around us. Even in the minor qualifications of diction and style, the difficulties are not insurmountable. The imperfections of an infant language are greater as an instrument of thought than as a vehicle of feeling; accordingly, when the historian and philosopher find it unfit for their purposes, contemporary poets often exhibit a richness, strength, and propriety, which anticipate the improvements of several centuries.

But there is a state of society more unpropitious, and situations infinitely less inviting, than those now supposed. When taste has received the last touches of refinement, and composition its highest graces, should the spirit of poetry inflame an untutored and illiterate mind, what are his prospects of success ? Ease and retirement, if not indispensable to the perfection of his higher attributes of fancy and imagination, are clearly so when correctness and elegance are essential to his purpose of affording delight. His first productions are necessarily esteemed coarse and faulty; and though applause may predominate, the just severity even of friendly criticism chastens his confidence and self-esteem, and consequently removes half his strength. Add to these, the effects produced by perpetual descents to the dead level of vulgar life, the exhaustion of strength and spirits by employments uncongenial to his dispositions, or, worse than all, perhaps the subjection of the mind itself to some dull monotonous pursuit, and you will have an idea of the merits of such resolute persons as have encountered these difficulties, and, in defiance of them, attained the highest eminence in the art of which I am speaking, and be disposed to deplore the far greater number who have perished under them.

Our own times, I take pleasure to

of the first sort, of one who, by the mere force of natural parts, has raised his name from obscurity to the first rank, and divided the public favour with others equally endowed, but much more happily circumstanced than himself. I allude to the author of The Queen's Wake, a work of which we now judge without finding it necessary to make allowances for the accidents of education and training, which sometimes smooth, but seldom

retard, the fate of inferior productions. The history of this author affords one of the strongest instances I remember of the superiority of nature to fortune; of the great length to which persevering talents can draw the slenderest means. A few years ago Mr Hogg was known only as an extraordinary shepherd, who composed humorous songs for the rustics of Ettrick Forest, or modulated softer love ditties on the banks of the Yarrow. About the same time Mr Scott was beginning to direct all men's eyes to the BORDER, and the unequivocal sovereignty he soon established over the public attention, rendered any thing like rivalship, in that department, absurd, and emulation eminently hazardous. But Hogg, like every poet born, was an enthusiast. Instead of being bei struck dumb either with envy or despair, as some birds are said to be by the voice of the nightingale, with modest assurance, which he has since vindicated, he struck a lower key, and supported no mean accompaniment. The defects of his education were obviated by unremitting attention to the strength and copiousness of our own language, and his taste speedily corrected by an active admiration of refined writers. Hence almost every one of his numerous publications, up to that just mentioned, improves on its predecessor, although to all appearance he had few to teach him, and fewer opportunities of learning. His first essays remind us of our native poets in the sixteenth century, The Queen's Wake does honour to the present. I am happy to learn that another edition of this work is at present publishing by subscription for the benefit of the author, who, like most of his brethren, has had cause to complain of fortune, and, like too many of them, with but partial redress. The observations accompanying the proposals, stand. a gentleman who has contributed much to the reputation of this country and age, and to the delight of all the lovers of poetry and polite letters,-not only by his own pen, but also by an affectionate attention to the rising merit of others. There is nothing, I think, more pleasing than such cordial friendship and esteem between men distinguished by similar excellencies, and the rather because the experience of former times renders it unexpected.

I.

As it was once my intention to write an account of the antiquities of the midland counties of this kingdom, and as I made some investigations for that purpose, both in the public archives and the repositories of individuals, I was surprised to see, in your useful Magazine for April last, (in a curious disquisition on the ancient custom of "Sitting below the Salt,") a very erroneous account of a family in Lanarkshire, of great antiquity and respectability, I mean that of STEWART of ALLANTON. On looking over a list, which I made at the time, of the most distinguished names in that county, I find this family classed with the Douglasses, the Hamiltons, the Lockharts of Lee, and some others, who, as ancient barons and landholders, had had possessions there from a very remote period.

