按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
＇1＇ Strong； The Theology of the Poets。
Any one familiar with Milton will recognize that as a typical instance of the way in which a seed idea from the Scripture comes to flower and fruit in him。 The result is that more people have their ideas about heaven and hell from Milton than from the Bible； though they do not know it。
It seems hardly fair to use John Bunyan （1628…1688） as an illustration of the influence of the English Bible on literature； because his chief work is composed so largely in the language of Scripture。 Pilgrim's Progress is the most widely read book in the English language after the Bible。 Its phrases； its names； its matter are either directly or indirectly taken from the Bible。 It has given us a long list of phrases which are part of our literary and religious capital。 Thackeray took the motto of one of his best…known books from the Bible； but the title； Vanity Fair； comes from Pilgrim's Progress。 When a discouraged man says he is 〃in the slough of despond；〃 he quotes Bunyan； and when a popular evangelist tells the people that the burden of sin will roll away if they look at the cross； 〃according to the Bible；〃 he ought to say according to Bunyan。 But all this was only the outcome of the familiarity of Bunyan with the Scripture。 It was almost all he did know in a literary way。 Macaulay says that 〃he knew no language but the English as it was spoken by the common people； he had studied no great model of composition； with the exception of our noble translation of the Bible。 But of that his knowledge was such that he might have been called a living concordance。〃＇1＇
＇1＇ History of England； vol。 III。； p。 220。
After these threeShakespeare； Milton； and Bunyanthere appeared another three； very much their inferiors and having much less influence on literary history。 I mean Dryden； Addison； and Pope。 It is not necessary to credit the Scripture with much of Dryden's spirit； nor with much of his style； and certainly not with his attitude toward his fellows； but it is a constant surprise in reading Dryden to discover how familiar he was with the King James version。 Walter Scott insists that Dryden was at heart serious； that 〃his indelicacy was like the forced impudence of a bashful man。〃 That is generous judgment。 But there is this to be said： as he grows more serious he falls more into Bible words。 If he writes a political pamphlet he calls it 〃Absalom and Ahithophel。〃 In it he holds the men of the day up to scorn under Bible names。 They are Zimri and Shimei； and the like。 When he is falling into bitterest satire； his writing abounds in these Biblical allusions which could be made only by one who was very familiar with the Book。 Quotations cannot be abundant； of course； but there is a great deal of this sort of thing：
〃Sinking； he left his drugget robe behind； Borne upward by a subterranean wind； The mantle fell to the young prophet's part； With double portion of his father's art。〃
In his Epistles there is much of the same sort。 When he writes to Congreve he speaks of the fathers； and says：
〃Their's was the giant race before the flood。〃
Farther on he says：
〃Our builders were with want of genius curst； The second temple was not like the first。〃
Now Dryden may have been； as Macaulay said； an 〃illustrious renegade；〃 but all his writing shows the influence of the language and the ideas of the King James version。 Whenever we sing the 〃Veni Creator〃 we sing John Dryden。
So we sing Addison in the paraphrase of Scripture； which Haydn's music has made familiar：
〃The spacious firmament on high； With all the blue ethereal sky。〃
While Dryden yielded to his times； Addison did not； and the Spectator became not only a literary but a moral power。 In the effort to make it so he was thrown back on the largest moral influence of the day； the Bible； and throughout the Spectator and through all of Addison's writing you find on all proper occasions the Bible pressed to the front。 Here again Taine puts it strikingly： 〃It is no small thing to make morality fashionable； Addison did it； and it remains fashionable。〃
If we speak of singing； we may remember that we sing the hymn of even poor little dwarfed invalid Alexander Pope。 He was born the year Bunyan died； born at cross…purposes with the world。 He could write a bitter satire； like the 〃Dunciad〃； he could give the world The Iliad and The Odyssey in such English that we know them far better than in the Greek of Homer； but in those rare moments when he was at his better self he would write his greater poem； 〃The Messiah〃； in which the movement of Scripture is outlined as it could be only by one who knew the English Bible。 And when we sing
〃Rise； crowned with light； imperial Salem； rise〃
it is worth while to realize that the voice that first sung it was that of the irritable little poet who found some of his scant comfort in the grand words and phrases and ideas of our English Bible。
With these sixShakespeare； Milton； Bunyan； Dryden； Addison； and Popethe course of the Jacobean literature is sufficiently measured。 There are many lesser names； but these are the ones which made it an epoch in literature； and these are at their best under the power of the Bible。
In the Georgian group we need to call only five great names which have had creative influence in literature。 Ordinary culture in literature will include some acquaintance with each of them。 In the order of their death they are Shelley （1829。）； Byron （1824）； Coleridge （1831）； Walter Scott （1832）； and Wordsworth （1850）。 The last long outlived the others； but he belongs with them； because he was born earlier than any other in the group and did his chief work in their time and before the later group appeared。 Except Wordsworth； all these were gone before Queen Victoria came to the throne in 1837。 Three other names could be called： Keats； Robert Burns； and Charles Lamb。 All would illustrate what we are studying。 Keats least of all and Burns most。 They are omitted here not because they did not feel the influence of the English Bible； not because they do not constantly show its influence； but because they are not so creative as the others； they have not so influenced the current of literature。 At any rate； the five named will represent worthily and with sufficient completeness the Georgian period of English literature。
Nothing could reveal more clearly than this list how we are distinguishing the Bible as literature from the Bible as an authoritative book in morals。 One would much dislike to credit the Bible with any part of the personal life of Shelley or Byron。 They were friends； they； were geniuses； but they were both badly afflicted with common moral leprosy。 It is playing with morals to excuse either of them because he was a genius。 Nothing in the genius of either demanded or was served by the course of cheap immorality which both practised。 It was not because Shelley was a genius that he married Harriet Westbrook； then ran away with Mary Godwin； then tried to get the two to become friends and neighbors until his own wife committed suicide； it was not his genius that made him yield to the influence of Emilia Viviani and write her the poem 〃Epipsychidion；〃 telling her and the world that he 〃was never attached to that great sect who believed that each one should select out of the crowd a mistress or a friend〃 and let the rest go。 That was not genius； that was just common passion； and our divorce courts are full of Shelleys of that type。 So Byron's personal immorality is not to be explained nor excused on the ground of his genius。 It was not genius that led him so astray in England that his wife had to divorce him； and that public opinion drove him out of the land。 It was not his genius that sent him to visit Shelley and his mistress at Lake Geneva and seduce their guest； so that she bore him a daughter； though she was never his wife。 It was not genius that made him pick up still another companion out of several in Italy and live with her in immoral relation。 In the name of common decency let no one stand up for Shelley and Byron in their personal characters！ There are not two moral laws； one for geniuses and one for common people。 Byron； at any rate； was never deceived about himself； never blamed his genius nor his conscience for his wrong。 These are striking lines in 〃Childe Harold；〃 in which he disclaims all right to sympathy； because；
〃The thorns which I have reaped are of the tree I planted；they have torn me and I bleed。 I should have known what fruit would spring from such a tree。〃
Shelley's wife would not say that for him。 〃In all Shelley did；〃 she says； 〃he at the time of doing it believed himself justified to his own conscience。〃 Well； so much the worse for Shelley！ Geniuses are not the only men who can find good reason for doing what they want to do。 One of Shelley's critics suggests that the trouble was his introduction into personal conduct of the imagination which he ought to have saved for his writing。 Perhaps we might explain Byron's misconduct by reminding ourselves of his club…foot； and applying one code of morals to men with club…feet and another to men with normal feet。
If we speak of the influence of the Bible on these men； it must be on their