Moreover, inaccurate as Hugo often is, it is never the inaccuracy that
falsifies. He has been severely criticized for having in _Au Lion
d'Androcles_ assigned to a single epoch events and personages which are
really separated by centuries. But all the facts are typical of the
spirit which dominated Imperial Rome, and combine therefore to form a
description which has poetic and imaginative, if not historical, truth.
And if, with greater licence, he has accumulated upon the head of a
single Mourad all the crimes of a long line of Sultans it is because in
drawing Mourad he is drawing the Turkish nation. Mourad is to him the
typical Turk, the embodiment of Oriental cruelty and lust. If again, to
pass to a larger subject, he has chosen legend rather than history as
the basis of many of his poems, it is not only because of his own innate
love of the marvellous and romantic, but because he cared for the truth
embodied in legend more than the truth embodied in chronicle. If he
mingled fiction with his history, it was because he conceived of the
fiction as being as true a representation of the facts of an era as
annals and records. It may be true that Hugo made imagination do duty
for study, but it is also true that an imagination, such as Hugo's, may
be as sure an instrument as study in reconstructing the past. He may
have mistaken the date of Crassus by several centuries, but readers of
Suetonius will hardly deny the faithfulness of his delineation of at
least one side of the civilization of ancient Rome; he may have invented
a Spanish princess, but his carefully stippled portrait of Philip II
is true to the life, even if it be Philip in his darkest moods. His
inaccuracies are in truth of small account. Who that reads _Le Cimetiere
d'Eylau_ cares whether there was a place of burial in the battlefield or
not? or what lover of _Booz endormi_ seeks to know how closely the flora
of Palestine has been studied? A more serious criticism than the charge
of inaccuracy is that of partial vision, and from this Hugo cannot be
entirely exculpated. He saw with his heart, and seeing with the heart
must always mean partial vision. For at the root of Hugo's nature lay an
immense pity, pity not merely for the suffering, but for what is base
or criminal, or what is ugly or degraded. It was this pity which is the
keynote of _Notre-Dame de Paris_ and _Les Miserables_; it is this pity
which inspired much of the _Legende des Siecles_.

The defence o