Amenities of Literature Consisting of Sketches and Characters of English Literature — A Reader’s Guide
Edition facts
Before opening Amenities of Literature Consisting of Sketches and Characters of English Literature — A Reader’s Guide, the edition data offers a quick orientation: 282,702 words, 20 hr 30 min estimated reading time, and 34 detected text sections.
The text analysis averages about 27.7 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.
Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “English literature -- History and criticism,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.
Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.
How this score is calculated
- Description quality20 pts
- Title & short description10 pts
- Source metadata20 pts
- Text length15 pts
- Chapters / structure15 pts
- EPUB file integrity20 pts
Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.
Read the Text
were older than the Jews.
Whence and when the British Druids transplanted themselves to this lone world amid the ocean, bringing with them all the wisdom of far antiquity, to an uncivilized race, is one of those events in the history of man which no historian can write. It is evident that they long preserved what they had brought; since the Druids of Gaul were fain to resort to the Druids of Britain to renovate their instruction.
The Druids have left no record of themselves; they seem to have disdained an immortality separate from the existence of their order; but the shadow of their glory is reflected for ever in the verse of Lucan, and the prose of Cæsar. The poet imagined that if the knowledge of the gods was known to man, it had been alone revealed to these priests of Britain. The narrative of the historian is comprehensive, but, with all the philosophical cast of his mind and the intensity of his curiosity, Cæsar was not a Druid;[9] and only a Druid could have written--had he dared!--on DRUIDHEACHT--a sacred, unspeakable word at which the people trembled in their veneration.
The British Druids constituted a sacred and a secret society, religious, political, and literary. In the rude mechanism of society in a state of pupilage, the first elements of government, however gross, or even puerile, were the levers to lift and to sustain the unhewn masses of the barbaric mind. Invested with all privileges and immunities, amid that transient omnipotence which man in his first feeble condition can confer, the wild children of society crouched together before those illusions which superstition so easily forges; but the supernatural dominion lay in the secret thoughts of the people; the marauder had not the daring to touch the open treasure as it lay in the consecrated grove; and a single word from a Druid for ever withered a human being, "cut down like grass." The loyalty of the land was a religion of wonder and fear, and to dispute with a Druid was a state crime.
They were a secret society, for whatever was taught was forbidden to be written; and not only their doctrines and their sciences were veiled in this sacred obscurity, but the laws which governed the community were also oral. For the people, the laws, probably, were impartially administered; for the Druids were not the people, and without their sympathies, these judges at least sided with no party. But if these sages, amid the conflicting interests of the multitude, seemed placed above the vicissitudes of humanity, their own more solitary passions were the stronger, violently compressed within a higher sphere: ambition, envy, and revenge, those curses of nobler minds, often broke their dreams. The election of an Arch-Druid was sometimes to be decided by a battle. Some have been chronicled by a surname which indicates a criminal. No king could act without a Druid by his side, for peace or war were on his lips; and whenever the order made common cause, woe to the kingdom![10] It was a terrible hierarchy. The golden knife which pruned the mistletoe beneath the mystic oak, immolated the human victim.
The Druids were the common fathers of the British youth, for they were the sole educators; but the genius of the order admitted of no inept member. For the acolyte unendowed with the faculty of study all initiation ceased; nature herself had refused this youth the glory of Druidism; but he was taught the love of his country. The Druidical lyre kindled patriotism through the land, and the land was saved--for the Druids!
