" THE COURT OF PHILIP IV."
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPROTATOR."{
Sts,—In a review of "The Court of Philip IV." in the Spectator of November 16th, inspired by the writer's usual unfriendly feeling towards me and my work, the following words occur:— " It is based largely on five or six contemporary sources, from ` Hewers' Familiar Letters to the Memoirs' of Lady Fanshawe " ; and—" We can find little to justify a claim of originality, except in a few unessential details." To prove how untrue and unfair this is, it will suffice to say that more than seventy unpublished con- temporary documents, all transcribed by me for the purpose, are drawn upon and quoted in the volume, many of them long and important, as well as a large number of printed contemporary authorities practically inaccessible to English students. The portions of the book dealing with the diplomatic relations between England and Spain are mainly based upon the unpublished MS. note-book of Sir Arthur Hopton in the British Museum and the uncalendared correspondence in the Record Office. To deny originality to the work in such circumstances is an abuse of the reviewer's privilege, and, the reason for it being unknown to the many readers who look to the Spectator for unbiassed criticism, is apt to injure the work unjustly.—I am, Sir, Sc., MARTIN MIKE.
[Our reviewer did not wish to convey the impression that Major Martin Hume had not consulted a large number of original docu- ments, but rather that he had succeeded in extracting from them little of importance that was new. His account, for instance, of the years 1636-1637 is substantially the account of Rodriguez Villa. At the same time, the review implied that the not very accurate treatment of his sources must excite distrust. In the description of a quarrel in Madrid the Spanish reads : "y con tanto apeado don Francisco cogiO la espada de otro,"—"and with that Zapata dismounted and took the sword of a bystander." This becomes (p. 329) : "and with that Zapata leapt in a rago from his mule, and snatching a sword from a bystander JP This deliberate heightening of the colour cannot be justified. We think it better to pay no attention to Major Martin Humes attempt to discover the identity of his reviewer. We are strong believers in the anonymity of journalism. But anonymity cannot be preserved except by resolutely refusing all invitations to play the guessing game.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
