“Originally published in 1896.”

In the following pages my aim has been to sketch the development of criticism, and particularly of critical method, in England; and to illustrate each phase of its growth by one or two samples taken from the most typical writers. I have in no way attempted to make a full collection of what might be thought the most striking pieces of criticism to be found in our literature.

Owing to the great wealth of such writing produced during the last sixty years, it is clearly impossible to give so complete a picture of what has been done in this period as in others. I am obliged to content myself with one specimen of one writer. But that is the writer who, in the opinion of many, is the most remarkable of all English critics. For the permission, so kindly granted, to include the Essay on Sandro Botticelli I desire to offer my sincerest thanks to Messrs. Macmillan and to the other representatives of the late Mr. Pater.

It may seem strange to close a volume of literary criticism with a study on the work and temperament of a painter. I have been led to do so for more than one reason. A noticeable tendency of modern criticism, from the time of Burke and Lessing, has been to break down the barrier between poetry and the kindred arts; and it is perhaps well that this tendency should find expression in the following selection. But a further reason is that Mr. Pater was never so much himself, was never so entirely master of his craft, as when interpreting the secrets of form and colour. Most of all was this the case when he had chosen for his theme one who, like Botticelli, “is before all things a poetical painter”.

1. E. VAUGHAN

February, 1896.

In the perusal of the Irish literature, we see that the strength of this conservative instinct has been of the greatest service in the preservation of the early monuments in their purity. So much is this the case, that in many tales the most flagrant contradictions appear, the author or scribe being unwilling to depart at all from that which he found handed down. For instance, in the “Great Breach of Murthemney,” we find Laeg at one moment killed, and in the next riding black Shanglan off the field. From this conservatism and careful following of authority, and the littera scripta, or word once spoken, I conclude that the distance in time between the prose tale and the metrical originals was very great, and, unless under such exceptional circumstances as the revolution caused by the introduction of Christianity, could not have been brought about within hundreds of years. Moreover, this same conservatism would have caused the tales concerning heroes to grow very slowly once they were actually formed. All the noteworthy events of the hero’s life and his characteristics must have formed the original of the tales concerning him, which would have been composed during his life, or not long after his death.

Bolu’da Halvetîlik denildiği zamân ilk akla gelen meşhûr mutasavvıflar Mudurnulu Dâvûd El-Halvetî, Kemâl Ümmî, Mustafâ Konrapavî, Göynüklü Akşemseddîn ve Ömer Sikkîn Dede gibi bazı âbide şahsiyetlerdir. Bolu merkezden Mustafâ Safî Efendi, Nasrullâh Sırrı Efendi, Muhammed Reşid Efendi, Gerede’den Aziz Halîl Efendi, Geredeli Abdullâh Efendi ve Mudurnu’dan Halîl Rahmi Efendi ise yine son dönemin önemli Halvetî şeyhleridirler. Mustafâ Safî-i Âmedî Efendi, tarîkat-i Halvetiyyenin dört ana kolundan Cemâliyye koluna bağlıdır. Bu kolun aşağıya doğru şubelenişine bakılacak olursa Halvetiyye-i Şa’bâniyyenin Nasûhiyye şubesinden ayrılan Çerkeşiyye şubesi Mustafa Safî Efendinin de yetiştiği şubedir ancak halîfeliğini aldığı şube ise Halîliyye şubesi olmuştur. Bolu’ya Çerkeşîlik, Şeyh Mustafâ Safî Efendi tarafından Aktaş Dergâhı vâsıtasıyla getirilmiş ve 1813-1846 yılları arası 33 sene boyunca şehir hayatına hâkim kılınmıştır. Safî Efendi, Halvetiyye içerisinde ayrı bir kol kurmamıştır. Tarîkat adabında her dâim Çerkeşî usûlü ile Şeyh Şa’bân-ı Velî’ye bağlı kalınmıştır.