CharlesStrickland lived obscurely. He made enemies rather than friends. It is notstrange, then, that those who wrote of him should have eked out their scantyrecollections with a lively fancy, and it is evident that there was enough inthe little that was known of him to give opportunity to the romantic scribe;there was much in his life which was strange and terrible, in his charactersomething outrageous, and in his fate not a little that was pathetic. In duecourse a legend arose of such circumstantiality that the wise historian wouldhesitate to attack it.

But a wisehistorian is precisely what the Rev. Robert Strickland is not. He wrote hisbiography(3) avowedly to "remove certain misconceptions which had gainedcurrency" in regard to the later part of his father's life, and which had"caused considerable pain to persons still living. " It is obviousthat there was much in the commonly received account of Strickland's life toembarrass a respectable family. I have read this work with a good deal ofamusement, and upon this I congratulate myself, since it is colourless anddull.

讲到查理斯·思特里克兰德，生前知道他的人并不多。他树了不少敌人，但没有交下什么朋友。因此，那些给他写文章的人必须借助于活跃的想象以弥补贫乏的事实，看来也就不足为奇了。非常清楚，尽管人们对思特里克兰德生平的事迹知道得并不多，也尽够浪漫主义的文人从中找到大量铺陈敷衍的材料，他的生活中有不少离奇可怕的行径，他的性格里有不少荒谬绝伦的怪僻，他的命运中又不乏悲壮凄怆的遭遇。经过一段时间，从这一系列事情的演绎附会中便产生了一个神话，明智的历史学家对这种神话是不会贸然反对的。

罗伯特·思特里克兰德牧师偏偏不是这样一位明智的历史学家。他认为有关他父亲的后半生人们误解颇多，他公开申明自己写这部传记③就是为了“排除某些成为流传的误解”，这些谬种流传“给生者带来很大的痛苦”。谁都清楚，在外界传播的思特里克兰德生平轶事里有许多使一个体面的家庭感到难堪的事。我读这本传记的时候忍不住哑然失笑，但也暗自庆幸，幸好这本书写得实在枯燥乏味。