The Life and Letters of John Gibson Lockhart
Chapter 4: 1815-17
John Gibson Lockhart to Jonathan Christie, 22 December 1816
“Edinburgh, 73 George Street,
December 22, 1816 (Sunday forenoon).
“My dear Christie,—I
am most willing to believe that your obstinate silence is owing entirely
114 | LIFE OF J. G. LOCKHART. | |
to your hard studies, so, being unconscious of any such
excuse, I am resolved to make one more attempt on you. I presume I need not ask
you what you are doing. You are no doubt fagging hard at the law all the day,
and drinking tea and reading Greek plays with Buchanan all
the evening. Now and then you have a tavern shine with
some young fellows—perhaps with Traill, if he has in good earnest returned unto himself. I, you
must know, pursue a more dignified strain of life. I am now an advocate of a
week’s standing—have trod the boards of the Parliament House all
that time, with the air of a man wrapped up in Potier and
Cujacius, and have pocketed one fee
of three guineas, which I spent in punch and tobacco the same evening—so
far well. I am going west in a few days to cultivate the procurators of
Glasgow.
“There is a young and itching devil here—so God
speed the attorneys and damn sentiment.
“I suppose you have read before this time the new
novels, supposed to be, like ‘Waverley,’ by Walter
Scott. The ‘Old
Mortality’ story was very delightful to me, as the scene is
admirably laid and preserved in that part of the country with which I am most
familiar; but I have, unfortunately, read too much of the history of that
period to approve of the gross violations of historical truth which he has
taken the liberty—often, I think, without gaining anything by it—to
introduce. Burley has long been known by
me as a short, in-kneed, squinting, sallow, snarling
viper,1 and now
behold he is uselessly swelled out into a Covenanting giant, with a blue bonnet
of the cut of Brobdingnag. He was drowned, on his way from Holland to Scotland,
about the date of the Revolution. Claverhouse’s original letters I have seen—they are
vulgar and bloody, without anything of the air of a polished man, far less of a
sentimental cavalier in them.2 These productions, in
which true events and real personages are blended in so close a manner with
nonentities of all kinds, are only tolerable to us in proportion to our
ignorance of the places and period and persons described. The novels in
question have so much merit in almost every other point of view, that they
naturally attract uncommon attention to those passages of history on which they
are, or pretend to be, founded, and so by their very merit work their own
destruction. I wish the author had either stuck close to facts—in so far
as never to invent anything which could be contradicted by history—or
followed fiction altogether. This last tale is far more offensive than
‘Waverley,’ inasmuch as Waverley is a person more obscure than Morton, and more likely to have been omitted by
the contemporary writers. At the same time, the general truth of the
Covenanting manners exceeds, I should think, anything the author has executed
in that 1 One is reminded of Mrs. Squeers’ turned-up-nosed peacock. 2 Here the biographer utterly dissents from
this child of the Remnant. |
116 | LIFE OF J. G. LOCKHART. | |
way. Defoe’s
history of that period in Scotland is, however, after all equally picturesque,
better kept up, and incomparably better written; with all the other advantages
that truth ever possesses over fiction. There is no doubt of it, that man has
the strongest imagination of any prose writer that ever
lived. Such is his power that he can make plain matter of fact infinitely
brighter than all the inventions in the world could ever render a fictitious
event.
This is sad prosing, but we are now so much separated that
new books and old friends are the only subjects in which we can reckon on
finding each other’s attention alive. Sir
William Hamilton is very well at the other side of my table, and
requests me to hand you his love. Remember us both to
Buchanan. I rejoice to hear of his being so happy with
you. I dined yesterday with his aunt, and they are all perfectly
well.—Yours most affectionately,
J. G. L.
“How is Nicoll? I wish, if you are writing him, you would desire
him to send me and Hannay our
exhibs. with all speed convenient. Write me quickly, at Glasgow—if
not for ten days (quod Deus
avertat) here again.”
John Balfour of Kinloch (1683 fl.)
Scottish covenanter who participated in the murder of Archbishop Sharp and was declared a
traitor after the battle of Bothwell Bridge.
Jonathan Henry Christie (1793-1876)
Educated at Marischal College, Baliol College, Oxford, and Lincoln's Inn; after slaying
John Scott in the famous duel at Chalk Farm he was acquitted of murder and afterwards
practiced law as a conveyancer in London. He was the lifelong friend of John Gibson
Lockhart and an acquaintance of John Keats.
Jacques Cujas (1520-1590)
French humanist, jurist, and professor.
Daniel Defoe (1660-1731)
English novelist and miscellaneous writer; author of
Robinson
Crusoe (1719),
Moll Flanders (1722) and
Roxanna (1724).
Robert Hannay (1789 c.-1868)
Son of James Hannay of Kirkcudbright; he was a classmate of John Gibson Lockhart's at
Balliol College, Oxford, afterwards a Scottish barrister.
Alexander Nicoll (1793-1828)
Educated at Marischal College, Aberdeen before becoming a Snell Exhibitioner at Balliol
College, Oxford, he catalogued oriental manuscripts at the Bodleian and was regius
professor of Hebrew (1822).
James Traill (1794-1873)
Of Hobbister, Orkney; educated at Balliol College (Snell Exhibitioner) and the Middle
Temple, he was a police magistrate in London. Traill was John Christie's second in the duel
with John Scott.