The passage in the article to which I allude is taken from a book of some curiosity, "The Memorie, or Memoirs of the Somervilles," written by the eleventh Lord Somerville about 1680, and edited two years since by that indefatigable writer, Mr Walter Scott. In this publication, Sir Walter Stewart of Daldowie and Allanton, and his brother, Sir James Stewart of Coltness, are represented to be of a family of Yeomen or Fewars, whose ancestors never had, until their day, (the middle of the seventeenth century,) " Sat above the salt foot." And further, it is stated, seemingly as an extraordinary honour done to them, that they actually did sit above the salt at the table of Somerville of Camnethan, "which for ordinary every Saboth they dyned at, as most of the honest men within the parish of any account." See Memoirs, vol. II. P.

upon the Clyde, near Glasgow: That Sir Allan Stewart of Daldowie (grandson to Sir Robert,) obtained, on account of his valour in 1385, from King Robert II., his father's second cousin, the rank of knight banneret, together with the honourable addition of the lion-passant, or English lion, to his paternal coat armorial;-as also, on the same account, the lands of Allanton, in Allcathmuir, from the church in 1420. Moreover, that I had seen charters and seasines, in the possession of his posterity, from 1460 and 1492 downwards; since which time they have intermarried with some of the first families in the kingdom. Knowing these things as I did, I own I was surprised to observe his descendant, Sir Walter Stewart of Daldowie and Allanton, described, in 1650, as "the goodman of Allanton, and of a very mean family upon Clyde"!!! See Memoirs, vol. II. p. 380.*

On applying to the worthy and learned Baronet who now represents this family, and inquiring whether he had seen the article in your Magazine, he replied in the affirmative, and laughed very good-naturedly at the account, observing, that it was quite fair from the pen of a Somerville, and as a production of the period. In regard to the the pretensions pretensio to superior descent assumed by Lord Somerville on the ground merely of his own statement, and as an apt counterpart to the above delineation, he reminded me of the well-known dialogue which took place between the lion and the man in the fable, when each contended for the superiority, and which I need not here repeat. It was on this occasion that the former pointed out to the king of the forest, as a conclusive argument in his own favour, a painting, in which was represented a lion

2 Y

in contest with a man, crouching under the stroke, and yielding to the strength of his antagonist.

The learned Baronet, moreover, obligingly communicated to me, from a MS. history of his family, which has been long preserved in it, some amusing anecdotes of the ancient feud that had subsisted between his ancestors and the Somervilles, of the inveteracy of which so many instances are detailed in Mr Scott's publication. And although such anecdotes must appear rather uninteresting in the present day, yet, I trust, you will admit the following few particulars into your useful work. In expressing this hope, I as

vanity also; but he was frugal, dexterous in the management of country affairs, and had added to his estates by such judicious purchases, that they greatly out-weighed the possessions of his rival. But the pas, or precedency, universally given to Sir Walter both in public and private, wounded the pride of Somerville, and induced him to bestow on his neighbour the slighting epithet of the "Goodman of Allanton;" a salutation which Sir Walter never failed to retaliate in kind; so that that of the "Goodman of Camnethan" was as courteously retorted, as often as opportunity offered. But this is a circumstance, which, though carefully record

tions from the gentleman in question; but I think it will not only appear as a proof of that impartiality, for which every public writer aspires to be distinguished, but as a matter of justice to a family, which certainly is at the head of one of the most ancient branches of the House of STEWART.

The feud, it seems, which subsisted between the Stewarts and the Somervilles, was of very ancient standing, probably originating in some of those predatory excursions, or personal quarrels, which occupied the leisure, while they inflamed the passions, of a warlike race of men. Sir Walter Stewart and Somerville of Camnethan, it appears, had inherited the antipathies of their respective houses. Unlike each other in temper and pursuits, their animosity was imbittered by their religious prejudices, and by their political and parish disputes. For, while Sir Walter supported, with all his might, the solemn league and covenant (the popular doctrine of the times), Somerville adhered, with no less pertinacity, to the episcopal principles of his ancestors; and no man, who contemplates only the milder influence of religious opinions at present, can in any degree conceive their rancorous character nearly two centuries ago.

When other topics failed, the antiquity of their families supplied a fruitful theme of jealousy and dissension, and was at that time an affair of no small interest as well as amusement to their neighbours. Camnethan (according to Lord Somerville, as well as the Stewart MSS.) was a vain and expensive character, who, by a course of extravagance, had run out his estate. Sir Walter, it appears, had his share of

Lord Somerville has not thought proper to notice. Both, however, being fond of their pint-stoup of claret, they occasionally forgot these animosities at the parish change-house, according to the custom of the times, or at their respective mansions; and as Camnethan's residence was in the immediate neighbourhood of the church, it was the fashion of the day to wash down the sermon there, with copious potations of that exhilarating beverage.

