Celtic MSS. in relation to the Macpherson fraud: With a review of Professor Freeman's criticism of [P.B. Du Chaillu's] "The Viking Age," by the author of "Celticism a myth"Roger, James Cruikshank
History
Celtic MSS. in relation to the Macpherson fraud: With a review of Professor Freeman's criticism of [P.B. Du Chaillu's] "The Viking Age," by the author of "Celticism a myth"
Roger, James Cruikshank
Celtic literature -- History and criticism; Ossian, active 3rd century
My attention was lately directed to a lengthy article that appeared in
_The Scotsman_ of the 12th of last November, bearing the initials of
Mr. Mackinnon, Professor of Celtic at the University of Edinburgh, to
whom I sent a copy of my book, _Celticism a Myth_, then just issued
from the press. The article begins with a tribute to the assiduity of
the Historiographer Royal in the cause of Celtic literature; but is
plainly intended as a refutation of my statement to the effect that
“It is no longer pretended that any Gaelic poetry has been preserved
in early manuscripts,” &c. In citing the remark of Dr. Irving it was
certainly not my intention to call down an exhibition of Professor
Mackinnon’s Celtic wares--of the authenticity and character of which I
am profoundly ignorant--but simply to express my conviction that the
alleged manuscript documents of which Macpherson professed to give a
translation did not exist. _De non existentibus et non apparentibus_
Dr. Johnson says, _eadem est ratio_. There are unfortunately now no
Doctor Johnsons, or Pinkertons or John Hill Burtons to deal with these
possible inventions or forgeries of a later age, the perhaps “other
evidences” of what the great lexicographer characterised as “Scotch
conspiracy in national falsehood.” Ample time and opportunity has been
afforded since 1762--the date when Macpherson first gave to the world
his _Ossian the Son of Fingal_--to fabricate missing documents or
supply others of more startling character. A pungent criticism from the
pen of Mr. Hill Burton, or a crushing commentary by either of the other
named critics, would probably have relegated these so-called Celtic
MSS.--some of them at least--to the nothingness whence they came. It is
clear that what Professor Mackinnon brings forward is not _evidence_,
certainly not such as would be accepted in a Court of Law. There is
no substantiation of the Macpherson manuscripts save the statements,
and what I fear must be regarded as the fabrications, of a number of
interested individuals retailed at second-hand, none of all whom can
be accepted as unprejudiced witnesses. After the strictest search
for the originals of Ossian, Dr. Johnson came to the conclusion that
as regards Scotland and the pretensions of James Macpherson, there
was not in existence “an Erse manuscript a hundred years old.” Any
attempt therefore, in our day to bring into agreement this literary
imposture with the difficulties which stultify all conception of its
genuineness is foredoomed to failure. If, as Mr. Mackinnon alleges,
it be “perfectly established” that Macpherson carried away from the
North-West Highlands several Gaelic manuscripts it is equally certain
he never exhibited them to anyone capable of forming a judgment as to
their authenticity. “The collection proper,” it would appear, “consists
of sixty-three separate parcels.” How many of these are genuine we
shall probably never know. These are “Transcripts of several MSS. or
portions of MSS. by Mr.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account