260 FEESH FIELDS 



the superficies, and helping make life shallow and 

 monotonous. How deep does the leading editorial 

 go, or the review article, or the Sunday sermon? 

 But such a force as Caiiyle disturbs our compla- 

 cency. Opinion is shocked, but it is deepened. 

 The moral and intellectual resources of all men 

 have been added to. But the literal fulfillment and 

 verification of his prophecies, shall we insist 

 upon that? Is not a prophet his own proof, the 

 same as a poet? Must we summon witnesses and 

 go into the justice-court of fact? The only ques- 

 tions to be asked are: Was he an inspired man? 

 was his an authoritative voice ? did he touch bot- 

 tom ? was he sincere ? was he grounded and rooted 

 in character ? It is not the stamp on the coin that 

 gives it its value, though on the bank-note it is. 

 Carlyle's words were not promises, but perform- 

 ances; they are good now if ever. To test him 

 by his political opinions is like testing Shakespeare 

 by his fidelity to historical fact in his plays, or 

 judging Lucretius by his philosophy, or Milton 

 or Dante by their theology. Carlyle was just as 

 distinctively an imaginative writer as were any of 

 these men, and his case is to be tried on the same 

 grounds. It is his utterances as a seer touching 

 conduct, touching duty, touching nature, touching 

 the soul, touching life, that most concern us, the 

 ideal to be cherished, the standard he held to. 



Carlyle was a poet touched with religious wrath 

 and fervor, and he confronted his times and country 

 as squarely and in the same spirit as did the old 



