A Guide to the Best Historical Novels and Tales | Page 8

these wrong
judgments? True, the real Science of History--the sifting of evidence,
and the discovery and unravelling of ancient documents--may be
described as an essentially modern attainment, so it would be
unreasonable to blame our older historians for errors which it was
largely, if not wholly, beyond their power to overcome. And it is just
here that I would emphasise my defence of the Romancist. If Historians

themselves have differed (and still differ)! may it not be pleaded on
behalf of the Historical Novelist that he also must be judged according
to the possibilities of his time? For, while he may have too readily
adopted false conceptions in the past, there is no necessity why, in the
future, he also--profiting by the growth of Critical investigation--should
not have due regard, in the working out of his Historical background,
for all the latest "results." And, I would further add, even though it be
true that Scott and others have misled us in certain directions, this does
not prevent our acknowledgment that, given their aspect of a particular
period, it was only fitting that the scheme of their novels should be in
harmony with it. If "Bloody Mary" was a cruel hypocrite, then our
reading of her period will be influenced by that real (or supposed) fact;
but, if further investigation reverses this severe judgment on the woman
herself, then, in Heaven's name, let us mould our general conception
afresh. The fountains of Romance show no sign of running dry, and,
though we may look in vain at the moment for a genius of the very
highest type, the Future has possibilities within it which the greatest
literary pessimist among us cannot wholly deny. If, then, fault can be
found with the older Romancists for the spreading here and there of
false historical notions, let us look to future workers in the same sphere
for adjustment. I believe, however, that one notable critic has
pronounced the mischief already done to be quite irreparable, seeing
that the only "History" at all widely spread is that derived from those
very romances in which errors are so interwoven with the sentimental
interest of the plot itself that readers inevitably "hug their delusions!"
But I think that this danger need not be contemplated seriously. The
Historical Novel exists primarily as Fiction, and, even though in our
waking moments we may be persuaded of the unreality of that "dream"
which a Scott or a Dumas has produced for us, we shall still be able to
place ourselves again and again under the spell of their delightful
influence. Moreover, while admitting Dumas' carelessness of exact
detail, it would hardly be contended by the most sceptical that his
works (still less those of Scott) are without any background of Historic
suggestiveness. Scott, indeed, shows signs of having possessed
something of that "detachment" which is one important qualification in
the Historian proper; there is a fairness and prevision in his historical
judgments which we look for in vain when reading the works of his

contemporaries.
And, having thus touched on what I believe to be the true relation
between Romance and History, I may note, as a last word, the use of
the Historical Tale to those who have the training of young folk. That
"desire to know," which is an essential for all true learning, is
sometimes best fostered by methods outside the ordinary School
routine. Thus, as regards History, where the text-book fails in arousing
interest, the tale may succeed, and, once the spirit of inquiry has been
stimulated, half the battle is gained. In saying this I am far from
wishing to imply that the reading of romances can ever take the place
of genuine historical study. I know well that such a book as Green's
"Short History of the English People" may prove to some more
fascinating than any novel. There are, however, cases in which recourse
may be had to a high-class work of fiction for the attainment of a truer
historic sense; while, taken only as supplement to more strictly
Academic reading, such a work may prove to have its uses.
Considerable discrimination is required--as I have already hinted--in
the choice of suitable books, and, as a help in this direction, I have
made out (vide "Suggested courses of Reading" at the end of this
volume) two special lists for Boys and Girls respectively, which will, I
trust, be found useful. If, besides being of help to teachers, my
recommendations should lead in any degree to further appreciation of
the great masters of Romance, the labour (by no means inconsiderable)
expended on this little compilation will be amply rewarded.
J. N.
January, 1902.

NOTE--the order in which the books are placed is, on the whole,
according to the periods dealt with; occasionally the grouping decided