FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114  
115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   >>   >|  
and therefore any attempt at wholesale plagiarism must have been immediately detected. The _Bachelier de Salamanque_, it is true, was in manuscript; but it had been long in the possession of the Marquis de Lerma and his son, before it became the property of Le Sage; and although tolerably certain that it had never been diligently perused, Le Sage could not be sure that it had not attracted superficial notice, and that the name was not known to many people. Now, by eviscerating the _Bachelier de Salamanque_ of its most entertaining anecdotes, and giving them a different title, and then publishing the mutilated copy of a work, the name of which, with the outline of its story, was known to many people as an acknowledged translation, he took the most obvious means of disarming all suspicion of plagiarism, and setting, as it seems he did, on a wrong track the curiosity of enquirers. How came the original manuscript not to be printed by its author? Because it could not be printed with impunity within the jurisdiction of the Spanish monarchy: the allusions to the abuses of the court and the favourites of the day are so obvious--the satire upon the imbecility of the Spanish government so keen and biting--the personal descriptions of Philip III. and Philip IV. so exact--the corruption of its ministers of justice, and the abuses practised in its prisons, branded in terms so lively and vehement--the attacks upon the influence of the clergy, their hypocrisy, their ambition, and their avarice, so frequent and severe--that while Philip IV. and Don John of Austria, the fruit of his intrigue with the actress Marie Calderon, so carefully pointed out, were still alive, and before the generation to which it alludes had passed away, its publication, in Spain at least, was impossible. The _Bachelier de Salamanque_ was not published for the same reason; and for the same reason, even in a country with perhaps more pretensions to freedom than Spain possessed, no one has yet acknowledged himself the writer of _Junius_. But why do you not produce the Spanish manuscript, and set the question at rest? exclaims with much _naivete_ M. Neufchateau. Does such an argument deserve serious refutation? That is, why do not you Spaniards produce a manuscript given to one Frenchman by another at Paris, in the 18th century, which of course, if our theory be true, he had the strongest temptation to destroy? Rather may the Spaniards ask, why do not _you_ produc
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114  
115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

manuscript

 

Philip

 

Spanish

 

Salamanque

 

Bachelier

 
abuses
 

produce

 

people

 

acknowledged

 
reason

obvious

 
plagiarism
 

printed

 

Spaniards

 

country

 

published

 

publication

 

impossible

 

pointed

 

Austria


severe

 

frequent

 

clergy

 

hypocrisy

 

ambition

 

avarice

 

intrigue

 

actress

 

generation

 

alludes


Calderon

 
carefully
 

passed

 

century

 

Frenchman

 
deserve
 

refutation

 

Rather

 

produc

 

destroy


temptation

 

theory

 

strongest

 

argument

 

writer

 

possessed

 
pretensions
 

freedom

 

Junius

 

naivete