UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The Literary significance and critical reputation of William Bell Scott's autobiographical notes Crerar, Patricia Jeanne 1971

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1971_A8 C74.pdf [ 6.1MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093352.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093352-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093352-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093352-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093352-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093352-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093352-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093352-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093352.ris

Full Text

THE LITERARY SIGNIFICANCE AND CRITICAL REPUTATION OF WILLIAM BELL SCOTT'S AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL  NOTES  by  PATRICIA JEANNE CRERAR B.A. (Honours), University of V i c t o r i a , 1967 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Arts i n the Department of ENGLISH  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1971  In  presenting  an  advanced degree at  the  Library  I further for  this  shall  agree  scholarly  by  his  of  this  written  thesis the  University  of  that permission  p u r p o s e s may  for  be  granted  gain  of  /^Jt*,  for  for extensive by  the  It i s understood  financial  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a  British  available  permission.  Department  Date  fulfilment of  make i t f r e e l y  representatives. thesis  in p a r t i a l  Columbia  shall  requirements  Columbia,  Head o f my  be  I agree  r e f e r e n c e and copying of  that  not  the  that  study.  this  thesis  Department  copying or  for  or  publication  allowed without  my  ABSTRACT  As a background figure i n the Pre-Raphaelite  movement, William  B e l l Scott s u f f e r s from an unattractive reputation l a r g e l y because of attitudes expressed i n his Autobiographical Notes. his  Chapter One  of this thesis examines  l i f e and work, but although a chronological approach i s used, i t i s Scott's  wide range of a c t i v i t i e s and friends which i s given prominence. In Chapter Two,  Scott's Autobiographical Notes i s considered.  Scott's l i f e l o n g i n t e r e s t i n journal w r i t i n g i s traced as much as i s possible, using manuscript material i n the P e n k i l l Papers at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia.  The chapter then covers the actual e d i t i n g of the Notes by  William Minto, making the point that even before h i s book was Scott's p o t e n t i a l readers were prejudging  the work.  published  Manuscripts i n the P e n k i l l  C o l l e c t i o n provide the M a t e r i a l for these d i s c l o s u r e s . The three parts of the t h i r d Chapter are concerned with the shaping of Scott's reputation through prejudice and hearsay.  The "Rossetti Legend,"  as i t existed while Scott was w r i t i n g h i s Notes and u n t i l the time of t h e i r p u b l i c a t i o n , occupies the f i r s t part of the chapter. which developed a f t e r h i s book met  Next, the  public view i s examined.  controversy  F i n a l l y , Scott's  reputation i s traced over the eighty years since the p u b l i c a t i o n of his autobiography. The f i n a l chapter opens with a survey of Scott's r e l a t i o n s h i p with Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i .  Most of the attacks made on Scott's Notes were  prompted by h i s treatment of R o s s e t t i .  The survey suggests that Scott  both as f r i e n d l y and as useful to Rossetti as he claims to have been.  was The  second and longer part of the chapter deals with charges made against Scott by William Michael Rossetti i n the Memoir volume of his Family L e t t e r s .  Information  i n the P e n k i l l Papers proves on one hand that Scott d i d not  fabricate anecdotes, and that he kept back much information which would have been of i n t e r e s t .  On the other .hand, this material makes i t obvious  that William Michael R o s s e t t i , the authority of whose book rests on h i s f i l i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , d i d not t e l l the e n t i r e truth about h i s brother.  Scott's  Autobiographical Notes, then, should be s e r i o u s l y re-examined as a reference work on R o s s e t t i and the Pre-Raphaelites.  .TABLE OF CONTENTS  ABSTRACT  i - i i  INTRODUCTION  1-5  CHAPTER ONE i. ii.  The Autobiographical Notes of William B e l l Scott His L i f e and Work  5-32  CHAPTER TWO i.  Scott's Preparation of His Manuscript  ii.  E d i t i n g of the Notes by William Minto  33-47  CHAPTER THREE i. ii. iii.  The Rossetti Legend Controversy  Over the Notes  Scott's Reputation  48-78  CHAPTER FOUR i.  Survey of Scott and Rossetti Relationship  ii.  Defense of Scott against William Rossetti  BIBLIOGRAPHY  75-104  105-116  INTRODUCTION  It i s something of a novelty to present a project concerning secondary work by a minor f i g u r e as a l i t e r a r y t h e s i s .  a  The autobiography  of William B e l l Scott, however, forms a v i t a l l i n k between what a c t u a l l y took place i n the Pre-Raphaelite our understanding  Brotherhood and what h i s t o r y has shaped i n t o  of t h i s group of energetic and imaginative painters and  poets. Several factors influenced the undertaking of t h i s project. long standing c u r i o s i t y about the Pre-Raphaelites was  f i r s t stimulated by  e d i t o r i a l work that I did i n English 501 on some of t h e i r l e t t e r s . most important  circumstance,  however, was  that i n 1963  A  The  the U.B.C. L i b r a r y  acquired an extensive c o l l e c t i o n of manuscript l e t t e r s and journals found at P e n k i l l Castle i n Ayrshire, Scotland.  These had been roughly  catalogued,  but they had not been c a r e f u l l y read, and on the suggestion of Professor Fredeman I began working on l e t t e r s between William B e l l Scott and A l i c e Boyd, which includes about 620 l e t t e r s written between 1859 In concurrence with the work on manuscripts,  and  1884.  I began to read  Scott's published work, concentrating on the Autobiographical Notes, and I began to examine other w r i t i n g by and about the Pre-Raphaelites associates.  As more material was  their  covered, i t became obvious that there are  contradictions i n Scott's present-day reputation. i n h i s own  and  Although Scott was known  time as both a painter and a poet, to contemporary l i t e r a r y  critics  he i s a f i g u r e of scorn, and only the art c r i t i c s seem to have made any attempt to evaluate h i s contribution to the progress of English culture. Jeremy Maas, i n h i s V i c t o r i a n Painters, puts Scott i n a reasonable as an influence on the Pre-Raphaelite  group.  perspective  Also contributing to their fervor were the close social and creative relationships formed with leading literary figures, in which William Bell Scott (1811-1890) formed an introductory bridge, reflecting the idea of universality in the arts, which was central to their creed, the 'exquisite, patient, virtuous manipulation' of their work, the early divergence of their aims, in fact the sheer muddle of the thing (p. 125). Among writers on Victorian literature, however, opinion is definitely biased against Scott.  From passing reference in a survey work that Scott i s "hardly  deserving of study", negative comments about Scott range to Lona Packer's book-length thesis that his immoral behaviour led to Christina Rossetti's frustration in l i f e .  In each case, whether a writer merely accepts a  traditional view of Scott or tries to see him in a new light,  the criticism  seems to derive from the reputation of his Autobiographical Notes. my point of view, the books contained nothing offensive.  From  Yet Scott's  contemporaries took such a dislike to the book that writers s t i l l , after 80 years, hold the volumes in contempt. Two specific discoveries in this new material are important i f a radical shift in Scott's reputation is to be effected.  F i r s t , there is  nothing in Scott's unpublished letters to support charges that Scott was mean or petty, or that he possessed, eventually an envious disposition. Alice Boyd was Scott's closest confidante and his comments to her about his London friends are frank, precise., and often humorous.  Certainly he criticized  his acquaintances on occasion, but his c r i t i c a l observations in this private correspondence are seldom cruel or malicious; nor are they hastily made.  Scott's letters to Alice prove that his intimacy with the men  he  discusses in his Autobiographical Notes was not fabricated; moreover, the disclosures he makes in the Notes comprise only a part of his actual, and often vivid, experience with such men as Dante Gabriel Rossetti, as unpublished material reveals.  The second discovery of importance to Scott's reputation i s related to William Michael Rossetti's Memoir of Dante G a b r i e l , written i n 1895.  Because Theodore Watts, although claiming the r i g h t to be Rossetti's  o f f i c i a l biographer, had not produced a major work on h i s subject even twelve years a f t e r Rossetti's death, William R o s s e t t i , i n 1895, must be c a l l e d an o f f i c i a l biography.  himself produced what  An exploration of the dubious v e r a c i t y  of the Memoir, even though written by the chief authority on Rossetti's l i f e , i s a major l i n k i n proving that Scott's Notes are a valuable sourcebook for the period. In simplest terms, one can say that the Memoir seems almost to have been written as a reply to Scott's Autobiographical sense I t i s not t r u l y an unbiased account of D.G.  Notes.  In t h i s  Rossetti's l i f e ; the  filial  involvement of William, Dante Gabriel Rossetti's brother, constitutes a negative, rather than a p o s i t i v e , influence on the h i s t o r i c a l p i c t u r e of both R o s s e t t i and  Scott.  C e r t a i n l y W.B.  Scott was  not a major, or even an  important, f i g u r e i n the development of English l i t e r a t u r e . was,  D.G.  Rossetti  however, and the d i s t o r t i o n of h i s image which h i s brother's Memoir  achieves, gives a d d i t i o n a l weight to the need for r e i n t e r p r e t i n g Scott's autobiography i n an unprejudiced  light.  Scott's autobiography was died.  published  i n 1892,  two years a f t e r he  Because of Scott's r e a l i s t i c treatment of R o s s e t t i , and h i s lack of  deference to A.C.  Swinburne, the book received very harsh reviews, which  i n turn prompted a controversy of Chapter 3).  c a r r i e d on i n the public press  (the subject  At the time, William Rossetti took a minor part i n the  argument, making only a few objections to d e t a i l s of time, place, or i n t e r pretation.  The Memoir, written three years later- shows,however,  had been deeply affected by Scott's Notes.  that he  Early i n the Memoir, William  disclaims both Scott's authority, and h i s own  s e n s i t i v i t y to Scott's  point of view.  As the book progresses,  William returns more and more to  passages i n Scott's book, correcting d e t a i l s , c r i t i c i z i n g a t t i t u d e s , and f i n a l l y q u a r r e l l i n g outright with some of Scott's interpretations of events. In several instances, William questions Scott i s l y i n g .  i n such a way  as to insinuate that  It i s not s u r p r i s i n g that Scott's Notes have a reputation  as an u n r e l i a b l e source. If anyone was  d i r e c t l y responsible for creating f a l s e impressions  about Dante R o s s e t t i , i t was Scott.  his brother William, and not William B e l l  Information about Rossetti's paranoia, h i s delusions, and h i s  c h l o r a l h a b i t , i s e x p l i c i t i n Scott's l e t t e r s .  Yet one does not even  need access to these manuscripts to see that William's picture of h i s brother was  s e r i o u s l y d i s t o r t e d on several matters.  i s that the Memoir was  shaped by William's  What i s most s i g n i f i c a n t  compulsion to block  Scott's  exposure of Dante G a b r i e l , and that because of f i l i a l authority,  William's  book has gained a following while Scott's Notes have been consigned to the realms of h a l f - t r u t h .  In the past, scholars have been content to accept  William Rossetti's version as a u t h o r i t a t i v e .  The new  material on which t h i s  thesis i s based proves that such assumptions are i l l - f o u n d e d . Autobiographical Pre-Raphaelite  The  Notes of William B e l l Scott deserve to be revalued  source-book.  as a  CHAPTER  ONE  William B e l l Scott's L i f e and Work The reader who encounters Scott where he i s usually found, i n the footnotes or appendices to works on the greater a r t i s t s of the V i c t o r i a n period, i s generally content to leave him there.  