead he made it a stereotyped story of religious instruction. This oft-rewritten horror continues to afford the young the opportunity to enjoy killing off martyrs to their hearts’ content. We thus find it necessary again to dismiss the story of religious instruction from primary consideration, but to remember its presence in the background. Stories of this kind, by the prominent place they gave to[54] Christianity, set a precedent which seemed to bind authors of the novel of Roman life to a considerable extent.

After the publication of Callista, a number of preachers, who wrote stories of religious instruction, were enabled by their scholarship, to embellish their work to some extent with a portrayal of Roman life. But even so, their work was often intended primarily for younger readers; their books are commonly classed as juvenile. Books of this kind were written by the Rev. John Neale, the Rev. A. D. Crake, the Rev. G. S. Davies and the Rev. A. J. Church. The last-named author was the most scholarly; and his work was excluded in Section I of this study, rather because it was intended for boys than because it represented the story of religious instruction. In considering the work of preachers, we have to pass over some years before we come to the truly great portrayal of life at Rome in the form of fiction, which is seen in Canon Frederic W. Farrar’s Darkness and Dawn, (1892). This is called by its author An Historic Tale, and he distinctly says it is not a novel; but in spite of his modest estimate of his own work, Darkness and Dawn is a great novel in every respect, except that it lacks a highly-developed artificial plot. And such a plot is unnecessary, since the element of suspense and even a certain unity of effect are attained merely by a faithful and realistic narration of events, either historical or characteristic of the time. Canon Farrar saw that the age of Nero supplied the best material for the work he contemplated; and in portraying life at Rome in Nero’s time with realistic effect, he has surpassed every other English novelist who has written of that period, and is not himself surpassed even by Sienkiewicz, the Polish author of Quo Vadis, (1895).

Darkness and Dawn을 쓰면서 Canon Farrar는 사려 깊지 만 그의 심오한 학문을 충분히 사용했으며, 철저하게 찰스 킹슬리의 장학금과 같습니다. 그는 과거의 삶에 대한 그의 묘사에서 킹슬리의 히파티아와 동등합니다 - "있었던 것"- 그러나 그는 그것이 또한 "[55] 될 것이니라." 그것의 비유적인 제목에도 불구하고, 어둠과 새벽은 히파티아가하는 역사의 앞으로의 휩쓸림, 문명의 행진, 기독교의 점진적인 승리에 대한 동일한 실현에 독자를 데려 오지 않습니다. 그러나 로마에서의 기독교와 이교도의 삶의 대조를 충실한 정확성과 오늘날의 삶의 관점에서 제시함에 있어서, 파라르는 그의 교훈을 다른 방식으로 가르친다. 그는 킹슬리와 같은 방식으로 역사의 시대에 대한 자신의 그림을 보편적 인 역사의 계획에 맞추지는 않지만, 킹슬리가 히파티아에서 로마 제국의 삶에 대한 묘사에서 시도하지 않은 세부 사항의 세밀함으로 네로 시대의 삶을 묘사합니다. Farrar는 사실로부터 자신의 교훈을 도출하기 위해 독자를 더 많이 남겨 두지만, 설교는 거기에 있으며 그 적용에서 보편적 인 것으로 간주 될 수 있습니다. 그러나 어둠과 새벽을 주로 로마의 삶에 대한 묘사로 간주하는 것은 공정합니다. 암시 된 바와 같이, Farrar의 과거에 대한 묘사 방법에는 Kingsley가 사용한 것과 뚜렷한 차이가 있습니다. 킹슬리는 과거의 삶에서 중요한 것들을 고려하는 것을 선택하고 그 중요성을 보여줍니다. 반면에 Farrar는 어떤 결과가 될 수있는 모든 것을 가장 세밀하게 정확하게 제공합니다. 킹슬리의 역사는 부당하게 비판을 받았다. Farrar 's는 비판을 초월합니다. Farrar는 역사적 정확성 문제에서 가장 훌륭한 점을 선별하고 무게를 측정 할뿐만 아니라 매너, 관습, 습관, 복장 및 독자가 자신의 이야기가 다루는 시간에 대한 친밀한 지식을 얻는 데 도움이되는 다른 모든 것들에 대한 가장 근면하고 상세한 설명을 제공합니다.

Between the date of publication of Hypatia, (1853), and that of Darkness and Dawn, (1892), there had come about a marked change in methods of scholarship, especially of classical scholarship; and the effect of this is to be seen in Darkness and Dawn. This change in methods of scholarship is chiefly characterized by an insistence upon the minute analysis of historical facts, and of the manners of[56] the ancients. Its effect upon the English novel of Roman life is due to the influence of the painstaking research made by scholars, usually Germans, in the field of Roman private life and Roman archæology; and to the influence of novels of Roman life which made use of such research, and were written by Germans. This influence will be discussed more thoroughly, when we have concluded our study of the English novel of Roman life as written by Churchmen.

The time of Nero’s reign at Rome is so crowded with historical events of interest that Farrar was enabled to make nearly all important events in his novel, Darkness and Dawn, either absolutely true to history, or so closely connected with history, that they might actually have happened at the time when they are supposed to have happened. The few unimportant and intentional anachronisms he has made are explained candidly in his preface. The events described in the novel, though nearly all of them actually happened in Nero’s reign, represent in kind and variety nearly all events which are narrated in other important novels of Roman life. The scenes portrayed are all thoroughly typical of life in ancient Rome. Neither Christian nor pagan life is overemphasized, although a natural and truthful contrast is made of them. Scenes in Nero’s palace, in the forum, in the crowded streets of Rome, at the amphitheatre, at the law-courts, and occasionally in the fashionable suburbs of the city, or at Nero’s various resorts away from Rome, are portrayed with a fidelity which cannot be questioned. And wherever it is possible to make a scene of realistic effect out of an actual historical event, or to add historical details to a scene which significantly portrays Roman life, the author does so. Yet in spite of the fact that so many scenes in Farrar’s novel are taken from history, it is by no means made heavy or overcrowded, with historical detail. Every detail is made significant and interesting, and put in its proper place, so that the general effort is not one of laborious effort but of consummate art. The minutiae of the picture, while effective in themselves,[57] do not obscure its larger lines. Few authors could have presented such a mass of historical detail and intimate information of the life of Rome in a single volume with such fine realistic effect. Farrar was able to make his scholarship count in producing a noble work of fiction; while others in attempting a similar thing were only able to compile what were practically dry hand-books of Roman antiquities.

In its portrayal of character Darkness and Dawn is equally true to life and history. So much is known of so many important historical characters of Nero’s time, that it becomes not only possible, but even advisable, to make use of only historical characters in a novel which deals with this period. Realizing this, Farrar dispensed almost entirely with imaginary characters. But he selected a large number of historical characters representing all ranks and conditions of life. And since some of these are taken from humble life, and do not play an important part in history, the author found it necessary to describe the course of their lives from his own imagination, aided by his thorough knowledge of the life of the time. It proved, for example, a very happy device to devote a considerable part of the narrative to a description of the wanderings of the runaway slave, Onesimus; for by this means the author was able to bring in many incidents, showing the variety of experiences that even a Roman slave might have. Onesimus is in fear of crucifixion; and is actually sentenced to the recognized punishment for a certain offense, of being thrown into the sea, sewed into a sack with a dog, a cat, and a viper. He also meets the King of the Grove at Aricia, a circumstance which reminds one of perhaps the most “pagan” of pagan customs surviving in the vicinity of Rome, as late as the time of Nero. Only a few of Farrar’s characters are unimportant historically, while the mere names of the others remind the reader of history. Agrippina, Nero, Seneca, Burrus, Pomponia, Acte, Poppæa, Tigellinus, St. John, and St. Paul are all important historical[58] figures. Farrar relates with accurate historical detail all the necessary facts concerning them; but he really brings them out of the realm of mere history, and makes them stand before one as real men and women like ourselves.

Where Farrar particularly excels is in his portrayal of the development of character; and in his delineation of the aspect which a conspicuous character will assume in the presence of death or of a great emergency. The portrayal of the development of Agrippina’s character is particularly fine, even though death takes her from the scene. She is shown as a character who combines strength of determination with a marked weakness in certain other ways. Her determination is shown in the pursuit of her ambition to gain and hold absolute power. Her weakness is seen to increase from the time when she begins to realize that Nero no longer feels her influence. She finally sinks to abject despair when she becomes certain that the nearness of her death is only a question of time. The changes of Nero’s character are also portrayed with masterful strokes. At first he is an ingenuous, sweet-natured boy, guided in the main by the advice of Agrippina and of his tutor, the philosopher Seneca; he only gives, in occasional fits of temper, the vaguest suggestions of what he was to become later. Farrar is careful to show that in passing from the sphere of boyhood to manhood and the duties of imperial office, Nero carried with him a certain puerility,—indeed remained puerile until his death. The author also shows how the germs of the most contemptible qualities of Nero were really fostered by Agrippina, who, while weakly pampering him, little realized how soon he would outgrow her control. Nero’s degeneration into the cruel monster and shallow buffoon well known to history is fearlessly painted by Farrar. His contemptible fear of death, and self-pity when death is certain, though suggested by history, are brought home to the reader with a realistic effect surpassing that of any merely historical narrative. Somewhat[59] in contrast to Nero’s death is that of Seneca, who was compelled to commit suicide by Nero’s decree. Seneca meets death with the resignation of a pagan philosopher, but perhaps not with true heroism. It remains for the Christians, St. Paul and St. John, to enable the author, by a simple narration of their suffering, to portray the unflinching courage and sublime hope of truly great characters in their hours of trial. Neither the stories of these two saints nor that of Nero’s living torches, is overdone, however. Nor is undue use of the sensational made in the revelation of the orgies at Nero’s revels, and the description of scenes in the arena. The author simply shows Christianity in the lives of a few historical characters such as St. Paul, St. John, Pomponia, Acte and Onesimus; he is not unfair, and is thoroughly accurate, in his portrayal of the pagans. He gives impartially both sides of the picture,—the light and shadow which the title of his novel implies. Its portrayal of human life, Christian and pagan, and its revelation of human character, give Darkness and Dawn the right to share with Hypatia a position of preeminence among English novels describing life in the Roman Empire, and owing their value in large part to the scholarship of great preachers.

Canon Farrar’s other great novel was called Gathering Clouds (1895), and has for its scene Constantinople in the days of St. Chrysostom. Besides the fact that the date of its story is rather late, the scene of the novel makes it inadvisable for us to consider it at length; especially since the author’s other novel has just furnished ample evidence of his ability to portray life at Rome; and he could gain nothing by transferring the scene to Constantinople. Alexandria, in which much of the scene of Kingsley’s Hypatia is laid, has been considered as the metropolis of a Roman province. But Constantinople in Chrysostom’s time was not in a province of the Western Empire, but was the capital of the Eastern Empire. And, while there are many interesting parallels to life at Rome to be found in novels[60] dealing with Constantinople, as capital of the Eastern Empire, it has seemed best not to consider such novels in detail, in a discussion of the novel of Roman life. In fact, the only other important English novel, which has for its scene Constantinople when Rome still remained capital of the Western Empire, is Sir Henry Pottinger’s Blue and Green. This is a realistic story of the riot arising between the two factions, partisans of the rival colors of the chariot-racing companies, but unfortunately is now out of print.

There remains one other novel of Roman life written by a preacher, which deserves especial consideration. This is the Rev. Sabine Baring-Gould’s Domitia. If one asks why this novel is especially to be considered, the answer is once more to be found in a realization of the author’s scholarly attainments. Domitia reveals a careful and minute study of Roman history, and especially of Roman private life. It is full of information regarding the life, habits, and dress of Romans in the time of Nero and Domitian. Instead of burdening his pages with footnotes in fine print, the author conceived the idea that such information could be contained in separate paragraphs and inserted bodily into the narrative; and in carrying out this idea he was so successful that the wealth of information conveyed without serious interruption of the narrative, gives Domitia its distinguishing characteristic. When a Roman galley is mentioned in the story, the author inserts a paragraph describing such a galley; when a funeral is to take place, he inserts a similar description of a Roman funeral,—and so with other details of Roman private life and custom. History is inserted into the narrative in the same way, but the author wisely refrains from making too great a use of history. The time with which his novel deals includes part of Nero’s reign and all of Domitian’s; the interval between them is covered briefly. The most dramatic historical episodes narrated are the death of Nero and the death of Domitian, but other scenes taken from history are realistically portrayed. Nero and Domitian are also the most important historical[61] figures, and their characters are well brought out. The heroine of the novel, Domitia, the wife and supposed cousin of the Emperor Domitian, is not very important in formal history; but from a few hints given by history, the author has drawn a character thoroughly human, and such as might have lived at the time. Her mother, representing the frivolous and self-seeking type of Roman matron, is thoroughly characteristic of the time of Domitian. Her father, the soldier who has given his life to his duty to his country, represents by his character the old Roman virtues, which still survived in the hearts of a few men. While Domitia becomes a Christian, her story is not so told as to emphasize Christianity unduly; and in telling it, the author has given us a notable novel of Roman life, sound in its history and its revelation of Roman private life, and presenting a story of human interest.

Baring-Gould also wrote Perpetua (1897), a novel which suggests something of Roman life. Its subject reminds one that he edited The Lives of the Saints with an erudition which shows his knowledge of Roman life. Perpetua is the story of a Christian martyr to the later Roman persecution at Nimes, in the Roman province of Gaul. The Emperor Caracalla, by whom the edict for this persecution was issued, does not appear in the story, and, of course, the life in the provincial town of Nimes only vaguely suggests life in the capital. But some customs are represented, which had spread from Rome throughout the provinces. Since Perpetua was published the year before Domitia, it is probable that their author had some things in mind when writing the former, which he did not use until he wrote the latter novel. Nimes was selected for the scene of Perpetua, because the author had visited the town and become familiar with its history and archæology. He was thus able to reconstruct accurately the life of its people, as they thronged the festival of the local divinity, or crowded into the amphitheatre to witness persecution of the Christians. Roman paganism is seen to be losing its grip, since the[62] pagan citizens do not all take the local god very seriously. The element of “magic” in pagan superstition is seen in the deception practiced by the priestesses of the god; they make his voice sound over the town by shouting into a trumpet-shaped amplifier, which magnifies the sound. Another familiar element in the novel of Roman life is seen in the labyrinth motive, which appears when the hero of the story makes his escape from the prison through a dark, vile, and tortuous drain. Christianity, while it appears to be still weak, if one looks upon some of the wavering converts who are represented, is seen to be growing in strength, when one realizes the unyielding faith of Perpetua, and of a few others. But too much is not made of Christianity, and Baring-Gould’s novel is not to be considered a story of religious instruction. Perpetua is chiefly important to our subject in that it suggests the work which its author was to do in his other novel, Domitia. There is little use made in Perpetua of important historical events or characters. The heroine’s name, “Perpetua,” was suggested by that of a martyr of the persecution at Carthage, whose story is well known, and does not belong to the history of Nimes. Since the publication of Domitia, no very important novel of Roman life has been written in English by any great scholarly preacher. Many other preachers have written books of considerable merit, which portray something of Roman life; but further discussion of these books is withheld, since they are primarily stories of religious instruction, or are intended only for younger readers.

B. THOROUGHNESS IN SCHOLARSHIP, RESULTING IN PART FROM THE INFLUENCE OF SUCH GERMAN SCHOLARS AS BECKER,—BECKER’S “GALLUS”

We have made some mention of the scholarship of German writers; the Germans were not the only classical scholars whose influence is important in our study, but in some cases made an exceedingly thorough study of the private life of the Romans, and the effect of this is seen upon the[63] English novel of Roman life. An exceedingly careful attention to minute details in the study of the private life of the Romans is seen in the work of Professor W. A. Becker in Gallus, or Roman Scenes in the Time of Augustus, published in Leipsic (1838). This is not a novel at all, though it contains some connected material in the form of fiction. The importance of Becker’s Gallus in its effect upon the novel of Roman life, has been overemphasized by pedantic schoolmen; but it served to show English scholars the necessity for absolute exactness, even to the most minute details, in all matters pertaining to the study of the private life of the Romans. Becker is not in any sense to be considered a pupil of Scott, though his work was published shortly after the world had read the last of Scott’s novels. But Becker showed later German followers of Scott how it was possible to present with minute accuracy the life of the Romans; and these German historical novelists who thus portrayed Roman life, had an important influence upon the English novel of Roman life, as has been suggested in connection with Canon Farrar’s Darkness and Dawn. In Gallus, which we have said is not a novel, Becker says (in the Preface), “His original intention was to produce a systematic handbook, but finding this would lead to too much brevity and curtailment, and exclude altogether several minor traits, ... which were highly necessary to a complete portrait of Roman life, he was induced to imitate the example of Bottiger and Mazois, and produce a continuous story, with explanatory notes on each chapter. Those topics which required more elaborate investigation, have been handled at length in Excursus.” The “continuous story” which Becker chose was that of “Cornelius Gallus, a man whose fortunate rise from obscurity to splendor and honor, love of Lycoris, and poetical talents, render him not a little remarkable.” The author tells the story of Gallus, wherever possible, absolutely in accordance with history. He cites as his sources for this personal history[64] Dio Cassius, Strabo, Suetonius, Vergil, Propertius and Ovid. He says further that “the Augustan age is decidedly the happiest time to select,” for a portraiture of Roman manners, since for the study of Roman private life of that period there is abundant source-material. He says that “apart from the numerous antique monuments which have been dug up, and placed in museums, our most important authorities on Roman private life are the later poets, as Juvenal, Martial, Statius: then Petronius, Seneca, Suetonius, the two Plinys, Cicero’s speeches and letters, the elegiac poets, and especially Horace. Next come the grammarians and the digests; while the Greek authors, as Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Plutarch, Dio Cassius, Lucian, Athenaeus, and the lexicographers, as Pollux, still further enlighten us.” In his careful citation of sources, and careful choice of what were the best sources, Becker pointed the way for all those who wrote of Roman life, whether they wrote in the form of the novel or not. He succeeded in making his work what he wished it to be, “a desirable repository of whatever is most worth knowing about the private life of the Romans.” Moreover, while Becker’s work does not pretend to be a novel, and is far too learned and ponderous to be called a novel, he unconsciously aided later writers of the novel of Roman life by showing them what a mistake it would be to overcrowd such a novel with details of Roman private life. At the same time they might derive some profit from Gallus as a model of accuracy in such matters. Becker’s work was a step in the proof of the fact that the later novel of Roman life must be accurate and precise in matters of scholarship. It is true that Bulwer had done somewhat the same thing that Becker claims to do in Gallus, but Becker’s meticulous regard for detail, while showing English novelists what to avoid, also aided them to a more full appreciation of the necessity for absolute accuracy, even in matters of small importance.

