what is not true, and what he must have known to be otherwise; he
does not dare to say what is true, and it is almost an aggravation
of this reproach, that he aimed to deceive posterity, and poisoned
at the fountain a stream from which another generation was to
drink. No defence has ever been set up for the fidelity of
Clarendon's history; nor can men, who have sifted the authentic
material, entertain much difference of judgment in this respect;
though, as a monument of powerful ability and impressive eloquence,
it will always be read with that delight which we receive from many
great historians, especially the ancient, independent of any
confidence in their veracity."--Hallam, _Constitutional History_,
8vo. vol. ii. p.502.

"His style is a little long-winded; but, on the other hand, his
characters may match those of the ancient historians; and one
thinks they would know the very men if you were to meet them in
society. Few English writers have the same precision, either in
describing the actors in great scenes, or the deeds which they
performed; he was himself deeply engaged in the scenes which he
depicts, and therefore colours them with the individual feeling,
and sometimes, doubtless, with the partiality of a partisan. Yet, I
think he is, on the whole, a fair writer; for though he always
endeavours to excuse King Charles, yet he points out his mistakes
and errors, which certainly were neither few nor of slight
importance."--Scott, _Life by Lockhart_, vol. v. p. 146.

Other opinions as to the noble writer will be found in the _Life of
Calamy_, and in Lord Dover's _Essay_; but I have perhaps trespassed too
much on your space.