went about London noting matters for comment. This, it will be noticed, brought about an important combination of moods or methods,—that of the serious didactic essay, made for a useful end, and that of the familiar essay, representing individual fancies and experiences. The second journal, the Spectator, from the first frankly devoted each number to a single essay, of a suitable length to be read at the breakfasttable; the writer was now supposed to be a gentleman called simply "the Spectator," whose character Addison sketched in the first number. Other characters were also devised, as companions in his experiences, representing different types of English life; of these the most famous is Sir Roger de Coverley, who was gradually developed to the position of a character in a work of fiction. The papers of this sort show, therefore, how the essay sometimes tends to pass over into the field of the story. But the typical Spectator essay was even more didactic than in the case of the Tatler, dealing with problems of morals, manners, or literature, though familiar in tone and popular in appeal. "I shall be ambitious," wrote Addison, "to have it said of me that I have brought philosophy out of closets and libraries, schools and colleges, to dwell in clubs and assemblies, at tea-tables and in coffee-houses." The journal ran to 555 numbers, of which Steele appears to have written some 236 and Addison 274, the remainder being contributed by their friends. The essays were also bound up for sale in book form, and exerted an extraordinary influence on journalism and the art of the essay for a century following; they were widely imitated not only in England, but also in France, Germany, and even Russia.

The most important successors of Addison and Steele in the periodical essay were Samuel Johnson and Oliver Goldsmith, the leading prose writers of the later eighteenth century. Dr. Johnson issued a journal called The Rambler, from 1750 to 1752, made up almost wholly of his essays, and again, from 1758 to 1760, contributed a series called "The Idler" to a

newspaper. But although on the serious side of life he was as sound a critic as Addison, he was not possessed of the lightness of touch, the deftness of familiar style, which had so distinguished the Spectator; hence few modern readers care to penetrate the heaviness of his style-which sometimes reminds one of the thick folds of an elephant's skinto the substance of his essays. Goldsmith was much happier in following the Spectator tradition; indeed in the happy-golucky facility of both his life and his style he is more like Steele than Addison. He began his work in the periodical essay in 1759, in a little journal called The Bee, which lasted only eight weeks; but his chief reputation in the form depends on the series of papers called "The Citizen of the World," contributed to the Public Ledger in 1760. These were represented as letters written by a Chinaman, named Lien Chi Altangi, temporarily residing in London, who undertook to describe the course of English life and manners to a friend at home. The idea was not a new one; Addison himself had used it in a well-known paper presenting the views of some "Indian Kings" who had visited England, and in 1757 Horace Walpole had published "A Letter from Xo Ho." But Goldsmith developed the idea fully, and in describing the experiences of the imagined writer from day to day in London he gave the familiar essay the most distinctive form it had acquired for many years. Sometimes, as in the two papers on "Beau Tibbs," Goldsmith's essay closely approaches the methods of fiction, as we have seen was true of some of Addison's and Steele's.

In the early years of the nineteenth century the essay was again strongly affected by certain developments in periodical literature. We must once more distinguish between the familiar type and the critical, for which new opportunities were furnished by two different kinds of journal, the magazine and the critical review. Blackwood's Magazine was founded in 1817, the London Magazine in 1820; and both of them, espe

cially the latter, did much to develop the essay of the more informal kind. With the former is especially associated the work of John Wilson, whose pen-name was "Christopher North." Wilson wrote very abundantly, and through a long series of years, but rarely put his compositions into the brief and finished form characteristic of the true essay; one therefore finds his most interesting work in the rambling talks of the Noctes Ambrosiana (conversations called "Ambrosial Nights") rather than in pieces which can be selected for separate printing. The London Magazine had the honor of printing some of the best work of the essayists Hazlitt and De Quincey, and, above all, the Elia Essays of Charles Lamb. There was also a group of periodicals edited by the brothers John and Leigh Hunt; and for these Leigh Hunt, as well as his friend Hazlitt and other essayists, wrote informal papers on both literature and life. The result was a larger body of writing in this form than had been seen before at one time, and its quality remains unexcelled.

