THE WORLD OF BOOKS.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18413, 20 June 1925, Page 13

THE WORLD OF BOOKS.

HALF HOURS IN A LIBRARY.

tWICULLY 'WBITTBN I 0» "iHB SMBS.")

By A. H. Grinuxg,

CXVIII.—ON MARY STUART. When I was younger I, as was the fashion, "indulged in the habit of recitations; in those days 1 had a fair memory which stood me in good stead. One of my favourite recitations was a, well-known poem, to be found even to-day in popular books of elocution, called "Mary Queen of Scots." I remember on one occasion being persuaded to attend the classes of a professor of elocution; and in due time being called upon to display niy skill, I confidently commenced: —

"I look'd far back into other years, and lo! in bright array, I eaw, as in a. dream, the forms of ages passed away."

I had hardly got well into the first stanza, however, before I was pulled up, and severely criticised in regard to intonation, action, phrasing, etc., and long before I got to the. end of my "piece" I felt liko a fool and every bit of conceit was taken out of me. The one point on which I received a. little praise was my memory; I was almost word perfect and after the passing of years, the memory of those oftrepeated lines remain with me to-day.

A recent cable message from -London, stating that a Mr Ainsworth Mitchell has, after years of investigation, cleared the character of Mary Queen of Scots of the guilt with which she is generally charged, set mo thinking of that recitation of long ago. Although I knew it so well, I was ignorant of the author, who on enquiry proved to be Henry Glassford Bell. Reference to those invaluable little volumes, "Poets and Poetry of the Nineteenth put me in possession of the following information: "Henry Glassford Bell (1805-1874), author of 'Summer and Winter Hours' (1831), 'My Old Portfolio' (1832), 'Romances and Other Minor Poems' (1865); for many years Sheriff Substitute and afterwards Sheriff of Lancashire; the' 'Tallboys' of the 'Noctes Ambrosianea' of his friend Christopher North, a versatile writer, some of whose ballads and dramatic poems are well known —'Mary Queen of Scots' committed to memory by thousands of schoolboys and -girls; 'The Uncle,' delivered with powerful effect from almost as many platforms by leading elocutionists." The conception of Mary Stuart conveyed in Henry Glassford Bell's poem is controverted by much reliable evidence, and borne out by other authorities. The poet writes:

I know that- queenly form again, though blighted .was its bloom. I saw that grief had decked it out —an offering for the tomb! I knew tho eye, though faint its light, that once at> brightly shone— I knew the voice, though feeblo now, that thrill'd Avith every tone — I knew that-bounding grace of step, that symmetry of mould!

In a newly published book called "In Byways of Scottish History," the author—Louis A. Barbc—gives pride of place to Mary. Queen of Scots as "a brilliant personality." Ho writes: "More than three hundred years have elapsed since Mary Stuart was sent to the scaffold by Elizabeth, and met death with'that noble fortitude which awed her enemies and which has half redeemed her fame 'in th.e eyes even' of those who Tegard the tragedy of Fotheringay as an act no less of justice than of expediency. But even at the prosent time interest in ' her memory has not died away; nor can the question of her innocence or of her guilt be yet said *o have been definitely/ settled by all that has been written about her in the interval. It hardly seems probable that it ever will be, for it is still a question of politics with some and of religion, with many. And even in the rare instances where judgment is not blinded by the prejudice or the, partiality of party or of. creed, it is affected by an influence, nobler and more excusable indeed, but not less powerful nor less misleading—by unreasoning sentiment, by the sympathy which the romance of the unfortunate Queen's chequered : career, her legendary, beauty, her long, captivity and her heroic death awaken." On one point, .namely that. of Mary Stuart's personal appearance, Mr Barbe cleverly collates all the available evidence:—

The historians of Mary Stuart all agree in telHr.g us that she was the most beautiful woman of her ago; and it must bo admitted that this is fully borne: out by all that .can bo gathered from" contemporary writers. It is not only such poetio enthusiasts 83 Michel de l'Hopital, Du Ballay, and Ronsard, or such courtly flatterers as Brantome and Castelnau, who pronounce her beauty to have been matchless—far exceeding "all. that is, ehall be, or has ever been," but the serious and dignified chroniclers whom Jebb has brought together in his valuable folios— Strada, B'ackwood and even de Thou—also grew eloauent in praise of Tier charms. But perhaps the most convincing testimony that can be adduced is contained in a poem, composed by an Englishman who was confessedly hostile to Mary and whose satire was so keenly felt by her "that she made it-the subject" of a formal comtilaint to Elizabeth. • ■