As presented i n the usual  "thumbnail" sketch of a minor f i g u r e , Scott appears merely as a series of dates and publications summarized by the t r a d i t i o n a l note about displays i n the Autobiographical  Notes.^  the nastiness he  Here i s Scott i n miniature  —  the  Scott seen, for example, by the editors of the recently published Rossetti letters:  William B e l l Scott (1811-90) a r t i s t , art c r i t i c , and poet; younger brother to the painter David Scott (1806-49); taught at the Government School of Design i n Newcastle on Tyne, 1844-64; became a f r i e n d of D.G.R. i n 1848; contributed to The Germ; l i v e d near D.G.R. i n Chelsea, 1864-82; h i s posthumous Autobiographical Notes, published i n 1882, gave great offence to D.G.R.'s surviving r e l a t i v e s and f r i e n d s . ^  Yet the fact that Scott l i v e d long enough to f e e l that his l i f e was worth an autobiography, specifying i n h i s w i l l i n s t r u c t i o n s for i t s p u b l i c a t i o n , suggests that a closer look at h i s l i f e would prove i n t e r e s t i n g and valuable. While the h a l f dozen l i n e s of a biographical note are an absurd way  to mark a man's achievements, Scott's own story of his l i f e i s i n many ways  an unsatisfactory source of information about him.  His r e f u s a l to pay close  attention to chronological d e t a i l s accounts for much of the book's weakness as autobiography.  His decision to l e t inaccuracies pass was deliberate:  chronology i s of l i t t l e consequence i n these notes of mine. powers of memory I do not possess that command dates" preparing  "Exact  The p a r t i c u l a r  (Notes, I, 527).  In  the manuscript for p u b l i c a t i o n , Scott's editor, aware that the book  had h i s t o r i c a l importance, t r i e d to correct the obvious inaccuracies.  However  he was not t o t a l l y s u c c e s s f u l , and mistakes i n dating made the book vulnerable to harsh attack soon a f t e r i t s p u b l i c a t i o n . The b i o g r a p h i c a l usefulness of the volume i s further impaired by Scott's s h i f t i n a t t i t u d e s towards autobiography  at various times i n l i f e .  In 1854,  Scott completed h i s f i r s t "Autobiographical Journal", consisting of four  3 hundred f o l i o pages.  I t was probably begun about 1845, when he took h i s  p o s i t i o n at Newcastle, a time when h i s future was " f i r s t v i s i b l y s e t t l e d by profession and marriage,"  At the age of forty-three, he decided that h i s  preoccupation with j o u r n a l w r i t i n g was f o o l i s h , and wrote no more u n t i l 1877. In the Preface to the Notes, he explains h i s intentions i n t h i s early attempt at  autobiography: I have thought to understand myself better by t h e i r means. But i t has not been so, the d i f f i c u l t y i s too great. I t i s not impossible to do, but i f we could "see ourselves as others see us" the p o e t i c a l i n t e r e s t at least i s gone, the record i s worthless. (Notes 1,2).  The dominant impression Scott gained from re-reading h i s early book was that "I must have had a double: these documents were ..."  a creature personating me, whose w r i t i n g  When he decided i n 1877 to rewrite h i s reminiscences,  he nevertheless intended to incorporate some of h i s early passages into the text.  He restates h i s new purpose as " A l l I propose, then, i n these pages i s  to describe with some degree of accuracy some of the scenery of my l i f e , and of  the l i v e s of my dear and intimate f r i e n d s " (Notes, I, 5). Scott says he  w i l l burn the f i r s t j o u r n a l .  There are a few pages extant, however, which  suggest that the early j o u r n a l was indeed very d i f f e r e n t from the published Notes.  Lona Packer, who had access to some of the remaining journal pages,  wrote:  "we know from what fragments s t i l l remain of the o l d journal that he  had i n places confided to i t s pages emotional experiences of an intimate nature, and these confidences concerned  a woman."  Professor Packer's  thesis  that Scott was journal was love:  C h r i s t i n a Rossetti's secret love leads her to suggest that the  destroyed  because of comments such as Scott's d e s c r i p t i o n of  "a giddy dance of nature round the terminal i d o l , a rabies of-mad  incantations and gymnastic lunacy round and round the voracious The l a s t chapter i n the Notes was written i n 1882, Rossetti's death.  Scott says "My  i d o l . " (p.63)  the year of  work has not been Art for Art's sake, but  truth for truth's sake ... I s h a l l miss the l i t t l e task I have always f a l l e n back upon as an occupation pleasant retirement  i n the absence of any other more urgent i n t h i s  I enjoy" (Notes I I , 318).  abandon his involvement with autobiography.  However, Scott did not In the concluding  Boyd recounts that for his l a s t , i n v a l i d years, he was and i n t e r p o l a t i n g passages i n h i s manuscript. the present,  until  writing  about former f r i e n d s ,  Certainly there i s evidence that Scott  extremely d i s s a t i s f i e d with the tendency to g l o r i f y Rossetti i n the years  a f t e r his death.  But i t i s also a fact that Scott's Autobiographical  were a l i f e l o n g i n t e r e s t , and that the main work was death.  done much before  Notes Rossetti's  That the book went through various stages does cause d i f f i c u l t y i n  knowing Scott through his book.  The writer may  be the young man  Newcastle and London or his chronological counterpart, may  often busy re-writing  Scott's c r i t i c s , from 1892  h i s book as a chance to make s p i t e f u l observations  was  chapter A l i c e  l i k e to characterize him as a b i t t e r and envious old man,  expecially Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i .  really  be the older man,  i n Scotland, or he may  of energy i n  "the somnambule."  He  less ambitious, but wiser and mellowed at his retreat be the i n v a l i d heart-attack patient working b u s i l y  from h i s bed to change once more the statement of former years.  Scott was born September 12, 1811, i n Edinburgh, Scotland, the seventh of eight c h i l d r e n .  The f i r s t four children a l l died i n the year when  Scott's older brother David was born.  A strong r e c o l l e c t i o n f o r Scott was  being c a l l e d by the name of Lockhart, one of the boys of the e a r l i e r family. Scott's father, the best Scottish engraver of h i s time, had an engraving and p r i n t i n g o f f i c e near Parliament Square which seemed to the young boy h i s major i n t e r e s t besides " r e l i g i o n and the state of h i s pulse."  Scott f e l t  himself the f a v o r i t e of h i s mother i n s p i t e of her more obvious a f f e c t i o n f o r the children who  died before Scott was born, but he i s blunt about h i s father's  a t t i t u d e to him:  "He never expressed to me anything but i n d i f f e r e n c e ; always  i l l i n health, he never took any notice of me, a fact begetting a repellent f e e l i n g on my part" (Notes, I, 29). Scott says very l i t t l e about h i s brother Robert or s i s t e r Helen, but f o r David Scott, born i n 1806 and the only other member of the family gained recognition i n the a r t s , he expresses both love and admiration.  who  Scott's  Memoir of h i s older brother was a sign of h i s honour for David, and was perhaps meant to be read as a companion piece to h i s own  autobiography.^  David began h i s career as an engraver, with the production of a series of designs f o r Thomson's "Scottish Melodies."  He then took up painting,  and by 1830 he had become an Associate of the Scottish Academy.  Having  achieved "reputation and r e s p e c t a b i l i t y , " he spent two years working i n h i s chosen f i e l d , preparing h i s Monogram of Man  for p u b l i c a t i o n i n 1831.  he went to I t a l y where he t r a v e l l e d , painted, and wrote, presumably  In 1832, familiarizing  himself with the c l a s s i c a l works which h i s brother sees as having so much influence on h i s painting.  William says of David's taste: "The abstract  and the heroic were necessary, and [his] delight i n any p i c t u r e , poem or speculation rose i n proportion to i t s distance from the scenes and motives of  the present" (Notes I, 17).  On h i s return to England, David Scott was  further  honoured by h i s contemporaries with h i s e l e c t i o n to the Scottish Academy. In  1842,  David entered unsuccessfully the government competition f o r  mural decorations to Westminster H a l l .  William B e l l Scott defends h i s brother  sketches for h i s subject, which i n s t y l e repudiated the " c a r e f u l , bold academi German p r a c t i c e " but which r e f l e c t e d c a r e f u l study i n the medium of fresco. At the next contest held i n 1844, work i n the fresco medium.  David was nearly the only a r t i s t to submit  However, h i s work gained l i t t l e p r a i s e , though  i t s unfinished treatment provided a source of amusement (Notes  I, 168-9).  This second f a i l u r e was extremely discouraging to the a r t i s t and seemed, i n his  brother's view, to i n t e n s i f y h i s a l i e n a t i o n from "the amenities of the  p i c t u r e - l o v i n g p u b l i c " (Notes I, 216).  David then committed h i s a r t i s t i c  l i f e to accomplishing what he f e l t to be important, not what was deemed important by the outside observer. David's early death i n 1849 by h i s death as an a r t i s t .  was preceded, i n William's estimation,  While h i s personality was impressive and powerful,  and h i s c r i t i c a l sense acute, he was b l i n d to the "modern" p o s i t i o n of a r t : "What he was  c r i t i c a l l y weak i n , i n r e l a t i o n to a r t , was  i n the professional  question, the common sense and prudential conduct of h i s peculiar a b i l i t i e s " (Notes I, 263).  He compares h i s own  long l i f e and less spectacular career to  David's: Frangas non f l i c t a s was h i s unacknowledged law. I ... whose nature i n many ways i s exactly the opposite to a l l that, l i v e on s t i l l — t h i r t y years a f t e r he ceased to require the advice he never took — with something l i k e my o l d ambition of s e l f - c u l t u r e , i n which, a l a s , he, as an example to be avoided, p a i n f u l l y assisted (Notes I, 263).  William B e l l Scott's l i f e u n t i l 1850,  the date of p u b l i c a t i o n of  the Memoir, i s marked by a growing output of a r t i s t i c and l i t e r a r y works and  an increasing reputation as a person of a r t i s t i c authority.  U n t i l 1837, when  he moved to London, Scott remained i n Edinburgh, where he r e l u c t a n t l y assumed r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the family business.  However, he spent some time at study  i n the Antique Class at The Trustees G a l l e r y .  His early poetic endeavours  were mainly d i d a c t i c poems i n blank verse, and his "boyish ambitions" were such that he arranged an introduction to S i r Walter Scott, "the greatest Scottish poet of the day."  The encounter was  disappointing for William Scott,  then aged about 17, for the older poet's conversation was a P h i l i s t i n e " (Notes I, 74).  A f t e r the age of 20,  " l i k e the gabble of  Scott exhibited h i s  f i r s t p i c t u r e , a dark forest with a hermit praying, as i l l u s t r a t i o n to some l i n e s from Coleridge's Rime of the Ancient Mariner. 1833-34 and one may  assume that the set of etchings of Loch Katrine and  Trossacks, mentioned i n the Notes (I, 76), was Another aspect of Scott's early twenties the St. Luke's Club.  He gives the date as  also published at this time.  i n Edinburgh was  a painter's group,  The chairman of the club, Professor John Wilson, was  f r i e n d of Scott's uncle, and became William's kept one of Scott's poems, "The  " p o e t i c a l advisor."  a  Wilson  Burgher of Limoges," with the assertion that  he would t r y to publish i t i n Blackwood's Magazine, where he wrote as North".  the  "Christopher  The poem never appeared, but a long " o c t o - s y l l a b i c story" c a l l e d  "Anthony" written at this time d i d , when remodelled, f i n d i t s way (Fortnightly Review, July 1868). "sort of dithyrambic  into p r i n t  Scott notes w r i t i n g also at t h i s period a  laudation" on Shelley.  This was  published i n T a i t ' s  Monthly Magazine i n 1831.^ The  St. Luke's Club had given Scott a close friend i n William Shand,  and these two, with several other friends of s i m i l a r occupation, decided publish a l i t e r a r y annual. October 1834;  The Edinburgh University Souvenir was  to  published i n  i t contained contributions mainly by Scott and Shand, with a  l i t e r a r y sketch by David Scott, then i n Rome.  