A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 2 (of 3), From the Renaissance to the decline of eighteenth century orthodoxySaintsbury, George
History
A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 2 (of 3), From the Renaissance to the decline of eighteenth century orthodoxy
Saintsbury, George
Criticism -- History; Literature -- History and criticism; Literature, Medieval
The first is the slightest; but it is interesting for more than its
authorship. It was attached to James’s _Essays of a Prentice in the
Divine Art_, of which it gives some rules: it shows that Buchanan had
taken pains with his pupil; and it also exhibits that slightly
scholastic and “peddling,” but by no means unreal, shrewdness and acumen
which distinguished the British Solomon in his happier moments. It is
characteristic that James is not in the least afraid of the charge of
attending to mint, anise, and cumin. He plunges without any rhetorical
exordium into what he calls “just colours”—do not rhyme on the same
syllable, see that your rhyme is on accented syllables only, do not let
your first or last word exceed two or three syllables at most. This
dread of polysyllables, so curious to us, was very common at the time:
it was one of the things from which Shakespeare’s silent sovereignty
delivered us by such touches of spell-dissolving mastery as
“The multitudinous seas incarnadine.”
Then he passes to feet, of which he practically allows only the iamb;
while he very oddly gives the word “foot” to the syllable, not the
combination of syllables; and lays down the entirely arbitrary rule that
the number of “feet”—_i.e._, syllables—must be even, not odd. There is
to be a sharp section (“cæsura”) in the middle of every line, long or
short; and the difference of long, short, and “indifferent” (common)
feet or syllables is dwelt upon, with its influence of “flowing,” as the
King calls rhythm. Cautions on diction follow, and some against
commonplaces, which look as if the royal prentice had read Gascoigne, a
suggestion confirmed elsewhere.[249] Invention is briefly touched; and
the tract finishes with a short account of the kinds of verse:
“rhyme”—_i.e._, the heroic couplet, “quhilk servis onely for lang
historieis”; a heroical stanza of nine lines, rhymed _aabaabbab_;
_ottava rima_, which he calls “ballat royal”; rhyme royal, which he
calls “Troilus verse”; “rouncifals,” or “tumbling verse” (doggerel
alliterative, with bob and wheel); sonnets; “common” verse (octosyllable
couplets); “all kinds of broken or cuttit verse,” &c.
-----
Footnote 249:
It is, however, excessive to represent James as a mere copyist of
Gascoigne.
-----
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account