Mr Barbe quotes; from a poem _ entitled "Mnister Randolphe's Fantnsie," which, published in May, 1566, gave such grievous offenco to Mary that she dispatched Robert Melvill' as a special envoy to the English Council to inform Elizabeth of the crime committed by one of her subjects "that in tynio this worke mighte be suppressed and condign punishment taken upon tho wryter" to the end it might be made apparent that, the author, of the poem,' Thomas . Randolph, was not "maytayned against her, not only by advise and counsell to move her subjects agavnste her, but also by defamation and falce reports mayko her odious to the world." In Mary's mind Randolph was associated ™tti all the intrigues which had led to the detection of the most powerful of her nobles. Mr Barbe quotes evidence to show that Randolph was not the author of the poem of which no trace can be found in the literature of the sixteenth century and of .which no mention is made by contemporary chroniclers. Curiously enough the original manuscript of the poem has survived and is preserved amongst the documents of the Record Office* it has been republished in one of the volumes of the Scottish' Texts Society. The second part of the "Fantasie" "is devoted to Queen Mary's confession and from that confession Mr Barbe 'quotes- a few lines as proving be-vond doubt Mary's beauty of face and fairness of form:—

But I could boast of beauty with Iho best. In skilful points of princely attire And of the golden gifts of Nature's behest, wV,o filled my * ac6 of favor frefm and fair ' Sber.uTy shines like Phoebus in the air, And nature formed my features beside tn fiuch proport as advanceth my pndo. Thus fame affatethe (proclaims) my state to the stars- , , . Bnfeof* the sifts of nature's device Tharsound the retreat to other princes' ears, \VhollyT°- resign to me. the chiefest pnzo.

The portraits of Mary Stuart extant in no wise bear out the word pictures of her beauty. It has even been suggested that she had "a slight but perfectible squint." Mr Barbo finds it difficult to reconcile this very striking

contradiction. "Possibly," he says, "the truth may be that the fascination of Mary's face consisted less in the regularity of outline or the striking beauty of any one feature than in the expression by which it was animated." On other points'Mr Barbae is very interesting:—

Her complexion, though likened bv Eonsard to alabaster and ivory, does not soem .to have possessed the clearness and brillancy which the comparison implies; for Sir James Melville, though anxious to vindicate hi 3 Queen's claim to bo considered 'S-ery lovely" and "tho fairest ladv in her country," acknowledged that she was less "white" than Elizabeth. Tlifbrightness of her eyes, which Eonsard likened to stars, and Chastelard to beacons, has not been questioned; but their colour is a point about which there is les3 unanimity, opinion ranging between hazel and dark prey. .As t»vt»Hs her hair, the- discrepancy of contemporary authorities is even greater. Brantome and Eonsard describe a. wealth of golden hair, and this is to a certain extent confirmed by Sir James Melville, who, when called upon by Elizabeth to pronounce whether his Queen's hair waa fairer than b<?r own. answered that "the fairness of the-n bofh was not their worst faltcs." To this, however, must be opposed the testimony of Nicholas "White, "who. writing to Cecil in 1563. described the Queen as black-haired. The explanation of thi3 may possibly be in Mary's compliance with the fashion, introduced about this time, of wearing wigs. Indeed, Knollyr informed Whit© that she worn "hair of sundry colour," and in a letter to Cecil, praised the skill with which Mary Seton —"the finest busker of hair 'to bo seen in any country"—"did set such a curled hair •upon the Queen that was said to be p. perewyke, that showed very delicately." According to one account, tho Qtiee" of Scots wore black according to another, auburn ringlets on the morning of her execution. Both, however, agree in this, that when the fake covering fell she- <'a,ppeared as grey as if she had been eisty and ten yeare old."

To all this Mr Barbd adds that Mary Stuart was of a, full figure, and became actually stout in later life; and that she is described in the report of her execution as having a double chin. All this does not exactly coincide with the poetic idea of "that queenly form" and that "symmetry of mould." But there is worse to follow. Henry Glassford Bell, picturing the "stately convent, with its old and lofty walls," describes:- '

"And there five noble maidens sat, ben?ath the orchard trees, In that first budding spring of youth, when all its prospects please."