Charles Lamb, by common consent, is the chief master of the English familiar essay, and the most brilliant practitioner in that form since Montaigne. For this type, as we have seen, individual personality counts most, and Lamb chanced to have just the personality required for the finest results: he was whimsical in his tastes, sometimes fantastic in imagination, yet always showed a sound judgment which penetrated his foibles with solid wisdom. He was a great reader, and had the art of pouring into his writing the flavor of the masters of English prose, without seeming to write in any other style than his own. Above all, he was like a child in the simple and curious interest which he showed in people and things. Hence whatever he wrote of became interesting when seen through his eyes, and, whether he makes the reader grow serious or smiling, his personality remains charmingly companionable. William Hazlitt, his contemporary in the same field, is like Lamb in the richness of his interest and

in the skill with which he brings together in the essay form the results of his reading and his personal experiences. His personality, however, is less agreeable; he was a somewhat fretful and wayward person, who, falling short of the sweet and sound character of Lamb, falls short correspondingly in his work. Moreover, he did not have the art of doing finely finished work in brief space, but let his pen run on with little sense of definite plan or end. Hence one of his essays is like a piece of tapestry of no definite pattern, which can therefore be cut into lengths of varying dimensions without injury; whereas one of Lamb's is more likely to resemble a tapestry complete in itself. Yet despite these things, Hazlitt is an essayist of great importance, and the substance of his writings is so full and varied that one may take them up day after day for many days, always certain of coming upon ideas fresh and worth while. The third of these magazine essayists of the period, Leigh Hunt, is like Lamb in his amiability, and like Hazlitt in the rambling and uncertain quality of his art. His essays are almost always agreeable, but rarely the very best of their kind.

The other type of periodical, the critical, is represented chiefly by the Edinburgh Review and the Quarterly Review, founded respectively in 1802 and 1809. These journals devoted themselves chiefly to book notices, but they made of them much more than brief descriptions; those who wrote the reviews were encouraged to develop them into extended discussions of whatever subject was suggested by the book in hand. The result was a new type of essay. Of the review editors the greatest was Francis Jeffrey, who was connected with the Edinburgh from its beginning until 1829; his own critical essays are among the most readable of the period. In 1825, however, he found a young contributor whose fame soon surpassed his own. This was Thomas Babington Macau- ✔ lay, who began his career with a review of a recently discovered work of Milton's, from which he branched out,

cially the latter, did much to develop the essay of the more informal kind. With the former is especially associated the work of John Wilson, whose pen-name was "Christopher North." Wilson wrote very abundantly, and through a long series of years, but rarely put his compositions into the brief and finished form characteristic of the true essay; one therefore finds his most interesting work in the rambling talks of the Noctes Ambrosiana (conversations called "Ambrosial Nights") rather than in pieces which can be selected for separate printing. The London Magazine had the honor of printing some of the best work of the essayists Hazlitt and De Quincey, and, above all, the Elia Essays of Charles Lamb. There was also a group of periodicals edited by the brothers John and Leigh Hunt; and for these Leigh Hunt, as well as his friend Hazlitt and other essayists, wrote informal papers on both literature and life. The result was a larger body of writing in this form than had been seen before at one time, and its quality remains unexcelled.

Charles Lamb, by common consent, is the chief master of the English familiar essay, and the most brilliant practitioner in that form since Montaigne. For this type, as we have seen, individual personality counts most, and Lamb chanced to have just the personality required for the finest results: he was whimsical in his tastes, sometimes fantastic in imagination, yet always showed a sound judgment which penetrated his foibles with solid wisdom. He was a great reader, and had the art of pouring into his writing the flavor of the masters of English prose, without seeming to write in any other style than his own. Above all, he was like a child in the simple and curious interest which he showed in people and things. Hence whatever he wrote of became interesting when seen through his eyes, and, whether he makes the reader grow serious or smiling, his personality remains charmingly companionable. William Hazlitt, his contemporary in the same field, is like Lamb in the richness of his interest and