During this period Scott  was  incubating h i s poem that he met  The Year of the World.  It  w a s  around t h i s time too  Rosabell Bonally, the subject of one of his better poems (dis-  cussion follows, p.  13).  It has been suggested that with Scott's move to London i n 1837,  his  creative a c t i v i t y underwent a change, with his a r t i s t i c work becoming more important than h i s l i t e r a r y . ^  In order to support himself i n London, Scott  etched a s e r i e s of i l l u s t r a t i o n s for a volume of poetry i d e n t i f i e d only as Landscape L y r i c s .  The process of etching could, Scott f e l t , supplant  the  currently popular, but rather slow and expensive method of i l l u s t r a t i o n by engraving.  While his "painter's etchings" gained a t t e n t i o n , they brought him  l i t t l e money.  His second attempt, a Christmas c a r o l , found a publisher, but  brought meager returns, while his t h i r d , a series of pictures of the C i v i l War,  was  never accepted f o r p u b l i c a t i o n .  These f a i l u r e s with etching prompted  Scott to take up painting more s e r i o u s l y . At t h i s time i n London, landscape painting was to "a new  and i n t e r e s t i n g school of h i s t o r i c a l and,  and i l l u s t r a t i v e p a i n t e r s " (Notes I, 107). study which this "school" of painters was  l o s i n g i n popularity  loosely speaking, inventive  Scott mentions a new  habit of  acquiring, e s p e c i a l l y i n the f i e l d s  of architecture and costume, and which he saw manifested i n the work of h i s brother David.  Applying himself to the p r i n c i p l e of study, Scott produced  a p i c t u r e t i t l e d "The to a Mr.  Paternoster  Old English Ballad Singer," which he was  able to s e l l  for a moderate p r i c e , thus being able to sustain h i s  existence, i f but modestly.  Scott learned that impecuniosity  was  the  a f f l i c t i o n of nearly everyone connected with the arts i n London i n the 1830's. Another problem of the London a r t i s t , e s p e c i a l l y of a younger, a r r i v i n g man,  was  the d i f f i c u l t y of getting h i s works on view.  There was  at  the time one main e x h i b i t i o n g a l l e r y for water-colours and o i l paintings, the Academy, and the p o l i c y of "keeping-him-down" u n t i l a painter became a member  caused much uneasiness among developing for the unknown.  a r t i s t s , as well as serious anxiety  Another smaller g a l l e r y , the B r i t i s h I n s t i t u t e i n P a l l M a l l ,  was supported by subscribers, but i t was controlled by the keeper and, rumor had i t , h i s frame-maker son.  I t was here that Scott's "Old English Ballad  Singer" was exhibited'. Just as Scott had i n Edinburgh made acquaintance with a group of young men of l i t e r a r y ambition, so i n London he became part of a group of young men of a r t i s t i c enthusiasm, among them Richard Dadd, William Powell F r i t h , and Augustus Leopold Egg. He found his fellows i n London l e s s than e x h i l a r a t i n g i n several ways.  One disappointment was t h e i r adherence to  i l l u s t r a t i n g the popular subjects of the previous  two decades rather than  exploring the h i s t o r i c a l subjects for which they professed  excitement.  To  Scott's way of thinking, these men were,in addition, too r e t i c e n t about sharing t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l knowledge or problems. Scott elaborates:  On this l a t t e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c  " i t was a society of r i v a l s ; there were too many for the  chances of success,  too many f o r the small amount of fame and fortune to be  divided among them"  (Notes I, 110). I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t that Scott uses the  word "them" rather than "us". core a common need:  Yet t h e i r contact with one another had at i t s  the necessity of e x h i b i t i n g t h e i r pictures and of  undermining the overwhelming power of the Academy.  In 1841, Scott was i n v i t e d  to a meeting, chaired by Richard Dadd, which he describes as an example of many such attempts to e s t a b l i s h exhibitions or e x h i b i t i n g s o c i e t i e s . The Westminster H a l l Competition of 1842 and 1844 did make e x h i b i t i o n by nonAcademy men easier, by bringing before the public many capable but unheard-of painters.  Scott assesses h i s early London friendships o b j e c t i v e l y , suggesting  that among these men he never f e l t strong bonds that had existed with h i s Edinburgh colleagues, for when i t came time for him to leave London he d i d not  f i n d i t hard to abandon the r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n this c i r c l e . inates h i s " a l i e n a t i o n " further by remembering  However, he i l l u m -  "At the same time i t i s  possible my undefined character as poet, etcher, and even c r i t i c might with some of them have stood i n the way  of freedom of intercourse" (Notes I, 113).  Scott found h i s most comfortable companions i n this f i r s t period among the l i t e r a r y set. London there was  London  He asserts that i n the period of h i s going to  l i t t l e i n t e r e s t i n popular poetry or minor poets, p o s s i b l y  because the p u b l i c simply did not consider much contemporary poetry worth mentioning.  The great men,  Browning and Tennyson, were read and respected,  but f o r poetry of less than epic intent there was  l i t t l e interest.  Scott  says nothing of the poet-laureate Southey or of William Wordsworth who  v. . succeeded him i n 1843, yet perhaps this suggests no more than a young man's lack of enthusiasm  f o r an o l d man's poetry.  Scott's most valued and respected  l i t e r a r y acquaintance was Leigh Hunt, at t h i s time a man  of about 53 years,  l i v i n g f r u g a l l y but contentedly, and s t i l l concerned with l i t e r a r y pursuits as publisher of The Monthly Repository.  Through Hunt's friendship, Scott  published h i s poem "Rosabell" i n this magazine i n 1838.^ • ;  e>  This work, one of /  the poetry manuscripts he brought with him from Edinburgh, i s a dramatic poem in  f i f t e e n parts employing varied verse forms.  It describes and comments on  the corruption of a country g i r l by wicked c i t y l i f e ; following her  through  her l i f e as a man's mistress, as a p r o s t i t u t e a f t e r her abandonment by and to her death i n a charity h o s p i t a l .  The poem underwent several revisions  during Scott's l i f e t i m e ; the major one was a change of the t i t l e name to "Mary Anne."  This was  him,  and heroine's  suggested by R o s s e t t i on the grounds that the  second name was more appropriate and "true to l i f e " f o r a g i r l of t h i s s i t u a t i o n . Another friend of l i t e r a r y rather than a r t i s t i c i n c l i n a t i o n G.H.  Lewes, who  became editor of the Fortnightly Review (1865-66), and  the 'husband''of n o v e l i s t George E l i o t . ,  Lewes was a young man  was later  of twenty-one  when Scott met  him i n London, and the older man  i n the younger:  could see l i t t l e p o t e n t i a l  "I could not make him out of get a true glimpse of h i s  acquirements, holding by high and pure ways of l i f e and habits of body, which he ignored"  (Notes I,  Scott, who  130).  was  nick-named "Duns Scotus" by Lewes, was  working on a  series of designs i n o u t l i n e which i l l u s t r a t e d the progress through l i f e of a self-seeking man. showed him, his  Lewes was  very enthusiastic about the f i r s t design  and proposed to write an accompanying piece.  designs would become mere i l l u s t r a t i o n s  the designs were published i n 1851, was  When  as The Journey of Prince Legion, Lewes  w r i t i n g opera c r i t i c i s m i n the Leader.  suggestion  Scott, fearing that  declined Lewes' o f f e r .  t  Scott  Scott was  amazed by Lewes'  that he, and not the "melancholy" Scott had conceived  of the  c e n t r a l idea f o r the now-published designs, and had expressed i t i n a poem 8 which he found "detestable" i n retrospect. Another writer with whom Scott had contact at this time was C a r l y l e , although t h i s was  a much less intimate or amiable r e l a t i o n s h i p than those with  Lewes and Leigh Hunt.  Scott records that i n 1838  he published i n an obscure  V. magazine an a r t i c l e e n t i t l e d "More Letters of O l i v e r Cromwell."  He  describes  the a r t i c l e as a s a t i r e on Cromwell's s t y l e , and an i m i t a t i o n , done i n admiration  of C a r l y l e ' s w r i t i n g .  Hearing that the a r t i c l e had angered C a r l y l e ,  and wishing to p r o p i t i a t e , Scott sent him a l a t e l y published volume e n t i t l e d Hades or the T r a n s i t ; and the Progress of the Mind.  C a r l y l e , Scott admits,  acknowledged the book graciously, but framed i t i n what Scott took as an "arrogant  formula" which exposed him as a man  people he was  better and wiser than they.  of David Scott and C a r l y l e , also was  who  took pleasure i n informing  Dr. Samuel Brown, a close f r i e n d  among William's  acquaintances of this  period, and many times he helped Scott make valuable contacts i n the a r t i s t i c world.  Scott's reminiscences about the l a t e r years of h i s f i r s t sojourn i n London eventually focus on one important event; the Cartoon Competition for the decoration of the Houses of Parliament.  He writes of two close  f r i e n d s , Ralph Wornum and Thomas Sibson, with whom he took weekly sketching expeditions.  Sibson, who was not formally trained as an a r t i s t but who  could draw very accurately by i n s t i n c t , did not "presume" to enter the contest, but went to Munich to study and do i l l u s t r a t i o n s .  As a member of the sculptor  P a t r i c Park's " c i r c l e " , Scott met Benjamin R. Haydon, an a r t i s t he considers the most " s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t " man he ever encountered.  Scott elaborates that  Haydon was an egoist i n the extreme, having a kind of "vanity, i n t e l l e c t u a l and personal, which made i t impossible f o r him to regard any other man as the same species with himself ..." (Notes I , 117). Haydon's assumption art world."  Scott's impression i s based on  that he would be successful i n the "coming event of the  At a dinner party where Haydon was expounding h i s theories, Scott  objected and was made a source of r i d i c u l e .  He "revenged" himself, however,  i n a sonnet on Haydon published i n Poems by a_ Painter, a revenge which i n the Notes he r e c a n t s . ^ The Cartoon Competitions of 1842 and 1843, which awakened the p u b l i c to the many unrecognized a r t i s t s at work i n London, marked an important step i n the a r t i s t i c l i f e of London. B e l l Scott's way of l i f e . demonstrated  They also marked a change i n William  The f a i l u r e of h i s designs i n the second competition  to him the weakness of h i s p o s i t i o n as a professional a r t i s t .  Other misfortunes, such as the r e j e c t i o n of two pictures by the Royal Academy and the B r i t i s h I n s t i t u t i o n , and the f a i l u r e of the publisher of the I l l u s t r a t e d Book of Ballads, impelled Scott to accept a post offered him by the Board of Trade, and i n 1844 he l e f t London f o r Newcastle, to take up a mastership there i n the government School of Design. reason f o r his departure  Later i n the Notes he advances as another  h i s disappointment i n the art and poetry of that time  (Notes I, 251).  His personal reaction to the a r t i s t i c projects considered  important had become i n d i f f e r e n t to a degree that i t was not worth h i s b r a i n " i n such a struggle for popularity.  "working  In the opinion of the c r i t i c  John Gere, i t was probably h i s acceptance of a teaching job that kept Scott i n the lower ranks of p a i n t e r s . ^  In a sense, then, t h i s decision to leave  London could have been the f a t a l blow for Scott's career as a painter, although even i n retrospect Scott does not seem aware of this p o s s i b i l i t y . Another change i n h i s l i f e was h i s marriage i n 1838 to L e t i t i a Margery Norquay. The move to Newcastle was a change of l o c a t i o n and p o s i t i o n which anticipated an eventful s o c i a l and a r t i s t i c period i n Scott's l i f e .  His  occupation at the School was at f i r s t confusing, due to contradictions i n intent and p o l i c y , and to the influence of manufacturers on t h e i r workers, the intended students.  Faced with such rules as no drawing of the human f i g u r e ,  no geometry, perspective or mechanical, drawing, and no teaching of anyone intending to enter the Fine Arts p r o f e s s i o n a l l y , Scott i n many cases chose to ignore outright the statements of p o l i c y .  