Altı yüz yıllık Osmanlı topraklarında devletin en zirvesindeki Padişahtan tutun da halkın arasında yaşayan demirci ustası veya marangoza kadar pek çok şahsiyet klasik edebiyat veya halk edebiyatı tarzında şiir söyleyebilmiştir. Binlerle ifade edilebilecek bu şairlerin kesin sayısı şimdiye kadar tam olarak tespit edilebilmiş de değildir. Öyle ki hâlen pek çok şairimiz ve eserleri gün ışığına çıkarılmayı bekleyen bir hazine konumundadır. Söz konusu bu hazinenin her bir değerli taşını küçüğüne büyüğüne bakılmaksızın gün yüzüne çıkarmak, bilim âlemine tanıtmak ve günümüz insanlarının istifadesine sunmak biz araştırmacıların ortak sorumluluğudur.

Bu sorumluluk çerçevesinde biz bu çalışmamızda on dokuzuncu yüzyılın ikinci yarısı ile yirminci yüzyılın başlarında Manisa’nın Kasaba yani günümüzdeki adıyla Turgutlu ilçesinde yaşamış olan Kasabalı Nûrî’yi ele almaya çalıştık. Osmanlı devletinin dağılma döneminin olumsuz şartları içerisinde yetişmiş bir şahsiyet olarak karşımıza çıkan Kasabalı Nûrî, özellikle dönemin aksaklıklarını korkusuzca dile getirmeye çalışan cesur bir şair olarak dikkatleri çekmektedir. Hem aruz hem de hece vezinleriyle şiirleri bulunan Kasabalı Nûrî’nin müstakil bir divanı bulunmasa da iki farklı mecmua ile dönemin önemli gazetelerinde yayımlanan şiirleri önemli bir yekun oluşturmaktadır. Şairin çalışmamıza dahil ettiğimiz bu şiirlerinin tümü, söz konusu kaynaklardan temin edilmiştir.

“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.

The literary history, as I conceive it, is an account of one strand, so to speak, in a very complex tissue: it is connected with the intellectual and social development; it represents movements of thought which may sometimes check and be sometimes propitious to the existing forms of art; it is the utterance of a class which may represent, or fail to represent, the main national movement; it is affected more or less directly by all manner of religious, political, social, and economical changes; and it is dependent upon the occurrence of individual genius for which we cannot even profess to account. I propose to take the history of English literature in the eighteenth century. I do not aim at originality: I take for granted the ordinary critical judgments upon the great writers of whom so much has been said by judges certainly more competent than myself, and shall recall the same facts both of ordinary history and of the history of thought. What I hope is, that by bringing familiar facts together I may be able to bring out the nature of the connection between them; and, little as I can say that will be at all new, to illustrate one point of view, which, as I believe, it is desirable that literary histories should take into account more distinctly than they have generally done.