[65]

C. GERMAN FOLLOWERS OF SCOTT—THE GERMAN NOVEL OF ROMAN LIFE; ITS INFLUENCE ON THE ENGLISH NOVEL

If Becker and other German scholars showed scholars elsewhere the necessity of thoroughness in classical scholarship, and added much to their study of Roman life, it is equally true that Sir Walter Scott showed the world the possibilities of the historical novel. Needless to say Scott had imitators throughout Europe and America; and not only was his success immediate, but his influence on the historical novel was a permanent thing. Many who eagerly devoured his novels in boyhood became his imitators in later life. Not a few of these historical novelists were Germans, and some of their finest works deal with the life of ancient Rome. The authors of these novels endeavored to imitate Scott in many of the things which made his historical novels successful; for example, they saw that the life of Rome supplied them with gorgeous historical scenes, just as the life of mediæval times had supplied such scenes to Scott. But they especially resolved to follow Scott in presenting realistic descriptions of manners, and it must be admitted that some of them described the manners of Roman times quite as well as Scott had described the manners of mediæval times. These German novelists, such as George Ebers, were well fitted to describe the manners of Rome, since they were thorough students of Roman things; and they had been shown how these things could be presented, by Becker and other scholars, who wrote some years before them.

In 1876 was published A Struggle for Rome, by Julius Sophus Felix Dahn. This is Dahn’s greatest novel, and portrays with fine realistic effect the struggle between the Ostrogoths and Belisarius. In this, and in its handling of the character of Totila, it suggests the great novel of George Gissing, Veranilda (1904). Another prominent character besides Totila, in Dahn’s novel, is Cassiodorus. The scene in part is laid at Ravenna, and the decay and final collapse of the Gothic kingdom are well illustrated. In 1882 Dahn[66] began a series of short novels, illustrating, he says, the spread of Roman civilization, which went hand in hand with the decline of Roman power over the migrating German tribes. The first of these novels is Felicitas (1882), which describes the capture of the distinctly Roman town of Claudium Juvavum (now Salzburg), by the Germans. The author gained his material when he was employed at Salzburg, in the archives, library, and museum of Roman antiquities. He added to his fund of thorough information by explorations in the vicinity of the town, finding many Roman things of interest. Felicitas well illustrates the thoroughness of research and the acute scientific spirit, which the Germans in a measure gave to the novel of Roman life. It also tells a story of deep human interest. In 1894 Dahn published A Captive of the Roman Eagles, a novel which tells the story of Bissula, and portrays the struggle between the Romans and the Alemanni near Lake Constance. This novel is also a model of thoroughness and historical accuracy. Dahn’s last novel, which appeared shortly after, was call The Scarlet Banner (1864), and paints with a like accuracy the overthrow of the Vandal king, Gelimer, by Belisarius.

The historical novels of George Ebers, and the profound classical scholarship he displayed in some of them, are well known everywhere. While his important series of historical novels, starting with An Egyptian Princess (1879), is designed principally to follow the course of history in Egypt, some of its numbers illustrate Roman life and Roman history. In 1881 appeared The Emperor, which presents a fine picture of life in the time of Hadrian. While the scene is laid mainly in Egypt, life in Alexandria is shown as presenting a close parallel to that of Rome. The sternness of Roman dominion in Egypt and the growth of Christianity in the Empire are brought home to the reader with many minute touches which show the author’s acuteness. The richly pictorial style is well suited to the description of splendid scenes, and the manners of private life are[67] portrayed with accuracy of detail. Ebers also excels in his analysis of character. The Emperor Hadrian, who appears first as a benevolent philosopher, soon shows that he is capable of becoming a cruel tyrant. The character of Hadrian’s wife Sabina is also carefully analyzed, while his favorite, the beautiful youth Antinous, plays a prominent part in the story. It is likely that this gave a suggestion to Professor Hausroth (pseud. George Taylor), who made Antinous the hero of his novel of that name, which appeared in the same year as The Emperor.

1885년 에버스는 테오도시우스 시대의 알렉산드리아에서의 삶을 묘사하고 로마의 관습을 많이 드러내는 세라피스를 출판했다. 기독교인과 이교도 사이의 투쟁은 세라피스 성전의 파괴와 신의 거대한 형상의 철거로 절정에 달하는 것으로 표현됩니다. 이것은 우상 숭배를 폐지하는 칙령의 결과였습니다. 세라피스 신전이 그곳에 무기를 보관한 수많은 이교도들에 의해 방어되는 극적인 장면은 수년 후 미국 작가 T. 에버렛 하레(T. Everett Harré)의 로마 생활 소설(Behold the Woman (1916))에 등장했다. 또 다른 흥미로운 점은 세라피스가 치명적인 사고가 발생한 후 기독교인이 이교도를 물리 치는 전차 경주를 묘사하는 훌륭한 장면을 포함하고 있다는 것입니다. 이 장면은 Ben Hur (1880)의 유명한 장면에 의해 Ebers에게 제안되었을 수 있습니다. 다른 한편으로는 벤 허 (Ben Hur)의 미국 저자 인 월리스 장군이 조지 에버 (George Ebers)와 같은 독일 학자들의 모범에 대한 학문 문제에 대한 그의 정확성 중 일부를 빚지고있을 가능성이 큽니다.

로마의 삶의 많은 부분을 묘사 한 Ebers의 또 다른 소설은 Per Aspera (A Thorny Path) (1892)였습니다. 장면이 다시 알렉산드리아에있는 동안, 황제와 같은 Per Aspera는 로마 황제가 지불 한 방문 당시의 도시를 보여줍니다. Per Aspera에서 황제는 Bassianus이며, 그의 별명 인 "Caracalla"는 후드 (caracalla)를 착용하는 그의 관습에서 파생되었습니다. 카라칼라의 초상화는 그의 육체적, 정신적 인 모습을 보여 주며 잘 완성되었습니다.[68] 고통, 그의 자존심, 꿈 및 증가하는 광기. 기독교인들은 자연광으로 묘사되는 반면, 이교도의 관습은 잘 설명되며, 알렉산드리아의 화려함, 전시 및 풍요로움은 상상력을 현혹시킵니다. 미로 동기는 세라피스 신전의 비밀 구절의 신비에 나타납니다. 경기장에서 검투사를 대표하는 장면은 특징적으로 로마인이며, 퍼레이드 그라운드에서 젊은이들을 학살하는 것은 로마의 잔인함과 황제의 힘을 보여줍니다. 그러나 에베르스는 인간의 성격에 대한 평소의 통찰력으로 재치있게 그를 조롱 한 사람들을 잔인하게 처벌 할 수있는 황제가 그에게 궁극적 인 가치가 거의 없다는 것을 발견했습니다. 황제의 건강이 좋지 않다고 말할 때, E. L. White의 Andivius Hedulio (1921)에서 중요한 역할을하는 위대한 로마 의사 Galen에 대해 언급합니다.

다음으로 고려해야 할 에버스의 소설은 클레오파트라(Cleopatra, 1894)이다. 그것은 곧 영구적으로 로마 지방이 될 에베르스의 삶에 대한 지식을 보여주는 많은 특징적인 접촉을 포함하고 있지만, 클레오 파트라는 이집트의 위대한 여왕의 후기 역사에 대한 동정적인 해석만큼 로마 생활에 대한 묘사가 아닙니다. 에버스는 늘 그랬듯이 역사에 절대적으로 진실하지만, 클레오파트라를 역사적 인물이 아닌 강한 감정에 종속된 인간으로 제시하려고 노력한다. 안토니우스조차도 클레오파트라의 성격에 영향을 미치는 강한 사람의 성격처럼 로마 장군의 성격에 그다지 많이 나타나지 않는다. 에버스의 클레오파트라의 가장 큰 가치는 에버스가 다른 어떤 소설가보다 클레오파트라의 진정한 성격을 제시하는 데 훨씬 더 가까워졌다는 사실에 있다. 라이더 해가드 경의 클레오파트라는 가난한 작품으로 언급되어 왔지만, W. S. 데이비스의 훌륭한 소설 《카이사르의 친구》(1900)에서 클레오파트라는 단지 어린 소녀로 묘사될 뿐이다.

A beautiful little novel which Ebers calls A Question; the Idyll of a Picture by His Friend Alma Tadema (1881), is written in a style quite different from that of his other novels. Its scene is Sicily, near Aetna, at a “time when the[69] entire earth and air were peopled with gods, nymphs and satyrs.”[25] It is mentioned here because in its scene, its theme, and the simplicity and beauty of its style, there is a strong suggestion of the recently published novel of Mr. Eden Phillpotts, Evander (1919), the scene of which is prehistoric Italy. Evander gives one an idea of the first faint beginnings of Roman life in a semi-mythological setting similar to that of A Question.

The novels of Ernst Eckstein were almost as widely read in England and America as those of Ebers. Some of them equal or even surpass Ebers’ best work. Quintus Claudius (1881), gives a splendid portrayal of life in Rome under Domitian. The author has presented in a single story practically the whole life of Rome, and has described the most noted characters of the time. “The life and manners of all classes at this period were never painted with a bolder pencil than by Eckstein in this masterly romance, which displays as much scholarship as invention.”[26] In this review a better expression than “invention” would be “a gifted imagination and a deep insight into human nature.” In Quintus Claudius, the character of Domitia is interpreted in an entirely different way from that in which Baring-Gould interpreted it in Domitia (1898); but this does not mean that either author was untrue to history, since little is known of her, save that she and her Emperor-husband were at variance. In Eckstein’s novel the intrigues of Domitia really furnish the central theme, rather than the affairs of the imaginary Quintus Claudius, who spurns her and loves Cornelia. Quintus and Cornelia are very finely characterized, the former being by no means perfect, and subject to the vices of the time, although he later becomes a Christian. Among historical characters the poet Martial is portrayed as the court parasite that he was. The conspiracy[70] against Domitian is described with historical accuracy and fine realistic effect. The book ends with the murder of Domitian and the accession of Trajan. Nerva is mentioned but not as an emperor.

In Prusias (1882), Eckstein rises to the greatness of his theme. The story is that of the revolt, in which Roman slaves, under the leadership of Spartacus, rose against Roman oppression. The character of Spartacus, in every respect true to history, is made to represent democracy and freedom. Coming, as it did, shortly after the Civil War had settled the slavery question in America, Prusias had a wide reading here. To supplement the fine character of Spartacus, Prusias, the technical hero of the story, is also represented as magnanimous and farsighted, well-fitted to aid the great general of the slaves in inspiring them to fight for freedom. By a stroke of genius, Prusias, who first appears in the disguise of a Chaldean magician, is conceived to be the brother and agent of Mithradates, King of Pontus. Rome’s two most powerful enemies are thus allied against her. While Prusias does much of the planning of the conspiracy, he does not overshadow the general of the slaves. The truly great historical character, Spartacus, is presented with a power not since equaled in fiction, and only approached by the Rev. A. J. Church in his excellent book for boys, Two Thousand Years Ago (1885), written shortly afterward. Prusias also portrays life in the city of Rome under the republic with accurate detail.

In The Chaldean Magician (1886), Eckstein portrays life at Rome under Diocletian. The varied phases of the many-sided life at Rome are brought into the picture in many ways, and Diocletian’s persecution of the Christians is given its due place. But as the title implies, the author gives especial attention to the magic arts which were practiced by Chaldean astrologers at Rome. The character of the “Chaldean Magician” had been in Eckstein’s mind when he was writing Prusias, and he took the opportunity of giving[71] it greater prominence in his novel named for such a character. In fact, from the date of this novel, the figure of the Chaldean astrologer supplants that of the priest who deals in “Egyptian magic,” in those novels which deal with magic imported from foreign lands to Rome. It became the fashion for wealthy Romans to keep a Chaldean astrologer in their household, and such a character appears in Baring-Gould’s Domitia, and in Mr. W. S. Davis’s A Friend of Caesar.

Eckstein’s greatest novel of Roman life was Nero (1889). It was impossible for him to surpass the portrayal of the general life of Rome, which he had already made in his earlier novels; but in dealing with life in the time of Nero, he found the greatest opportunity to display his talents. In his faithfulness to the life and history of the time he prepared the way for the two other authors who have written great novels dealing with Nero’s time,—Canon Farrar in Darkness and Dawn (1892), and H. Sienkiewicz in Quo Vadis (1895). He was also closely followed by Hugh Westbury in Acte (1890), and by two writers of books for boys, the Rev. A. J. Church in The Burning of Rome (1892), and G. A. Henty in Beric, the Briton (1892). Eckstein’s keenness in portraying the court intrigues of Agrippina, Seneca, and Tigellinus, shows his understanding of human nature. But his greatest triumph is in the analysis of the character of Nero. The early boyhood of Nero, and his ingenuous love for Acte, who is kidnapped and kept hidden by the agents of Agrippina, are revealed with genuine sympathy. And Nero’s later development is traced step by step, with a fairness that makes him appear the victim not only of his own weakness, but of circumstance. In his revelation of character, as shown in his handling of the character of Nero or of Spartacus, Eckstein surpasses even the notable work of George Ebers.

[72]

REVIEW OF THE INFLUENCE OF GERMAN SCHOLARS AND AUTHORS

It is not intended to overemphasize the importance of the influence of German scholars and authors upon the English novel of Roman life. The influence of work such as that of Becker upon the English novel of Roman life may be described as follows: (1) It stimulated many English scholars to study the life of ancient Rome with a similar insistence upon accuracy in regard to the most minute details of history and archæology; in one or two instances an attempted imitation of work like Becker’s is seen in the work of pedantic authors of the novel of Roman life. (2) It served as one of the influences, which led popular writers of the novel of Roman life to realize the need for at least some accurate study of the history and life of Rome. The influence of German novelists such as Ebers and Eckstein, upon the English novel of Roman life, is seen in the more thorough scholarship which such English novels display,—especially after the publication of Eckstein’s Nero, which is the first of a series of important novels portraying life in Nero’s time. This series, as has been said, includes not only Farrar’s great novel, Darkness and Dawn, and other English fictions, but also the fine work of the Polish author, Sienkiewicz, in Quo Vadis (1895). In speaking of the thoroughness of German scholars, it might be said that in some instances German novelists such as Ebers, seem occasionally to have made the mistake of assuming that a mass of particulars heaped together can be shaped into the aspect of a general truth. In pursuing the details of a picture of Roman life, they have lost sight of its larger lines sometimes; but, on the whole, very rarely. We must not forget that there were English scholars, who played their part in impressing upon historical novelists the necessity for accuracy. But the German authors of novels of Roman life, produced so many good novels of this kind in so short a time, that their influence is seen in the work of English[73] novelists, both in regard to the subjects which English writers have chosen, and in the methods of presenting such subjects taken from Roman life.

D. TWO PEDANTIC NOVELS OF ROMAN LIFE

Few novelists have made the mistake of attempting to include in a novel such work as appears in Becker’s Gallus. But in one or two instances, novelists have tried to crowd their pages with antiquarian knowledge, putting into their narratives matters which Becker would have placed in his Excursus. This pedantic display of knowledge is in itself a defect, and we shall consider separately two novelists who proved to be guilty of it. Miles Gerald Keon, British Colonial Secretary to Bermuda, wrote, in 1866, a novel called Dion and the Sibyls. This was published in London. In spite of its pedanticism, it contains some interesting similarities to the much greater work of General Lew Wallace in Ben Hur (1880). Like Ben Hur it deals with the time of Christ, and a further similarity is seen in the fact that the author does not make the mistake of portraying Christ as one of the central figures, and does not lay much of the scene in Jerusalem. Keon’s hero, Dion, also, like Ben Hur, is not too closely identified with Christianity, though he is invited to expound its doctrines before the Emperor. Scenes in Judea in Dion and the Sibyls include the banquet at which John the Baptist is beheaded, and a pedantic display of knowledge is made in repeating things told of Herod Agrippa, Herodias, Berenice, and the high priest Caiphas. This display of pedantic knowledge is further seen in the part of the narrative which tells of Dion’s meeting with Dionysius the Areopagite, who becomes St. Denis, and brings Christianity to Gaul. But most of the scene of Keon’s novel is laid in Rome, and in this part of the story the characters of Tiberius, his brutal eunuch Lygdus, and the wily Sejanus, are portrayed in such a way as to show the author’s indefatigable search for details. The only really good scene in the novel is that in which the[74] young Paulus, of the Æmelian family, subdues the famous “Sejan horse” in the amphitheatre. The story of this vicious horse became a tradition, so that Mr. E. L. White would have done well to give the name “Sejanus” to a similar animal in Andivius Hedulio (1921), a novel of the time of Commodus; (instead he turns the name into Selinus). In Keon’s novel Paulus was directed how to overcome the horse by the sibyl of Cumæ, and as the title suggests, the magic spells of such witches appear prominently in the story; the use of a “love-philtre” suggests The Last Days of Pompeii (1834). The mention of a famous acrostic, whose initial letters spell the Greek word for fish, remind one of the use made of this symbol of the early Christians, which appears in later novels of Roman life, notably in Darkness and Dawn (1892), and Quo Vadis. But Dion and the Sibyls is mentioned at this point as an example of pedanticism in the novel of Roman life.

Another example of pedanticism in the novel of Roman life is seen in The Money God; or The Empire and the Papacy (1873). It is needless to mention the various matters of detail which the author, M. A. Quinton, mentions in order to display his pedantic knowledge; but it is sufficient to say that he is very learned indeed, and has read extensively in the works of the Latin authors.[27] In some instances he is very inaccurate in the deductions which he makes from his reading, and there are some notable mistakes in topography. The one redeeming feature of the novel is its remarkable handling of a chariot-race scene; the details of this scene are so similar to the details of a scene in Ben Hur (1880), that it seems possible that Lew Wallace may have known of Quinton’s work. While the scene of the Money God is partly laid in Rome, it does not portray[75] Roman life, but rather presents certain details of Roman life in an arbitrary manner, and in confused order. A Roman marriage ceremony is described, and the methods of Roman money-lenders are explained in this arbitrary way. Quinton also wrote Aurelia: or the Jews of Capena Gate, a few years before The Money God, but I have been unable to obtain this book. In Dion and the Sibyls, and in The Money God we have two very pedantic novels, which, nevertheless, mention some of the things which are mentioned in Ben Hur. But before considering Ben Hur itself, let us retrace our steps to the year 1843, and from that time follow the course of the popular melodramatic novel of Roman life. This kind of novel represents the class in which Ben Hur more properly belongs.

E. NOVELS WRITTEN BY SO-CALLED “POPULAR” NOVELISTS, WHO RELY ON THE MELODRAMATIC FOR THEIR APPEAL; THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE “POPULAR” NOVEL OF ROMAN LIFE FROM 1843 TO THE PRESENT DAY

As has been said, the growing insistence upon thoroughness of scholarship, which is seen in the work of both German and English scholars, resulted not only in a somewhat direct imitation of the methods which appear in Becker’s Gallus (1838), by a few pedantic novelists; but more especially in an attempted exhibition of scholarship by “popular” novelists, who wrote novels of Roman life after this date. These “popular” novelists were men who either turned out novels by the score, or produced a few novels of the made-to-order variety; who sought for material with the idea of obtaining “grist for the mill,” rather than of writing a masterpiece. Such novelists have in most cases relied for their appeal upon the use of melodramatic material; but even these “popular” novelists soon came to realize the necessity of sound scholarship to any author who intends to attempt a novel of Roman life. In the class of “popular” novelists, we shall also include those novelists whose principal desire seems to have been to tell a “rattling good[76] story” or to present a series of gorgeous pictures from the life of the past,—though in some cases a more serious purpose seems to underlie work of this description. We shall begin our review of the “popular,” melodramatic novel of Roman life with the novel of Ellen Pickering, which appeared in 1843; but the “gorgeous romance,” which is a direct development of the “popular” novel, did not reach its height until considerably later. After 1843 all true novels of Roman life make at least some pretense of thorough scholarship.

