kespeare is as
much out of the category of eminent authors as he is out of the
crowd. A good reader can in a sort nestle into Plato's brain and
think from thence; but not into Shakespeare's. We are still out of
doors."

After all the homage which Emerson pays to the intellect of Shakespeare,
he weighs him with the rest of mankind, and finds that he shares "the
halfness and imperfection of humanity."

"He converted the elements which waited on his command into
entertainment. He was master of the revels to mankind."

And so, after this solemn verdict on Shakespeare, after looking at the
forlorn conclusions of our old and modern oracles, priest and prophet,
Israelite, German, and Swede, he says: "It must be conceded that these
are half views of half men. The world still wants its poet-priest, who
shall not trifle with Shakespeare the player, nor shall grope in graves
with Swedenborg the mourner; but who shall see, speak, and act with
equal inspiration."

It is not to be expected that Emerson should have much that is new to
say about "Napoleon; or, the Man of the World."

The stepping-stones of this Essay are easy to find:--

"The instinct of brave, active, able men, throughout the middle
class everywhere, has pointed out Napoleon as the incarnate
democrat.--

"Napoleon is thoroughly modern, and at the highest point of his
fortunes, has the very spirit of the newspapers." As Plato borrowed,
as Shakespeare borrowed, as Mirabeau "plagiarized every good
thought, every good word that was spoken in France," so Napoleon is
not merely "representative, but a monopolizer and usurper of other
minds."

He was "a man of stone and iron,"--equipped for his work by nature as
Sallust describes Catiline as being. "He had a directness of action
never before combined with such comprehension. Here was a man who in
each moment and emergency knew what to do next. He saw only the object;
the obstacle must give way."

"When a natural king becomes a titular king everybody is pleased and
satisfied."--

"I call Napoleon the agent or attorney of the middle class of modern
society.--He was the agitator, the destroyer of prescription, the
internal improver, the liberal, the radical, the inventor of means, the
opener of doors and markets, the subverter of monopoly and abuse."

But he was without generous sentiments, "a boundless liar," and
finishing in high colors the outline of h