XXXI THE BEST HUNDRED BOOKS 93 



instructors of youth, including the Master of 

 BaUiol. It is really a very remarkable list. 



Sir John himself wrote, in reference to the 

 issue : 



We often see it stated that the main result of schools 

 and public libraries is to create a demand for sensational 

 novels, or even for a lower class of literature. 



It is therefore satisfactory that Messrs. Harmsworth 

 should have undertaken to issue the 100 books, which I 

 suggested in my lecture at the Working Men's College, 

 at a price which nothing but a very large sale could 

 render possible. Whether they are the " best " books 

 or not, no one will deny that they are very good ones. 



It has, indeed, been suggested that the list contains 

 hardly enough light literature. The representation of 

 Oriental Literature especially has led to some difference 

 of opinion. As regards the Shi King and the Analects 

 of Confucius, I must humbly confess that I do not 

 greatly admire either ; but I recommended these because 

 they are held in the most profound veneration by the 

 Chinese race, containing 400,000,000 of our fellow- 

 men. I may add that both works are quite short. 



The Ramayana and Mahabharata, and St. Hilaire's 

 Buddha, are not only very interesting in themselves, 

 but very important in reference to our great oriental 

 Empire. Kalidasa's Sakoontala is generally regarded as 

 the gem of the Hindoo Drama, and the Shahnameh is 

 the great Persian Epic. 



Of the Koran, I suggest portions only. We must 

 remember that 150,000,000 of men regard it not merely 

 as the best of books, but as an actual inspiration. 

 Surely, then, it could not have been excluded. 



A popular writer, in a recent work, has observed, 

 that " why any one should select the best hundred more 

 than the best eleven, or the best thirty books, it is hard 

 to conjecture." But this remark entirely misses the 

 point. Eleven books, or even thirty, would be very 

 few ; but no doubt I might just as well have chosen 

 90, or even 110. Indeed, if our arithmetical notation 

 had been duodecimal instead of decimal, I should no 

 doubt have made up the number to 120. I only chose 

 100 as being a round number. 