His connection with the School  of Design was s a t i s f y i n g to him, for he saw the school and i t s usefulness develop over the years, and was aware of the influence of such programs on the a r t i s t i c taste of h i s nation.  In 1877, he could say, "the progress of  f o r t y years has made so large a d i f f e r e n c e , we may be said to be becoming p r a c t i c a l l y a nation of a r t i s t s , and as able i n general design for decorative trades as any people i n the world" (Notes I, 179). As he had done i n Edinburgh and London before, Scott made friends i n Newcastle with men of l i t e r a r y and a r t i s t i c a b i l i t y .  While h i s new  friends were of lesser importance to the a r t i s t i c world than h i s London acquaintances had been, he found t h e i r h o s p i t a l i t y warm and he was encouraged by t h e i r i n t e r e s t to resume h i s work.  His p o s i t i o n had given him both  domestic s t a b i l i t y and connections i n the art world, and h i s creative work f l o u r i s h e d i n these conditions. attended an anatomy class and,  In h i s early years i n Newcastle, Scott considerably refreshed by his new  again took i n t e r e s t i n landscape p a i n t i n g .  His new  l o c a t i o n , he  surroundings, Scott found,  had a f a s c i n a t i n g h i s t o r y and he began his Antiquarian Gleanings i n the North 12 of England at this time.  The book contains drawn and etched examples of  f u r n i t u r e j ' p l a t e , and church decoration with descriptions by Scott. t i o n of Antiquarian Gleanings i n 1851  Publica-  brought praise for the a r t i s t i n his  " f i d e l i t y to the o r i g i n a l " and a note of recognition to the School which employed hxm.  was  Scott's most important l i t e r a r y work of h i s early years i n Newcastle 14 ' h i s long poem The Year of the World ; " I t was my f i r s t and l a s t important /  act of l i t e r a r y enthusiasm, and quite an honest one"  (Notes, 1, 235).  Scott's  youthful enthusiasm for s e t t i n g the world r i g h t by his art i s r e f l e c t e d i n t h i s poem of 1846,  but at the time of w r i t i n g the Notes he f e l t the same  impulses s t i l l present dogma that i n no way  i n him:  "an antagonism to any form of art or any  aids advancement —  r e l i g i o u s " (Notes, I, 233).  s o c i a l , s c i e n t i f i c , a r t i s t i c or  In retrospect, Scott sees h i s i n t e r e s t i n  re-writing and publishing as somewhat obsessive, f o r he published quickly without reading i t to anyone e l s e .  the poem  However, h i s preface to the work  does not betray any frenzy but states that "the p u b l i c a t i o n of the poem possesses to the Author something of the i n t e r e s t attaching to the promulgation of a creed as w e l l as that of a work of art."''"'' The p u b l i c a t i o n of this poem and i t s reception by the few who i t foreshadowed for Scott, the l i m i t e d success he was  read  to have as a poet.  He  sees the period as a d i f f i c u l t one for poetic success, c a l l i n g i t a "time when no sane poetry could meet with a t t e n t i o n , when Tennyson scarcely paid, and Browning became u n i n t e l l i g i b l e " (Notes, I, 254).  In an attempt to deal with  t h i s lack of i n t e r e s t i n poetry, Scott sent copies of his work to h i s friends, and to prominent for  l i t e r a r y figures such as C a r l y l e and Samuel Brown, hoping  their responses.^  Many recipients simply f a i l e d to acknowledge the  book, presumably agreeing with the opinions of c r i t i c s who  conceded  that  although Scott apparently had some important purpose of mission, the poem was not l i k e l y to a t t r a c t many prospects.  November of 1847 brought Scott a  l e t t e r from the young Gabriel R o s s e t t i , and i t s immediate message to the older poet was  that, "I was,  i t seemed, not destined to be wholly unknown  at a s u f f i c i e n t distance" (Notes, I, 244). The l e t t e r proved to have a l a s t i n g importance to Scott, f o r h i s reply to i t brought a bundle of manuscripts, containing "Songs of the Art Catholic."  I f somewhat puzzled by the intent of the t i t l e , Scott was  extremely  impressed by the q u a l i t y of the poetry, and i n Christmas of 1847 he made his f i r s t personal acquaintance with R o s s e t t i , h i s family and h i s f r i e n d s . " ^  Seeing  t h e i r work and understanding t h e i r enthusiasm caused Scott to regret h i s leaving London for the more p l a c i d i n t e l l e c t u a l climate of Newcastle, for he c a l l s h i s f i r s t meeting "the beginning of a new  i n t e r e s t of l i f e to me:  from  them sprang a knowledge of many men and many f i e l d s " (Notes, I, 251). Scott sees h i s l i f e at t h i s point entering a new phase of growth, the former one ending with the death of h i s brother David i n 1849 and of his  mother i n 1850.  His mother's death l e f t him with no obligations to the  c i t y of h i s b i r t h and young manhood, and he determined never to return to Edinburgh.  At f i r s t h i s status as the only l i v i n g member of h i s family f i l l e d  him with a sense of o l d age.  This, however, gave way  to a f e e l i n g of renewal:  "I was dead and re-born into a more self-centered and freer existence" (Notes, I, 275).  It i s l i k e l y that the success of his Memoir of David Scott  R.S.A., and the publishing of h i s brother's a r t i s t i c designs, gave him the confidence which effected t h i s r e v i t a l i z a t i o n .  The period of "new  l i f e " began with the p u b l i c a t i o n i n 1850  of  the Memoir, followed by the Chorea Sahte V i t i ; or Steps i n the Journey of Prince Legion and Antiquarian Gleanings i n the North of England, i n 1851.  A  d i f f i c u l t y i n determining Scott's work i n these years r e s u l t s from Scott's s e l e c t i v i t y of material i n w r i t i n g the record of h i s l i f e . exhibited about twenty pictures between 1838  and 1869,  He  apparently  but he mentions few  18 p a r t i c u l a r s i n h i s Notes. The Germ, the " o f f i c i a l  Likewise, he f a i l s  to mention his contribution to  organ" of the Pre-Raphaelite  Brotherhood, and h i s  comments on this p u b l i c a t i o n would lead most readers to assume that although he was  asked repeatedly  he published  two  for contributions he refused to contribute.  In f a c t ,  sonnets i n The Germ, one i n the issue of March, 1850,  entitled  "Early A s p i r a t i o n s " , and another, "Morning Sleep" i n the issue of February, The  1850.  concluding l i n e s of the former poem are e s p e c i a l l y relevant to Scott's  view of h i s l i f e as entering a new  phase:  No More i n Pride to other ears he sings But with a dying charm himself unto: ^ For a sad season; then, to active l i f e he springs.  The year 1854  brought another p u b l i c a t i o n , a volume of verse  e n t i t l e d Poems, but more commonly known as Poems by a Painter.  Rossetti  had offered to prepare an etching as a f r o n t i s p i e c e , but never completed the promised p i c t u r e .  As he had done before with Hades and The Year of the World  Scott sent copies of the volume to friends and prominent l i t e r a r y f i g u r e s . This time, C a r l y l e did not ignore the book, but sent a note advising the poet to stop rhyming and s t a r t acting.  Scott r e p l i e d i n a s u i t a b l y perturbed  manner, and received i n return an apology from C a r l y l e who f r o n t i s p i e c e as "Poems by a P r i n t e r " and had advised  has misread the  the p r i n t e r accordingly.  If C a r l y l e ' s response to the book brought disillusionment, other readers were more appreciative.  Through his friendship with Samuel Brown,  Scott became acquainted with S i r Walter and Lady Trevelyan.  The review of  Scott's Memoir of h i s brother which appeared i n the Scotsman newspaper was written by Lady Trevelyan, and as i n t e r e s t i n him had been shown, Scott sent a copy of Poems (1854) to t h e i r home, Wallington H a l l .  This led to a  friendship of many years, which included the commissioning of Scott to decorate a newly-formed courtyard at Wallington.  The project, which was  arranged and begun by 1856, i s a series of eight pictures large enough to contain l i f e - s i z e f i g u r e s , i l l u s t r a t i n g the border.  the h i s t o r y of Northumberland and  These pictures were exhibited i n the rooms of the L i t e r a r y  Society of Newcastle, i n order of t h e i r completion. Scott's Wallington  commission brought him many new acquaintances  and Scott did h i s part by introducing former acquaintances to the Trevelyans. John Ruskin was introduced  to Scott at this time (about 1856) but no f r i e n d -  ship developed for t h e i r natures,  Scott found, were " a n t i p a t h e t i c " (Notes, I I , 8).  Around 1857, Scott met A.C. Swinburne, then a "schoolboy" of twenty years. Although the two men had an amiable, i f r e s p e c t f u l l y distanced r e l a t i o n s h i p while Scott was a l i v e , i t was h i s report of the f i r s t meeting with Swinburne which p r e c i p i t a t e d the outcry against his Notes and the subsequent  blackening  of Scott's name. Scott gave several other men the chance to share i n the Trevelyans' patronage.  Thomas Woolner, the P.R.B. member whose expedition to A u s t r a l i a  was a romantic disappointment, received a much needed commission to sculpt a marble group which would occupy the center of the h a l l . that the sculpture was intended  Although Scott says  to express or t y p i f y a l l the h i s t o r y that he  was painting, the f i n i s h e d piece was t i t l e d "Mother and C h i l d " .  Dante  Rossetti received a commission for a water-colour picture, "Mary i n the House of John", which was done i n 1858. Arthur Hughes was another who benefited  p r o f e s s i o n a l l y by Scott's introduction to Wallington  Hall.  The most important friendship i n Scott's personal l i f e was begun through his connections with Wallington 1859,  H a l l and the Trevelyans.  In March,  he met A l i c e Boyd, a lady of about t h i r t y years who wished to f i n d some  new i n t e r e s t i n a r t .  Impressed by her " i n t e r e s t i n g face and voice", Scott  says that, "I devoted myself to answering t h i s desire of hers, and from day to day the i n t e r e s t on either side increased" (Notes, I I , 57). A l i c e Boyd's brother was the l a i r d of P e n k i l l Castle i n Ayrshire i n Scotland, and Scott was the guest of A l i c e and her brother  Spencer i n the summer of 1860.  This was the f i r s t of many long v i s i t s and an eventual permanent residency by Scott.  The friendship became such that A l i c e spent the winter months with  Scott and h i s wife i n London, while the Scotts, or often j u s t William, passed the summer months at P e n k i l l with Miss Boyd.  Although Scott i s never  s p e c i f i c i n h i s Notes about the success or f a i l u r e of his marriage, i t i s c l e a r that he considered A l i c e Boyd, rather than L e t i t i a , his wife, the loving companion i n h i s l i f e .  Scott's v i s i t s and correspondence with. A l i c e were not,  at any rate, i n t e r f e r e d with by h i s m a r i t a l status.  Some of the most i n t e r e s t i n g  and informative l e t t e r s i n the P e n k i l l Papers are part of the extensive correspondence between Scott and A l i c e .  In Scott's l e t t e r s e s p e c i a l l y , t h e i r  close friendships with the Pre-Raphaelite  members are d i s c l o s e d , and a l l the  l e t t e r s between Scott and A l i c e are e s p e c i a l l y valuable f o r t h e i r honesty and plainness of expression on personal matters. Before h i s return to London i n 1864, Scott had published some art criticism.  As a master i n the Government School, he had begun, i n 1859, to  lecture to his classes of senior students.  These l e c t u r e s , c o l l e c t e d under  the t i t l e of Half-Hour Lectures on the History and P r i n c i p l e s of the A r t s , were published in' 1861.  That t h i s was Scott's f i r s t p u b l i c a t i o n i n art  c r i t i c i s m i s u n l i k e l y , for the f i r s t l e t t e r from Rossetti mentions a paper on Art i n the Monthly Repository  (Notes, I, 243).  In 1864,  Scott moved from Newcastle back to London.  With changes  i n the structure of the Government School imminent, he had resigned h i s p o s i t i o n , a move that he l a t e r decided was  a mistake.  Public meetings and  testimonials held i n honour of Scott's work i n Newcastle give evidence he had won  the general respect of the community.  More important  that  to h i s career,  however, are the two commissions for paintings which he received.  