It was probably at one of these convivial meetings that Lord Somerville met Sir Walter, and his brother, Sir James Stewart of Kirkfield and Coltness, "with most of the honest men (as he says) within the parish, of any account:" And it was not unnatural in his Lordship to speak, in the language of t of the family, of two of its most inveterate political opponents, and of the only persons in the district, possessed of rank and fortune sufficient to overshadow the consequence of his kinsman. The fact is, that both the vanity and the consequence of Somerville were soon not only overshadowed, but completely eclipsed, in Lanarkshire; for Sir James Stewart, who was a merchant and banker in Edinburgh, and had acquired a handsome fortune in these honourable professions,* actually purchased the greater

* He became commissary and paymastergeneral, anno 1650, to the Scotch army under General Leslie, which was defeated at Dunbar by Oliver Cromwell; and, together with the Marquis of Argyle and the Earl of Eglinton, was one of the three commissioners who, on the part of the Scotch, held the conference with Cromwell on Bruntsfield Links.

part of the Camnethan estate, leaving the owner in possession of only the mansion-house, and an inconsiderable space adjoining to it. This last portion, a few years after, was also disposed of to an advocate in Edinburgh, of the name of Harper; and it has since passed, together with other property of greater extent, into a younger branch of the Lee family.

There is another anecdote of these two rival lairds, Sir Walter Stewart and Somerville of Camnethan, which is recorded in the family history above alluded to; and I shall beg leave to mention it as illustrative of the characters of both.

When Oliver Cromwell, after reducing Scotland to subjection, directed a valuation to be taken of the landed property of the kingdom (and which constitutes the rule whereby the cess and sundry other public public burdens are still paid), the Laird of Camnethan, anxious to exhibit his importance as a landholder, gave in his rent-roll at an extravagant value, and, as it was supposed, greatly beyond the truth. Sir Walter, on the other hand, who would have spilt the last drop of his blood in a contest for superiority on any other occasion, when called upon for his return, took care to exhibit a statement as greatly below the mark. On this, his neighbours, who knew of their bickerings, did not fail to rally him, for being thus surpassed by his rival, although well known to be possessed of a far more valuable estate. But the wily knight, who guessed at the object of the Protector's policy, was resolved to act with becoming moderation on such an occasion, and encouraged his brother, Sir James, in the same prudent line of conduct. He therefore only laughed at the transaction; quietly observing, that his neighbour's estate was "bonny and bield, and all lying on the Clyde;" whereas his own (he said) was " but cauld muirland, as every body knew, and naething like Camnethan's." Accordingly, the two properties stand thus taxed and rated in the cess-books, down to the present period.

The bitterness with which Lord Somerville speaks of all his political opponents, and the soreness with which he details his friend's contest with his neighbour about changing the site of the parish church, and Sir Walter's successful application against him to the General Assembly (which, I find,

are also given at length in the Stewart MSS.), are a sufficient evidence of his entering with eagerness into all the family quarrels. Hence his anxious desire, on every occasion, to detract from the character, and lessen the importance, of both the brothers, Sir Walter and Sir James; to represent them as fewars, "from some antiquity," however, of the Earl of Tweeddale's, in Allcatamuir; to describe them as persons whose ancestors had "sat below the salt," &c. &c.; all of which, he himself must have felt, were what Tacitus calls Ignorantia recti, et invidia, the mere ebullitions of party animosity, of animosity of all others the most likely to go down with the uninformed among his own adherents, that it vilified their adversaries, and contained withal a certain intermixture of truth. But could Lord Somerville, even in imagination, have anticipated that these his Memoirs were to descend to posterity, that they were to be edited, in a future day, by one of the greatest geniuses of his age and nation, and, under the protection of his powerful name, sent forth to pass current with the world, we may do him the justice to believe, that he would have repressed his envy, and tempered party rancour with greater moderation. He seems, however, in his day, to have been what Dr Johnson called a good hater," although, in the main, a very worthy and honourable man.