Ellen Pickering, an American authoress, who turned out a score of “popular” novels, wrote as one of the last of them, Julia of Baiae; or the Days of Nero (1843). She clearly shows her realization both of the necessity for thorough scholarship in matters of history, and of her own shortcomings in such matters. This is plain from the diffidence of her preface to the novel, and from the fact that it was published anonymously. The story of the death of Burrus, and the appearance of Vespasian in the Praetorian guards, are matters introduced not in strictly historical order. But otherwise the book has no great faults. It is, however, not even intended as a great novel, and is only cited here in illustration of the fact that a reasonable display of scholarship was coming to be demanded even of popular novelists. Julia of Baiae appeared two years after the last of the Rev. Ware’s novels (Julian, 1841), and was dedicated to the Rev. Fred. J. Goodwin, M. A., Rector of St. George’s Church, Flushing, N. Y. Yet, while it contains a story of the martyrs, it is not to be considered a story of religious instruction, but as an attempt at a popular novel with a rather feeble essay at classical scholarship.

Wilkie Collins, who wrote Antonina in 1850, is a curious example of a novelist possessed of rather high talents, yet turning out novels which were made to the order of the popular taste, and did not have the stamp of permanence. Collins belongs to the school of Dickens rather than that of Scott; and he develops the melodramatic side of Dickens,[77] while dispensing with Dickens’ humor. In fact, in Antonina, Collins goes back somewhat toward the style of the Gothic romancers, who preceded Scott. Bleak mountainsides, dark caverns and rushing torrents suggest the “Gothic” terror. The labyrinth motive appears as one of the principal motives of the story, in that its chief character, a priest of Serapis, spends his life in digging a secret passage through the walls of Rome, that he may thwart the Christians by letting in the pagan invaders. This motive is also used in a description of the secret passages under the temple of Serapis. Another “Gothic” element is shown in the ghastly scene at the banquet where guests and host resolve to die before leaving their couches. While the story describes the siege and sack of Rome by the Goths in 410 A. D., the invaders are made to appear less like the real Goths than like the characters of the “Gothic” romancers. In fact, the few historical characters of Antonina are not very well done, and its history is not very good. But in writing this, his first novel, Collins realized that he must be fairly accurate in matters of history,—and in his descriptions of Roman life in Antonina he sometimes achieves fine realistic effect.

It would be unfair to brand the excellent work of Henry W. Herbert as that of a “popular novelist,” since he displays a profound scholarship not usually found in the “popular novelist.” But it may be fair to consider that one of his aims was to tell a “rattling good story,” and in this he was certainly successful. His one important novel was called The Roman Traitor; or Days of Cicero, Cato, and Catiline, and was published in Philadelphia in 1853. It is a powerful story of the conspiracy of Catiline against the Roman republic in 63 B. C. The character of Catiline is portrayed with masterful strokes, while those of Lentulus, Cethegus, and other conspirators, are also well-done. Cicero, Cato, and the young Julius Caesar, also appear in a natural light, though of these three, only Cicero is made to play an important part. Scenes in the Senate and in the houses of the[78] nobility are life-like, yet not over-done. The author has succeeded admirably in portraying real men and women, their thoughts, desires and passions. Scenes of politics, luxury, and intrigue, ring true to life. Speeches assigned to Cicero, Caesar, and Cato, are literal translations from the works of Cicero and Sallust. Yet the author makes them seem as real as though the words were being spoken today. He also shows a thorough knowledge of the topography of ancient Rome. Certain “Gothic” elements appear in the story, especially near the end, where the scene is a dark, dismal recess, overlooking a fearful chasm. But the general style surpasses that of any Gothic romance and is suggestive of Scott. Fine as it is in its portrayal of Roman life, The Roman Traitor is even finer in its telling of a remarkable story. It is also the only really effective handling of the conspiracy of Catiline in the form of fiction.

The chief aim of Major G. J. Whyte-Melville in The Gladiators (1863), is obviously to present a “gorgeous romance,” replete with hair-raising episodes. Whyte-Melville, who is the first of the brilliantly sensational writers of the “gorgeous romance” of Roman life in English, is well known for his novels of sporting life in England. In The Gladiators he portrays the brilliant and corrupt society of ancient Rome in the first century, A. D., in a way which suggests his knowledge of a similar brilliant sporting society in modern England. In his use of history in The Gladiators, Whyte-Melville is fairly accurate. While not a man of profound scholarship, he fortunately found his historical material in a compact and readily accessible form, in the work of the Jewish historian Josephus. There is not much genuine history in the first part of The Gladiators, in which portion the scene is laid in Rome; but in the latter part of the novel, the author followed Josephus, in his wish to find plenty of exciting and romantic episodes. It is interesting to note, for example, that the story of the secret passage through the walls of Jerusalem (which illustrates the labyrinth motive), was taken by Whyte-Melville from[79] Josephus. Many other instances could be cited of Whyte-Melville’s indebtedness to Josephus. Croly, it will be recalled, followed Josephus to some extent, but made a more scholarly and imaginative use of his material. The latter part of The Gladiators, in which the author relies more on the guidance of history, is better than the first part of the story, and contains some really fine descriptions of episodes in the siege of Jerusalem. However, that part of the story which deals with life at Rome and the defeat of Vitellius is accurate in its portrayal of some characteristic scenes of Roman times. In general, The Gladiators, while it has an impossible plot, and consists mainly of a series of gorgeous scenes, may be said to portray Roman life very well in most of its scenes. It lacks unity in its story and probability in some of its details, and this is what prevents its having a completeness of realistic effect.

It would be absurd as well as unfair to call Ben Hur (1880), Gen. Lew Wallace’s great novel of Roman life, “merely a popular” novel. A gorgeous romance it certainly is,—but this is not all. Ben Hur has been and still is “popular” in the best sense of the word. Some of the finest novels of Roman life, even such great works as Kingsley’s Hypatia and Canon Farrar’s Darkness and Dawn, make their strongest appeal to the cultured few; Ben Hur appeals with equal power to all. Moreover, some novels of Roman life interest every one for a time, yet later lose their power to interest; Ben Hur has become a permanent thing, appealing to the popular taste of all time. Ben Hur is the first novel of Roman life in English which has with uniform success combined a high seriousness and sincerity of tone, with a use of the sensational achieving the utmost in realistic effect. Such a combination was only partly attempted in Hypatia,—which only makes a limited use of the sensational,—and was only equalled in isolated parts of Salathiel. Ben Hur has been called a romance, but as one reads it, his feeling is not, “This is romance,” but “This is life!”

Ben Hur is so universally known, that it is needless to[80] review it here. It has never ceased to be sold in English-speaking countries; while it has been translated into French, German, Bohemian, Swedish, Turkish, Spanish, Portuguese and Arabic, and printed in raised letters for the blind. Its dramatization has also increased its popularity. Hence we need now only consider a few points about Ben Hur in regard to its relation to our subject. In the first place, Ben Hur is definitely a novel of Roman life, though its scene only goes to the city of Rome in occasional brief explanatory paragraphs. Other novels of Roman life so far considered have deserved to be called such, either because their scene was laid (at least in part) in Rome, or because it was laid chiefly in some great city of the Empire, (as Alexandria in Hypatia), in which life very strongly resembled the life of Rome. But from Ben Hur, more than from any other novel, one gets a sense of other related parts of the Roman world. Other novelists, as Croly in Salathiel, have successfully carried their characters to different parts of the Roman world, and have described scenes, which were of deep significance, but which none the less were associated in one’s mind with a definitely limited place. But in Ben Hur from the beginning of the story, when the three “wise men,” representing the antiquity of Egypt, the learning of the East, and the culture of Greece, meet and pursue the common purpose of their lives, one perceives that the important events and even minor episodes of the story are to be of such tremendous significance, that they throw off the limitations of time and place. The events of Ben Hur are accurately assigned by the author to different historical places, but they really belong not so much to separate, individual parts of the Roman world, as to the whole of that world. Christ was born in Palestine (the scene of most of Ben Hur), but His message was to the whole world,—and the world was then Roman. Ben Hur was a Jew, but the message he received was for Jew and Gentile, Roman master and Roman slave. That the entire world was Roman in the time of Christ is shown by Wallace with great[81] care and fidelity. Wherever the story takes one, he meets with characteristic Roman scenes. Scenes in Palestine show the unmistakable marks of the Roman oppressor, and the bitter hatred with which Rome’s power is regarded. We meet with Roman soldiers, a Roman slave-gang, we witness the departure of a Roman galley, and a Roman fight at sea; we behold the conclusion of a Roman all-night revel, while the Romans take precedence over all other celebrants in the Grove of Daphne. Even the chariot-race scene,[28] the most famous in Ben Hur, could have been transferred to Rome, and is characteristic of the Roman world.

How then does Ben Hur show the coming of Christ into the world, the material part of which was under Roman sway? The novel is called in its alternative title A Tale of the Christ;—and such it is. The figure of Christ appears when he is a babe worshipped by the Magi, and later in scenes near the time of the Crucifixion; but these scenes are based on Scripture rather than created by Wallace. We have spoken of the fact that no novel of Roman life can be successful, if it makes Christ the central figure or character. Ben Hur does not do so; but its author shows enough of the life and death of the lowly Nazarene to convince one of His Divine Influence upon the Roman world, which has become the world of today. Ben Hur as he listened to the preaching of Jesus, and gazed upon His wonderful countenance, remembered having seen Him before. “That the look so calm, so pitiful, so loving, had somewhere in the past beamed upon him as that moment it was beaming on Balthazar, became an assurance. Faintly at first, at last a clear light, a burst of sunshine, the scene by the well at Nazareth what time the Roman guard was dragging him to the galleys returned, and all his being thrilled.” This quotation is typical of the story of Ben Hur; a Tale of the Christ. The mother and sister of Ben Hur suffered misfortune at the[82] hands of the Romans, and were only freed from the cruelty of the Roman world by their acceptance of and meeting with The Master. Lew Wallace is equally great in his portrayal of the material life of Rome and the spiritual life of Christ.

Having chosen his subject, Wallace wisely refrained from making any very great use of Roman history, or of Roman historical characters not important in the Bible story. But just as the scenes of his novel are typical of life in the Roman world, so his characters exhibit the variety of race, creed and nationality to be found in the people Rome ruled. Beside a number of different types of Hebrew character which the author portrays, there are at least two kinds of Romans in Ben Hur, the proud, cruel oppressor, in Messala, and the magnanimous benefactor, in Quintus Arrius. Other characters represent the sage of whatever nationality, the youthful Greek with his perfect physical beauty, the Arab sheik, the seductive siren of the Nile, the devout Christian, and the pagan priestess. But Wallace does not rely too much on atmosphere or local color. His knowledge of Roman history was sound. While Messala, an imaginary character, is important in the story, Sejanus, who controlled the politics of Rome, is given his proper place in the background. In fact, the scholarship of Wallace was sound in every way. While he did not finish his schooling according to the prescribed course, he completed his own education more thoroughly than most men do. He was a great reader of good books, and at the age of 19, had read every book in his father’s library,—700 standard works. He continued to be a great reader and student, and formed a large library of his own. Besides his reading Wallace had a rich experience of life on the battlefield and in public life, and was peculiarly well fitted to understand with sympathy all sorts and conditions of men. Ben Hur is the only other novel of Roman life, besides Salathiel, to arouse successfully the reader’s sympathy for a Jewish hero. In his presentation of Ben Hur as a slave, Wallace showed his realization of antiquity of the slavery question; and he had shortly before[83] done his part in settling forever that question. His sympathetic understanding of men, women, and little children of the present aided him in portraying with sympathy various types of character seen in the life of the past. Ben Hur is a novel which voices the hopes and aspirations of the common people of all the world.

Any estimate of the absolute value of Ben Hur must place Lew Wallace’s novel very high indeed. If one discounts the great influence the book has had upon its many readers, and considers it simply as a piece of art, it still ranks very high. While Ben Hur is said to have brought its author more sudden fame than any other novel has brought to an American author, this fame which came suddenly, did not as suddenly depart. If he is judged by the merits of Ben Hur, Wallace deserves to be ranked, as a novelist, with other great American novelists, such as Cooper, Hawthorne and Howells. In the opinion of a noted authority on American literature, Ben Hur “is in every respect a great novel.”[29] And it is impossible to differ with this opinion. Reduced to its lowest terms, all adverse criticism of Ben Hur lies in an arraignment of its so-called “faulty syntax.” Those who make this criticism in every case fail to give any quotation in illustration of their view, or to be specific in any other way. If one were to go through Ben Hur hunting for irregularities of syntax, doubtless he could find them just as easily as they may be found in the work of almost any other great novelist,—and perhaps no more easily. It is doubtful if the great majority of reviewers who have criticised the syntax of Ben Hur have had any thorough appreciation of what syntax is. Moreover, to quote a recent work on style, by a classical scholar, who is speaking of the style of Sophocles, it seems “that liberties of this kind are not confined to any particular stage of literary history, but are mainly due to the individual bent of the writer’s genius. No ancient[84] author, however, has carried them to a greater length than Sophocles, ... he rejoices in those confusions of syntax ... by which one construction is suddenly merged in another.”[30] Sophocles has not perished on account of irregularities of style or syntax, nor will Lew Wallace, for any such reason. The free style of Ben Hur is well suited to describe its ever-changing scenes. Nor is the novel to be criticised for looseness of construction. Its combination of unity and variety make Ben Hur in every sense a great novel suited to a portrayal of life in the Roman Empire in the time of Christ. The chariot race, the sea fight, and the disentombing of Ben Hur’s mother and sister, are thrilling episodes in the world’s literature; and considered as a whole, Ben Hur is one of the great novels of all time.

After the appearance of Ben Hur many “popular” novels of Roman life tend toward a greater or less imitation of Lew Wallace’s great novel. There is, however, little such imitation in John W. Graham’s Neaera (1886), a novel the author of which displays genuine scholarship. In its description of the splendor and crime of the court of Tiberius, Neaera depends much on the Annals of Tacitus, which furnishes the best source for such a description of the Rome of Tiberius. The character of the gloomy Emperor is well drawn, as are also those of Sejanus, his mistress Livia, and Lygdus, the eunuch. Domitius Afer is made prominent, and through him we learn of the methods of the Emperor and others who make use of the ruffians of the Subura to attain their ends. The banquet of Apicius, and his suicide furnish the material for a realistic description of manners.

An example of a very poor kind of “popular” historical novel is found in The Son of a Star (1888), by B. W. Richardson. This is a wildly fantastic romance which bears on the title page a quotation from Horace, “Ficta voluptatis causa sit proxima veris,” but is certainly very far from the[85] truth in most respects. While The Son of a Star makes occasional brief displays of accurate scholarship, chiefly borrowed from other novelists, its loose construction and false atmosphere make it a good example of the novel of Roman life “gone to seed.” The bright, though false, coloring of this romance suggests the work of Sir Rider Haggard, which has already been excluded from consideration in this study. His Cleopatra appeared in the following year (1889). This date, in fact, may be said to mark the point at which the pretended novel of Roman life, with its artificial coloring, becomes separated from the true novel of Roman life.

The idea of presenting the life of Rome as a gorgeous and at times bloody spectacle, with a frequent use of the sensational, reached its greatest height in Quo Vadis (1895), by the Polish author, H. Sienkiewicz. This idea had appeared in the English novel of Roman life, e. g., in Salathiel (1827), The Gladiators (1863), and Ben Hur (1880). There is no need to review Quo Vadis in detail here, since it is so well known; but let us establish its relation to the English novel of Roman life. It appeared after Eckstein’s Nero (1889), and a number of English novels of Roman life of the time of Nero, and may owe some of its inspiration to these, especially to Darkness and Dawn (1892). But after Quo Vadis was translated into English (1896), its influence upon later English novels of Roman life overshadowed even that of Canon Farrar’s great and more serious work. Quo Vadis has been translated and read in civilized lands even more widely than Ben Hur. These are the two novels of Roman life which have had the most widespread influence upon all subsequent novels of Roman life the world over. Quo Vadis adds practically no new element to the novel of Roman life, but puts certain elements which already existed into a more intensely vivid, and even lurid form,—in short, emphasizes the sensational. In its larger outlines Quo Vadis is reminiscent not only of Darkness and Dawn but of Hypatia. It represents the[86] same struggle between the Christian Church and the Roman pagan world, the same triumph of Christianity. The contrast lies between the proud, voluptuous, and cruel spirit of pagan Rome and the spirit of humility and hope of the dwellers in the catacombs. A personal contrast is seen between Nero, the royal performer in the circus, and St. Peter, the fisherman who was to rule the world by his example. Other characters are those familiar to the novel of Roman life, Petronius the connoisseur in luxury, Vinicius the active young Roman noble, Lygia the beautiful Christian maiden condemned to the arena, Ursus the powerful slave, the dissolute Poppæa and members of Nero’s court, Croton the athlete, Glaucus the forgiving Christian, and others too numerous to mention. The scenes of Quo Vadis are also familiar, much the same as those of Darkness and Dawn, the picture of the fire at Rome being especially fine. While the moral lesson exists in Quo Vadis, what Sienkiewicz did for the novel of Roman life was to portray the life of the city of Rome itself in a form absolutely irresistible to the so-called “average” reader. Realistic effect was the most important thing to the writer of Quo Vadis; and in preparation for the writing of a novel which should portray the life of Rome with realistic effect he traveled widely and made a thorough study of numerous Latin authors, especially those who describe the life of Rome of the first few centuries A. D. The result is that Sienkiewicz was a profound scholar; and his scholarship appears in Quo Vadis,—though the novel shows some instances of error, chiefly topographical error, especially in the description of the great fire. None the less Quo Vadis is now the novel of Roman life which shows to the greatest extent a combination of careful scholarship and popularity of appeal. By 1900, nearly 2,000,000 copies of the English translation (1896), by Jeremiah Curtin, had been sold; and the influence of the novel upon popular taste is still important, since it creates beyond a doubt in every reader’s mind a desire to read further in Roman historical fiction.

[87]

The Sign of the Cross, by Wilson Barrett, appeared immediately after Quo Vadis, and, though very popular, is nothing but a weak and slavish imitation of Sienkiewicz’s great novel. This is all that need be said of The Sign of the Cross as a novel, since there is nothing original about it, and its brief popularity was due entirely to the reflected splendor of Quo Vadis. The fact that this novel was turned into a play with some success, following the example set by the dramatization of Ben Hur, shows that theatrical managers realized the possibilities offered by a novel of Roman life. Unfortunately the drama of Roman life presented either on the stage or the screen, has in nearly every instance, become more a gorgeous spectacle or a sensational melodrama, than a serious drama. But the drama of Roman life is mentioned here, since it has induced many who have seen such a play to read the novel on which it was based. This was the case with Ben Hur, which in the form of a novel offers, I believe, a higher and stronger appeal than any dramatic production based upon it.

