greatest work. The acted "Faust" is very different from the written poem.

Mr Matthew Arnold has praised Wordsworth for the amount of good verse he has written, which, while admitting that he has written much that is not good, he claims to exceed that of the other poets of his time. For Dunbar an opposite claim may be put forward. The total amount of his verses is not great, but in them there is scarcely a weak line. Varied as is his style, and although there are, of course, degrees of merit in his poetry, he is always direct, clear, and vigorous. Another, and it is the last and most important limitation of Dunbar, is that he is primarily a local, though not a temporary poet. This was due to the place and the language in which he wrote. Scotland was and is a small country, and he wrote chiefly, not even for all Scotland, but for that part of it which knew the Court of James IV., in a dialect now seldom used for literature. Hence he requires unfortunately to be commented on and to be interpreted. He does not appeal directly to the people, and he requires an educated audience.

COMPARISON OF DUNBAR WITH PRECEDING
SCOTTISH POETS.

When Dunbar is compared with the Scottish poets who preceded him, his superiority shows itself in his originality, his versatility, and the melody of his verse. The three most famous of these were chroniclers in verse rather than poets. They can scarcely claim the name of makers. The 'Chronicle' of Andrew of Wyntown, of great value as an early contribution to the history of Scotland, which it often treats more faithfully than the prose 'Chronicle' of John of

Fordoun, has little poetical merit. The 'Bruce' of John Barbour is a biography in rhyme of its hero, partly founded on history and partly on tradition; but, with the exception of a few fine passages, as the apostrophe to Freedom, it has only one poetical quality-the easy flow of its simple rhyming lines. The 'Wallace' of Blind Harry, a less trustworthy record, is inferior in its versification. It has some passages of pith and rugged force, due to the greatness of its subject, but cannot be deemed a great poem.

All these writers merely put into verse, for facility of recollection, what had been handed down by learned or popular tradition. Dunbar did not seek his subjects in

tradition or history.

as

The earliest poetry of Scotland, as of other countries, was alliterative, and is represented by such works as Thomas the Rhymer's prophecies, the Romances from the Arthurian Legend, the "Auntyrs of Arthur," of Sir Gawain and Sir Tristram, and a few satirical poems, "Cockelbie's Sow" and the "Houlat" of Holland. This alliterative species of poetry had been continued by some of the other poets Dunbar mentions in his "Lament," as Sir Gilbert Hay in the romance of "Alexander the Great." Dunbar himself, as we have seen, did not entirely drop its use, though generally using it in combination with rhyme. He did not, however, follow the older poets in making the common romance of the middle ages, or the popular ballads of his own country, the subject of his verse. Arthur and Gawain, like Robin Hood and Adam Bell, are merely glanced at and passed by. He chose his subjects from the present, not from the past.

This is the more noteworthy, as his patron, James IV., did all he could to revive the glories of Arthur. He had

L

his round table at Stirling, and his mimic tournaments of its knights. He named one of his sons Arthur, and perhaps instituted an order of knighthood in Arthur's honour. But Dunbar was not a man to allow himself to be drawn away from his natural bent. When he wrote, as he sometimes had to do, verses to order, it was against the grain. He complains more than once that the inspiration would not come at the royal command. Although the alliterative romantic poets preceded him in time, they were not, any more than the metrical chroniclers, his poetic ancestors. He belonged to the line which began with Chaucer, was continued by Gower and Lydgate, and had already, in the Kingis Quair" of James I., and the poems of Henryson, the Dunfermline schoolmaster, representatives in Scotland.

INFLUENCE OF CHAUCER ON DUNBAR.

These writers, although original poets, are more directly imitators and continuators of Chaucer's style than Dunbar. Dunbar, while he gratefully acknowledges the father of English poetry as his master, takes from him chiefly his language, which often finds parallels; but as regards the substance of his poems, only the tale of "The Tua Mariit Wemen and the Wedo," and the verses on his Empty Purse, show traces of imitation. The characters of the two men, which are stamped on their poetry, were too distinct to allow of direct imitation. The cheerful, gentle, genial Englishman stands in marked contrast to the satirical, severe, and sad Scot. Both are full of humour; but how different is the smile which ripples over the smooth verses of Chaucer from the grim and grotesque laughter of Dunbar! To James I. Dunbar makes no allusion. In one

point-the poetry of love—he is Dunbar's superior. But he is the author of only one poem. Henryson, in the sweetness of his verse, and uniform purity of his moral tone, excels Dunbar, but has not the same faculty of invention or so great a variety either of metres or of subjects.

INFLUENCE OF THE FRENCH POETS ON DUNBAR.

It is, if anywhere, from the French poetry that Dunbar may seem to have borrowed some of the substance of his thoughts, as he certainly did some of the forms of his poems. The absence of any allusion to the famous masters of the Ballades and the Rondeaux-to Villon and Charles of Orleans-is singular. We have again to remember that some of his poems are probably lost,amongst them, those he wrote in France, unless his muse was silent at the period of life when it usually is most ready to sing. But there is another reason for his passing over the French poets. He had no real sympathy with them, although he could not remain unaffected by their melody and metre, and by the sweet melancholy which seems wedded to their artistic forms of verse, and is expressed in their burdens and monotonous but telling refrains. But here, too, he was original. He was never the slave of any form of metre or of poem, but was able to bring all into his service. As he is freer when he is alliterative than the old alliterative poets, so he is less strict in his use of the ballade, which does not conform to the French rules. If a French critic would probably deny him the praise of good taste as well as correctness, and blame him for protruding the moral, an English critic may claim for him a more manly style and a healthier view of life

The result is that Dunbar used the three kinds of poetry which preceded him—the Alliterative of northern England and southern Scotland, the Chaucerian of southern England, and the French of Villon and the poets of the Renaissance -but did not allow his originality and independence to be overpowered. He is a representative of his country, which enriched its thought from the stores of other lands England, France, and Germany-but remained true to itself.

COMPARISON WITH BURNS.

The versatility of Dunbar is even more remarkable than his originality. In this he has outstripped not merely his predecessors but his successors,-Montgomery, Allan Ramsay, Fergusson, and Scott. They chiefly cultivated one kind of poetry. Burns alone can boast of the same variety

-now comic, now tragic, now satirical, now moral, now religious. Burns, indeed, is his chief competitor-his superior in the poetry of love, in the poetry of pathos, in natural imagery, in lyric fire, in sympathetic charm; his equal at least in satire and in sarcasm, perhaps in moral and religious poetry. But Burns has not a firmer hand, and does not so readily pass from one mood to another. Both of them, and indeed all their countrymen, were denied the dramatic gift. Scotland ceased to be an independent country before the theatre came to its full birth, and after its birth Calvinism long forbade a fit audience, even if there had been a poet who could write tragedy or comedy. If the future should produce a Scottish dramatist, the past of his country has furnished him with ample material for the drama.