A. IMPORTANT NOVELS OF ROMAN LIFE
Valerius, a Roman Story: John G. Lockhart, (1821)
The Epicurean: Thomas Moore, (1827)
Sathaliel, the Immortal: George Croly, (1829)
The Last Days of Pompeii: Sir E. G. Bulwer-Lytton, (1834)
Zenobia: William Ware, (1836)
Attila: G. P. R. James, (1837)
Probus—later called Aurelian: William Ware, (1838)
Julian, Scenes in Judea: William Ware, (1841)
Antonina: Wilkie Collins, (1850)
Hypatia: Charles Kingsley, (1853)
The Roman Traitor: Henry Herbert, (1853)
Callista: John Henry Newman, (1855)
The Gladiators: G. J. Whyte-Melville, (1863)
Ben Hur: Gen. Lew Wallace, (1880)
Marius the Epicurean: Walter Pater, (1885)
Darkness and Dawn: Archdeacon Frederic William Farrar, (1892)
Gathering Clouds: Archdeacon Frederic William Farrar, (1895)
The Sign of the Cross: Wilson Barrett, (1897)
Perpetua: Rev. S. Baring-Gould, (1897)
Domitia: Rev. S. Baring-Gould, (1898)
A Friend of Caesar: William Stearns Davis, (1900)
Vergilius, a Tale of the Coming of Christ: Irving Bacheller, (1904)
Psyche: Walter S. Cramp, (1905)
Veranilda: George Gissing, (1904)
An Heir to Empire: Walter S. Cramp, (1913)
Behold the Woman: T. Everett Harré, (1916)
The Unwilling Vestal: Edward Lucas White, (1918)
Evander: Eden Philpotts, (1919)
Andivius Hedulio: Edward Lucas White, (1921)
Pan and the Twins: Eden Philpotts, (1922)
The above list represents my choice, based upon reasons indicated, of the most important novels of Roman life. The process of selection may be carried still further, however; and, using the same standard as before, I have chosen from this list a dozen novels which stand out above the rest, and are to be considered the absolute best among novels of Roman life. This more select list is as follows:
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 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]
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, 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 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, 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, 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.
Of even greater importance to the historical novel was Scott’s determination to do for the people of Scotland, what Miss Edgeworth had done for the people of Ireland,—to bring before his readers real Scotch people of all ranks and conditions of society, to portray human life in his pages. Scott is especially a realist when dealing with characters taken from lowly life; but his realism is not confined to lowly life alone, as some critics would have us believe. His great historical figures, it is true, are often given romantic and literary treatment; but even they do not lack human touches, and in any case, a proper balance is maintained by including characters who are human enough. What has made Scott’s novels deserve to endure is his faithful representation of human nature. The same thing could be said of any great historical novel, whether it deals with England or America a few years back or with the remote times of ancient Rome. Scott’s plan in writing the historical novel, was to create imaginary characters, with all the attributes of real human beings, and to place them in an historical background, containing a few historical characters. This plan, in the main, has been followed by successful historical novelists since his time,—including those who write of Roman life,—and seems best adapted to portraying the life of the past with realistic effect.
It may now be asked when Roman life was first drawn upon in what may be termed “historical fiction”; whether any evidence of this is to be found before the period when Scott set alike the standard and the fashion in that form of writing. It must be remembered that classic subject-matter has taken a large place in many forms of English literature, though it would be out of place to give examples here taken from other forms of literature than fiction. Not to mention the very early translations and reworkings of mediæval legends on classic subjects, it is well to recall that Chaucer uses classic subject-matter abundantly, and that his Troilus and Cressida approaches the modern historical novel in nearly every way, though it is written in verse. If we are looking for an early presentation of Roman life in a form leading toward modern prose fiction, we must turn to the allegorical quasi-historical romances of the seventeenth century. One of them which may be claimed for England is the Argenis (1621), of John Barclay. Barclay, who was born in France, of Scotch father and French mother, lived for a time in England and finally went to Italy, where he wrote the Argenis in Latin. It describes important historical characters of his own time, but under classic names. Its scenes are placed in classic countries and the story is told in terms of Roman life and custom. A marriage is performed in a temple dedicated to Juno and Lucina, high priests perform the ceremony, and the bridal party honor Hymen and Apollo. Barclay opened the way for a series of French romances which were much in vogue in England. This led to the formation of literary societies, to one of which Roger Boyle belonged. His Parthenissa (1654), is another historical allegory, like Barclay’s; it confuses several great Roman wars, bringing Hannibal and Spartacus into the same scene.[12] Such romances show something of Roman life in the form of fiction, but are far removed in some ways from the modern historical novel; and it will be best for us to return to the time of Scott, and search for a portrayal of Roman life in the fully developed form of the historical novel.