In his chapter in "The Pour Marys," Mr Barbe goes far to dissipate the idea; ho writes:—

Reference is seldom maue to the Queen's Marys, tho four Maids of Honour who3o romantic attachment to their Royal 'mistress and namesake, the ill-fated Queen of Scots, has thrown such a halo of popularity and sympathy about their memory, without calling forth the well-known lines: "Yes'treen the Queen had four Maries, The night slie'l bao but throe; There was Mflrie Seton, and Marie Seton,

And Marie Carmichael and mo. To thoso who are acquainted with the whole of tho ballad which records the sad fate of the guilty Mary Hamilton, it must have occurred that there ia a ftriking incongruity, between ■ the traditional loyalty of the Queen's Marys and the alleged execution cf one of their number, on tho denunciation of the offended Queen herself, for the murder of an illegitimate child, tho reputed offspring of a criminal intrigue with Darnloy. Yet a closer investigation of the facts assumed in the ballad, lends to a discovery even' more unexpected than even this. It establishes, beyond the possibility of a dcaibt, that, of the four family names given in the stanza as those of the four Marys, two only aro authentic. Mai'y Carmichael and Mary Hamilton herself are mere poetical myths. Not only does no mention of them occur in any of the lists still extant of tho Queen's personal attendants, but there also exist documents of all kinds from serious historical narrative" and authoritative charter, to gossiping correspondence and polished opipram, to prove the colleagues of Marv Beton and Mary Seton were Mary Flelfiing-. and Mary Livingstone. How the apochryphal names have found their way into" the ballad, or how the ballad itself has come-to be • connected with the' Maids of Honour, cannot be determined.

Swinburne was a champion of Mary Stuart; indeed, some of the. loveliest lines he ever penned were his "Adieux a Marie Stuart"'; whilst she- is immortalised in his series of plays "Chastebird," "Bothwell," and "Mary Stuart." Of "Chastelard" Sir Edmund Gosse says that it took seven years to compose it to the author's liking. "Thoso clear eyes of 'a swordblade's hue' which moved so many hearts to madness at the close of the sixteenth century reigned like stars in the firmament of Swinburne's imagination. Mary Stuart was the only figure in" pure history t<> which he ever gave minute attention, but his study of her character and adventures was so close and so clairvoyant that it has received the grudging praise of professional historians, who are never ready to believe that poets can know anything definite about history." To' which Sir Edmund Goske adds: —

•In this case, the young poet's worship of the memory of Mary Queen of Scots was no new or light emotion. Like almost everyone of the deepest and most durable of Swinburne's infatuations, it beean in his boyhood. The romance which hung about the history of his Border ancestors extended tn the legend that Thomas Swinburne of Capheath had taken arms for the defence of Miry Stuart somewhere between. Lochleven and Langsido, and had' succumbed to tho irresistible charm of her presence. A boyish excursion to the forfalice in Roxburghshire, which is celebrated as the *cene of Mary's dashing visit to the wounded Bothwell, was the occasion upon which the chivalrous imagination of Algernon wa-3 enslaved for ever.

"Chastelard" was published in 1865, while "Mary Stuart," completing the trilogy of which "Bothwell" formed a part, was not completed until 1881. In that same year Swinburne contributed to the "Fortnightly Review" a prose Noto on tho character of Queen Mary. The play was indifferently received by Press and public alike, but it brought a consolatory letter from Sir Henry Taylor, author of ""Philip von Artevelde," and also au invitation from the editor of the new edition of the "Encyclopedia Britanniea" to write the article on Mary Queen of Scots. Best of all, it produced the seven "Adieux a Mary Stuart 1 ' commencing and ending: —

Queen, for whose house my fathers fought, With hopes that rose and fell, Red star of boyhood's fiery thought, Farewell!

They gave thoir lives, and I, my Queen, Have given you of my life, •Seeing your bravo star burn high between Men's strife.

Yet well nigh as with flash of tears ' Tho song must say but so That took your praise up twenty years Ago. _ More bright than stars or morns that vary, Sun kindlins heaven and hell. Here, after all these years, Q.ueen Mary, Farewell. .

An interesting comparison may be instituted the characters of Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary, a comparison reflected in the of Mr John Drinkwater's "Mary" Stuart" and Miss Gwen John's "The Prince," both plays being reinforced in Miss Gwen John's study of '?Queen Elizabeth." The final word, is with Swinburne, when he writes:—

Elizabeth, so shamefully Mary's inferior in personal loyalty, fidelity, and gratitude, was as clearly her superior on the one allimportant point of oatriotisra. The saving salt of Elizabeth's character, with all its well-nigh incredible mixture of heroism and- egotism, meanness and magni-ficence,-was simply this: that overmuch as

(Continued at foot of next column.)

she loved herself, ehe did yet love England better. Her best, though not her only fine qualities, were national and political, the high virtues of a good public servant; in the-private and personal qualities which attract and attach a friend to his friend and a follower to his leader, no man or woman was ever more constant and more eminent than Mary Queen of Scots*