Another novel which definitely goes back to Quo Vadis for its best scenes, but is possessed of some individual merit, is Amor Victor, the third edition of which appeared in 1902. This novel, by Orr Kenyon, is also marked by the seriousness of purpose which underlies the sensationalism of Quo Vadis. It particularly resembles Quo Vadis in its scenes in the arena, and in showing the tremendous difference between the appalling difficulties presented to the Christian at the time of the Empire, and those which he now meets. But Amor Victor also shows the similarity of atrocities committed by pagans then and now. This novel seems to be the first to draw parallels between events in the past and definite, specific occurrences of the present, taken sometimes even from personal experiences. For example, the author, in describing certain almost unthinkable atrocities which occurred in the Roman arena, shows how exactly the same outrages were committed upon the Christians by the Turks shortly before he wrote. Even since Amor Victor[88] was written, these scenes have been repeated in Turkey. Moreover, Kenyon, in describing the scene in which Arsaces, the giant Parthian, kills a lion in the arena, is recalling the time when he himself had seen Sandow, the famous strong man, throw a lion in a public exhibition. This definite use of an incident, which the author has seen with his own eyes, aids him in achieving realistic effect. A similar use of an incident which actually occurred, is made by Mr. E. L. White in Andivius Hedulio (1921), in which the description of the miraculous escape of Commodus’ chariot from disaster was suggested by a real accident in the streets of Baltimore. Amor Victor takes its story of St. John the Apostle from the patristic writings. It is accurate in its historical coloring. In speaking of his serious purpose, the author says in a note at the end of Amor Victor, “Newell Dwight Hillis has shown that really great works of fiction are those which illustrate some vital principle, some deep moral lesson.” The novel conveys a moral lesson. Yet, while parts of it are also written in juvenile style, Amor Victor is not merely a story of religious instruction, but a true novel of Roman life. The Story of Phaedrus, by Hillis, to which Kenyon has reference in his quotation, is more a story of religious instruction written in distinctly juvenile style. Its hero does not see much of Roman life, since he spends most of his life in copying sacred writings in the depths of the catacombs.

An imitation of Ben Hur with some original touches is Mr. Irving Bacheller’s Vergilius; A Tale of the Coming of Christ (1904). The author reverses the plan of Lew Wallace, by placing the birth of Christ at the end, instead of at the beginning of his story. Mr. Bacheller’s attempt to use the birth of Christ as a climax, to which the rest of the story leads, is not very successful. His treatment of sacred scenes falls far below that of Lew Wallace, and the construction of his plot is poor. But he has described some scenes in Roman life with fine realistic effect, particularly those which take place in the magnificent palaces of Rome[89] and Jerusalem. The descriptions of intrigues which take place in the court of Augustus, show the uncertainty of life at Rome at the time. The characters are few in number, Augustus and the young Jewish prince Herod Antipater being the only important historical figures. The crafty nature of Augustus is portrayed with a very keen insight into the depths of human nature, and the vindictive hatred of the Jewish prince forms a marked contrast to the noble, ingenuous nature of Vergilius, the imaginary hero of the story. Vergilius is a young patrician, and a favorite of Augustus; his character is not idealized and is quite representative of Roman times. In justice to Mr. Bacheller’s work, it should be said that he has not attempted to fill as large a canvas as did Lew Wallace in Ben Hur; his picture of life in Roman times is more limited in its scope, and more chaste in its outlines. Scenes which make use of the sensational are not overdone. Vergilius is a novel of Roman life, containing many beautifully written passages, which give it a very high position among such novels.

Lux Crucis (1904) is a very readable novel by Mr. Samuel M. Gardenhire. It is called by its author A Tale of the Great Apostle, and is dedicated to the Rt. Rev. Ethelbert Talbot, Bishop of Central Pennsylvania. Lux Crucis is, more than any other novel I know of, an attempt to portray Roman life by taking as much material as possible from previous novels of Roman life. Everything is thus taken at second-hand, without recourse to original sources. This method may show wide reading, but hardly shows thorough scholarship. Scenes in the arena depend upon Quo Vadis; scenes which have to do with St. Paul and Christian characters suggest Ben Hur and Darkness and Dawn; while other passages, especially that representing the gladiator’s school, undoubtedly go back to The Last Days of Pompeii. The author takes his history, chronology, and topography at second hand, and apparently he is confused in his remembrance of his own reading. The result is that Lux Crucis probably contains more ridiculous mistakes than any other[90] novel of Roman life. For example, a so-called Briton is given the Anglo-Saxon name of Ethelred, though he lives in the time of Nero, before the Saxon invasion of Britain; he is made to come from Brittany, though Armorica did not receive that name until at least six hundred years later; and he speaks of crossing the channel to Angle-land, “with a smile.” (The reader also smiles.) An anachronism which is related to topography occurs, when the Forum of Trajan is mentioned in this story of Nero’s time, though the accession of Trajan did not take place until thirty-three years later. These typical instances of error in Lux Crucis are selected from a great number, some of which are almost equally bad. It is remarkable that, in spite of these inconsistencies, the novel is pleasing in its portrayal of characters, historical and non-historical, and many of its scenes are by no means devoid of realistic effect. Lux Crucis furnishes examples of the pitfalls awaiting an author who has attempted a piece of work requiring scholarship, but has been handicapped by his unscholarly methods.

Mr. Walter S. Cramp’s popular novel, Psyche (1905), describes the Rome of Tiberius, and contains much sound history taken from the Annals of Tacitus. In this it resembles Graham’s Neaera, which had appeared in 1886. In 1913 Mr. Cramp published another novel of Roman life, called An Heir to Empire, which is much like Psyche in its general outlines, except that the story centers in the life of Augustus’ court, instead of in the life of the court of Tiberius. It makes no great misuse of history, but adds too many fanciful details to historical episodes; this in spite of the fact that the novel is formally dedicated “To the Honorable Rodolpho Lanciani, whose genius touched the dust and ruins of Ancient Rome and made them live.”

F. INFLUENCE OF FRENCH NOVELS OF ROMAN LIFE

Hitherto no mention has been made of the influence of French novels of Roman life upon English novels of Roman life. And I have found that this influence of French novels[91] is not nearly so important as might be supposed, but on the whole, is rather an indefinite thing. But before concluding our survey of the “popular novel” of Roman life and the “gorgeous romance,” it is best to say a few words, (regarding the latter phrase especially), of the influence of certain French novels. In 1862 Gustave Flaubert’s famous Salammbo appeared in the English translation. While this great work undoubtedly had a tremendous influence as a “gorgeous romance,” it is difficult to trace this influence directly. The Gladiators (1863) appeared the following year, and exhibits a similarity of style in presenting the gorgeous pageantry of the past; but while The Gladiators may owe something to Salammbo, it seems more likely that Whyte-Melville’s novel was an independent effort to please a certain element of the public taste. Later and greater novels, such as Ben Hur and Quo Vadis, may have profited by the splendid example of Flaubert, who filled a large canvas with brilliant colors, but did not sacrifice truth,—but here again the influence is indefinite. In fact, Salammbo appears to have stood forth with such tremendous power that it discouraged rather than encouraged imitation. No one,—so novelists have thought,—could hope to equal Flaubert’s novel in splendor of style or in realistic effect. Thus Salammbo has remained the only great novel whose scene is ancient Carthage. Though its scene does not go to Rome, no view of Roman life would be complete without some knowledge of the most powerful enemy of the Roman Republic, whose life was so closely connected with that of Rome. Salammbo combines the story of a Carthaginian princess, a sister of Hannibal, with an account of the Mercenary War. The description of this war of Carthage with her own soldiers, suggests troubles Rome later had with armies composed of heterogeneous elements. Salammbo is equally vivid in its description of the pagan customs of Carthage, particularly of the custom of offering human sacrifices to Moloch. A few books which describe the city life of Carthage, or her wars with the Romans, no doubt owe[92] their inspiration indirectly to Salammbo. G. A. Henty’s excellent book for boys, The Young Carthaginian (1886), describes the political organization and social conditions existing in the city of Carthage, and gives a similar description of the sacrifice to Moloch, before taking Hannibal on his campaign against Rome. The Lion’s Brood (1901) has its scene entirely in the Italian peninsula. Recently Señor Blasco Ibañez published Sonnica (1920), which seems to show evidence of his reading of Salammbo. In this novel Hannibal’s siege of the semibarbaric city of Saguntum recalls Flaubert’s description of the siege of Carthage by the Mercenaries. Sonnica, besides giving a good characterization of Hannibal, is especially noteworthy for its accurate portrayal of the stern, bare, and crude city of Rome in the early days of the republic. This portrayal contains a fine paragraph on the Roman father, and mentions several historical characters, such as the vindictive Cato and the slave Plautus. Sonnica does not appear as yet to have influenced novels of Roman life in English, though it may have given some suggestions to Mr. Jaquelin A. Caskie, who has written Nabala (1922), an attractive novelette, dealing with the Third Punic War. More likely Nabala, (as everything else in fiction connected with Hannibal and Carthage before her fall seems to do), goes back for its principal inspiration to Salammbo. Its scenes of fighting outside the city of Carthage recall similar scenes in Salammbo, as does its description of what goes on inside the city, the human sacrifice to Moloch furnishing the climax of the story.

A novel written in quite different style by Flaubert is The Temptation of St. Anthony (1874). This has for its scene the cell of an anchorite in the time of Constantine, since St. Anthony says in the novel, “The Emperor Constantine has written me three letters.” In describing the visions[31] which pass through the mind of the saint, however,[93] the author makes it seem as though the entire pageant of the past history of the Roman Empire were passing before his eyes. In his temptation the saint sees pagan gods pass before him, and he takes on the personality of famous kings, with their unlimited power to gratify their passions. In his mental wanderings, he speaks of Athanasius, the Arians, and the monks of Nitria. This last thought recalls the part which the savage monks of Nitria play in Kingsley’s Hypatia, and the talk of other affairs of the Church also suggests Hypatia. Moreover, the situation of St. Anthony alone in his cell in the desert is strongly reminiscent of passages at the beginning and the end of Kingsley’s novel. But St. Anthony’s strongest temptation comes in the form of the vision of Thais, an irresistibly beautiful courtesan. This suggests M. Anatole France’s (Jacques Anatole France Thibault) Thais (1889), which also makes a portrayal of the beautiful courtesan. Custom forbids English and American novelists from making such a portrayal in detail, and it is to be doubted whether they could present such a picture with the realism of French authors, whose view-point has always been radically different, as regards the degree of frankness to be allowed a novelist in portraying a man’s passion for a beautiful woman. The portrayal of the beautiful courtesan in the French novel of Roman life reaches the greatest frankness in Pierre Louys’ Aphrodite, which is, in effect, a description of the schools of prostitution in Roman Alexandria. French novels of this kind have had little effect on novels of Roman life written in English. However, there is one novel written by an American of French descent, which frankly tells the story of a beautiful courtesan, and will now be discussed.

Mr. T. Everett Harré published in Philadelphia in 1916 Behold the Woman. This is the story of the famous Alexandrian courtesan of transcendent beauty, who is known in the Lives of the Saints as St. Mary of Egypt. Mr. Harré takes the general outlines of his story from the Lives of the Saints, though adding much from invention. And, while[94] Behold the Woman shows an individuality of style and a remarkable power of description, it appears to be a book full of echoes. There is, for example, some similarity of plot between Behold the Woman and the Thais of M. Anatole France, in that both novels portray the repentance and regeneration of the fallen woman.

태국의 M. France는 "호기심 많을 정도로 미묘한 상상력의 경건함과 생각의 불경건함"을 결합한 것으로 알려져 있습니다. (B. W. Wells in The Encyclopedia Americana, 1920) 이 비판이 태국인들에게 적용되는 것처럼 정의롭든 그렇지 않든간에, Harré의 작품은 생각의 불경건함을 전혀 보여주지 않는다는 것을 가장 단호하게 말해야합니다. 로마 세계에서의 삶의 사실들을 제시함에 있어서, 여자를 보라 안에서, 그는 진리에 대한 간단한 진술을 하고 있다. 상상력의 경건함은 마리아의 회심과 사막에서의 참회의 삶에 대한 이야기에서 실제로 드러납니다. 그러나 주님의 만찬의 방으로 추정되는 방이 타락한 승려들의 난폭함에 의해 모독당하는 장면에서도, 저자는 생각의 불경건함을 보여주지 않는다. 만일 종교에 관한 문제들을 제쳐두고 단순한 도덕성에 자신의 믿음을 둔다면, 부도덕에 대한 비난이 무엇이든지 진실하게 여자를 보라에게 제기될 수 있겠는가? 보라 여인의 어떤 장면들에는 피에르 루이스의 아프로디테로부터 직접 차용한 증거가 나타나는데, 거기에는 예의의 목욕탕과 화장실에 대한 정교한 묘사가 있었고, 상징적인 언어로 그녀의 매력에 대한 광범위한 카탈로그가 있었다. 보라 여인에서 세라픽 성전의 파괴에 참석하는 장면들은 비슷한 장면을 묘사했던 에베르스의 세라피스 중 하나를 상기시킨다. 그러나 Harré는 특히 성전과 그 거대한 우상을 파괴하라는 부름을 받았지만 그렇게하기를 두려워했던 로마 군인들의 미신을 미세한 감동으로 묘사하는 데 탁월합니다. 더욱이, 이 기회에 그리고 마리아의 궁전에서 연회가 결렬될 때, 군대의 잔인한 행위는 로마의 막강한 힘을 무자비하게 사용하는 것을 잘 나타낸다. 또한 《여자를 보라》에는 킹슬리의 소설에서 취한 약간의 제안이 있는 것 같고,[95] Hypatia, 동일한 적절한 이름이 사용되지만 바뀐 이름; 킹슬리의 영웅인 필람몬의 이름은 히파티아의 작은 인물 중 하나에 해당하는 여인 보라의 한 인물에게 주어진다. 더욱이, 알렉산드리아의 거리에서 폭동이 벌어지는 장면들은 여인을 보라는 히파티아의 비슷한 장면들을 연상케 한다. 두 책은 비슷한 방식으로 야만적 인 승려를 대표합니다. 마리아는 필람몬이 히파티아에서 수도사들의 허세를 통해 보았던 것처럼, 그들의 가짜 기독교를 꿰뚫어 볼 수 있다. 그러나 Harré 씨가 서문에서 말했듯이, 그는 킹슬리와 "그런 시대를 쓰는 사람은 ... 사람들이 얼마나 악했는지 알 수 없다." 여기서 그는 히파티아의 서문을 인용하고 있지만, 그렇게 말하지는 않는다. 여자를 보라에서 그는 사람들이 얼마나 악한지를 말해줍니다. 그리고 서문에서 소설은 강한 남성과 두려움없는 여성을위한 것이지 어린이를위한 것이 아니라는 것을 정당하게 언급합니다. 마리아의 궁전에서 열린 연회에서의 난폭함에 대한 묘사는 아마도 로마 생활의 어떤 소설에서처럼 그러한 장면을 묘사하는 것처럼 현실적 일 것입니다. 그러나이 묘사의 솔직함은 Canon Farrar의 어둠과 새벽, 아무도 그 단어의 어떤 의미에서도 부도덕하다고 생각하지 않는 소설에서 거의 거의 동등합니다. 도시의 빈민가 인 브루촨 (Brucheum)에서의 마리아의 냉담한 삶에 대한 묘사 또한 현실적이며, 로마 생활의 소설 저자들이 사회의 모든 계급들 사이에서 삶을 제시한다고 주장 할 때조차도 무시 당했던 삶의 측면을 묘사합니다.

Other scenes in Behold the Woman are similar to those which are already familiar in the novel of Roman life. And no matter what he is describing, the author’s genius and originality have enabled him to portray scenes from life in Roman times, with a vividness and realism hardly exceeded in any novel of Roman life. The style of Behold the Woman is richly ornamental at times, but never too flowery for the theme which the author has in hand. Behold the Woman could be placed in the class of the “gorgeous romance” along with such novels as Ben Hur and Quo Vadis. But it shows,[96] more than any other novel of Roman life in English, the influence of the French novels of which we have spoken.

G. NOVELS WRITTEN BY TEACHERS OF ROMAN HISTORY OR OF THE CLASSICS

Some of the novels which have been mentioned were written by school teachers or college professors. Charles Kingsley at the time when he wrote Hypatia was a school teacher very much in need of more pupils, whose fees would help him make both ends meet.[32] The Rev. A. J. Church, M. A., to whose books for boys allusion has been made, was a Professor of Latin at University College, London. But I wish to consider now those novels which have been written by teachers, who wished especially to illustrate certain periods of Roman history, or to make the life of some great Roman historical character stand out with particular vividness. The word “novels,” as here used, is meant to apply in the main to books which can be read with pleasure both by boys and their elders; and it will be recalled, that in defining the novel of Roman life, books written only for boys, or written with a religious motive, were excluded. The work of the Rev. A. J. Church is therefore excluded, practically for two different reasons. But, since it often touches closely the true novel of Roman life, the titles of some of his books will be mentioned. His Two Thousand Years Ago (1885) has been spoken of, as following Eckstein’s Prusias (1884), which is also on the Spartacus theme; but Church’s book is entirely a book for boys. The Count of the Saxon Shore (1887) is a similar book on the period marking the end of Roman control in Britain. To the Lions (1889) makes the same use of the correspondence between Trajan and Pliny that had been made in Valerius; but its scene is Bithynia, and it is purely a religious story. The Burning of Rome (1892), as has been said, follows Eckstein’s Nero (1889),[97] but even this book by Church cannot be called a novel, though it is his best book. Lords of the World (1898) describes the fall of Carthage and Corinth. Finally, The Crown of Pine (1905) tells of the banishment of the Jews from Rome in the time of Claudius, of the preaching of St. Paul, and of the Isthmian games at Corinth. The style of this last book is characteristic of the Rev. Church’s work; his thorough scholarship is greater than his power to interest the reader, juvenile or otherwise.

A novel (for so it fully deserves to be called), written before the Rev. Church’s books, is Helena’s Household (1858). This is by James De Mille, Professor of Belles Lettres at Dalhousie College, N. S. Though it has been catalogued as a juvenile book, it hardly deserves this description. And while it is dedicated to the Rev. John Pryor, D. D., and shows some influence of the story of religious instruction, it deserves to be classified as a novel of Roman life. Helena’s Household has a very good historical background, and contains some very fine descriptions of life at Rome. The story of Boadicea’s defeat is told by a Briton who was taken captive on that occasion. This same Briton is made to fight in the arena, in a scene which is fairly well done. This mention of a British slave, and the outline of the siege and destruction of Jerusalem at the end of the novel, suggest The Gladiators (1863), a novel which resembles De Mille’s book in its rambling construction. Nero’s atrocities are in the main passed over, though there is a fine description of the great fire at Rome, which he is said to have caused; and the buffoon Emperor is described as acting at the games in Greece. Pomponia is not made a very important character in the story, but her Christianity is made the excuse for entirely too much religious talk, for a novel of Roman life. St. Paul and St. Luke are represented as prisoners, and a fine description is given of St. Paul’s heroic death, though his martyrdom is not the central theme of the story by any means. Moreover, the life of the Christians is realistically described, without the false[98] element of terror, which is often added to such descriptions. In spite of its rambling construction, and religious discussion, Helena’s Household is a scholarly piece of work, which both illustrates Roman history, and portrays well the life of Rome. The Martyr of the Catacombs, (1858), by De Mille, is more a religious story than a novel.

