_, so admirable for the
time when it was written, is left untouched by the editor, not even
the notes giving any intimation of the great progress made in the
knowledge of the Middle Ages within the last hundred years. The editor
may have chosen to regard the work as a literary monument to be
preserved as it stands, and certainly it would require very extensive
if not entire recasting."
There would seem to be some misapprehension at the bottom of these
statements. No one, we believe, has ever undertaken to edit
Robertson's _History of Charles the Fifth_. Prescott appended to it a
long "Account of the Emperor's Life after his Abdication," and for
that reason it has been included in all subsequent editions of his
works. But no intimation has ever been given that the editor of
Prescott's histories had assumed the same office for Robertson. If any
one be engaged in editing _Charles the Fifth_, we can only wish him
joy of the task. We trust, however, he will not proceed on the plan
suggested by the _Nation_, of "recasting" the work in whole or in
part. Such a process could hardly be considered as proper treatment of
any literary production, which, whatever its demerits, should at least
be subjected to no worse perversions than those of dishonest or
incompetent criticism.
Pages:
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385