The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1894-03-06
PROPHETS AND POETS
A CLAIM OF MENTAL CONNECTION IN
THEIR WORK.

Genius between the Ancient Writers and
Shakespeare.
In his studies In life and literature un-
der the title of "Biblical and Shakespear-
can Characters Compared" the Rev. James
Bell claims to break new ground. 1t is his
endeavor to establish certain intellectual
and psychical identity-a community of
genius, so to Speak-between the Hebrew
prophets and the British bard in that their
prophecies were poetic and his poesy was
prophetic.
1t is certain that Shakespeare's works
contain n large number of surprising fore
casts, realized by the discoveries and in
ventions of modern times; that he was
gifted with president perceptiveness, en-
aiding his minds eye to see ''the vision
of the world and all the wonder that would
be-" In this respect he was undoubtedly
akin to some of tho Hebrew prophets who
on their part resembled him in the faculty
of poetic conception displayed not only
conjecturally in relation to potentialities
of the unknown future, but descriptively
In connection with contemporary actuali-
ties.
These and other PARTIES of capacity in
men of genius belonging to different pc
RODS of time have ere now suggested them
selves to thoughtful minds without num-
Der. Hence, as Mr.. Bell remarks, no apol-
ogy is needed in these days for comparing
the prophecies of the Old Testament with
the plays of Shakespeare. "They may not
speak with exactly the same tone and Gu
dencc In their voices, nor appeal always to
the same sentiments and emotions. Never
theless they sometimes approach one an
other very closely, and their meaning often
runs i'll parallel lines" With n candor
rarely manifested by one of his cloth, the
reverend essayist frankly admits that the
Bible is no longer regarded by the major
lty OF intelligent persons as "a book of
theological dogmas, Il systematic body of
d1vlnity,a mere supplier of texts for preach
ers and professors. 1t is now felt to be a
book dealing with the passion of life, ap-
pcaling to the hearts of life in all men,"
These are characteristics which it possesses
in common with Shakespeare's works
MIR. Bell is not tho only interpretive
thinker who has recognized the existence
of these and other afIinities between
Shakespeare and the prophets, or who has
heard now and again some "of the III.
tenser notes of the Hebrew harp sounding
through the Shakcspearean drama" He
has, however, rs far rs we know, taken
the initiative in instituting immediate and
distinctive comparisons between Biblical
and theatrical heroes, his assortment of
whom would, in more than one case mp
a
strange incongruity. For instance he links
together Eli the prophet and Hamlet4he
Dane, as well us Saul and Macbeth, Jon
athan and Horatio, King David and Har-
ry of Monmouth
How Hamlet and Eli resemble one an
other is not Immediately manifest to the
average intelligence, while, ms Mr.. Bell
admits, the main points of unlikeness be-
tween them are prominent and outstand
ing enough. ELI was ut once high priest
and judge in confusing period of He
brew history. When we make his acouaint-
ance, he is already gray and old, dwelling
in Shiloh, where he performs his official
functions. We see that the failure of his
powers adds to the difficulty and pathos
OF MS position and perhaps serves to make
the more apparent to us his characteristic
weakness of nature"
Hamlet, on the other hand, is young,
cultured, possessed of Gre powers of re-
lection the more purely intellectual of all
Snakespearean characters.
$50 wide is the interval between Eli.
the gray bearded Hebrew, and Hamlet,
the youthful Dane, so marked are their
contrasts, that no connection seems posi-
Die between them, and yet there is COM
mon ground on which they meet and touch
each other in spite of all their points of
disagreement.
This common ground, according to Mr..
Bell, consists is like infirmty of charac-
ter and reveals q the action of the sclfsame
moral law" In either case the burden of
responsibility seems more than each of
them can bear.
Eli and Hamlet both discern what re-
quircs to he done, alike are warned by the
voice of admonition and hear the call of
duty, but they both break down on the
field of action. They fall in fortnight di-
rectncss and stcadfastncss of will in
promptitude and vigor of conduct Hence,
instead of bringing order out of disorder
and harmony out of dscor(, they make
confusion worse COMPOUNDED and become
involved at length in Ale tolls of wide
spreading, irrcmcdablc disaster" Like
Hamlet, Eli had not perseverance and CON
sistency of purpose. He betrayed tcnden-
cy to let things drift and to "unpack his
heart with words"
The prophet and the prince rescmbled
one another in being failures rs practi-
cal men," They knew we'll enough what
they ought to have done, but knowledge
with them did not become changed into
moral determination. "They missed their
mark by not doing the right thing Mt the
right time" From the above it may be
gathered that Hamlct's likeness to Eli, ms
defined by Mr.. Bell, is relative rather than
posltiVc a parity OF weakness, not of
strength; of defects, not of qualities.
Saul and Macbeth certainly appear to re-
semble one another more closely in story rs
well as in character than Eli and Hamlet.
The elected king of Israel and the Scottish
usurper, rs young men, were honorable
and valiant, kindly and generous. They
stood high in public estimation until they
began ITO yield to strange suggestions
to think and act for themselves alone, for
getful of the duties they owed to others.
neglectful of the responsibilities that be-