A fine illustration of Roman history is given in Kallistratus; an Autobiography (1897), a novel dealing with the campaigns of Hannibal against Rome. This is not to be considered an imitation of Flaubert’s Salammbo, or any other novel dealing with the Carthaginians, but is an independent attempt to illustrate certain facts of Roman history. The author of Kallistratus was Mr. A. H. Gilkes, M. A., Master of Dulwich College, Dulwich, and the preface to the novel is written from the College. Kallistratus need not be considered a book for boys, and is infinitely better than most books for boys. But its hero, Kallistratus, is a typical boys’ hero, who serves as Hannibal’s aide and personal attendant. Besides telling the story of the Second Punic war from Hannibal’s point of view, Kallistratus presents with a very realistic effect an account of the chicanery of an ancient oracle, which is located on the banks of the Rhone near Massilia, and is consulted by a Gallic chieftain. Hannibal’s victories over the Romans are accurately described, and attributed in part to Varro, the low-born consul, as they should be. Moreover, the fact that Kallistratus’ brothers and sisters are sent to Rome under the protection of the Scipios, affords the author an opportunity to describe life at Rome to some extent. While the character of the great Hannibal does not stand out with especial force in this novel, Kallistratus gives a truly realistic account of his campaigns from the point of view of one who was with him; and it may well have served as a model in many ways for Mr. Duffield Osborne, when he was writing The Lion’s Brood, (1901), a novel which treats of the same period from the Roman point of view. Mr. Gilkes’ other novel, Four Sons, (1909), seems to lapse into more juvenile style,[99] mainly because its subject is not so inspiring. But it illustrates very faithfully the period of Roman history which was marked by the inroads of the Greeks in Southern Italy and the Samnite War. The author’s interest in books for boys and the school life of boys, is shown not only by the profession he has chosen, but also in the genuine book for boys he has written, called Boys and Masters. But of the books he has written, Kallistratus especially, would be of interest to any intelligent reader, juvenile or otherwise.

A Friend of Caesar, (1900), by William Stearns Davis, a college professor, whose scholarly attainments have won for him a well-deserved reputation, is the first and, in my opinion, the only book which successfully illustrates with the most minute detail every important event or incident in a brief period of Roman history (50-47 B. C.), crowded with important events,—and at the same time presents a fictitious story of supreme interest, surpassing that of most historical novels. It is in fact, the world’s best school-history book in the form of fiction. Mr. Davis was well qualified to write such a book, by his experience in writing in briefer form stories meant to aid in the study of Roman history in schools and colleges,—his parallel readings have been widely used by other teachers. A Friend of Caesar is a very scholarly piece of work by a very scholarly man; and it is absolutely accurate in its history, presenting everything which a school-boy may be expected to learn in his study of Roman history and life of a definite period. Yet, while it is very slightly expurgated of grosser elements, it is in no sense a book for boys alone, but a novel which can satisfy the taste of the most mature readers. Mr. Davis has thus succeeded in combining, in a single volume, elements which other authors have found it very difficult to combine. A Friend of Caesar is in fact a novel of Roman life in the best sense in which that phrase can be used. As Mr. Davis says in his preface to the novel, “If this book serves to show that classical life presented many phases akin to our own, it will not have been written in vain.” This sentence shows[100] the highest possible conception of the function of the historical novel. In portraying life at Rome at the time of the fall of the Roman Republic, Mr. Davis (in his preface) disparages his own work in comparison with that in Quo Vadis; he says that he is taking the pagan point of view rather than the Christian. But, judged purely from a consideration of the necessity for accurate scholarship, A Friend of Caesar is a far more thorough work than Quo Vadis; and, while containing a number of scenes of great dramatic value, it does not rely unduly on the melodramatic and the sensational. In matters requiring minute and careful scholarship, it is possible that Mr. Davis goes too far; there are times when the reader feels that it is becoming too much a school-book. Yet this insistence on detail, while leading to possible faults, also assures the principal virtue of A Friend of Caesar, its absolute reliability.

Julius Caesar himself is the most important figure in this novel. The finest and noblest points in the character of this great man, among the world’s great men, are emphasized; while his defects are entirely left out of the picture. The resulting character of Caesar in the book is thus idealized to some extent, but perhaps not too much so for the purpose of a novel. Caesar appears as the hero, great statesman, and controller of the world’s destinies that he was. The technical hero of the story is Quintus Livius Drusus, and he is a typical boy’s hero; his history is given in a way which arouses interest and associates him closely, in the reader’s mind, with Caesar. Cleopatra seems to have been an important character in the author’s mind, mainly because she played an important part in history. Her personality is viewed in a somewhat more attractive light than might be expected, and as a character she blends well with the idealized character of Caesar. The weaker side of Pompeius’ character is emphasized, and he is not brought into the foreground enough to be considered a really important character. The manner of his death is well portrayed in ch. XXII, “The End of the Magnus.”

[101]

Perhaps the most notable scene in A Friend of Caesar is the historical one in the Curia. In this the destinies of the Roman Republic are shown to be in the hands of its own unscrupulous government, just as much as they are later in the hands of Caesar; this scene is truly great, and contains no apparent inconsistencies. The scene in which Agias is saved by Fabia, is modelled somewhat on a similar scene between Onesimus and a Vestal in Canon Farrar’s Darkness and Dawn, as Mr. Davis candidly says in his preface. The scene depicting the riot in Alexandria, especially the passage which shows how little the brutal Roman soldiers care for the lives of the poorer citizens, recalls a similar scene in Hypatia. But A Friend of Caesar contains very little direct borrowing from previous novels of Roman life, and does not rely too much upon historical events as a means of obtaining realistic effect. The scene in which trusty old Mamercus guards the door of the villa, is a masterpiece in its description of hand-to-hand fighting, and excels, in its realism, the description of the actual battle between the forces of Caesar and those of Pompey. In its portrayal of character, and its presentation of realistic scenes, A Friend of Caesar is a novel which rests firmly upon its own merits.

George Manville Fenn was not a teacher, but his book for boys, Marcus, the Young Centurion, (1904), is given passing mention here, since, like Mr. Davis’s novel, it deals with Julius Caesar. Fenn’s book tells something of Caesar’s campaigns in Gaul, but a far better book on this subject is The Standard Bearer; a Story of Army Life in the Time of Caesar, (1915), by Mr. Albert Carleton Whitehead. This book tells very realistically the story given in Caesar’s Commentaries, but is rather a book for boys than a novel of Roman life.

The Unwilling Vestal, (1918), by Mr. Edward Lucas White, a teacher and thorough scholar of Baltimore, Maryland, was quite evidently written to show that life in ancient Rome was essentially “modern.” While this novel[102] mentions historical events, such as the campaigns of Marcus Aurelius, and gives a most striking portrayal of the effects of the great pestilence at Rome, it does not attempt to narrate historical details so much, as to make the life and customs of ancient Rome seem familiar and real to the modern reader. It has achieved this latter purpose by presenting Roman life chiefly as it affects a single character, Brinnaria the Vestal. It is true that the figure of Marcus Aurelius appears in the novel, and at the close of the book Commodus plays an important part; Almo, the charioteer, is a character of whom we hear much at second-hand, but we seldom make a closer acquaintance with him, and even the descriptions of his fights in the amphitheatre are lacking in realistic effect. The Vestals, with whom Brinnaria is later associated, are given natural and human qualities, but do not play any very important part. The Unwilling Vestal is a character-study, a study of one character. The other characters are important only as they influence the principal one. Moreover, the varied scenes of Roman life which are portrayed center about the principal character. Hence, most of them have to do with the life of a Vestal. This is shown to be far from a narrow or confining life. In addition, the author seems justified in selecting for his Vestal a person so independent, self-willed, and unusual as Brinnaria. Her parents play little part in the story, and from the very first, she shows a disposition to “go it alone.” By devoting so much attention to Brinnaria, and emphasising her human qualities, whether virtues or faults, the author has succeeded in making us feel that we know Brinnaria well. It seems to be a part of the author’s purpose to convince us that Brinnaria and her chum Flexinna are not essentially different from the modern American girls we see and know; and so he gives us a thorough acquaintance with Brinnaria, the girl, before introducing us to Brinnaria, the Vestal. There are no really great scenes in The Unwilling Vestal. In attempting to recall any such, one thinks at once of the scenes in the[103] amphitheatre; but here, as elsewhere, we are concerned with Brinnaria, her feelings, and her interests.

While Almo, the charioteer, comes before us directly only a few times, the story, (indirectly told), of his career as charioteer, gladiator, villicus, and King of the Grove, affords opportunity to throw interesting sidelights on things that took place here and there in the world of the Roman Empire. For example, a concise and accurate account of the way in which the racing companies were managed, is given. An interesting account is given of Brinnaria’s occupations inside the Temple of Vesta, and, as has already been indicated, it is shown that, besides being a Vestal, she was an important figure in the social life of Rome. The author says:

She took great delight in mixing in society merely for society’s sake. Moderns are likely to imagine that the Vestals of ancient Rome were nuns, or something like nuns. They were nothing of the sort. They were maiden ladies of wealth and position, whose routine duties brought them into familiar association with all the men important in the Roman government, hierarchy, nobility, and gentry, and with their wives and daughters.

Though The Unwilling Vestal fails to present some of its scenes with realistic effect, because of the lack of a sufficient number of characters of different kinds, its author does portray some very interesting things in Roman life, through the medium of a single interesting character and a very real one. Mr. T. Everett Harré had given a vivid picture of life in Roman Alexandria, while presenting only one important character, in Behold the Woman, (1916), two years before; but the character of Mary, while intensely human, is not intended to show especially “modern” traits of character. Brinnaria in The Unwilling Vestal, is made to seem in some ways more familiar to the modern reader, and more like his modern acquaintances, than any other single character in any novel of Roman life, written before Mr. White’s book. Besides being an interesting novel, The Unwilling Vestal is so accurate in its description of Roman life and custom that it could be used as a schoolbook of[104] great value. Finally, the so-called “modern scientific touch” is given in the crucial scene of the story, in which Brinnaria exonerates herself by carrying water in a sieve,—something which the author had seen done in a series of accurate experiments. The Unwilling Vestal is original in style, and does not seem to depend on previous novels of Roman life in any way. Its omission of any mention of the Christians, makes it easier for the author to portray truthfully the life of Pagan Rome.

In The Unwilling Vestal, (1918), Mr. White had told many interesting things about Roman life, but in limiting himself to a single important character, whose experiences are narrated in the third person, he sometimes had failed to make the reader feel a share in the life of Rome, as an eye-witness of the scene, or even a participant in it. Such a realistic effect he actually attained in Andivius Hedulio, Adventures of a Roman Nobleman in the Days of the Empire, (1921). This improvement he brought about in part by introducing a large number of characters from all ranks and conditions of Roman society, thus “presenting, in a narrative fiction, a complete and faithful depiction of all the phases, high and low, of that life which made up the grandeur which was Rome.”[33] And most of the numerous characters are made just as familiar to the reader as Brinnaria had been made in The Unwilling Vestal. But this is not the only means taken by the author to make his novel realistic; and the realistic effect is made complete by the fact that the adventures of Hedulio are narrated in the first person by a character who has the entire sympathy of the reader. While not a great believer in newspaper reviews, I am willing to admit there is some justice in the high praise made by “G. W. D.” in The Evening Public Ledger, Philadelphia. After comparing Andivius Hedulio to Salammbo, he says of Mr. White’s novel, “The history is so subtly interwoven with the narrative, that it becomes an[105] integral part of it. The attention of the reader is concentrated on the human relations and the characters are men and women kin with the men and women of the present century. Mr. White has made the past live as if it were the present. Or to put it another way, he has abolished time, and has exhibited to us the unchanging human emotions playing upon one another in Rome of the second century, just as they play upon one another in America of the twentieth century. He has not once yielded to the temptation to display his eruditions at the expense of the story, a temptation to which so many learned men succumb when they try to write historical fiction. They succumb because they lack the instinct of the story teller, and do not realize that a novel must be a human drama first, whatever else it may be, whether a study of manners or of morals or a picture of the world in a historical epoch.... There is nothing that people are more interested in than in other people.”

Any adverse criticism of Andivius Hedulio would most naturally be directed against the somewhat loose construction of its plot. The plot of the novel imagines the young Roman nobleman wrongly suspected of conspiring against the life of the Emperor Commodus. Fleeing for his life, he passes eleven years in various disguises, never getting very far from Italy and returning again and again to Rome, through one chance or another. As the author says in his Note to the Reader, “The plot ... has a general resemblance to the ancient Milesian tales; as, for instance, that on a version of which Shakespeare based his Comedy of Errors. More definitely it is affiliated with the plot of the Metamorphoses of Apuleius... Much of the plot shows derivation from romances of the Picaresco type, or approaching that type... The atmosphere of the adventures collectively is indubitably that of the Satiricon of Petronius, along with much from the Metamorphoses of Apuleius.” Much of the plot, says Mr. White, came from his assuming that there was a fashionable litter-craze at Rome, “a fad of wealthy fops for journeying by litter[106] instead of by travelling coach... Much of the minor incident and local color derives from my saturating myself with what survives to us of Roman roadbooks.” In a sense Andivius Hedulio is a romance of the road. In reading the novel, I was much impressed by the author’s genuine delight in strange, unexpected, but not improbable adventures, and was reminded much of certain aspects of the romances of Robert Louis Stevenson; it was no surprise to discover later that I had overlooked its dedication “To Robert Louis Stevenson, who in reading fiction loved ‘The open road and the bright eyes of danger.’” Moreover Mr. White, like Stevenson, realized that the best way to tell a story, especially a story of adventure, is to tell “one thing after another.” This is the way it was done by the authors of the Milesians, of the Metamorphoses, and of the “picaresque” romances. Such works have their place in the line of ancestry of the modern novel, and the author is entirely justified in using them,—somewhat expurgated,—since often they portray life in a very realistic way. It cannot be said that Andivius Hedulio excels such great novels as Ben Hur and Darkness and Dawn, in portraying the life of the Roman world with realistic effect. But the author’s genius, in making the experiences of characters of the Roman world seem essentially like our own experiences, and those of our friends, makes this novel excel most other novels of Roman life in this respect.

Andivius Hedulio is the work of a scholarly teacher of Latin, who wished to throw a strong light on the life of the historical period of Commodus’ reign; and especially to present Commodus in the character of “the most perfect athlete the world ever produced, misplaced on earth’s greatest throne.” Mr. White’s novel is in no sense a school-history book, such as Mr. Davis’s A Friend of Caesar; but any school-boy could read it with pleasure, and learn from its sound scholarship, much, that would aid him in his classical studies. Commodus is the most important historical figure, and, as the author says, the part he plays in the[107] novel is due in part to what is said of him in the work of Gibbon, Dio Cassius, and Herodian. While other sources mentioned by Mr. White in his Note to the Reader, show a wide reading and a thoroughness of scholarship, the novel itself is sufficient evidence of this, and is entirely free from slavish copying. He frankly admits that the culminating incident in the chariot races originated partly from certain details in the chariot race in Ben Hur, (1880). But this incident is given a peculiar originality, by the addition of details taken from the account given to Mr. White of a “run-away” accident, which actually occurred in Baltimore. This illumination of the past, by placing in a story of the past an incident which has recently occurred, often aids a novelist in attaining realistic effect, and illustrates one of the ways Mr. White has taken to make the past seem real to present-day readers. The labyrinth motive appears in Andivius Hedulio, when the hero and his faithful servant make their escape from a secret stair, and through a long, dark and filthy drain. This incident was suggested by the escape of Jean Valjean in Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables, and Baring-Gould may have taken a similar incident in Perpetua from the same source.

Commodus’ joy in driving his horses to victory in the chariot races and in displaying his skill in the amphitheatre, is well portrayed by the author; but perhaps the greatest stroke in the portrayal of Commodus, is made, not when he is governing horses, or overcoming single opponents, animal or human, in the arena, but when he is controlling the minds and passions of the army of mutineers. While Commodus is not the technical hero of the story, he is the real hero of the novel, and in a fine character-study he is represented as the man who really controlled the Roman world, whether addressing soldiers and courtiers, or impressing the populace by his skill in the arena. But besides presenting life at the court of Commodus and in the higher social circles at Rome, with which the Emperor was definitely connected, the novel takes one through the streets of[108] Rome and into different quarters of the city, in such a way as to illustrate the life of all classes of Roman society; and presents with fairness most of the various types of human character, which were to be found in the city of Rome itself and in various parts of the Empire. Since the Christians were comparatively few in number, even as late as the time of Commodus, (and the life of Rome was still essentially pagan), the author wisely refrains from any attempt to give them a place in his story. He says of Andivius Hedulio, “Especially I judged it free from vital anachronisms. I know of no fiction dealing with Rome or Greece which does not project-back later ideas of duty, right and wrong, morality and such like ethical concepts, into periods far anteceding those in which these conceptions developed. The Greeks and Romans had very definite notions as to personal morals, decency, duty, and the like, but many of the ideas most prevalent among us originated since Roman times and were then non-existent and inconceivable.” It would be beside the mark to cry “paganism,” against Mr. White’s Andivius Hedulio, since paganism is exactly what he wished to portray. In some respects this novel excels any other previously discussed, in its portrayal not only of the outward life, but of the social and ethical atmosphere of pagan Rome. And its teacher-author has been eminently successful in showing, to school-boy and mature reader alike, “all the phases, high and low, of that life which made up the grandeur which was Rome.”

H. NOVELS WRITTEN BY AUTHORS WHO HAVE PORTRAYED ROMAN LIFE FROM AN ESTHETIC VIEWPOINT

Walter Pater’s Marius the Epicurean appeared in 1885. While Pater was a tutor at Oxford, Marius the Epicurean is so far removed from being a school-book, that it was impossible to consider it in the class of novels written by teachers to illustrate Roman life or a certain period of Roman history in a pedagogical way. In fact Pater’s work is so different from most novels of Roman life, and has a[109] literary value so much higher than most novels of any kind, that it is best considered in a class by itself. Nothing has ever been written exactly like Marius the Epicurean, which ranks above Pater’s other literary productions, fine as they are, and furnishes his principal contribution to posterity. It was indeed written for posterity, and not intended to be read as an interesting novel and then forgotten. Marius the Epicurean is the finest piece of pure literature that will be considered in this study. Moreover it cannot escape consideration as a novel of Roman life. Its full title is Marius the Epicurean, His Sensations and Ideas. Its hero is a Roman boy, who advances in years, until he arrives at mature manhood, and whose death is recorded at the end of the story. “It would probably have been called a novel had its chief claim and merit not been independent of fiction.”[34] In following the development of Marius, Pater is showing what might have happened to a young man in the Rome of Marcus Aurelius, if he were possessed of a particularly fine esthetic sense, and devoted his life to an esthetic ideal. There is sufficient binding material in the form of narrative to make Marius the Epicurean rather a novel than a series of essays, though it contains fine studies of the physical and spiritual life of Rome. Such novels of Roman life as George Gissing’s Veranilda, (1904), and Mr. Eden Phillpotts’ Pan and the Twins, (1922), have derived much inspiration from both the substance and quality of Pater’s work. Such a thorough classical scholar and ardent lover of the classics as Lionel Johnson could say of its exactness, in Post Liminium: “Readers, accustomed by long experience to use Marius for a text-book,—exact, precise, rigorous, well warranted and attested,—of the Antonine age, do not need to be told that Mr. Pater never writes without his facts and evidences.”[35]

[110]

Pater’s aim in Marius the Epicurean had something in common with the aim of some of the best novels of Roman life, that have been considered, however unique his method may have been. He purposes to show a young man in an age similar to our own, and one who exhibited “a sort of religious phase possible for the modern mind.” Marius is like Pater in his serious and refined nature, and his esthetic delight in religious ceremonial, but represents better Pater’s ideal. Though he is taught to believe in the outworn system of paganism, he takes delight only in the most beautiful elements in pagan religious ceremonials. In his quest of the fine and the beautiful in religious emotion, he is led to higher and higher forms of philosophy, each step in his development being minutely described by Pater, not with the accompaniment of abstract philosophizing, but with the desire to portray in simple terms the beauty of esthetic experience. At each step toward a higher intellectual existence Marius approaches the ideal of a Christian life; his soul is said to be “naturally Christian,” and he admires elements of beauty in the thought and life of a Christian comrade. Finally by a mere accident, he dies a Christian. Marius the Epicurean simply portrays the life of Rome, as it appeared to a young Roman who lived only to seek the highest good in esthetic experience. It clearly shows that life governed by an esthetic ideal, could and did exist in the days of Marcus Aurelius, just as it can and does exist today.