The Druidical custom of unwritten instruction was ingeniously suggested by Cicero, as designed to prevent their secret doctrines from being divulged to those unworthy or ill fitted to receive them, and to strengthen the memory of their votaries by its continued exercise; but we may suspect, that this barbarous custom of this most ancient sodality began at a period when they themselves neither read nor wrote, destitute of an alphabet of their own; for when the Druids had learned from the Greeks their characters, they adopted them in all their public and private affairs. We learn that the Druidical sciences were contained in twenty thousand verses, which were to prompt their perpetual memory. Such traditional science could not be very progressive; what was to be got by rote no disciple would care to consider obsolete, and a century might elapse without furnishing an additional couplet. The Druids, like some other institutions of antiquity, by not perpetuating their doctrines, or their secrets, in this primeval state of theology and philosophy, by writing, have effectually concealed their own puerile simplicity. But the monuments of a people remain to perpetuate their character. We may judge of the genius or state of the Druidical arts and sciences by such objects. We are told that the Druids were so wholly devoted to nature, that they prohibited the use of any tool in the construction of their rude works; all are unhewn masses, or heaps of stones; such are their cairns and cromleches and corneddes, and that wild architecture whose stones hang on one another, still frowning on the plains of Salisbury.[11] A circle of stones marked the consecrated limits of the Druidical tribunal; and in the midst a hillock heaped up for the occasion was the judgment-seat. Here, in the open air, in "the eye of light and the face of the sun," to use the bardic style, the decrees were pronounced, and the Druids harangued the people. Such a scene was exhibited by the Hebrew patriarchs, from whom some imagined these Druids descended; but whether or not the Celtic be of this origin we must not decide by any analogous manners or customs, because these are nearly similar, wherever we trace a primitive race--so uniform is nature, till art, infinitely various, conceals nature herself.
In the depth of antiquity, misty superstition and pristine tradition gave a false magnitude to the founders of human knowledge; and our own literary historians who have been over-curious about "the Genesis" of their antiquities, have inveigled us into the mystic groves of Druidism in all their cloudy obscurity. The "Antiquities of the University of Oxford" open with "the Originals of Learning in this Nation;" and our antiquary discerns the first shadowings of the University of Oxford in "the universal knowledge" of the Druidical institution in "ethics, politics, civil law, divinity, and poetry." Such are the reveries of an antiquary.
[2] The existence of these _giants_ was long historical, and their real origin was in the fourth verse of the fifth chapter of Genesis, which no commentator shall ever explain. AYLET SAMMES in his "Britannia Antiqua Illustrata, or the Antiquities of Ancient Britain derived from the Phoenicians," has particularly noticed "two teeth of a certain giant, of such a huge bigness, that two hundred such teeth as men now-a-days have might be cut out of them." Becanus and Camden had however observed, that "_the bones of sea-fish_ had been taken for _giants' bones_;--but can it be rationally supposed that men ever entombed fishes?" triumphant in his arguments, exclaims Aylet Sammes. The revelations of geology had not yet been surmised, even by those who had discovered that giants were but sea-fish. So progressive is all human knowledge.
[3] The miraculous event was perpetuated by the whole Teutonic people, "while it was fresh in their memories," as our honest Saxon asserts; hence to this day we in our Saxon _English_, and our Teutonic kinsmen and neighbours in their idiom, describe a confusion of idle talk by the term of _Babel_, now written from our harsh love of supernumerary consonants _Babble_; and any such workmen of Babel are still indicated as _Babblers_.--"A Restitution of Decayed Intelligence," 138, 4to. Antwerp, 1605.
The erudite Menage offers a memorable evidence of the precarious condition of etymology when it connects things which have no other affinity than that which depends on _sounds_. See his "Dictionnaire Etymologique, ou Origines de la Langue Françoise," ad verbum BABIL. Not satisfied with the usual authorities deduced from _Babel_, this verbal sage appeals to us English to demonstrate the natural connexion between _Babbling and Childishness_; for thus he has shrewdly opined "The English in this manner have _Babble_ and _Baby_!"
After all the convulsion of lips at Babel, and confusion among the etymologists, the word is Hebrew, which with a few more such are found in many languages.
[4] Julia, the empress of Severus, once in raillery remonstrated with a British female against this singular custom, which annulled every connubial tie. The British woman, whose observation had evidently been enlarged during her visit to Rome, retorted by her disdain of the more polished corruption of the greater nation. "We British women greatly differ from the Roman ladies, for we follow in public the men whom we esteem the most worthy, while the Roman women yield themselves secretly to the vilest of men."
Such was the noble sentiment which broke forth from a lady of savage education--it was, however, but a savage's view of social life. This female Briton had not felt how much remained of life which she had not taken into her view; when the attractions of her sex had ceased, and the season of flowers had passed, she was left without her connubial lord amid a progeny who had no father.
[5] This practice of savage races may have originated in a natural circumstance. The naked body by this slight covering is protected from the atmosphere, from insects, and other inconveniences to which the unclothed are exposed. But though it may not have been considered merely as personal finery, which seems sometimes to have been the case, it became a refinement of barbarism when they painted their bodies frightfully to look terrible to the enemy.