Sir  Walter Trevelyan, apparently pleased by the r e s u l t s of the large paintings, commissioned a series of pictures for the upper spandrels of Wellington H a l l . The subject  was  the b a l l a d of Chevy Chase, "from E a r l Percy's going out 20  to the bringing home of the dead".  These were placed i n 1870.  The second  commission was made through subscriptions by friends and colleagues, wished to commemorate Scott's service to the people of Newcastle. .£200 was  given Scott on h i s departure  who  Approximately  for London, and he f u l f i l l e d h i s com-  mission i n 1865 with a p i c t u r e e n t i t l e d "The Building of the New  Castle;  The O r i g i n of the Town." On e s t a b l i s h i n g himself i n London, Scott began to form around him a c i r c l e of f r i e n d s , contacting many acquaintances London.  of h i s previous l i f e i n  Of h i s former c i r c l e of a r t i s t s , F r i t h and Egg, had become Academy  members and Scott found t h e i r company generally uninteresting. the Pre-Raphaelite valued f r i e n d s . 1847  or 1848,  Brothers and their " s a t e l l i t e s " became Scott's most  Following h i s i n i t i a l contact with R o s s e t t i and Hunt i n  Scott had come to know Woolner, Munro, William Michael R o s s e t t i ,  Arthur Hughes, M i l l a i s , Morris, and Burne-Jones. well equipped with friends who literary  As a r e s u l t ,  In London again he  could stimulate both h i s a r t i s t i c  was  and  impulses. His next twenty years were h i s most productive, e s p e c i a l l y i n the  f i e l d of art h i s t o r y and c r i t i c i s m . period were revised i n 1867  The Half-Hour Lectures of the Newcastle  and again i n 1874.  His poem "Anthony" was  published  i n 1868,  i n the F o r t n i g h t l y Review.  During the f i r s t years a f t e r  h i s return to London, Scott was working on a book about Albert Durer, c o l l e c t i n g p r i n t s by t h i s a r t i s t and doing etchings of his own to act as illustrations.  The book, published i n 1869,  was  intended  to provide for the  B r i t i s h p u b l i c an authentic account of Durer*s l i f e and works.  In h i s Preface  to the volume, Scott comments that considering Durer's popularity i n England, i t i s quite remarkable that "no English book about Albert Durer, no complete t r a n s l a t i o n of h i s Journal, L e t t e r s , and other pieces, no catalogue or c r i t i c a l 21 account of h i s works, should have yet appeared." considered  h i s book "antiquated  By 1882,  however, Scott  by the rapidly-developing Durer l i t e r a t u r e i n  Germany" (Notes, I I , 193). The year 1870  began a decade of intensive publishing, commencing with  an a r t i c l e i n the F o r t n i g h t l y Review on "Ornamental Art i n England."  Scott's  p o s i t i o n i n t h i s a r t i c l e i s that "a higher appreciation and f e e l i n g f o r the b e a u t i f u l , and for the moral uses of taste, w i l l simplify a l l our a p p l i c a t i o n 22 of ornament." His a r t i c l e explains how the Government Schools of Design e s p e c i a l l y have attempted to do t h i s . In March of t h i s year, he contributed i  a note on Ebenezer Jones to Notes and Queries.  The  following year, 1871,  two more minor p u b l i c a t i o n s , one a report on "Miscellaneous report on the London International E x h i b i t i o n of this year.  brought  A r t " i n an o f f i c i a l The second  was  a review i n Fraser's Magazine t i t l e d "The Art Season of 1871," i n which Scott discussed the possible harm to English art r e s u l t i n g from the i n f l u x of French a r t i s t s into England.  Scott's major p u b l i c a t i o n i n this year was  book, Gems of French A r t , which he described as a picture-book, Pictures done i n small."  his  "a Gallery of  He attempts to i l l u s t r a t e , by sixteen p r i n t s and  h i s comments on them, the state of contemporary French' h i s t o r i c a l and art which he considers i n f e r i o r to.English art of the same period.  "genre"  A criticism  of English a r t i s t s comes through, however, i n h i s discussion of the French  a r t i s t s ' capacity for unity of sentiment and colour.  He says of the  new  English painters "the t e r r i b l e , the t r a g i c , or the pathetic seem a l l impossible  i n presence of the trumpery seductions  of bright colours or 23  'charming b i t s ' of colour by way The next year, 1872,  of r e l i e v i n g the sadness of the monotony."  Scott published  three books on a r t :  The  B r i t i s h School of Sculpture with twenty engravings and f i f t y woodcuts; Our B r i t i s h Landscape Painters with sixteen engravings, and a book on 24 modern Belgian art s i m i l a r to the previous volume on French a r t .  In  1873  he brought out M u r i l l o and the Spanish School of Painting, with, f i f t e e n engravings and nineteen woodcuts, and a volume on modern German a r t .  This  year also brought the f i r s t of several editions of poetry with a memoir and i l l u s t r a t i o n s by Scott.  The editions of Keats, and of L e t i t i a E l i z a b e t h  Landon i n t h i s year, were followed i n 1874 Coleridge.  by editions of Byron, Shelley  and  In t h i s general period, although the dates are uncertain, are  two books of pictures with notices of the subject and painter, one oh Venetian Painters and one on The I t a l i a n Masters-Lesser and Scott's own  The  Greater.  a r t i s t i c talent came into the public view again i n  with Poems, i l l u s t r a t e d by himself and Alma Tadema. near p u b l i c a t i o n i n 1873,  The book was  1875  apparently  but Scott's decision to make i t an i l l u s t r a t e d book  delayed p u b l i c a t i o n u n t i l 1875  and perhaps also affected the number of buyers.  A l e t t e r from R o s s e t t i , which Scott dates as 1873,  encourages him to publish,  saying "such a moment i s the very one for such a piece of work as doing j u s t i c e to your p o e t i c a l chances once for a l l " (Notes, I I , 202).  Scott  acknowledges his gratitude to Rossetti's i n t e r e s t , and to the encouragement of Swinburne and Morris, i n his dedicatory sonnet.  Many c r i t i c s ,  Scott  reports r u e f u l l y , saw both the dedication and Tadema's etchings, as attempts of the poet to "bolster up II,  204).  [his] now  inadequate powers of pleasing" (Notes,  However, a l a t e r assessment, by the writer of the D.N.B. a r t i c l e  suggests that t h i s volume "marks Scott's highest point of achievement i n 25 Poetry"  because many of the sonnets had been anthologized.  Scott also  published an e d i t i o n of Shakespeare, and i n The Examiner published a review of Letters on Landscape A r t . While t h i s period of intensive publishing suggests to an objective observer that Scott had f i n a l l y found h i s place i n the l i t e r a r y world, i t was a discouraging s i t u a t i o n to the producer of a l l these works.  He had  been w r i t i n g , i n h i s art books, analyses of other men's success, instead of gaining renown for himself.  His work on editions of poetry had set him  w r i t i n g memoirs of poets who had gained recognition, while he remained a " p i c t o r ignotus."  His own volume when presented to the world brought  the  admiration of a few l o y a l f r i e n d s , but the scornful words of c r i t i c s accused him of attempting to gain glory through association with men ability.  who of proven  Scott dates an assessment of h i s l i t e r a r y work as taking place  before the summer of 1872, but as the books he mentions were published either i n t h i s year or l a t e r , i t i s l i k e l y the s e l f - c r i t i c i s m took place l a t e r . Looking back at the books written i n the previous years, he says they were "better than they deserved to be, and only made me f e e l that I was my time away, and was  throwing  i n danger of looking l i k e a l i t e r a r y hack; so I did  no more" (Notes, I I , 170). The l a s t f i v e years of the 1870's nevertheless brought more publications, i f at a slower rate.  Scott wrote the introduction to a r e p r i n t of  Albert A l t d o r f e ' s The F a l l of Man,  published by the Holbein Society i n 1876.  In the next year he published an e d i t i o n of S i r Walter Scott's Works, followed by William Blake:  Etchings from h i s Works, i n 1878.  In  1879,  he wrote an a r t i c l e i n Fraser's Magazine e n t i t l e d "A P o r t f o l i o of Ancient Engravings," i n which Scott leads the reader into the delights of a j u d i c i o u s l y assembled c o l l e c t i o n of engravings.  The L i t t l e Masters  appeared  also i n 1879,  as one volume i n a "Series of I l l u s t r a t e d Biographies of the  Great A r t i s t s . "  This l a s t book was  republished i n 1880.  Scott's l a s t  p u b l i c a t i o n of the art h i s t o r y he had apparently come to scorn was  a descrip-  t i v e catalogue designed to i l l u s t r a t e The Art of Engraving on Copper and Wood from the Florentine N i e l l o Workers of the F i f t e e n t h Century to that of William Blake. The publications i n the next decade are sparse: poetry, i n 1882,  a volume of  t i t l e d A Poet's Harvest Home, and a book of etchings  i l l u s t r a t i n g the Kingis Quair paintings on the s t a i r c a s e at P e n k i l l , published i n 1887. he was  If Scott had given up h i s r o l e as art h i s t o r i a n and  s t i l l busy on l i t e r a r y p r o j e c t s .  reviewer,  Before h i s death he had prepared for  the press a f i n a l volume of twenty poems c a l l e d Aftermath, but the anxiety of publishing became too great, and A l i c e Boyd decided against p u b l i c a t i o n at this time.  A second e d i t i o n of A Poet's Harvest Home was published posthumously  i n 1893,  and i n t h i s e d i t i o n the Aftermath appeared.  Scott's l i f e was Notes.  The l a s t decade of  also that of the f i n a l rewriting of the Autobiographical  While 1882  i s the date given by Scott as the >last year he worked on  the Notes, editor William Minto discloses that even during h i s years of i n v a l i d i s m at P e n k i l l , Miss Boyd would f i n d Scott r e - w r i t i n g and r e v i s i n g u n t i l l a t e at night. For the three summer months i n the year 1865  to 1868,  Scott was  painting the s t a i r c a s e at P e n k i l l c a s t l e with i l l u s t r a t i o n s of the King's Quair, the poem w r i t t e n by James the F i r s t of Scotland while i n e x i l e . During the winter months of the same years, 1865  to 1868,  Scott had a  d i f f e r e n t p r o j e c t , the decoration of the windows of the South Kensington Ceramic G a l l e r y . on the windows.  His purpose was  to depict the h i s t o r y of the ceramic arts  D i f f i c u l t i e s i n regulating the i n t e n s i t y of l i g h t coming  through the windows caused Scott to experiment i n several media, and  he  found a s a t i s f a c t o r y s o l u t i o n i n doing the designs i n " g r a f f i t o " on a burnt umber ground.  In 1869  Scott received a commission for the staircases and  doors of the South Kensington Lecture Theatre, but although he prepared drawings for t h i s work, i t was Kensington brought him, occupied  never c a r r i e d out.  i n 1873,  His association with South  a p o s i t i o n as an assistant examiner, which  him for a month or longer each summer u n t i l 1885.  of Scott's work i n the l a t e r years of h i s l i f e i s known. concluding enough. was  L i t t l e else Miss Boyd, i n the  chapter to the Notes, says that Scott painted a l i t t l e when w e l l  As l a t e as September, 1887,  he began a p i c t u r e of Iona, which  unfinished at the time of his death. Exactly how  published sources.  many pictures Scott painted i s hard to ascertain from  The Dictionary of National Biography asserts that Scott  exhibited twenty pictures i n London between 1838  and 1869,  be i d e n t i f i e d for Scott himself says l i t t l e of them. Dictionary of A r t i s t s from 1700 between 1840  and 1873.  to 1893  but many cannot  Algernon Graves, i n his  l i s t s thirty-one pictures exhibited  Seven were shown at the Royal Academy, nine at the  B r i t i s h I n s t i t u t e , four at the Society of B r i t i s h A r t i s t s , and eleven i n various exhibitions such as the Portland Gallery and the I n s t i t u t e of O i l Painters,  whatever the d e t a i l s , and they remain d i f f i c u l t to determine,  Scott did place his work before the p u b l i c . Because of the d i f f i c u l t y of determining and what Scott exhibited, i t i s nearly impossible of how  his contemporaries viewed his a r t .  