In Marius the Epicurean, Pater, as the author, shows himself to be more a true Hellenist than any writer appears to be in any novel of Roman life written before Pater’s work,—though his truly Greek appreciation of the beautiful is in no way inconsistent with Christianity. But the book portrays not merely the beauty of Greek philosophy. Viewed as a portrayal of life, Marius the Epicurean may be fairly said to portray essentially the entire course of the religious life of Rome,—starting with the primitive and patriarchal “religion of Numa,” and passing through later[111] forms, (whether wholly Roman or including foreign elements); and further on through the abstractions of Greek philosophy, to the highest form of Christianity. The social and moral phenomena to be seen at Rome in the times of Marcus Aurelius, are shown, and the part which great schools of Greek philosophy played in the life of Rome, is made to appear important.

While no great character portrayals are attempted in Marius the Epicurean, Marius is made to meet with such great characters as the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, Apuleius, and Lucian. Marcus Aurelius is portrayed in a very modern light as a public lecturer, through whose example Marius determines to become a student of rhetoric at Rome; yet to Marius he seemed to be, (as he actually was), the greatest thinker and the greatest man of his time. In his representation of the character of Faustina, who is seen surrounded by her children, including the supposedly illegitimate Commodus, Pater may owe something to Swinburne’s poem, Faustine. Roman customs are well represented, when we see people performing sacrifices or going to the theatre to celebrate a holiday; and the life of Rome is made to seem real by minute descriptive touches, such as those which describe the evidences of the ravages of the great pestilence. Roman shops, inns, temples, and other buildings appear crowded with people, and a multitude of human types are shown, as soldiers, courtesans, beggars and little children. Some description is also made of a Roman marriage ceremony; and the mythological burlesques and gladiatorial contests of the amphitheatre are described as affecting different individuals in different ways. In the death of Verus appears something of the spirit which made the Romans turn such a matter into a public event; the great Galen, making his way through the throng to the side of the sufferer, is a figure which is familiar elsewhere in the novel of Roman life.

But the most characteristic scenes taken from the outward life of the Romans’ are the banquet and the Triumph[112] of Marcus Aurelius. Pater adds to the reality of these Roman scenes by portraying not only the characteristics of men, but also those of children, and even animals. Thus in the triumphal procession go “the ibex, the wild-cat, and the reindeer stalking and trumpeting grandly.” Though scenes of the martyrdom of the Christians only appear as told at second-hand, a characteristic Roman brutality is shown by the guards in charge of Christian prisoners. Thus the material life of Rome, as well as its religious life, is portrayed in Marius the Epicurean. What Pater did for the novel of Roman life was to show the possibility of portraying not merely the material existence of the Romans, but the whole life of Rome considered from a religious and esthetic standpoint. Marius the Epicurean has been said to stand without fiction; but the highest hope of any fiction might well be to rise to the level of Pater’s work. It took five or six years to write, and shows Pater’s thorough scholarship, and his appreciation of the beautiful in Latin and Greek literature. Mr. Edward Hutton sums up its excellence when he says that, “In Marius the Epicurean, Pater gave us a book profound and simple, bounded by the great refusals of an artist, perfect in prose, stooping to nothing, having the dignity of a great poem, and the thoughtfulness that is characteristic of the writers of the Augustan age.”

George Gissing in Veranilda, (1904), seems to be the first author of a novel of Roman life to derive much inspiration from Pater’s Marius the Epicurean, (1885). Gissing resembles Pater in his exact scholarship, his love of Greek things, and his estheticism. Veranilda was to have in it the love of the classics, but is unfinished. Yet it is evident that only a few chapters at the end are missing, and what we have of Veranilda is finished with Gissing’s finest and most delicate touches. The late Mr. Frederic Harrison says of Gissing in the preface to Veranilda, that in this novel, “his poetical gift for local color, his subtle insight into spiritual mysticism and, above all, his really fine scholarship and classical learning had ample field.” Mr. Harrison[113] considers Veranilda “far the most important book which George Gissing ever produced,” and most readers of Gissing will concur in this opinion. Though the subject-matter of Veranilda is somewhat different from that of Marius the Epicurean, there is much similarity between the two books in the way subjects are presented, and at times Gissing’s purity of style approaches that of Pater. In many respects Veranilda is the greatest novel of its kind. Not only does it show thoroughness and accuracy in scholarship, but it has very genuine characterization and atmosphere. The spirit of Veranilda is the spirit of the time it describes,—the spirit of disillusion, unrest, and uncertainty amid scenes of strife, sorrow, and decay. Yet there are gleams of hope to be found in Gissing’s great novel, which portrays life in and near Rome in the “Era of Justinian.” While the outward, physical life of fallen Rome is portrayed accurately, as it would appear to the eye, the special excellence of Veranilda lies in its exact reproduction of the spirit of the time with which it deals. In this respect it probably excels any other historical novel in English,—bar none,—and deserves a high position as pure literature. Moreover in his portrayal of life in the past, Gissing has not failed to establish its connection with life of the present; realistic effect is never lacking in Veranilda. Yet even when portraying life in the most general terms, Gissing continually shows the same selection and preference for the esthetic, the same search for the beautiful, which marks the work of Walter Pater in Marius the Epicurean.

The plan of Veranilda is more complete than that of most historical novels; it deals chiefly with real historical characters and actual historical events, yet there is not too much formal history in the novel. It was carefully written after a most thorough study of the best modern writers, (especially Gibbon), who deal with the age of Justinian and Belisarius, and of the remains of the literature of the time. The scene is Rome and Central and Southern Italy, and local color is obtained not at second-hand, but from the[114] author’s direct observation of the places he describes, and a careful review of extant documents concerning them. Gissing had spent some time travelling in Italy and Veranilda may be considered his most original novel. In selecting the scene and the time of Veranilda, Gissing evidently intended to write a novel which should convey a sense of Rome’s former greatness. The center and source of power of the Roman Empire had shifted to Constantinople, though even here the power of Rome was none too strong. Felix Dahn’s two novels, A Struggle for Rome, (1876), and The Scarlet Banner, (1894), deal with the same period with which Veranilda deals; The Scarlet Banner being concerned with the overthrow of the Vandal king, Gelimer, by Belisarius. A Struggle for Rome, is like Veranilda in its subject matter, since it is concerned with the struggle between the Ostrogoths and Belisarius, and mentions some of the same characters that appear in Veranilda. The characterization of Totila, the Gothic king, especially suggests Veranilda. But while A Struggle for Rome is Dahn’s greatest novel, it does not appear that Gissing was so much indebted to it in Veranilda, as to original historical sources. The period with which Veranilda deals comes somewhat after the true end of Pagan Rome, and no novel will be discussed which deals with a later period.

Gissing preserves a fine unity of effect in making the events of his story center about Rome, and not about Constantinople. “The Eternal City” lies there as of old, and its inhabitants cannot shake off the feeling that it still is “eternal.” The wise Justinian is to them a foreign tyrant, under whose governor they are harshly oppressed. The great commander Belisarius, though he has temporarily defeated the Goths, has now left Italy, and is no longer thought of as deliverer of Rome; the fame of Totila is spreading. Throughout this book, with its descriptions of ruined towns, ruined families, and the ruins of the City of Rome itself, one feels the former greatness of Rome. Everywhere is decay, everywhere is to be seen a dying out[115] of the best elements of Roman civilization. Many of the scenes which form the setting for the principal action in the story, are typical of this lingering death of the great city. While everywhere the old Rome is dying out, is there springing up anything new to take its place? Even though the novel is incomplete, one can see that the author means to show conclusively that the Goths will furnish new life, and new strength, to Rome and to civilization.

In Hypatia, Kingsley had portrayed “the dying world” of Rome, especially in the chapter headed by that phrase. In Marius the Epicurean, Pater had pointed out the coming downfall of Rome in several different ways. He had said, for example, that the Germanic tribes, whom Marcus Aurelius defeated, were merely the advance guard of a vast body of wandering tribes destined to overrun the Roman world. Marcus Aurelius in his triumph over the Germans, appeared to Marius, “chiefly as one who had made the great mistake,” as a man who had failed. “The most Christian” Stoic Emperor, in pursuing his thoroughly Roman policy of enforcing worship of the gods with an iron hand at Rome, and ruthlessly subjugating peoples on the frontiers of the Empire, had failed to save Rome from becoming more and more a nation of “coarse, vulgar people,” an Empire that failed. In Veranilda we see the impressive remains of that great failure. Its psychology, like that of most of Gissing’s work, is the psychology of failure. As the decayed condition of his old home appears to be symbolic of failure to Marius, near the end of Marius the Epicurean, so all through Veranilda the decay of material things seems to symbolize the downfall and death of “Eternal Rome.” Yet the gleams of hope, which appear through the gloom, are symbolic of a new life. While no such large contrast is made in Veranilda, as is made in Hypatia, the hope of Christianity in a failing world is made very real.

Aside from the scene depicting the murder at the villa, there are few sensational scenes in Veranilda. Moreover, in most of the scenes of importance, it is noticeable that[116] only a limited number of people appear. The greater part of the novel is pitched in a minor key. There are countless incidents of importance, whisperings, doubts, uncertainties; trivial words often have a hidden meaning, trifling actions assume great importance. The remains of Rome’s grandeur are suggested in the character of Flavius Anicius Maximus, a worthy descendant of an ancient and noble family; and his sister Petronilla serves to keep before our minds something of the uncompromising pride of any descendant of an old Roman family. A similar pride appears in the characters of the Deacon Leander and Vigilius. But more fitting messengers of God are the holy Abbott Benedict and his monks. The scenes about the monastery are drawn with a masterful touch; one feels the genuine influence for good, which the holy Abbott has over Basil, and the real help which he gives to Basil, in the difficulty with which Basil is confronted. St. Benedict appears as a man who leads a genuinely spiritual life, with insight enough to solve all of Basil’s difficulties.

Veranilda herself is a truly radiant figure, and it is in justice that the novel is named for her. She does not often appear upon the scene, it is true, but the sincerity of her character and her overwhelming loveliness are drawn with convincing strokes. Her innocence at all times, especially when in Marcian’s power, and her faith in those into whose care she is entrusted, are points of strength in her character, not of weakness; and she proves herself truly great in her forgiveness of Basil. In his delineation of character especially, Gissing has at times equalled the exquisite touches of Pater. How little is told of St. Benedict or of Veranilda, yet how definitely their characters are impressed upon the reader! Veranilda is beyond question, the character who best represents beauty of body and soul, in the novel of Roman life, and, I believe, surpasses Pater’s Marius in representing a “soul naturally Christian.” In any case, one feels that in Veranilda, as in Marius the Epicurean,[117] there always exists the esthetic conception of an inseparable connection between physical and spiritual beauty. Gissing followed Pater in showing that the life of Rome could be portrayed as being far from entirely physical and material; and he showed more definitely than Pater, that Roman life could be presented in the form of a novel, with realistic effect, yet with the exercise of a discriminating selection of the finer elements of subject matter, and in a style delicately fitted to portray these finer elements.

A review of esthetic elements to be found in the novel of Roman life would not be complete without some consideration of two recent novels by Mr. Eden Phillpotts, Evander, (1919), and Pan and the Twins, (1922). Mr. Phillpotts has shown his appreciation for classic art in The Joy of Youth, while another of his novels, The River, shows his love for the beautiful in nature. Mr. George Moore says, “Morality is but a dream, but beauty is real;” his novel, The Brook Kerith, is not considered here as a novel of Roman life, but in it the author often harks back to the beautiful pagan world. There is something of this in the two novels of Roman life written by Mr. Phillpotts. As has been said, George Ebers had written, A Question; The Idyl of a Picture by His Friend Alma Tadema, (1881), which presents the beauties of pastoral life in semi-mythological classic times in pre-historic Sicily, and suggests Evander in subject matter. In Marius the Epicurean, Pater had said, “Farm life in Italy, including the culture of the olive and the vine, has a grace of its own, and might well contribute to the production of an ideal dignity of character, like that of nature itself in this gifted region. Vulgarity seemed impossible.” The ideal beauty of a simple, outdoor life, centering in the farmer’s hut, appears in Evander, a novel which portrays life in prehistoric Italy and abounds in beautiful pastoral description. In its portrayal of life, Evander shows somewhat the same discriminating selection of esthetic elements to be seen in Marius the Epicurean.[118] and Veranilda; but unlike the work of Pater or Gissing, Evander has a rich and picturesque humor. Here, in Mr. Phillpotts’ novel, is optimism in contrast to the detachment of Pater, and Gissing’s somewhat continuous pessimism. Mr. Phillpott’s light, humorous, cheerful style in Evander, makes the novel rank far below Marius the Epicurean and Veranilda as a work of art, and is a concession to popular taste; yet it has a virtue of its own. Many readers, who would find Marius the Epicurean too serious, could read Evander with pleasure and profit.

Evander portrays life in Italy when marriage was just coming into fashion; it is really a satire of the “triangle” of the ordinary man, the genius, and the woman who does not know her own mind. But it truthfully represents the beginnings of things most characteristically Roman; especially the Roman ideals of the home, the community, and finally law, ideals which sprang from the simple, austere, agricultural life of the prehistoric Romans. The author is right in representing as real to these primitive Romans, “nymphs, goat-foot fauns and other immortal creatures of lake and mountain, vale and forest, who spied upon humanity with wonder when the world was young.” Among other gods, Pan, under the Latin name of Faunus, appears to a mortal woman, in Evander, as he had done in Mr. James Stephens’ novel, The Crock of Gold; and the humorous, delicately satiric style of Evander at times suggests Mr. Stephen’s work. In portraying life “when the world was young,” the author of Evander seems to ask, “Why should it grow old?” And in portraying ancient pagan life as a satire on modern life, he does not fail to show that the ideals and aspirations of man have changed but little.

Pan and the Twins, (1922), as its title suggests, makes a similar use of the god Pan, and is a novel written in a style similar to that of Evander. It differs from Mr. Phillpotts’ other novel of Roman life in including historical material. Not very much history is brought into Pan and the Twins,[119] but when historical events are mentioned, they are made vividly significant, and are rightly interpreted. The scene is laid chiefly on a country estate near Rome, and in the time of Valentinian, though other Roman Emperors are mentioned. Even more than Evander, Pan and the Twins suggests Mr. James Stephens’ The Crock of Gold, but is a better constructed novel and a finer piece of art. The satire of Pan and the Twins is delicate but very pointed at times, as when Theodosius convinces the Christian bishop that it is not his duty to the State to have Arcadius burned alive. Its humor is equally delicate, but no one could fail to laugh at the spectacle of one of the Emperor’s favorite bears, which escapes from its cage at the amphitheatre and becomes very much worried that “malefactors” are no longer provided as its daily food.[36]

While its philosophy is at times “sugar-coated,” Pan and the Twins offers a very strong plea for sanity in religion and life, and suggests that they are one and the same thing. Moreover, in its portrayal of life, it distinctly seeks for elements of beauty. With a few delicate touches, the author presents in his heroine a figure of ideal physical and spiritual beauty, not unlike Gissing’s Veranilda in conception. In portraying Roman life, coarser elements are kept in the background. One is made to feel the existence of the horrors of the amphitheatre, the inconsistencies of the Church, and much of the varied life of Rome. Roman customs, as, for example, the marriage ceremony, are correctly described. But in the foreground of the picture appear always scenes amid the sunlight and pure air of the Roman country landscape. Pan and the Twins is not a great novel, but one that contains much beautiful writing. The scenes which it portrays are selected chiefly for their esthetic appeal, but are real, none the less; not inconsistent[120] with life, past or present. It is not necessarily either “pagan” or Christian; but seems to undertake to show that beauty cannot be defined entirely in terms of morality, Christianity, or paganism. Pan and the Twins ranks far below such a consummate piece of art as Marius the Epicurean, but successfully presents the esthetic, in terms more readily appreciated by the popular taste.

[121]

IV
In Conclusion

In thus reviewing the principal lines of development which the novel of Roman life has followed to the present day, it has been found that, in some cases, these lines lead away ultimately from the true type of the novel which portrays the life of Rome with realistic effect. Thus the line of the novel of Roman life as written by scholarly preachers has been found to branch off, at a certain point, into the line of the story of religious instruction, a form which was excluded by definition in Section I of this study. The line of the “popular” novel of Roman life has always had a tendency to branch off, and deteriorate into cheap imitations, which attempt to use Roman life to provide artificial coloring, but do not really portray Roman life at all. The line of the novel of Roman life written to illustrate “schoolbook” history has in most cases branched off directly into the line of books for boys—Mr. Davis’s and Mr. White’s novels being the notable exceptions. While there has been little direct imitation of the pedantic elements in the work of German scholars, with their meticulous overemphasis upon detail; German novelists such as Eckstein have been shown to follow Scott in their methods of writing historical novels, and to suggest in turn to English novelists, the thorough way in which subjects taken from Roman life may be presented by any novelist. Few English novelists have attained notable success in portraying Roman life in terms which suggest the purity of style and beauty of thought of Pater’s Marius the Epicurean.

