Gallery by the Deputy Mayor. Sir William saw there a portrait which he recognised as that of George Buchanan, but on closer inspection he found it to be the portrait of Jeannin, president of the local parliament at Dijon. It was labelled Portrait de President Jeannin, 1540-1623, Ecole Française,' and had across the top of the painting 'LE PRESIDENT IANIN' in old capital letters. He made a note of this and after returning home wrote for the photograph of the painting which is here reproduced. That this portrait, the one at St. Andrews, and that in possession of the Buchanan Society are portraits of the same individual there can be no doubt. A comparison of these three here reproduced shows that the copyist of the St. Andrews portrait failed to reproduce the broad forehead of the original, and Raeburn followed the copy. Other differences will present themselves on a close scrutiny; the most obvious is the treatment of the collar. In the original this is almost equal in width throughout, and lies flat, with a straight front edge. In the St. Andrews copy there is a distinct decrease in the width at the back, and a curve on the front edge, both these characters are intensified in the Raeburn copy. In the original there is a depression from the dark. wrinkle on the back of the collar to the front, while in the St. Andrews copy there is an elevation continued to the curve on the front edge, and Raeburn has intensified this in harmony with the greater curve in the front.

The engraving by Woolnoth is an important witness as to the

1 It may interest the reader to know something of President Jeannin. He was born in 1540, and lived till 1623. He studied law and became a successful advocate. He was elected by the States to take charge of the affairs of Burgundy. The order for the massacre of the Huguenots on St. Bartholemew's day, 1572, he refused to execute. A few days afterwards the order was withdrawn. As an earnest Roman Catholic he joined the Holy League, believing that its only purpose was to advance religion. When he found that its objects were to secure the individual supremacy of the Pope, and to prevent the succession of the King of Navarre, the heir to the French throne, he separated himself from the League and became the chief instrument of its overthrow. Henry III. appointed him the First President of the Burgundy Parliament which held its meetings at Dijon. He was held in the highest esteem by the King, who afterwards added him to his Council. When Henry of Navarre ascended the throne, Jeannin was appointed his treasurer. He concluded a defensive alliance between France and the Netherlands in 1606, and in the year following he obliged Spain to recognise the independence of these provinces, and to conclude with them a treaty for twelve years. Cardinal Richelieu declared that he found the best instruction in the memoirs and negotiations of this great man, and that they formed his chief reading in his retirement at Avignon.

original Titian. The engraving was made, as has been stated, for Lord Buchan from his painting. It is a hard but true reproduction in all the specified details of the St. Andrews portrait.

It appears to me that one cannot hesitate to declare that the first copy of President Jeannin's portrait is that in St. Andrews University, and that this is the portrait that belonged to the Earl of Buchan, which was copied by Raeburn for the family of Drummikill and for the Buchanan Society.

WILLIAM CARRUTHERS.

Scotland in the Eighteenth Century'

WHAT

HAT precise period are we to understand by the eighteenth century in Scotland? The French reckon their eighteenth century from the death of Louis XIV. in 1715 to their great Revolution in 1789; while in England 1689 and 1789-the dates of the two Revolutions are generally accepted as the limits of the period. All such delimitations of human history must, of course, be more or less arbitrary, and are liable to be altered as the world changes its point of view. For example, the Middle Age, as we now define it, is not what was understood by the eighteenth century; as our knowledge widens and at the same time becomes more exact, there is a tendency to break up historical periods just as the astronomer with finer instruments breaks up the nebulae into individual heavenly bodies. Still it remains the fact that there are periods of history distinguishable from each other by certain broad characteristics that cannot be mistaken. We see these characteristics in the representative men of the time-in their prevailing mood and temper, in the subjects which interested them, in their manner of handling them. We have but to imagine any great man transplanted from one age to another to realise what is meant by the spirit of the age to which he belonged. Had Milton lived in the nineteenth century instead of in the seventeenth, could he have used the language he did in his controversies with Salmasius? Had David Hume been born in 1811 instead of in 1711, how different would his judgments have been on many things-on the historical import of religion among others. There is, then, such a thing as the 'spirit of an age,' and it may even be said that it is the historian's prime business to discover in what that spirit essentially consists. What are the representative facts, the leading tendencies, the main preoccupations, that mark off one age from another? In clearly discerning these and setting them forth in their mutual relations, the historian is helping us to understand 1 Lecture delivered in the University of Edinburgh, (Oct. 1908).