[6] See Mr. Tate's twelve questions about the Druids, with Mr. Jones's answers; a learned Welsh scholar who commented on the ancient laws of his nation.--Toland's "History of the Druids."
A later Welsh scholar affirms, "beyond all doubt there has been an era when science diffused a light among the Cymry--in a very early period of the world."--Owen's "Heroic Elegies of Llywarç Hen." Preface, xxi.
This style is traditional and still kept up among Welsh and Irish scholars, who seem familiar with an antiquity beyond record.
[7] Toland's "History of the Druids" in his Miscellaneous Works, ii. 163.
[8] "The Celtic Druids, or an Attempt to show that the Druids were the Priests of Oriental Colonies, who emigrated from India." By Godfrey Higgins, Esq. London, 1829.
This is a quarto volume abounding with recondite researches and many fancies. It is more repulsive, by the absurd abuse of "the Christian priests who destroyed their (the Druids') influence, and unnerved the arms of their gallant followers." There are philosophical fanatics!
[9] Cæsar was a keen observer of the Britons. He characterizes the Kentish men, _Ex his omnibus longè sunt humanissimi_,--"Of all this people the Kentish are far the most humane." Cæsar describes the British boats to have the keel and masts of the lightest wood, and their bodies of wicker covered with leather; and the hero and sage was taught a lesson by the barbarians, for Cæsar made use of these in Spain to transport his soldiers,--a circumstance which Lucan has recorded. In the size and magnitude of Britain, confiding to the exaggerated accounts of the captives, he was mistaken; but he acknowledges, that many things he heard of, he had not himself observed.
[10] Toland's "Hist. of the Druids," 56.
[11] The origin of Stonehenge is as unknown as that of the Pyramids. As it is evident that those huge masses could not have been raised and fixed without the machinery of art, Mr. Owen, the Welsh antiquary, infers, that this building, if such it may be called, could not have been erected till that later period when the Druidical genius declined and submitted to Christianity, and the Druids were taught more skilful masonry in stone, though without mortar. It has been, however, considered, that those masses which have been ascribed to the necromancer Merlin, or the more ancient giants, might have been the work of the Britons themselves, who, without our knowledge of the mechanical powers in transporting or raising ponderous bodies, it is alleged, were men of mighty force and stature, whose co-operation might have done what would be difficult even to our mechanical science. The lances, helmets, and swords of these Britons show the vast size and strength of those who wore them. The native Americans, as those in Peru, unaided by the engines we apply to those purposes, have raised up such vast stones in building their temples as the architect of the present time would not perhaps hazard the attempt to remove. "Essays by a Society at Exeter," 114.
BRITAIN AND THE BRITONS.
Britain stood as the boundary of the universe, beyond Which all was air and water--and long it was ere the trembling coasters were certain whether Britain was an island or a continent, a secret probably to the dispersed natives themselves. It was the triumphant fleet of Agricola, nearly a century after the descent of Cæsar, which, encircling it, proclaimed to the universe that Britain was an island. From that day Albion has lifted its white head embraced by the restless ocean, but often betrayed by that treacherous guardian, she became the possession of successive races.
Nations have derived their names from some accidental circumstance; some peculiarity marking their national character, or descriptive of the site of their country. The names of our island and of our islanders have exercised the inquiries, and too often the ingenuity, of our antiquarian etymologists. There are about half a hundred origins of the name of Britain; some absurd, many fanciful, all uncertain.[1] Our primitive ancestors distinguished themselves, in pride or simplicity, as _Brith_ and _Brithon_; _Brith_ signified stained, and _Brithon_, a stained man, according to Camden.[2] The predilection for colouring their bodies induced the civilized Romans to designate the people who were driven to the Caledonian forests as _Picts_, or a painted people.
That the native term of _Brith_ or _Brithon_, by its curt harshness, would clash on the modulating ear of the Greek voyager, or the Latin poet, seems probable, for by them it was amplified. And thus we owe to sonorous antiquity the name now famous as their own, for BRITANNIA first appeared in their writings, bequeathed to us by the masters of the world as their legacy of glory.