exactly when, where to gain an understanding  Bryan's Dictionary asserts that  i n Scott's art "the exyuberance of his fancy" i s most s t r i k i n g , and goes on to say t h a t , " t h i s , combined with his f i n e sense of s t y l e and h i s i n s t i n c t for  the picturesque,  compensates l a r g e l y for h i s somewhat.faulty draughtsman26  ship and h i s occasional f a i l i n g s as a c o l o r i s t . "  Noting that Scott took  much care i n studying d e t a i l s and accessories, the writer of the a r t i c l e adds that i n decorative ornament Scott i s at h i s best, for "here h i s faculty of invention and h i s f i n e taste give him high rank."  The conclusion drawn  by the biographical writers i s an unfortunate one for a "pictor ignotus," as both Bryan's Dictionary and the D.N._B. suggest that Scotts' reputation w i l l ultimately rest on h i s poetry, not his paintings. Scott never gained popular acclaim for either h i s a r t i s t i c or poetic undertaking, but from the people who came to know him, he gained respect, f o r , and i n t e r e s t i n , h i s work.  His contemporaries bought, recommended, and  enjoyed, h i s work.  r  The value of a survey of Scott's work i s not i n the tracing of a developing genius.  I t l i e s rather i n an understanding  of the scope of  his i n t e r e s t s , e s p e c i a l l y i n the knowledge that he was not merely one who discussed and c r i t i c i z e d , but one who acted.  He was sympathetic,  through  experience, with the despair of the a r t i s t and he knew the poet's fear to expose h i s work to those who are waiting to tear at i t , instead of hoping to enjoy i t .  Scott's s k i l l s , we have seen, were many.  He was an engraver  and etcher, a teacher of a r t , a painter i n o i l and water-colours, of decoration.  and a designer  He was adept at fresco, and could devise an a r t i s t i c  where one was needed.  His poetry was a l i f e - l o n g  technique  involvement, and he took  s e r i o u s l y the c r i t i c i s m s and encouragement of other poets, such as R o s s e t t i . As a l i t e r a r y h i s t o r i a n he was concerned with giving information about subjects he knew were not well known. From boyhood (as his v i s i t to S i r Walter Scott indicates) Scott strove to go beyond himself and h i s own capacities for enrichment, knowledge, amusement, and new i n t e r e s t s . of acquaintances  During h i s long l i f e , he had a wide retinue  and f r i e n d s , people whom he c u l t i v a t e d because they could  offer him something which he did not then have, or who came to him because of what he could offer them.  Scott lived an active l i f e and his contribution  to the lives of others who were, like Scott, the creators, the builders, the thinkers of his time, i s an important aspect of his reputation.  He was  involved in many professions and i n each new role he expanded his knowledge of men.  It was characteristic of Scott to share his fortune with his  acquaintances, and he consistently recommended work he liked to those i n a position to advance his artist or poet friends.  His Autobiographical Notes  show that Scott, through his own actions and his friendships, was a man intensely aware of and involved i n the changes taking place i n his century.  FOOTNOTES CHAPTER 1  William B e l l Scott, Autobiographical Notes of the L i f e of William B e l l Scott, ed. William Minto, 2 Vols. (London: Osgood, 1892). Hereafter c i t e d as Notes.  Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i , Letters of Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i , ed. Oswald Doughty and J.R. Wahl (Oxford: Clarendon, 1965), I, 33.  The P e n k i l l Papers at U.B.C. possesses one of the notebooks Scott used i n w r i t i n g this j o u r n a l . On the f l y leaf he has written "William B e l l Scott Newcastle-on-Tyne March 1847". Much of the book, i s mutilated through pages being ripped i n h a l f , but i n most cases the subject can be followed, even i f the exact meaning i s not c l e a r .  ^Lona Mosk Packer, C h r i s t i n a R o s s e t t i (Berkeley: C a l i f o r n i a , 1963), p. 63.  University of  William B e l l Scott, Memoir of David Scott R.S.A. (Edinburgh: Black, 1850). The f i r s t autobiographical journal written by Scott was completed i n 1854, i t was therefore probably b,egun or i n progress about the time of h i s Memoir of David. Many d e t a i l s of family are given i n the Memoir which are not included i n the Notes. ' William B e l l Scott, i n the Notes, wrongly gives the year as 1832.  Bryan's Dictionary of Painters and Engravers (London: 1921), V. p. 58.  G. B e l l ,  The t i t l e of t h i s poem varies i n s p e l l i n g . In the Notes Scott s p e l l s i t "Rosabell," while i n the Monthly Repository i t i s s p e l l e d "Rosabelle." In Poems by a Painter (1854), the poem was t i t l e d "Maryanne," curvJL there Scott refers to the o r i g i n a l t i t l e as "Rosabel." q William B e l l Scott t e l l s this story i n Notes, I, 133. The o r i g i n a l a r t i c l e by Lewes i s not a v a i l a b l e for reference. W i l l i a m B e l l Scott, Poems (London: Smith Elder, 1854), 171. The sonnet i s t i t l e d , "On reading Haydon's Autobiography." 1 0  (London:  John Gere and Robin Ironside, eds. The Pre-Raphaelite Phaidon, 1948),p.22.  Painters  William B e l l Scott, "Ornamental Art i n England," F o r t n i g h t l y Review, Oct. 1, 1870.  William B e l l Scott, Gems of French Art (London:  Routledge, 1871),  p. 13. This information i s from the D.N.B. a r t i c l e c i t e d i n note 18. However, a l e t t e r from R o s s e t t i of August 1871 (Notes, I I , 149), mentions the "Belgian book," suggesting 1871 was the year of p u b l i c a t i o n . References to Leys and Tadema i n the R o s s e t t i l e t t e r exclude the "Belgian book" as another t i t l e f o r Gems of French A r t .  D.N.B., XVII, 1052. The a r t i c l e i s signed Rfonald] Bfayne].  Bryan's Dictionary, V, 59.  CHAPTER  TWO  E d i t i n g of the Notes  Two years a f t e r William B e l l Scott's death, h i s Autobiographical Notes were published. own  They represent a l i f e l o n g concern with recording h i s  a c t i v i t i e s and with commenting on t h e . l i v e s of other men whose l i v e s  touched him.  As a young man  of s e n s i t i v e and a r t i s t i c a l l y ambitious  nature,  Scott probably began i n h i s l a t e teens to record the events i n h i s l i f e which impressed him. his  The d e t a i l s of h i s l i f e i n Edinburgh, as preserved i n  Notes, suggest that Scott employed some form of diary or j o u r n a l , i f  only something of the order of an appointment or occasion book. l i k e l y from Scott's l a t e r recording tendencies 1837,  I t seems  that the move to London i n  a long awaited g i f t of freedom, would provide c e r t a i n stimulus to  keep at least a log book or day-diary of s p e c i a l occurrences, and perhaps even a more a r t i s t i c a l l y self-conscious journal of h i s new Scott states i n h i s Notes that i n May  1854  l i f e and f r i e n d s .  he completed h i s f i r s t  Autobiographical  Journal c o n s i s t i n g of 400 f o l i o pages, and he suggests that then, at the age of 43, he decided that such a preoccupation was  f o o l i s h (Notes, I, 2).  If the remarks i n the Prologue to his Notes do r e f e r p r i m a r i l y to this work, the Journal should have s a t i s f i e d several purposes.  On  the  objective l e v e l i t recorded Scott's experiences, e s p e c i a l l y those of childhood, and contained notes on the a c t i v i t i e s of other men  he had known.  Some  structuring i s implied by Scott's comment that he t r i e d , i n this j o u r n a l , to make a connected h i s t o r y of the externals of h i s own was  career.  the subjective purpose of the book which was most important  However, i t to Scott.  His hopes for the journal's self-educational value were defeated when he r e a l i z e d that he could learn very l i t t l e about himself from the record he had kept.  Scott's exact meaning i s d i f f i c u l t to pinpoint, but his sense of  f r u s t r a t i o n , almost to the point of s e l f - d i s g u s t , comes out most c l e a r l y . The j o u r n a l f a i l s i n i t s educational r o l e , Scott says, because of the d i f f i c u l t y of taking an objective point of view about oneself.  Scott may  have meant  that o b j e c t i v i t y i s obtainable, but when the state i s reached further problems a r i s e which entrap one more, and make t h i s quest for self-knowledge a l l the more d i f f i c u l t .  In abandoning the j o u r n a l , he says " I t i s no more a true  p i c t u r e of what we saw,  f e l t , enjoyed, suffered, but of mistakes and reasons  the dead elements of the scene" (Notes, I, 2).^" beginning  —  These words, placed at the  of h i s f i n a l book, d i s c l o s e that Scott meant h i s readers to under-  stand c l e a r l y the retrospective nature of his comments on his l i f e and h i s contact with other  men.  Scott destroyed h i s f i r s t journal i n 1877, rewrite h i s reminiscences. see what was  Scott may  He i n s i s t s that his younger s e l f was  f i t and what was  t h i s "younger s e l f "  when he decided  u n f i t for possible preservation."  responsible for such unsuitable j o t t i n g s ?  "unable to But who  was  Although  have started his j o u r n a l as early as his days i n Edinburgh, there  i s no concrete suggestion of this i n the Notes.  In his discussion of the  book's inception, Scott points to a c e r t a i n time of l i f e when a man to begin an assessment of h i s past: s e t t l e d by profession and marriage." 1844,  to  when he was  is likely  "when our course i s f i r s t v i s i b l y For Scott t h i s time occurred about  given a post at Newcastle.  The Journal was  ended i n  1854,  and i f one assumes a short period between Scott's decisions for marriage and a profession, and h i s beginning  of h i s l i f e ' s record, i t i s possible that he  wrote the 400 f o l i o pages over a ten year span. preserved  i n the P e n k i l l Papers i s dated 1847,  The part of his early journal but reference i n the  mutilated page of the notebook suggests that the account was  first,  begun i n  Circumstances of Scott's l i f e i n the few years following  1845.  1850,  may  i l l u m i n a t e somewhat his reasons for w r i t i n g and discontinuing his r e c o l l e c -  tions.  His contact with the Pre-Raphaelite  as "the beginning of a new  group he described i n retrospect  interest in l i f e . "  The record of h i s l i f e  v e r i f i e s that at t h i s time Scott did begin to work with a new  vigor,  producing the Memoir of his brother David i n 1850,  and Prince Legion and  Antiquarian Gleanings i n 1851.  and 1852  his  The deaths i n 1849  respectively of  brother and mother meant a concrete release from family r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ,  and i f Scott's assertion that he f e l t a sense of r e - b i r t h seems over-dramatic, 2 the basic s i t u a t i o n can be imagined as conducive to change. abandonment of t h i s j o u r n a l i n 1854  Scott's  i s most e a s i l y explained by the observa-  t i o n that he extended h i s a c t i v i t i e s and friendships s i g n i f i c a n t l y at this time.  Poems by a Painter appeared i n 1854,  and brought with i t a series of  connections important to his career and personal l i f e . the Trevelyans,  The Wallington murals,  and A l i c e Boyd a l l became major influences on Scott's  i n the l a t e eighteen  fifties.  life  Scott probably l e f t o f f w r i t i n g h i s early  j o u r n a l , not through any immediate sense of s e l f - d i s g u s t , but p r i m a r i l y because of the pressure of other work. A far more self-conscious a t t i t u d e to his r e c o l l e c t i o n s i s evident i n Scott's resumption, i n 1877, his  of his r o l e as journal-writer.  Not only from  feelings about h i s inadequate younger s e l f , but e s p e c i a l l y from h i s  attitudes to humanity i n general does a p i c t u r e of the writer of the Notes come through.  The man  e a r l i e r age i s a man  who  who  edited out the spontaneous impressions of an  could declare that "We  l i v e surrounded by so many  s o c i a l conventions, we go about with so many deceptive  coverings, that a sincere  attempt at s e l f - p o r t a i t u r e i n w r i t i n g i s l i k e walking into the street naked He implies a strong awareness of the p o t e n t i a l e v i l i n his fellow men, that he speaks of "the d e v i l " as a bond between a l l men:  ..."  in  "the touch of nature  that makes the whole world k i n " (Notes, I, 5).  His task i n h i s new  auto-  biography w i l l be to present r e a l i t i e s , not appearances. Generally these explanatory remarks suggest few p o s s i b i l i t i e s about the l i t t l e understood character of William B e l l Scott, who s i x t y - s i x to re-write the story of h i s l i f e , and who autobiography as long as he was chapter i n d i c a t e that he was on paper.  