these authors the manner of expression is of immense importance. Their sentences as they run smoothly and lucidly along may seem to be artless and unstudied; but the ease and grace so fascinating to the reader have been attained at the expense of untiring labor and rigorous discipline. So also with the structure of the Essay; the writer may apparently be wandering with the vagaries of his own impulsive will, but beneath there is an informing purpose directing and restraining the flow of thought.

The Essay, as Mr. Gosse points out, was invented in March, 1571, in the second story of the tower of the old castle of Montaigne, when that French gentleman, weary of statecraft, settled down at his leisure to compose his inimitable Essais. Seeking deliberately for a means of self-revelation, he discovered this entirely new way of writing casually on the most diverse matters, treating them always, however, with his own prejudices, eccentricities, and hobbies visible in the background. Almost unwittingly he originated a distinct type of literature which has exerted a mighty influence on the authors and readers of succeeding centuries.

The earliest man to employ the form in England was undoubtedly Francis Bacon, who, in 1598, five years after Montaigne's death, published ten essays. In appropriating Montaigne's title, Bacon was unable to assimilate more than the superficial features of the Frenchman's spirit. Fortunately he was able in turn to make the Essay express admirably his own cold and logical turn of mind; thus, where Montaigne had instinctively been leisurely and desultory, Bacon was abrupt, incisive, and sententious.

Neither Montaigne nor Bacon, strangely enough, had any marked effect on the next generation or two in England. The poet Cowley and the statesman Sir William Temple produced essays, but neither was read extensively. Not until the advent of Joseph Addison (1672-1719) and Richard Steele (1672–1729), and their collaboration in the Tatler (1709-10) and the Spectator (1711-12), did the Essay become widely popular. By instituting the tri-weekly and daily periodical and devoting it principally to the Essay, they gave that literary form real dignity. The extraordinary success of their venture induced dozens of journalists through the eighteenth century to busy themselves in editing similar publications, and thus thousands of essays appeared, all but a few of which have justly been forgotten. Occasionally such men as Dr. Johnson and Goldsmith rose above the common level of mediocrity; but on the whole the essays of that period were dull and uninspired, burdened with didacticism and devoid of wit.

The golden age of the Essay in England began in the first quarter of the nineteenth century with the work of Lamb and Hazlitt, the two most brilliant masters of their school. With them the Essay became what it was to Montaigne, a picturesque medium for the disclosure of their own personalities. They gave it the impress of grace and beauty by embedding their ideas in a nearly perfect intimate style. At the same time the rise of the great British Reviews the Edinburgh (1802), the Quarterly (1809), and Blackwood's (1817) was a powerful stimulus to another variety of essay-writing, and led to the appearance of Macaulay and Carlyle, who represent the Critical and Biographical Essay at its best.

De Quincey wrote literally dozens of essays of a miscellaneous character, and managed to turn the form to the uses of a kind of "higher journalism." Meanwhile Irving, in America, was reviving the Essay of Addison and Goldsmith, and Emerson was experimenting with the "Wisdom Essay," and packing, like Bacon, a shrewd philosophy into the space of a few short pages.

Of the later essayists only a few need special mention. Matthew Arnold devoted himself largely to critical work, but he managed to bring that particular type of essay almost to perfection. The tradition of Montaigne, Lamb, and Hazlitt was continued by Robert Louis Stevenson, who, in both charm of style and grace of manner, proved himself not unworthy to be their literary successor.

To-day we seem to be watching a wholesome revival of the Essay. Miss Repplier writing on The Passing of the Essay and Mr. Middleton discussing The Decay of the Essay prove in their own work the very falsity of the contention which they are trying to establish. It is, of course, true that now as always the Familiar Essay is not popular with the great body of the reading public. Its appeal is rather to cultured, discriminating people, who constitute a small but influential part of the entire population. Nevertheless there is no occasion for pessimism. Mr. Arthur Christopher Benson, Mr. Augustine Birrell, Mr. Chesterton, Mr. Austin Dobson, Mr. Crothers, Mr. Gerald Stanley Lee, Mr. Richard Middleton, Mr. Richard Burton, Miss Repplier, and others have won their audiences and are likely to retain them. We may be sure that some Familiar Essays published during the last ten years

will compare not unfavorably with those of earlier periods.

As for the Essay in its broader sense, it has become practically indispensable as a medium for the interchange of opinion. It is a vehicle for ideas: the scholar may, in brief compass, announce the results of his researches; the statesman may outline his policies; the reformer may propose remedies for crying evils-all this with much less labor than would be involved in writing a longer book. We have several magazines devoted entirely to articles and essays; and there are few periodicals of the better sort which do not include at least one essay in every issue. Of all this vast amount of material produced annually, the greater part is necessarily of transient interest, lacking in style or in some essential which might have made it enduring. A small number of essays, however, will last beyond the month of publication; and these are almost invariably essays of the familiar sort, dealing, not with temporary or current events, but with the larger questions of life which loom up in every age. The work which does live is sufficient to show that the Essay as a type of literature is still well worth study, and that its glorious day is by no means over.

SELECTED ESSAYS

MICHEL DE MONTAIGNE

AGAINST IDLENESS

THE Emperor Vespasian,1 being sick of the disease whereof he died, did not for all that neglect to enquire after the state of the empire; and even in bed continually despatched very many affairs of great consequence; for which, being reproved by his physician, as a thing prejudicial to his health, "An emperor," said he, "must die standing." A fine saying, in my opinion, and worthy a great prince. The Emperor Adrian2 since made use of the same words, and kings should be often put in mind of them, to make them know that the great office conferred upon them of the command of so many men, is not an employment of ease; and that there is nothing can so justly disgust a subject, and make him unwilling to expose himself to labour and danger for the service of his prince, than to see him, in the mean time, devoted to his ease and frivolous amusement: and to be solicitous of his preservation who so much neglects that of his people.

Whoever will take upon him to maintain that 't is better for a prince to carry on his wars by others, than in his own person, fortune will furnish him with examples enough of those whose lieutenants have brought great enterprises to a happy issue, and of