The two English novels of Roman life, which have had the most profound influence upon other English novels of Roman life, are Kingsley’s Hypatia and Wallace’s Ben Hur; and one must look to these two especially, in any attempt to trace the lines of development which are of the most supreme importance, in the English novel of Roman life.[122] Since the publication of these two books, Quo Vadis has had a very important effect upon the English novel of Roman life, but this book followed Canon Farrar’s Darkness and Dawn, which in turn followed Eckstein’s Nero. The importance of Hypatia and Ben Hur, in the development of the novel of Roman life, is due principally to the clear relation which they establish between the life of the Roman world and the life of today, and to their illustration of eternal truths. It must be emphasized that novels such as these give one a comprehensive idea of life throughout the Roman world; Ben Hur is most successful in this, but the scenes in Hypatia, though chiefly laid in Alexandria, are symbolic of Roman life in a larger sphere. A few novels of Roman life have attained, in some measure, the success of Hypatia and Ben Hur, by portraying life in a number of different parts of the Roman world. But most novelists have done better work by limiting the scene of their novels to the vicinity of the City of Rome itself, while not attempting work upon such large outlines as those upon which the work of Charles Kingsley and Lew Wallace is based. It has been found that novels whose scene is laid chiefly outside of and apart from any great city of the Roman world,—especially those whose scene is in one of the remote provinces of the Roman Empire,—do not really portray Roman life. This has been found to be the case with novels whose scene is Roman Britain, since they merely present very elementary illustrations of school-book history, and do not portray the life of Rome at all.

In general, the novel of Roman life has been found to be a very elastic form, and this has necessitated a certain looseness of structure in the section treating of its development, (Sec. III); but especial care has been taken not to omit significant elements in this development, and not to set up arbitrary standards of value. The principal lines of development, which the novel of Roman life has followed, and which I have endeavored to trace carefully, have not converged up to the present time; this study has therefore[123] been devoted to an analysis of important individual elements, rather than to an attempt to construct from these elements a complete whole, based upon any abstract theory, and having a merely superficial unity. All elements of permanent value in the novel of Roman life have been given an entirely thorough consideration, the combination of a number of important elements in great novels has been pointed out; but the possibility of a further combination of these important elements into an even greater novel of Roman life than any which has yet been written, is something which the future alone can realize. While, for the sake of completeness, it has been necessary to review a number of inferior novels; these have, in most cases, been used to illustrate definite tendencies in particular lines of development of the novel of Roman life; or to mark the exact points at which such particular lines of development pass outside the limits of the field of the true novel of Roman life.

It is sincerely hoped that this study will serve as a complete and unbiased review of all the best work that has been done in the novel of Roman life. This work has been shown to be one requiring scholarship of the highest order, and offering to the reader products, whose literary merit compares favorably with that of the best work produced in other departments of the historical novel. In portraying life in the past with realistic effect, the novel of Roman life has been shown to be a direct development of the historical novel, a literary form which has in all important respects followed the example of Sir Walter Scott, and which has continued to show evidences of vigor and power to the present time. The life of ancient Rome has been shown to offer to the English historical novelist a field rich in material which illustrates the vital connection between the life of the past and the life of the present.

FOOTNOTES

[1]Evander: Mr. Eden Phillpotts, (1919).

[2]e. g., A Friend of Caesar: Mr. William Stearns Davis, (1900).

[3]Princess Salome: Dr. Burris Jenkins, Lippincott, Phila., (1921).

[4]Pomponia, the Gospel in Caesar’s Household: Mrs. J. B. Peploe Webb, (1867), (Presbyterian Publication Company, o. p.).

[5]Emma Leslie in Sowing Beside All Waters, etc., furnishes a clear example of the most worthless kind of work to be found in the form of the story of religious instruction.

[6]Scott rarely made a great historical character the central figure of a novel. An exception is seen in the character of Queen Mary in The Abbot.

[7]Prefatory Letter to Peveril of the Peak.

[8]Scott’s Introduction to Ivanhoe.

[9]Mr. Borden’s list of novels of Roman life by foreign authors is:

Nero: Ernst Eckstein, (1889)

A Thorny Path: George Ebers, (1892)

Quo Vadis: H. Sienkiewicz, (1895)

The Death of the Gods: D. Merejkowski, (1901)

[10]The Progress of Romance (1785).

[11]General Preface to the Waverly Novels.

[12]For a more complete outline of the tendencies of the romance at this time, see The Development of the English Novel: Wilbur L. Cross.

[13]This motive is used in Mr. E. L. White’s Andivius Hedulio, and in Baring-Gould’s Perpetua; in each of these novels the hero makes his escape through the drain.

[14]Thomas Love Peacock said The Epicurean was “not faithful to ancient manners, and ignorant of Epicureanism.”

[15]The date 1827 is given in the publisher’s note to the 1901 edition, as the date when Salathiel was first published. This is evidently a mistake on the part of the publishers (Messrs. Funk and Wagnalls), since 1829 is given as the original date of publication by historians of the novel (e. g., George Saintsbury in The English Novel), and in biographical accounts of Croly (e. g., The Dictionary of National Biography, etc.).

[16]Josephus is the direct source usually, and always the ultimate source of all novels which take the siege of Jerusalem for their theme. cf. Whyte-Melville’s The Gladiators.

[17]Croly’s classical scholarship is especially well displayed in his Catiline, which tells in the form of a verse drama the story of the famous conspiracy against the Roman republic.

[18]Since Bulwer wrote for many years under this name, before he became the Earl of Lytton, it is quite permissable to use the shorter form of his name.

[19]The scene of Valerius, of course, opens in Britain, but nothing of importance to the story happens there. This is doubtless a mere device to arouse the interest of English readers in the hero by hinting at the connection of “Roman” Britain with Rome.

[20]The date 1840, given in some guides to historical fiction, has been found to be incorrect.

[21]Hypatia는 1851 년 Fraser의 Magazine에서 시리즈로 시작되었습니다.

[22]킹슬리가 그의 여주인공을 위해 히파티아를 선택한 것과 관련하여, 그녀는 그리스 철학의 마지막 고수자를 대표한다고 말해야하며, 이것이 그녀가 선택된 진정한 이유입니다. 그러나 킹슬리의 여주인공과 웨어의 제노비아 사이에는 뚜렷한 유사성이 있습니다. 둘 다 로마 정부로부터 독립된 권력을 열망하는 여성들이었다. 둘 다 남성 카운슬러에게 의지한다는 생각을 생각했습니다. 히파티아는 필람몬에 대해 말하면서, 이렇게 말한다: "만일 내가 그를 롱기누스로 훈련시킬 수밖에 없다면, 나는 감히 제노비아의 역할을 할 수 있고, 그와 함께 상담자로서 ... 그리고 나의 오데나투스─오레스테스─를 위하여?" 그녀는 실제로이 계획을 따르려고 시도했으며, 심지어 그녀가 혐오하는 오레스테스와 동맹을 맺었습니다. 그러나 킹슬리의 여주인공이 부분적으로 웨어의 제노비아에 의해 그에게 제안되었다고해도, 이것은 Hypatia의 글쓰기로 이어지는 중요한 이유로 간주되어서는 안됩니다.

[23]옥스포드 음모의 이러한 측면에 대해서는 George Borrow의 Lavengro, (1851) 및 The Romany Rye (1857)를 참조하십시오. 또한 W. L. Cross, The Development of the English Novel, p. 211, W. L. Gates, Essay on Newman, in Three Studies in Literature, N. Y., (1899).

[24]이 인용문은 모두 찰스 킹슬리에서 찾을 수있는 동일한 편지에서 나온 것입니다. 그의 아내에 의해 편집 된 그의 삶의 편지와 추억 : Scribners, N. Y., 1894는 런던 판에서 요약되었습니다.

[25]M. J. Safford의 영어 번역 통지서에서 인용되었습니다. 이 통지는 현대 관중, 세인트 루이스에 나타났습니다.

[26]The Mail and Express, N. Y.의 현대 리뷰에서.

[27]인용 된 저자 중에는 Virgil, Pliny the Elder, Martial, Cicero, Seneca, St. Jerome, Juvenal, Tacitus, Plautus, Dion Cassius, Aulus Gellius, Aurelius Victor, Suetonius, Ovid, Ammianus Marcellinus, Tertullian 및 기타 여러 사람이 있습니다.

[28]월리스는 전차 경주 장면에서 퀸튼의 《돈 신》에 거의 빚을 지지 않았지만, 《돈 신》에서도 비슷한 장면이 지적되고 있다.

[29]아서 홉슨 퀸 (Arthur Hobson Quinn), 영어 교수 및 펜실베니아 대학 (University of Pennsylvania)의 학장 인 The American Novel-Past and Present; 학부의 강의, 1913-14, p. 302.

[30]J. M. 머레이, 스타일의 문제, (1922); The Classical Weekly February 26, 1923에서 인용.

[31]성 안토니우스의 유혹은 아마도 세계에서 꿈의 문학의 가장 좋은 예일 것이며, E. L. White는 Andivius Hedulio (1921)를 위해 자료를 수집 할 때 자신의 생각을 과거로 옮기는 방법을 염두에두고 있었을 것입니다.

[32]모리스 씨에게 보낸 그의 편지, 1851년 1월 16일(이미 인용됨), 찰스 킹슬리, 그의 삶의 편지와 기억들, 그의 아내, 런던 에드., Scribner's, 1894에서 그의 아내 abr.에 의해 ed.

[33]독자에 대한 저자의 메모.

[34]Walter Pater, 비판적 연구, Edward Thomas, N. Y., 1913.

[35]F. S. Dunn은 파터의 순결한 지시와 징계 윤리에 대한 정당한 존경심을 가지고 말하면서, 로마의 지형과 관련하여 에피쿠레아인 마리우스에서 일어난 두 가지 사소한 오류에 주목한다. (F. S. Dunn, 교실에서의 역사 소설,-고전 저널, April, 1911.)

[36]《돈 신》의 퀸톤은 갈레리우스 황제가 가장 좋아하는 두 곰에 대해 말했고, 그의 근원인 락탄티우스, 드 모르테 박해, 모자를 주었다. 21.

[124]

서지학

설명

다음 제목 목록은 로마 생활의 소설의 발전을 추적하는 데 따르는 계획에 따라 섹션으로 나뉘며, 앞선 연구의 섹션 III에 대한 보충 자료로 사용하기위한 것입니다. 목록의 각 섹션에서 제목은 저자가 로마 생활에 대해 하나 이상의 소설을 쓴 경우를 제외하고는 출판 날짜의 연대순에 따라 가능한 한 가깝게 배열됩니다. 그러한 경우 그의 모든 책은 출판 순서대로 함께 언급됩니다. 책의 원래 출판 날짜가 불확실한 경우, 가장 잘 이용 가능한 판의 날짜가 주어집니다. 또는 책에 대해 알려진 날짜가 없는 경우, 해당 책이 속한 섹션의 끝 부분이나 동일한 저자가 다른 책(알려진 날짜)의 뒤에 나열됩니다. 어떤 경우에는 제목이 인쇄되지 않은 책으로 나열되지만 공공 도서관에서 여기저기서 찾을 수 있습니다. 실제로 얻을 수 없다고 생각하는 책은 별표 (*)로 표시됩니다. 이 목록에는 로마 생활의 모든 진정한 영어 소설과 영어로 쓰여진 다른 모든 책이 포함되어 있으며, 제목은 로마 생활의 소설의 부산물로 수집되었습니다. 이러한 부산물은 로마 생활의 소설에 대한 연구에 대한 상대적 중요성에 따라 분류 될 것이며, 더 중요한 책이 먼저 주어진다.

각 소설의 가장 오래된 알려진 날짜는 괄호 안에 주어진다, (). 컬렉션에 실린 단편 소설을 포함하여 단편 소설은 생략되었습니다.

로마 생활의 소설, 그리고 그들의 부산물

1. 로마 생활의 소설의 기원과 관련된 소설. (§ II, P. 17 참조.)

테오도시우스와 콘스탄티아 사이에 전달된 것으로 추정되는 편지들—랭혼, 요한; 런던, (1778).

[125]

제노비아, 팔마이라의 여왕, 역사에 기초한 내러티브 - 미스 오키프; 런던, (1814).

발레리우스, 로마의 이야기—록하트, J. G.; 런던, (1821) - N. Y. Harper, 1835.

에피쿠리아인—무어, 토마스; (1827) - 맥클러그, 시카고, 1890년.

살라티엘, 불멸자—크롤리, 조지; (1827) - Repub. Funk & Wagnalls, 뉴욕, 제목, Tarry Thou Till I Come, 1903.

알렉산드리아인, 네 번째 세기의 이집트 이야기 - Anon. Whittaker, London, (1830).

폼페이의 마지막 날들—Bulwer-Lytton, E. G. 경; 네덜란드, N. Y., (1834).

금욕주의자—스탠포드, 제인 케이; 런던, (1834).

2. 설교자들의 중요한 소설. (§ III, A, p. 34 참조)

제노비아, 또는 팔마이라의 몰락—웨어, 윌리엄; 버트, N. Y., (1836) - 제임스 밀러, N. Y., 1869.

아우렐리안: 로마, 삼세기—웨어, 윌리엄; orig. pub. as Probus, (1838) - Burt, N. Y., n. d., Aurelian의 제목으로.

줄리안; 유대의 장면—웨어, 윌리엄; 에스테스, 보스턴, (1841).

히파티아—킹슬리, 찰스; (1853) - 맥밀란, 뉴욕 주, 1902.

파비올라: 카타콤바 교회—와이즈먼, N.추기경; Burns & Oates, London, (1855).

칼리스타—뉴먼, 존 헨리 추기경; (1856) - 롱먼, N. Y., 1890.

어둠과 새벽—패러, 프레드릭 더블유 대집사; (1892) - 롱맨스, N. Y., 1895.

구름을 모으는 것—패러, 프레드릭 더블유 대집사; (1895) - 롱맨스, N. Y., 1896.

페르페투아—바잉굴드, 에스 목사; 네덜란드, N. Y., (1897).

도미티아—바링굴드; Fred A. Stokes, N. Y., (1898).

[126]

3. 페던트의 두 소설 (§ III, D, P. 73 참조)

디온과 시빌, 첫 세기의 로맨스 - 쿤, 마일즈 제럴드; 런던, 벤틀리, (1866).

돈 신, 또는 제국과 교황권—퀸튼, M. A.; Kelly, Piet & Co., 볼티모어 (1873).

(*아우렐리아, 또는 카페나 게이트의 유대인들—퀸턴, M. A.; n. d.)

(*후리우스, 로마의 초기 그리스도인들의 이야기 - 퀸턴, M. A.; n. d.)

4. 교사의 중요한 소설. (v. III, G.)

헬레나의 가정; 로마, 첫 세기—드 밀레, 제임스; (1858) - 워드 앤 드러먼드, 뉴욕 주, 1897.

*카타콤바의 순교자—드 밀, 야고보; (1858).

칼리스트라투스, 자서전 - 길크스, A. H.; 롱맨스, (1897) - 프로우드, 런던, 1912.

*네 아들—길크스, 에이치; Symcox, Dulwich, (1909).

카이사르의 친구—데이비스, 윌리엄 스턴스; 맥밀란, 뉴욕 주, (1900).

내키지 않는 베스탈—화이트, 에드워드 루카스; 네덜란드, N. Y., (1918).

안디비우스 헤둘리오—화이트, 에드워드 루카스; 네덜란드, N. Y., (1921).

*클라우디안, 두 번째 세기—먼로, 에드워드 M., M. A. 목사; 마스터스, 런던, n. d.

5. 로마 생활의 예술 소설. (§ III, H, P. 108 참조)

*세르토리우스의 새끼 사슴—랜더, 로버트 아이어스; 롱맨스, 런던, (1846); (스페인의 장면).

마리우스, 에피쿠리아인—패터, 월터 호레이비; 맥밀란, N. Y., (1885).

베라닐다—기싱, 조지; Archibald, Constable & Co., London, (1904).

에반데르—필로포츠, 에덴; 맥밀란, 뉴욕 주, (1919).

판과 쌍둥이—필로포츠, 에덴; 맥밀란, 뉴욕 주, (1922).

[127]

6. 달리 분류되지 않은 소설을 포함하여 로마 생활의 인기있는 소설. (§ III, E, p. 75 및 F, P. 90 참조).

*황후—베넷, G.; 스미스 앤 엘더, 런던, (1835); (로마 생활의 소설로 나열됨).

아틸라, 또는 훈족—제임스, G. P. R.; (1837) - Routledge, 런던, 1903.

*검투사, 로마 제국 이야기 - 라몬트, 미스 엠; (1840) - 롱맨스, 런던, 1849년.

Baiae의 줄리아; 또는 네로의 날 - 피커링, 엘렌; 색스턴 앤 마일즈, 뉴욕 주, (1843).

안토니나—콜린스, 윌키; 하퍼, N. Y., (1850).

*다마스커스의 공성전, 역사적인 로맨스—니스벳, 제임스; 채프먼, 런던, (1851).

로마 반역자, 또는 키케로, 카토, 카틸린의 시대 - 허버트, H. W.; 피터슨, 필라델피아, (1853).

*전투의 내기 - 허버트, H. W., n. d. (로마 영국).

사비누스, 유대인과 이방인의 노예들—용, 샬롯 엠; National Society's Depository, Sanctuary, Westminster, (1861) - Whittaker, N. Y., 1890.

*쿡과 포로; 또는 인질 아탈루스 - 용, 샬럿 엠; 휘태커, N. Y., (1894).

검투사—Whyte-Melville, G. J.; (1863) - 와드 앤 록, N. Y., 1890.

Ænone, 로마에서의 노예 생활 이야기 - Kip, L.; 브래드번, 뉴욕 주; (1866).

*Ierne of Armorica; 클로비스 시대의 이야기—베이트먼, J. C.; Sadlier, N. Y., (1873), (갈리아의 장면).

*클라우디우스—코스톤, R. 케이 부인; 해차드, 런던, (1878).

*파란색과 녹색 - 포팅거, 헨리 경; 채프먼, 런던, (1879).

벤 허—월리스, 루이스 장군; 하퍼, N. Y., (1880).

네라—그레이엄, 존 더블유; 맥밀란, 뉴욕 주, (1886).

별의 아들—리처드슨, 비 더블유; 롱맨스, N. Y., (1888).

[128]

세상의 주인들—호푸스, 메리 에이 엠; Bentley, (1888), (1885 년은 아마도 틀렸을 것입니다).

*여왕 중 여왕 - 맥도월, C. J. F. S.; 스완, 런던, (1889), (제노비아).

클레오파트라—해가드, H. 라이더 경; 롱맨스, N. Y., (1889).

펄-메이든—해가드, H. 라이더 경; 롱맨스, 런던, (1902).

*Acte—Westbury, Hugh, pseud., (Farrie, Hugh C.); 벤틀리, 런던, (1890).

바라바스—코렐리, 마리; 리핀콧, 필라델피아, (1893).

십자가의 표징—바렛, 윌슨; 리핀콧, 필라델피아, (1897).

*파로스, 이집트인—부스비, G.; Ward & Lock, London, (1899).

사자의 무리—오스본, 듀필드; 더블데이, N. Y., (1901).

그녀는 홀로 서 있습니다 - 애쉬튼, 마크; L. C. Page & Co., Boston, (1901).

아모르 빅터 - 케냐, 오어; Stokes, N. Y., (3rd ed., 1902).

베르길리우스, 그리스도의 오심 이야기—바첼러, 어빙; 하퍼, N. Y., (1904).

럭스 십자가, 위대한 사도 이야기—가든하이어, S. M.; 하퍼, N. Y., (1904).

*마커스와 파우스티나—카렐, 프레드릭; J. Long, London, (1904).

*Et tu, Sejane—Twells, Miss J. H.; 코트, 필라델피아, (1904).

사이키—크램프, 월터 에스; 리틀 앤 브라운, 보스턴, (1905).