continued work on h i s  A l i c e Boyd's comments i n the concluding  never wholly s a t i s f i e d with a l l that he had  This self-consciousness, a concern for the opinion of those  would survive him, wrote.  able.  began at age  i s r e f l e c t e d also i n two autobiographical sketches  put who  Scott  Both are among the P e n k i l l Papers. In the e a r l i e s t , probably written about 1880,  he describes himself  as "foredoomed to follow painting as a profession, though h i s poetry  and  the books he has published ... make i t a question, whether the divided i n t e r e s t s , and somewhat opposite claims on h i s attention, evinced by his carrying on writing and painting almost simultaneously, have been i n h i s favour."  He  describes the Wallington murals as h i s p r i n c i p a l work i n p a i n t i n g , and states that The Year of the World was  an "exceedingly erudite and a l l e g o r i c a l produc-  t i o n which the world at large took l i t t l e notice of." A second, and probably u n t i l 1889 when he was  l a t e r , memoir i n Scott's hand has notations  granted an L.L.D. by Aberdeen U n i v e r s i t y .  In t h i s  version, The Year of the World i s described as "abstruce" while the Wallington paintings are s t i l l h i s most important work i n painting.  Paintings and books  which he feels are superior are l i s t e d , and the memoir takes on a more personal tone as he describes h i s a r c h i t e c t u r a l work, the addition to P e n k i l l : this l a t e s t work Mr.  "Of  Scott i s perhaps more proud than of anything else he has  done i n the various a p p l i c a t i o n of his a b i l i t i e s . " Scott's w i l l , also among the P e n k i l l Papers, i s the f i n a l document  he l e f t which gives an i n d i c a t i o n of h i s attitudes to h i s autobiographical work.  Dated July 2nd 1890, the w i l l requests i n section 10 that Professor  W. Minto of Abderdeen University " s h a l l undertake the o f f i c e of my L i t e r a r y Executor of r e v i s i n g and preserving the MS e n t i t l e d the Autobiography of, or some Records of the L i f e of William B e l l Scott l e f t by me, ensuring the P u b l i c a t i o n of the same, when the proper time a r r i v e s . "  He further s p e c i f i e s  that when Minto begins the task, he should be sent Scott's proposed etchings for  the book, the o r i g i n a l l e t t e r s quoted i n the manuscript, and a legacy ot ^  three hundred pounds.  Scott f i n a l l y suggests that perhaps Minto might  republish h i s Poet's Harvest Home with an "Aftermath."  Scott's i n s t r u c t i o n s  to Minto make i t clear that he intends h i s manuscript to be published.  In  a n t i c i p a t i o n of h i s death, Scott committed the r e s u l t of h i s l i f e - l o n g occupation to the j u r i s d i c t i o n of another man, a man he must have trusted completely on such matters. II  Who was William Minto and what was h i s s p e c i a l knowledge that prompted  Scott to choose him as a l i t e r a r y executor?  In a l e t t e r of October  28, 1874, Scott describes to A l i c e a "new man" who attended a dinner party given by h i s wife L e t i t i a .  William Minto, he says, i s Editor of the Examiner,  and has asked Scott i f he would write i n that journal.  Scott describes  him as a "very agreeable and w e l l educated l i t e r a r y man" but goes on to specify that t h i s means "without i n d i v i d u a l p e c u l i a r i t y and the force of genius."  Minto had moved to London from Aberdeen i n 1873, and by 1874 had  written f o r both the Daily News and the P a l l Mall Gazette. j o u r n a l i s t , then, that Minto f i r s t was known to Scott.  I t was as a  I f Scott was  unimpressed by h i s new acquaintance's genius, he c e r t a i n l y recognized h i s  value as a "contact" with the l i t e r a r y world i n which he strove to make h i s mark.  Letters i n the P e n k i l l Papers a f f i r m that i n the mid-eighties  was i n regular contact with Scott.  Minto  The summer of 1885 brought Minto an  i n v i t a t i o n to v i s i t P e n k i l l , but circumstances did not allow i t .  A year  l a t e r Minto wrote Scott of a dinner party at which he saw Edmund Gosse (fat and f l o u r i s h i n g ) as well as Swinburne and Theodore Watts (both i n good form). A l e t t e r of July 22, 1886, asks Scott for some biographical information to be given the editor of an Aberdeen newspaper.  Minto says that he knows a l l  Scott's poetry, and his Germ contributions, but knows l i t t l e about h i s " o f f i c i a l career."  The tone of this request i s somewhat coy, and could be an  attempt at f l a t t e r y .  Minto does know that Scott i s w r i t i n g b u s i l y , and hopes  part of h i s w r i t i n g time w i l l be spent composing verse.  Manuscript pages  i n A l i c e Boyd's hand (PP) d i s c l o s e that Minto paid long v i s i t s to Scott i n h i s l a s t three years, and that these v i s i t s included many nights when the two men closeted themselves away to work.  Early i n 1890, Minto decided to  publish Scott's l a t e s t c o l l e c t i o n of poems, an Aftermath, on Scott's d i r e c t i o n that he should not see i t u n t i l published.  Minto arranged the d e t a i l s ,  but the project was abandoned when A l i c e Boyd feared that Scott was becoming upset by the a c t i v i t y . The task which Minto undertook i n seeing Scott's book through the press i s documented i n h i s 87 l e t t e r s to A l i c e Boyd written between October 1890 and October 1892 i n the P e n k i l l C o l l e c t i o n (hereafter c i t e d as P.P. for P e n k i l l Papers). terms of Scott's w i l l .  On December 21, 1890, Minto wrote to A l i c e about the Minto was to insure p u b l i c a t i o n of the Notes  "when the proper time a r r i v e s , " and he requests  c l a r i f i c a t i o n of t h i s statement.  He wonders i f Scott ever s p e c i f i e d an i n t e r v a l which should elapse p u b l i c a t i o n because .  before  "some of h i s remarks about Ruskin, for instance, he could  hardly have contemplated being published during the l i f e t i m e of.that i n d i v i dual."  Minto f e e l s that a long i n t e r v a l would be impossible because of  "an abdundance of valuable h i s t o r i c a l matter that might be published and would i n t e r e s t tomorrow." Not u n t i l June of 1891 d i d Minto report work on the manuscript. The l e t t e r s from t h i s point d i s c l o s e three areas of information about the. e d i t i n g of the Notes.  F i r s t i s the e a s i l y anticipated information about  omissions, repressions, and Minto's e d i t o r i a l p o l i c i e s .  Second i s the  disclosure that Minto became unusually subjective about h i s e d i t o r i a l problems, and maintained a point of view which could be considered damaging to h i s presentation of Scott's o r i g i n a l material.  Third i s the fact that other  men than-Minto also became personally involved with the manuscript  Calthough  they had not even seen i t ) and were, as a r e s u l t , prepared to attack the book even before i t reached the public view. As Minto becomes more involved i n the p r a c t i c a l work of e d i t i n g , he i s influenced more and more by personal f r i c t i o n with, men who. f o r various reasons wished to thwart the p u b l i c a t i o n of Scott's Notes.  I n i t i a l l y , the  problems he encounters are e a s i l y handled by an exercise of h i s own d i s c r e t i o n , and h i s solutions are approved through consultation with A l i c e Boyd. In the e a r l i e s t l e t t e r s , of June 1891, Minto suggests to A l i c e the correction of a mis-dated Rossetti l e t t e r , and they agree on the omission of an episode concerning Mathilde Blind and Joaquin M i l l e r . .  Later,, on June 26,  he asks advice from A l i c e on some l e t t e r s by Rossetti and by Swinburne which Scott has incorporated into h i s manuscript.  Minto finds that "the dear  Autobiographer" has made complications by repeated revisions and interpolations i n these l e t t e r s .  Minto already expresses worried a n t i c i p a t i o n at having to  get permission to use such documents.  Repressions, however, w i l l apparently  be few, f o r i n 200 pages of manuscript Minto has found l i t t l e of importance which w i l l have to be kept out.  His p o l i c y w i l l be to keep back only what  might give legitimate offence. The question of l i b e l was f i r s t raised i n August 1891, when a f r i e n d asked Minto who was to pay the l i b e l l i s h e d (P.P. Aug. 1, 1891).  costs a f t e r the book was pub-  Minto subsequently learned that i t was "public  opinion" that the book would be l i b e l o u s , and i n r e f u t i n g the accusers, he began h i s more subjective involvement.  In the spring of 1892, l i b e l  charges  again became a p o s s i b i l i t y a f t e r an American reader of the proofs found them dangerous. for  Minto had Mr. Morse, Scott's l i t e r a r y executor, read the proofs  l i b e l o u s material and as a r e s u l t several passages were repressed.  Objection was made to a passage about Ruskin and Turner, and Minto questions Alice:  "But i f W.B. thought  the story important, I could hardly f i n d i t  consistent with my e d i t o r i a l duty to omit i t ? " (P.P., June 22, 1892). Apparently A l i c e r e p l i e d (as she w'as doubtless supposed to.) that Minto could c  not endanger himself or the book by courting l i b e l charges.  In J u l y , a f t e r  another lawyer, representing the publisher Mcllvainei had read the manuscript, Minto announced that "The only r e a l l y important concession .I have made are the Swinburne novel-reading incident at Wallington and the p r i v a t e sketch book of Turner" (P.P., July 9, 1892).  Among other changes made or allowed by  Minto are the e l i m i n a t i o n of a passage on Scott's marriage and h i s wife L e t i t i a , and revisions to references about R o s s e t t i and E l i z a b e t h Siddal, which Scott had apparently taken out of context.  Swinburne refused to allow  a l e t t e r of h i s to be published, and Minto chose not to publish a l e t t e r by Hake about R o s s e t t i .  These l a s t two examples are concerned with, the next  area of information about Minto's e d i t o r i a l procedures, f o r they involve h i s personal i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with h i s old friend's w r i t i n g .  In  the early stages of e d i t i n g , when Minto was f i r s t approaching  Scott's correspondents about using t h e i r l e t t e r s , he was surprised by the reluctance he encountered, and wrote to A l i c e :  " r e a l l y there i s nothing  given by the Hermit, i n the case of h i s friends at l e a s t , to which there could by any r a t i o n a l objection."  He added, " I t i s r e a l l y out of f r i e n d l i n e s s that  dear o l d W.B. wished to preserve some memorials of them i n h i s l i f e " (P.O., July 15, 1891).  But less than a month l a t e r , Minto had adopted a  d i f f e r e n t point of view on the issue of Scott's public p e r s o n a l i t y , f o r he wrote A l i c e , "Really i t would seem as i f the dear Hermit's sarcasm, which never struck me as being i n the least i l l - n a t u r e d has impressed h i s friends with the  idea that he was a most t e r r i b l e person" (P.P., Aug. 1, 1891).  Minto  encountered t h i s view of Scott i n the course of h i s attempts to gain permission to publish l e t t e r s which Scott had incorporated i n h i s manuscript.  Minto's  i n i t i a l p o l i c y was that he would show the proofs to the people involved before p u b l i c a t i o n , and i f he could not use the l e t t e r s he would j u s t omit them and rewrite the adjoining passages.  The l e t t e r s of William Holman  Hunt, he found, were r e a l l y the only ones of v i t a l importance to the continuity of  the Notes. Experience, and knowledge of the d i s l i k e of Scott harboured by  some men, caused Minto to change h i s p o l i c y about the l e t t e r s .  An interview  with Edmund Gosse, reported to A l i c e j u s t two days a f t e r Minto had said that Scott's friends "at l e a s t " could not be reluctant about the book, was one of Minto's enlightening experiences.  Gosse, described as " i n c l i n e d . t o be nasty,"  apparently had heard that the book was to consist mainly of l e t t e r s .  Minto  said that Gosse "almost made my blood b o i l to the point of i n d i s c r e t i o n by speaking of the o l d man as having been very severe i n h i s judgment l a t t e r l y . " Although he set Gosse straight as to "the f r i e n d l y and genial tone, of the  reminiscences" he Was s t i l l suspicious that Gosse "means mischief."  