into any symmetrical whole. The poems are cast in many forms; allegory, narrative, vision, didactic poetry, lyric poetry, all find a place. There is little history, but much legend, some fiction, and a good deal of mythology. The series was not designed as a whole. _La Chanson des Aventuriers de la Mer_ was written in or before 1840, _Le Mariage de Roland_, _Aymerillot_, and _La Conscience_ in or about 1846, and other pieces at intervals between 1849 and 1858, the date at which the poet appears to have begun the task of building these fragments into an epic structure. Nor is there in these poems any dispassionate attempt to portray the character of the successive ages in the life of the race. For Hugo there was no 'émancipation du moi.' The _Légende_ is less a revelation of history than it is a revelation of the poet. His choice of themes was dictated less by a careful search after what was most characteristic of each epoch than by his own strong predilections. He loved the picturesque, the heroic, the enormous, the barbarous, the grotesque. Hence _Éviradnus_, _Ratbert_, _Le Mariage de Roland_. He loved also the weak, the poor, the defenceless, the old man and the little child. Hence _Les Pauvres Gens_, _Booz endormi_, _Petit Paul_. He delighted in the monstrous, he revelled in extremes, and he had little perception of the lights and shades which make up ordinary human character. Neither his poems nor his romances show much trace of that psychological analysis which is the peculiar feature of so much modern literature. Child of the nineteenth century, as he was in so many respects, in many of the features of his art he belongs to no era, and conforms to no tendency, except that of his own Titanic genius. He could see white and he could see black, but he could not see grey, and never tried to paint it. He does not allow Philip II even his redeeming virtues of indefatigable industry and unceasing devotion to duty, while in his Rome of the decadence would assuredly be found scarce five good men. His vision is curiously limited to the darker side of history; he hears humanity uttering in all ages a cry of suffering, and but rarely a shout of laughter. He sees the oppression of the tyrant more vividly than the heroism of the oppressed. Has he to write of the power of Spain? It is in the portrayal of the tyrant of Spain rather than the men who overcame Spain that his genius finds scope. Does he wish to paint the era of religious persecution? It is the horror of the Inquisition rather than the heroism of its victims that is pictured on his canvas. Delineations of heroic virtue there are indeed in the _Légende_, but it is noteworthy that they occur usually in fictions such as _Éviradnus_, _Le Petit Roi de Galice_, and _La Confiance du Marquis Fabrice._[1] He has given us no historical portraits of noble characters which can be put side by side with those of Philip II and Sultan Mourad. As in his