To the knowledge of the Romans the island exceeded in magnitude all other islands; and they looked on this land with pride and anxiety, while they dignified Britain as the "Roman island." The Romans even personified the insular Genius with poetic conceptions. Britannia is represented as a female seated on a rock, armed with a spear, or leaning on a prow, while the ship beside her attests her naval power. We may yet be susceptible of the prophetic flattery, when we observe the Roman has also seated her on a globe, with the symbol of military power, and the ocean rolling under her feet.[3]
The tale of these ancient Britons who should have been our ancestors is told by the philosophical historian of antiquity. Under successive Roman governors they still remained divided by native factions: "A circumstance," observes Tacitus, "most useful for us, among such a powerful people, where each combating singly, all are subdued." A century, as we have said, had not elapsed from the landing of Cæsar to the administration of Agricola. That enlightened general changed the policy of former governors; he allured the Britons from their forest retreats and reedy roofs to partake of the pleasures of a Roman city--to dwell in houses, to erect lofty temples, and to indulge in dissolving baths. The barbarian who had scorned the Roman tongue now felt the ambition of Roman eloquence; and the painted Briton of Cæsar was enveloped in the Roman toga. Severus, in another century after Agricola, as an extraordinary evidence of his successful government, appealed to Britain--"Even the Britons are quiet!" exclaimed the emperor. The tutelary genius of Rome through four centuries preserved Britain--even from the Britons themselves; but the Roman policy was fatal to the national character, and when the day arrived that their protector forsook them, the Britons were left among their ancient discords: for provincial jealousies, however concealed by circumstances, are never suppressed; the fire lives in its embers ready to be kindled.
The island of Britain, itself not extensive, was broken into petty principalities: we are told that there were nearly two hundred kinglings, the greater part of whom did not presume to wear crowns. Sometimes they united in their jealousies of some paramount tyrant, but they raged among themselves; and the passion of Gildas has figured them as "the Lioness of Devonshire" encountering a "Lion's Whelp" in Dorsetshire, and "the Bear-baiter," trembling before his regal brother, "the Great Bull-dog." "These kings were not appointed by God," exclaims the British Jeremiah; he who wrote under the name of Gildas. Thus the Britons formed a powerless aggregate, and never a nation. The naked Irish haunted their shores, covering their sea with piracy; and the Picts rushed from their forests--giants of the North who, if Gildas does not exaggerate, even dragged down from their walls the amazed Britons. Such a people in their terrified councils were to be suppliants to the valour of foreigners; from that hour they were doomed to be chased from their natal soil. They invited, or they encouraged, another race to become their mercenaries or their allies. The small and the great from other shores hastened to a new dominion. Britain then became "a field of fortune to every adventurer when nothing less than kingdoms were the prize of every fortunate commander."[4]
We have now the history of a people whose enemies inhabited their ancient land: the flame and the sword ceaselessly devouring the soil; their dominion shrinking in space, and the people diminishing in number; victory for them was fatal as defeat. The disasters of the Britons pursued them through the despair of almost two centuries; it would have been the history of a whole people ever retreating, yet hardly in flight, had it been written. Shall we refuse, on the score of their disputed antiquity the evidence of the Welsh bards? The wild grandeur of the melancholy poetry of those ancient Britons attests the reality of their story and the depth of their emotions.[5]
We have spun the last thread of our cobweb, and we know not on what points it hangs, such irreconcileable hypotheses are offered to us by our learned antiquaries, whenever they would account for the origin or the disappearance of a whole people. The mystery deepens, and the confusion darkens amid contradictions and incredibilities, when the British historian contemplates in the perspective the Fata Morgana of another Britain on the opposite shores of the ancient Armorica, another Britain in La Brétagne.
The ancient Armorica was a district extending from the Loire to the Seine, about sixty leagues, and except on the land side, which joined Poictou, is encircled by the ocean. Composed of several small states, in the decline of the Roman empire they shook off the Roman yoke, and their independence was secured by the obscurity of their sequestered locality.