66

In regard to the term Fewar or Vassal, it must be known to every one, however slenderly versed in feudal history, that it implied merely the condition of him who held an estate under the tenure of "suit and service to a superior lord," without denoting any personal inferiority, or any degradation of rank. The greatest lords themselves, as well as barons of the first distinction, often held lands of a subject superior, and consequently were fewars or vassals to that superior, who, in his turn, held them of the crown. Further, that a tenure of lands from the church, in that period, was considered nearly as honourable as one under the crown itself. Of both of these holdings numerous examples occur in the course of the Somerville Memoirs. See vol. i. pp. 114, 117,

Insensibility to merit, and envy of the possession." See Tacit. in Vit. Agricol. sul initio

&c. &c. It appears that Sir Walter Stewart held one of his estates, namely that of Allanton, of the church, by which it was originally granted, as

already mentioned, to his ancestor, Sir

Allan of Daldowie. Soon after the

Reformation, when the immense property of the clergy came to be parcelled out to the great lords who had interest at court, Lord Yester, the ancestor of the Marquis of Tweeddale, obtained a grant of the whole barony of Allcathmuir, as first vassal under the crown; and the "superiority" was retained by that noble family until a late period. Thus the Somervilles, as it appears, held some of their estates of subjects superior, and therefore might specially be termed their fewars or feudal vassals, with the same degree of justice; although it is certain that the epithet extended in general to yeomen, or persons of inferior degree.

Having now, as I trust, sufficiently vindicated the family honours of a respected friend (who is much more able, had he chosen, to have undertaken the task himself), I shall here close the subject, and take leave of the worthy Lord Somerville, for whose family I entertain the highest respect, and from whose work I have derived considerable pleasure as well as information. Without drawing any invidious comparisons between such distinguished families as the Stewarts and the Somervilles, who may be allowed to stand upon their respective merits, I will only say, with a judicious ancient, Non historia debet egredi veritatem, et honeste factis veritas sufficit. I agree, however, with this Noble Lord, and with a much better writer, namely Tacitus,* in thinking, that it is a subject of regret, that the lives of virtuous men, and the history of honourable families, however written, have not oftener been preserved. It is not alone the intrigues of the statesman, or the exploits of the warrior, that deserve to be transmitted to posterity: it is much more in the native freshness of narratives such as those to which I allude, it is in the minuteness of personal detail which they supply, beyond the sphere of history, that we must look for an acquaintance with the true character of past ages. I am, Sir, your most obedient servant, CANDIDUS.

* In Vit. Agricol. sub init.

REMARKS ON GREEK TRAGEDY.

No III.

(Septem adversus Thebas ÆSCHYLI

EURIPIDIS Phænissæ.)

THE Chorus was the distinguishing feature of the Greek tragedy. It was composed of a company of men or women, who, though they are to be considered as witnesses rather than personages of the play, were usually connected with the principal characters by the ties of domestic dependence, or friendship, or country, and took a deep interest in the events that were passing. They remained constantly on the stage; and though they did not by their actions promote or retard the views of the main agents, yet they bore a considerable share in the dialogue. Their office was to soothe the sorrows of the sufferers, to shew to the vicious the danger of the unrestrained indulgence of the passions,-to strengthen the good in the pursuit of virtue, and to sing hymns in honour of the gods, in which an enthusiastic and elevated poetry was made subservient to morality and religion. Several inconveniences attended this singular appendage of the drama. As they never quitted the stage there could be no change of scene, and it was necessary that many sentiments should be uttered, and many actions performed, in their presence, which it was inconsistent with the nature of man to reveal. From this contrivance arose the unities of time and place, which were essential to the ancient drama. There could be no change of place where a number of people remained on the stage during the whole of the play; and as the time they could remain was limited, so necessarily was the duration of the action. The disadvantages of this arrangement are sufficiently obvious; for, besides that unnatural restriction, it is the chief cause why the Greek tragedy is so barren in incident, and, not unfrequently, so deficient in interest; and it is mere pedantry in modern critics to demand, that writers in these days should comply with rules that arose out of necessity not choice; for it must be remembered, that tragedy was ingrafted on the chorus, not the chorus on tragedy. This species of composition, which has been the delight of so many countries and so many ages, had its origin