If I thought I was labouring in support of a doubtful hypothesis, or if I was not satisfactorily convinced that Scott's merits rested upon a wider foundation than the beauties of his verse-and they are not few—or the general smoothness and elegance of his style, and that is by no means problematical, I should be averse from taking leave of you to-night, upon a contrast so much in favour of his mellifluous predecessor, and with these "tuneable" lines still sounding in your ears.

LECTURE III.

SOME general remarks yet remain to be made to complete the sketch upon which we are now employed: but before we proceed any farther, allow me to recall your attention to the fact alluded to in the commencement of my first Lecture-the universal recognition of Scott's supremacy in that class of literature which is the distinguishing feature of the age in which we live. The works of fiction, among which he holds the highest place, are now doing what the stage did in the time of Shakspeare, and what it continued to do till the office was shared by the periodicals of the reign of Anne and the early Georges, to hold the mirror up to nature and show the age its own lineaments. The lover of the drama may lament the decay of the public taste; and the admirers of the old sententious moral essay may be excused for expressing some contempt for a change which their fathers would have considered as an alarming sign of degeneracy and frivolity: but the "fiat" has gone forth, and the public seem determined, for the present, at least, to admit of no moral instruction; I might almost say, of no instruction at all, that did not come in the pleasing shape of allegory or fictitious nar

rative; and the despised novel is now, as Mr. Peter Pattieson says, "praised by the judicious and admired by the feeling, engrossing the young and attracting even the old." I have, in one of my former Lectures, spoken of the sudden advance of this species of composition in the hands of Scott, and do not intend to enlarge upon it here; but to draw your attention to another remarkable sign of the spirit of the age, the celerity with which the public intelligence has been collected and confirmed in this instance, and with how much more promptitude than at any former period the meed of public admiration is now bestowed on great talents-either of the literary or scientific kind. The gratitude of the world, in general, is no longer reluctantly doled out in the shape of posthumous fame: immediate reputation, honours, and even riches (if they are sought for), await the successful labourer in the fields of intellect.

In this particular, in the fortunes of the great men whose names I have ventured to associate, there is hardly any parallel. Shakspeare retired to his native place, after the performance of his "miracles of genius," beloved of his companions and intimates for his social virtues, but easy in his circumstances, more by his commercial success as a playhouse proprietor than by his fame as an author. His reputation as the greatest and most original of dramatic poets dates a century later; and it was not till a period comparatively recent that it has challenged the admiration of the world, and has been cherished with the fondness of idolatry.

Since the delivery of my first Lecture, one of the best

and most beautiful monuments to the genius of Shakspeare has appeared from the pen of a lady: no praise of mine can enhance the fame of Mrs. Jameson's "Characteristics of Women." For correct knowledge of her subject, for just discrimination and delicate and masterly handling, she far surpasses all other English critics on Shakspeare's female characters. The shrewd penetration of Hazlitt, and the somewhat paradoxical disquisitions of Lamb, must yield to the fine fancy and good sense of the lady-commentator; and her warm and generous estimate contrasts most favourably with the cold and metaphysical analysis of Richardson. Her fine fancy sometimes degenerates into prettiness and conceit, and approaches to what her great master would perhaps condemn under the appellation of "high fantastical: " but her love of truth, her admiration of the beautiful, her freedom from prudery and affectation in morality, and the boldness of her speculations, cannot be too much admired.

Amongst the best and most efficient critics and eulogists of Scott too, I think I might name another fair authoress *. Her essay is, in part, a psychological disquisition on the formation of his character and genius; in which, I think, she is in part very successful, although I dispute her favourite hypothesis, as I shall presently have occasion to observe.

And here let me pause for one moment-to congratulate my hearers of the fair sex on these and other great

* Tait's Magazine, Dec. 1832.

modern achievements of their accomplished countrywomen. One of the earliest and most successful champions in the cause of Shakspeare was a lady: Mrs. Montague's "Essay" may still be read with delight and instruction-the venerable parent of such daughters as Mrs. Jameson. Since the time of Mrs. Montague, a splendid succession of female writers grace our literary annals; and in spite of the prejudices which operate against a system of severer discipline for the female mind, the fields of science seem destined to furnish triumphs of the like kind-witness the name of Somerville.

Many Diana Vernons may be brought out by circumstances much less trying than the adventures of the admirable heroine of "Rob Roy."

To return to our subject.-There are parallel circumstances in the early history of these men-their education and mental discipline-that ought not to be overlooked in any estimate of their relative powers. It is true of the human mind, as of everything else, that, to a certain extent, like causes produce like effects— that different individuals having the same, or nearly the same natural capacities, operated upon by the same or similar external causes, will evince the same general character. Scott's and Shakspeare's early education seems to have been very loosely conducted: though not self-taught, they were left very much to their own guidance. It is very well known that Shakspeare's scholastic learning was very imperfect, and his academic life of very short duration; and we are given to