The tale runs that Maximus, having engaged his provincial Britons in his ambitious schemes, rewarded their military aid by planting them in one of these Armorican communities. To give colour to this tradition, the story adds that this Roman general had a considerable interest in Wales, "having married the daughter of a powerful chieftain, whose chapel at Carnarvon is still shown."[6] The marriage of this future Roman emperor with a Welsh princess would serve as an embellishment to a Welsh genealogy. This event must have occurred about the year 384. When the Britons were driven out of their country by faithless allies, Armorica would offer an easy refuge for fugitives; there they found brothers already settled, or friends willing to receive them.[7]
Isaac Disraeli’s Amenities of Literature opens with a preface that announces an ambitious design: not an arid narrative of books or authors, but a history of the human mind across time, tracing the rise, progress, and decline of public opinions. The work, left unfinished due to the author’s loss of sight, was edited by his son, Benjamin Disraeli, later Earl of Beaconsfield. The title connects it to Disraeli’s earlier Curiosities of Literature and Miscellanies of Literature, though the subject here has more unity of design. The preface introduces a key concept—the psychology of genius—by which Disraeli aims to reveal the secret connection between authors’ lives and their intellectual habits, moving beyond biographical dictionaries to explore the history of the individual mind.
Structure and Design: A Philosophy of Books
The preface outlines a work that ascends into a philosophy of books, where subjects, tendency, and influence over people discover their actual condition. Disraeli distinguishes between authors who are creators or creatures of opinion: the great form an epoch, the many reflect their age. This structural principle governs the collection, which comprises sketches and characters of English literature rather than a continuous narrative. The editor’s note indicates that the papers are a portion of a projected history, interrupted by blindness. The work thus presents itself as a fragment, yet one with a clear intellectual architecture: each sketch is meant to illustrate a great incident in national annals, following the steps of the human mind through time.
Recurring Images: The Eye and the Voice
A striking image recurs in the excerpts: the attempt to “paint the voice to the eye.” Disraeli examines various schemes to reform English orthography, from Pinkerton’s ludicrous scheme of adding vowels to Elphinstone’s experiment of writing words as pronounced. He notes that the eye bewildered in such uncouth pages finds customary errors more tolerable than perplexing innovations. The metaphor of the eye and ear recurs: our written language remains to the utter confusion of the eye and the ear of the baffled foreigner. This image ties the physical act of reading to the historical development of the language, emphasizing the tension between sound and script.
Movement Between Scenes: From Orthography to National Character
Disraeli moves fluidly from technical discussions of spelling reforms to broader reflections on national character. In the excerpt on orthography, he shifts from Pinkerton’s scheme to Elphinstone’s Scotch Scotticisms, then to the Elizabethan writers’ experiments, and finally to the authority of Parliament, quoting the great luminary of law that it can do anything except make a man a woman. This movement between specific examples and general principles characterizes the work’s method: each sketch or character serves as a window into the intellectual history of a people. The transitions are often abrupt, but they mirror the author’s aim to trace the steps of the human mind through the wide track of Time.
The Editor’s Role: Benjamin Disraeli’s Contribution
The edition is prepared by the son, Earl of Beaconsfield, who likely selected and arranged the papers. The preface, written by Isaac Disraeli, speaks of his design, but the editor’s hand is evident in the title page and the inclusion of the Project Gutenberg transcriber’s notes. The work is presented as a new edition, connecting it to the father’s earlier collections. While the excerpts do not reveal the extent of Benjamin’s editorial changes, the preface’s emphasis on the psychology of genius may reflect the son’s own interests. The reader should consider how the editor’s perspective shapes the presentation of these fragments of a larger history.
Readers approaching Amenities of Literature should expect a series of essays that reward attention to detail and patience with digression. The work is best read not as a comprehensive history but as a collection of inquiries into the intellectual habits of authors and the evolution of the English language. The recurring concern with orthography and the psychology of genius offers a unifying thread through the diverse sketches. Those interested in the history of criticism or the development of English prose will find here a distinctive voice, one that combines erudition with a personal, almost conversational tone.
Rereading Disraeli’s unfinished history, I kept thinking of his fascination with hidden forces shaping a story. That same quiet, almost mischievous logic seems to live inside The Wolf-Leader, where the folk tale turns inward and becomes something darker, more personal. It felt less like a companion and more like a familiar echo from a room I’d only half-remembered. The Wolf-Leader — Text and Context lingered with me that evening, like a candle left burning in a study long after the writer had gone to bed.
There are no reviews for this eBook.
How will you remember this book?
Save your reaction, strongest insight, and memorable passage.
Tanya Linda Stewart - 1 month ago
Dave Karen Summers - 1 month ago
Elizabeth Emily Henry - 3 weeks ago