제국의 후계자—크램프, 월터 에스; Richard C. Badger, The Gorham Press, Boston, (1913).

*검술사의 아들—리드, 오피; 레어드, 시카고, (1906).

[129]

본디오 빌라도 아래—슈일러, 윌리엄; Funk & Wagnalls, N. Y., (1906).

타르수스의 사울—밀러, 엘리자베스; Bobbs-Merrill Co., Indianapolis, (1906).

기쁨의 도시, 예루살렘의 포위 공격과 몰락의 사랑 드라마—밀러, 엘리자베스; Bobbs-Merrill Co., Indianapolis, (1908).

*리시니우스 상원의원—켈리, 더블유; 네덜란드, 뉴욕 주, (1909).

*운명의 도시 - 칼링, J. R.; Ward & Lock, London, (1910).

자유의 족쇄—브래디, 사이러스 타운센드; Dodd, Mead & Co., N. Y., (1913).

카이사르에게—오크지, 남작들; 도란, N. Y., (1914).

표준 전달자—화이트헤드, A. C.; American Book Co., N. Y., (1915).

그 여인을 보라—하레, 티 에버렛; 리핀콧, 필라델피아, (1916).

살로메 공주—젠킨스, B. A.; 리핀콧, 필라델피아, (1921).

계시록—집사, 둘시; Boni & Liveright, N. Y., (1922).

나발라—카스키, 재클린 A.; J. B. Bell, Inc., Lynchburg, Va., (1922).

7. 로마의 영국에 관한 대부분의 책들을 포함하여 소년들을 위한 책들(10쪽과 96쪽 참조)

이천 년 전—교회, A. J. 목사; Dodd, Mead & Co., N. Y., (1885).

색슨 쇼어 백작—교회, A. J. 목사; Putnam, N. Y., (1887), (영국).

라이온스에게—교회, A. J. 목사; Putnam, N. Y., (1889).

로마의 불타는 것—교회, A. J. 목사; (1892) - 맥밀란, N. Y., 1902.

세상의 주님—교회, A. J. 목사; Scribner, N. Y., (1898).

[130]

소나무의 면류관—교회, A. J. 목사; Seely, London, (1905) - Scribners, N. Y., 1906.

*No. XIII; 또는 잃어버린 베스탈의 이야기 - 마샬, E.; 카셀, 런던, (1885), (영국).

젊은 카르타고인—헨티, G. A.; 버트, N. Y., (1886).

성전을 위하여—헨티, G. A.; 블랙리, 런던, (1888).

베릭, 영국인—헨티, G. A.; Scribners, N. Y., (1892) - Scribners, N. Y., 1911, (영국).

*One Traveller Returns—Murray, D. C., & Herman, H.; Chatto, 런던, (1887), (영국).

페니키아 프라의 멋진 모험 - 아놀드, 에드윈 레스터; 버트, N. Y., (1890), (영국).

백부장 레피두스, 오늘날의 로마인—아놀드, E. L.; Crowell, N. Y., (1901), (로마인이 영국에서 다시 살아났다).

*정복당한 자에게 화가 있을진저—클락, 알프레드; 로우, 런던, (1893).

*영국 공작—맥스웰, H. E. 경; 블랙우드, (1895).

*갈리아를 항문함—스미스, E. M.; 언윈, 런던, (1899).

*영국의 위대함 포레톨드—"트레벨리얀, 마리"; 호그, 런던, (1900).

*고대 웨일즈의 이야기 - 엘링턴, H.; 휘태커, N. Y., (1900).

*마커스, 젊은 백부장—Fenn, G. M.; 니스터, 런던, (1904).

드루이드의 딸—세지윅, S. N.; 스톡웰, (1904), (영국).

*해돋이에서—스푸렐, 허버트; 녹화, 런던, (1904), (영국).

Nikanor, Tales의 Teller - Taylor, C. B.; McClurg, 시카고, (1906), (영국).

[131]

로마 독수리 아래서—"사곤, 아미오트"; 파트리지, 런던, (1907).

길의 만남—박스터, J. D.; 녹화, 런던, (1908), (영국).

두로브리베; 로만 로체스터—해리스, E.; 해리스, 로체스터, (1909).

*부디카—와드, C. H. D.; Ousely, 런던, (1912), (영국).

8. 종교적 가르침에 관한 이야기(39쪽과 53쪽 참조)

약어에 대한 설명 :

R. T. S.—Religious Tract Society, London.

S. P. C. K.—기독교 지식 증진을 위한 협회, 런던.

나오미: 또는 예루살렘의 마지막 날들—웹, J. B. 페플로 부인; Routledge, London, (1841), (날짜 1840은 아마도 틀렸을 것입니다).

줄라머크: 네스토리아인들의 이야기—웹, J. B. P.; Ward & Lock, London, (1848).

카르타고의 순교자들—웹, J. B. P.; Ward & Lock, London, (1850).

타가스테의 알리피우스—웹, J. B. P.; R. T. S., (Revell, N. Y.), (1865).

*폼포니아; 카이사르 가정의 복음—웹, J. B. P.; Pres. Pub. Co., Philadelphia, (1867).

*에바드네: 또는 그 타락의 제국—로우크로프트, C.; Boone, London, (1850).

이집트 방랑자들—닐, 존 메이슨 목사; S. P. C. K., (1854).

*Aptonga의 농장 - Neale, J. M.; 파커, 런던, (1856) - S. P. C. K., 1918.

*세베나의 유배자들—닐, J. M., (pseud. Aurelius Gratianus); 파커, 런던, (1859) - S. P. C. K., 1918.

디오스쿠리의 부두—닐, J. M.; S. P. C. K., (1917).

[132]

와디 아라비아의 라이온스—닐, 제이 엠; S. P. C. K., (1917).

다윗의 집의 왕자; 또는 거룩한 도시에서의 삼 년 - Ingraham, J. H. 목사; (1855) - 보스턴 로버츠, (1895).

*아도니야; 유대인 분산—스트릭랜드, 제인 엠; 심프킨, 런던, (1856).

*파르테니아, 또는 이교의 마지막 날들—리, E. B. 부인; Routledge, London, (1858).

Caecilia Metella, 또는 Rome Enslaved—"Julia, Aemilia"(Emily Julia Black); 채프먼, 런던, (1859).

클라우디아와 푸덴스: 글로스터의 초기 그리스도인들—라이슨스, S.; 해밀턴, 런던, (1861).

*클라우디우스의 빌라—커츠, E. L. 목사; S. P. C. K., (1861).

스페인의 순교자들—찰스, 엘리자베스 런들 부인; S. P. C. K., (1862).

정복자의 승리—찰스, E. R.; Dodd, Mead & Co., N. Y., (1871).

정복하고 정복함—찰스, E. R.; S. P. C. K., (1876)—Dodd, Mead & Co., N. Y., (1876).

경과되었지만 잃어버리지는 않음—찰스, E. R.; S. P. C. K., (1877)—Dodd, Mead & Co., N. Y., (1879).

아틸라와 그의 정복자들—찰스, E. R.; S. P. C. K., (1894).

*유대에서의 삶; 또는 첫 번째 기독교 시대의 글림프스 - 리차드, 마리아 티; 심프킨, 런던, (1862).

*빅터, 위대한 박해의 이야기—페리, G. G.; S. P. C. K., London, (1864).

*베스티나의 순교—피트먼, 엠마 알; 호더, 런던, (1869).

클라우디아—터커, 샬럿; 넬슨, 런던, (1869).

자유, 초기 그리스도인들의 이야기—터커, C.; R. T. S., (1871).

영국의 데이브레이크—터커, C., (pseud. A. L. O. E.); R. T. S., (1880).

[133]

폭풍우가 몰아치는 밤의 별들, 또는 카타콤바의 빛—"E. L. M."; 넬슨, 런던, (1870).

Æmilius: 데시안과 발레리안 박해—크레이크, A. D. 목사; Mowbray, London, (1871).

에바누스; 콘스탄티누스 대왕—크레이크, A. D.; 모우브레이, 런던, (1872).

세번에있는 캠프 - 크레이크, A. D.; Mowbray, London, (1875) - 바티칸 도서관, N. Y., 1891.

빅터의 로렐—크레이크, A. D.; Mowbray, London, (1885) - 바티칸 도서관, N. Y., 1889.

*표준 무기명 - 팔머, 엘렌; 해밀턴, 에든버러, (1871).

*노나: 배교자 줄리안 시절의 이야기—팔머, 엘렌; 해밀턴, 에든버러, (1872).

로마의 마르첼라, (두려움없는 기독교 처녀라고도 함) - Knevels, C. D. 부인, (pseud. Eastwood, Frances); 쇼, 런던, (1872).

*아다, 유대인 처녀—그레이, 아그네스 엠; 해밀턴, 에든버러, (1872).

*실렌 - 스네이드, 헨리; 롱맨스, 런던, (1873).

*에피파니우스—모스만, T. W.; 헤이즈, 런던, (1874).

가우덴티우스—데이비스, G. 에스 목사; S. P. C. K., (1874).

줄리안의 꿈—데이비스, G. S.; S. P. C. K., (1875).

그리스의 성 바오로 - 데이비스, G. S., n. d.

글라우시아: 그리스 노예—레슬리, 엠마; 넬슨과 필립스, N. Y., (1874)-R. T. S., 1904.

Quadratus, 교회 안에서의 세상 이야기—레슬리, E.; 필립스와 헌트, 신시내티, (1875).

모든 물 곁에 파종, 초대 교회 이야기—레슬리, E.; R. T. S., n. d. (이것은 단지 Quadratus 재 작성에 불과합니다.)

플라비아—레슬리, E.; Nelson and Phillips, N. Y., (1875), 나중에 제목으로 출판 됨

사자의 입에서; 또는 카타콤바에 있는 교회—레슬리, E.; 브래들리, 보스턴, (1880), (또한 술집. anon.).

[134]

황제의 봉사에 관하여—레슬리, E.; R. T. S., (1904).

*에돌 드루이드—킹스턴, W. H. G.; 파트리지, 런던, (1874).

*조비니안; 교황 로마의 초기 시절—킹스턴, W. H. G.; 해밀턴, 런던, (1877).

지포라, 유대인 처녀—브루셔, 엠 E. 부인; 런던, (1875).

필로크리스투스—애보트, 에드윈 에이 목사; 맥밀란, N. Y., (1878).

오네시무스, 그리스도의 자유인: 성 바울의 제자의 회고록—애보트, E. A.; Revell, N. Y., (1882) - (Repub. Corwin, C. E., ed.)

기독교인 실라누스—애보트, E. A.; 맥밀란, 뉴욕 주, (1906).

*나르시소스—목수, 더블유 보이드 목사; S. P. C. K., (Young, N. Y.), (1879).

*디오 아테네 사람 - 버, E. F.; 감리교 Bk., N. Y., (1880).

*갈대아 사람 알레프; 알렉산드리아에서 본 메시아—버, E. F.; 케캄, 뉴욕 주, (1891).

*파비우스, 로마인—버, E. F.; 베이커, N. Y., n. d.

플로티누스의 와드—헌트, 존 부인; 스트라한, 런던, (1881).

*발레리아, 또는 카타콤바의 순교자 - Witherow, W. H.; 울머, 런던, (1883).

도르카스, 파우스티나의 딸—쿤스, 네이선 C.; 포드, 뉴욕 주, (1884).

리비아 아리우스 : 원시 교회의 이딜 - 쿤스, 노스 캐롤라이나 주; 애플턴, N. Y., (1884).

*왕관에서 왕관까지; 초대교회 이야기—아논.; 해차드, 런던, (1885).

*왕과 여왕에 의해—메르시에, 제롬 부인; 리빙턴, 런던, (1886).

*폼페이의 노예 소녀 - 홀트, 에밀리 에스; 쇼, 런던, (1886).

*플로라, 로마 순교자—아논.; Burns & Oates, London, (1886) - Benziger, N. Y., 1887.

[135]

예루살렘의 레아—베리, E. P.; Randolph & Co., (1890).

*빌립—커틀러, 메리 시; 넬슨, 런던, (1890).

이삭하르의 아들—브룩스, 에스; Putnam, N. Y., (1890).

어서—워드, 엘리자베스 펠프스 부인; (1890), (나사로의 이야기).

거룩한 도시의 운명—농부, 리디아 에이치; 랜돌프, N. Y., (1895).

타이터스, 십자가의 동지—킹슬리, 플로렌스 엠; D. C. 쿡, 시카고, (1895).

십자가의 군인 스데반—킹슬리, 에프 엠; 헨리 알테무스, 필라델피아, (1896).

바울, 십자가의 헤럴드—킹슬리, 에프 엠; 알테무스, 필라델피아, (1897).

십자가 승리—킹슬리, 에프 엠; Ward & Lock, London, (1900).

토르, 예루살렘의 길거리 소년—킹슬리, 에프 엠; D. C. 쿡, 시카고, (1905).

베로니카—킹슬리, 에프 엠; 애플턴, N. Y., (1913).

다른 지혜로운 사람의 이야기 - VanDyke, Henry J.; Harper, N. Y., (1895) - Harper, N. Y., 1907.

안티파스, 추사의 아들, 그리고 예수가 사랑했던 다른 사람들—휴튼, 루이스 에스; 랜돌프, N. Y., (1896).

요한, 메시아 왕 이야기—우즈, 캐서린 피; Dodd, Mead & Co., N. Y., (1896).

잉가의 아들—우즈, 캐서린 P.; Dodd, Mead & Co., N. Y., (1897).

황혼에서 새벽까지—우즈, 케이 피; 애플턴, 뉴욕 주, (1899).

*빅터 세레누스—우드, 헨리; Gay & Bird, London, (1898).

압도하는 승리 - Gee, Annie L.; S. P. C. K., (1898).

카르타고의 장관 - 메이슨, 캐롤라인 앳워터; 더블데이, 가든 시티, 뉴욕 주, (1899).

하얀 방패—메이슨, C. A.; Griffith & Rowland, 필라델피아, (1904).

[136]

타르수스의 바울—새, 로버트; 넬슨, 런던, (1900).

루시우스 플라부스—스필만, 요셉 목사; 킬너, 필라델피아, (1900).

백부장 디오메데—헨더슨, H. A. 목사; 감리교 Bk., N. Y., (1902).

*아드나—엘리스, 제이 브레켄리지; R. T. S., (1902).

*성소 폴라—페리, 더블유 C.; Sonnenschein, London, (1902).

벳세다—디어본, 말콤; 딜링엄, N. Y., (1902).

*가장 거룩한 트로스—피델리스, 메리 수녀; Burns & Oates, London, (1903).

*늑대 피부의 영웅 - 베반, 톰; R. T. S., (1904).

*빌라도 법정—홉스, 로 알; Fenno, N. Y., (1906).

*툭툭 예수 아이의 이야기 - Smyth, S. P. N.; 순례자 출판사, 보스턴, (1907).

*니즈라—클라르만, 앤드류; 프레드. Pustet & Co., (1908).

*메디올라눔의 레오—홀리스, 거트루드; S. P. C. K., (1909).

*여왕과 황제를 위해—프로테로에, 에르네스트; R. T. S., (1909).

*잊혀진 문—카우퍼, 프랭크; S. P. C. K., (1909).

막달라의 마리아—로버슨, H. G. 부인; Saalfield, Akron, O., (1909).

막달라의 마리아—살투스, 에드가; 녹화, 런던, (1909).

*유다의 성경—Byatt, H.; 롱, 런던, (1909).

파트모스의 프리스카—맥쿡, 헨리 시 목사; 웨스트민스터 출판사, 필라델피아, (1911).

*Faustula - "Ayscough, John", (Francis Browning Drew); Chatto, London, (Kilner, Philadelphia), (1912).

[137]

파에드루스 이야기; 우리가 세상에서 가장 위대한 책을 얻은 방법 - 힐리스, 뉴웰 드와이트 목사; 맥밀란, 뉴욕 주, (1914).

왕의 오심—밥콕, 버니; Bobbs Merrill Co., Indianapolis, (1921).

키레네의 시몬—샤스티드, 토마스 홀; Wahr, Ann Arbor, 미시간, (1923).

9. 로마 생활의 소설로 등재된 책들. (출판일 불확실함)

1세기.

*상원 의원의 딸 인 Iola - Hillhouse, N. L.

*바이에의 줄리아—브라운, J. W.; n. d., (아마도 같은 제목의 엘렌 피커링의 소설에서 위조 된 것일 수 있음).

필로, 첫 세기의 삶—해밀턴, J.

*누워 있지 않은 유령 : Metempsychosis에 대한 연구 - Anon.

*베르길리아—그레이, G.

2세기.

*로마에서 온 편지—와이스, 유스타스.

*마리우스 플라미니우스; 하드리아누스의 날들—아논.

3세기.

*테반 군단—블랙번, E. M.

10. 종교 이야기. (출판 날짜 불확실)

a. 로마 근처에 씬을 가진 사람들.

1세기.

*미나: 네로와 초기 그리스도인들의 시대—로스, 앤드류.

로마도 유대도 아니고 호벤, E.

2세기.

*로마의 아동 순교자와 초기 그리스도인들—아논.

*세 명의 로마 소녀 - 뱀포드, 엠 E.; American Baptist Pub. Co.

*세 베레니케스—브라이트, A. M. 부인.

[138]

포로 처녀 - 아논.

4세기.

신들의 마지막 전투—켈리, F. C.; 필라델피아.

b. 아프리카에서 씬을 가진 사람들.

아프리카 파비올라, 또는 테르툴리안 시대의 카르타고의 교회 - 클라크, A. C.

파비올라의 자매들, 파비올라의 동반자—클라크, A. C.

*데오다투스; 또는 카르타고의 순교자—윌리엄스, E.

*우리의 작은 카르타고의 사촌 - 윈슬로우, 클라라 V.

*반달, 또는 반 기독교인 - 루비, 윌리엄 J.

c. 아시아에서 씬을 가진 사람들.

에베소의 안드로스—코푸스, J. E 목사

시로의 아들—코푸스, J. E. 목사; 벤지거, 뉴욕

*아슬레인: 네스토리아 기독교인들의 매너—아논.

팔마이라, 로마, 그리고 초기 기독교인들─아논의 몰락.

*다마스커스의 몰락—러셀, C. W.

d. 팔레스타인에 씬을 가진 사람들.

1세기.

유대 캡타—토너, C. E.

*유대인의 비극—헤밍.

*제라, 믿는 유대인—아논.

1 세기 이후.

압디엘; 초기 그리스도인들의 이야기—아논.

e. 영국에 씬을 가진 사람들.

*모나 베스탈—도르시, 안나 에이치; 리핀콧, 필라델피아, c. 1850.

*Alleluia 전투, 또는 영국의 펠라기우스주의 - 아논.

*드루이데스—아논.

구텐베르크 전자책 고대 로마의 프로젝트 끝 영어 소설 ***

'시문학관련' 카테고리의 다른 글

헨리 데이비드 소로  (0) 2022.11.17
사평역  (0) 2022.11.06
영어 및 관련 문헌 과거 석사 - 영어 편지  (0) 2022.10.30
Ode to a Nightingale  (0) 2022.10.18
Great Gatsby - 위대한 개츠비  (0) 2022.09.05

관련글

티스토리툴바