These  encounters caused Minto to resort to a less straightforward e d i t o r i a l p o l i c y . He informed A l i c e (P.P., Sept. 13, 1891) that where consent to publish was d i f f i c u l t to obtain, and the l e t t e r important, he would put the passages i n  26 the  f i r s t person, as i f Scott were quoting from memory. Theodore Watts, then the companion of Swinburne, was t r y i n g , Minto  f e l t , to have a "finger i n the p i e . " Swinburne had written to Minto i n July 1891, expressing pleasure that he had been named e d i t o r , and allowing some suggested changes i n a l e t t e r written by him (Swinburne L e t t e r s , ed. Lang, V. 6, p. 9).  As a r e s u l t Watts and Minto had an interview which, was  described to A l i c e as "amusing." the  By October 11, Minto's r e l a t i o n s h i p with  Swinburne household had deteriorated.  Swinburne wrote a very stern  l e t t e r refusing Minto permission to publish h i s l e t t e r s , saying that he saw nothing worthy of preservation i n those l e t t e r s Minto had sent L e t t e r s , V. 6, p. 294). the  (Swinburne  The l e t t e r suggests that Swinburne i s reacting to  rumours about the book f o r he s p e c i f i e s that i n s p i t e of. h i s "deep and  c o r d i a l regard" f o r Scott, he does not want h i s l e t t e r s i n the forthcoming book.  Minto responds that Swinburne can "be d  w e l l r i d of h i s "early effusions."  d" ands adds that they are  Other evidence that a l l was not r e a l l y  " c o r d i a l " i s Minto's r e f u s a l to p r i n t a l e t t e r by Hake on Rossetti because of some "opportunity" i t would give Theodore Watts.  The s u b t l e t i e s of t h i s  decision are not explained, but they are perhaps related to Watts' p o s i t i o n as a reviewer for the ^thenaeum. While constantly defending Scott's motives, Minto i s nevertheless amused by the wavering between solicitousness and indignation shown by those men who  fear exposure i n the Notes.  He c l e a r l y enjoys the r o l e of r e l a t i v e  omniscience for he expresses to A l i c e "a c e r t a i n fun" i n having to handle  reminiscences" heUdS' s t i l l suspicious that Gosse "means mischief."  These  encounters caused Minto to resort to a less straightforward editorial policy. He informed Alice (P.P., Sept. 13, 1891) that where consent to publish was d i f f i c u l t to obtain, and the letter important, he would put the passages i n 26 the  f i r s t person, as i f Scott were quoting from memory. Theodore Watts, then the companion of Swinburne, was trying, Minto  f e l t , to have a "finger in the pie." Swinburne had written to Minto i n July 1891, expressing pleasure that he had been named editor, and allowing some suggested changes i n a letter written by him (Swinburne Letters, ed. Lang, V. 6, p. 9). As a result Watts and Minto had an interview which- was described to Alice as "amusing." the  By October 11, Minto's relationship with  Swinburne household had deteriorated.  Swinburne wrote a very stern  letter refusing Minto permission to publish his letters, saying that h_e saw nothing worthy of preservation i n those letters Minto had sent (Swinburne Letters, V. 6, p. 294).  The letter suggests that Swinburne i s reacting to  the rumours about the book for he specifies that i n spite of. his "deep and \  cordial regard" for Scott, he does not want his letters i n the forthcoming  'i book. Minto responds that Swinburne can "be d well r i d of his "early effusions."  d" ands adds that they are  Other evidence that a l l was not really  "cordial" i s Minto's refusal to print a letter by Hake on Rossetti because of some "opportunity" i t would give Theodore Watts.  The subtleties of this  decision are not explained, but they are perhaps related to Watts' position ' as a reviewer for the .Athenaeum. While constantly defending Scott's motives, Minto i s nevertheless amused by the wavering between solicitousness and indignation shown by those men who fear exposure in the Notes.  He clearly enjoys the role of relative  omniscience for he expresses to Alice "a certain fun" i n having to handle  such "touchy p e r s o n a l i t i e s " as Gosse and Watts.  The omniscient r o l e also  comes through Minto's assertion that he w i l l show William Rossetti the complimentary remarks made about him, i n order to reassure him about the book, but he adds, "On the other hand I fancy we are not c a l l e d upon to show W.M.R. before-hand the remarks on h i s Germ sonnet."  The encounters  with Watts and Swinburne lead Minto to consider "as a lark." including an epilogue containing r e p l i e s to requests to publish, f o r he i s amused that "a great deal of character" comes out i n the answers. The p u b l i c a t i o n date of the book was set f o r November 15, and much e a r l i e r i n the month Minto was nervously a n t i c i p a t i n g an unwelcome reception.  A l e t t e r to A l i c e on the 2nd, meant to prepare her f o r the  expected blow, also exposes Minto's involvement and suspicious anxiety. Theodore Watts, who was l i k e l y to review the book for the Athenaeum, i s one v i l l a i n , "a wretched l i t t l e pettyfogging creature." If he i s not on h i s good behaviour i n the Athenaeum n o t i c e of the Autobiography when i t comes out., I must have a l i t t l e go at him. If only he would sign h i s name to a deprecatory notice! Then would there would be some ink shed ere set of sun. "Smite them down, Theodore, smite them down." Do you remember h i s great poem on the Armada? ... Remember we must be prepared f o r any number of i l l natured people trying to plant t h e i r l i t t l e stings. What does i t matter? Nobody whose opinion i s worth having can read these notes without f e e l i n g the charm of a great and lovable personality. (P.P., Nov. 2, 1892),  By mid-November Minto had received encouragement from Richard l e Gallienne, who planned to review the Notes.  But he s t i l l f e l t i t necessary to warn  A l i c e about the " b i t i n g and snapping":  He had too strong an i n d i v i d u a l i t y not to offend some. But ... I have too much f a i t h i n the general sense of the B r i t i s h p u b l i c , even of the average c r i t i c not to f e e l c e r t a i n that the reception of the work w i l l be warm and sympathetic. (P.P., Nov, 14, 1892).  Even i n h i s a n t i c i p a t i o n of a quarrel Minto i s sure of v i c t o r y .  Re writes  that "Those c r i t i c s primed to regard the Notes as i l l - n a t u r e d " w i l l defeat themselves.  C r i t i c i s m w i l l excite readers to look at the books for them-  selves, and they w i l l then see the absurdity of the charges: malicious caught i n t h e i r own Two  snare."  (JP.T?.  17, 1892).  subjects of importance emerge from the l e t t e r s from Minto to  A l i c e during the period of h i s editorship."* as editor was  , Nov.  "Thus are the  both active and personal.  The  f i r s t i s that Minto's r o l e  His concluding  chapter on Scott i s  c e r t a i n l y valuable for the c h r o n i c l i n g of the l a s t and quite active years of Scott's l i f e .  However, h i s strongest influence on the.public conception  of  Scott as a man  d e f i n i t e l y shows through his e d i t i n g of Scott's o r i g i n a l words.  For h i s t o r i c a l accuracy, t h i s influence i s a p o s i t i v e one, because of h i s concern with correct dating and accurate transcription, of l e t t e r s .  The  P e n k i l l l e t t e r s do i n d i c a t e , however, that Minto's involvement with the material, e s p e c i a l l y that r e f e r r i n g to i n d i v i d u a l s s t i l l a l i v e , i n t e r f e r e d with h i s e d i t o r i a l o b j e c t i v i t y about inclusions and omissions.  In several  instances, Minto's admittedly well-intentioned i n t e r e s t has shaped Scott's manuscript into a document for which Scott could not, t e c h n i c a l l y , be held responsible.  These changes are not d r a s t i c , and A l i c e Boyd's acquiescence  to them could mean they did not express sentiments unfamiliar to Scott.  Yet  a l t e r a t i o n s were made, and often f o r personal reasons rather than f o r editorial  correctness. The second point of i n t e r e s t i s that the controversy  Notes was  anticipated much before the date of p u b l i c a t i o n .  over the  Minto was  aware  that the books would bring f o r t h various objections, but as editor he considered the h i s t o r i c a l value more important than the wounding of a few egos.  It i s also c l e a r that c e r t a i n men. were waiting f o r the appearance of  the Notes as a chance to vent long-repressed h o s t i l i t y against Scott. Swinburne's published l e t t e r s , f o r example, show that Minto was not imagining h o s t i l i t y i n Swinburne's r e f u s a l to have h i s l e t t e r s printed.  The poet  meant the r e f u s a l as a warning that anything objectionable i n the Notes would be challenged.  (Swinburne L e t t e r s , V o l , 294)  The presence, weeks  before the books were published, of two committed and opposing  sides may  help to explain the i n t e n s i t y , the frequent t r i v i a l i t y , and the damaging nature of the r e s u l t i n g controversy over Scott's  autobiography.  FOOTNOTES CHAPTER 2  The Autobiographical Journal of 1847, now i n the P e n k i l l Papers begins with doubtful sentiments about the usefulness of journal w r i t i n g . Unfortunately these pages are mutilated enough to make t r a n s c r i p t i o n highly conj e c t u r a l . 2 Reference to the mutilated journals v e r i f i e s that Scott's experience of death with David and h i s mother, was i n t e n s e l y . f e l t . He also comments on the g r a t i f y i n g success of h i s Memoir of David. See William Knight's essay on Minto i n Some Nineteenth Century Scotsmen, 1903. ^William Michael Rossetti caught Minto's use of t h i s technique, but he blamed i t on Scott; "Mr. Scott ... proceeds to quote some words of mine, which (as he puts i t ) I 'said' but I fancy that i n fact I wrote them, i n the year 1872." (Memoir I 278). <  ~*The many s p e c i f i c references to changes or suppressions i n the Notes, which appear i n Minto's l e t t e r s to A l i c e Boyd, v e r i f y the importance of these P e n k i l l Papers to the study of Pre-Raphaelite and V i c t o r i a n figures. A catalogue of the references w i l l supplement the previous discussion of Minto's influence on the Notes. 1890 31  Ruskin  June July  6 13  July July Sept. Sept. Sept.  15 21 2 3 13  Oct. Oct. Oct.  15 16 26  Oct. Nov. Dec.  30 5 15  R o s s e t t i ; Swinburne M[athilde] Blind and Joaquin [ M i l l e r ] R[ossetti] Morris; Holman Hunt: R o s s e t t i Swinburne Rossetti William M. Rossetti R o s s e t t i ; Dr. Hake; Hueffer; M a r z i a l s ; Tadema; William R o s s e t t i Swinburne Woolner repressions i n general; Rossetti and Mr. Lfeyland] Holman Hunt Scott's e d i t i o n of Burns sketches of Rossetti and Swinburne  Dec.  \,  1891  Jan. Jan. Feb. Feb. March March March May May June July  6 13 3 26 1 6 13 16 18 22 9  July  30  planning the l a s t chapter Scott's marriage R o s s e t t i ; Swinburne;. Munro; Elizabeth omission concerning A l i c e Boyd Holman Hunt d e t a i l s of publishing Rossetti Ruskin Ruskin and M i l l a i s ; Rossetti Mrs. Scott; Ruskin •• . agent at Wallington; Mr. Lleyland]? Cat R o s s e t t i ' s ) ; Swinburne; Turner Leyland incident  Siddal  CHAPTER THREE Controversy  Public interest  i n a forthcoming  o f a book's p o t e n t i a l s u c c e s s .  I n the i n s t a n c e of S c o t t ' s Notes, however,  c u r i o s i t y t o o k the form o f rumor and d e f i n i t e l y p r e j u d i c e d men and  contacts.  To  a u t h o r , a man  who  work i s u s u a l l y a welcome s i g n  s p e c u l a t i o n , c o n t r o l l e d by a  whose s t r e n g t h l a y i n t h e i r l i t e r a r y  few,  professions  some degree, t h e i r f e a r of exposure or r i d i c u l e by knew most o f them, was  preparation against  assuaged by  the e x p e c t e d a t t a c k .  taking  attitudes.  Had  defensive  D i s c u s s i o n of the book's p o s s i b i l i t i e s  caused such t e n s i o n t h a t when the book d i d appear i t was many f o r i t s n e g a t i v e  the  those men  apparently  with defensive  read  f e e l i n g s been  p a i n t e r s o r s c u l p t o r s , t h e i r c o m p l a i n t s would have c i r c u l a t e d among a group o f s y m p a t h i z e r s .  Unfortunately  f o r S c o t t , the men  s e l v e s h i s v i c t i m s were h i g h l y v o c a l , w i t h of t h e i r day. artistic  and  an a r t i s t , and  l i t e r a r y s u b j e c t s has been so molded and  t r o v e r s y w h i c h d e v e l o p e d , t h a t w r i t e r s today a c c e p t  how  S c o t t was  Rarely  " R o s s e t t i legend"  b l a c k e n e d by  the  on con-  the posthumous p i c t u r e  much p u b l i c a d o p t i o n  discover of  the  counted i n the r e c e p t i o n o f h i s Notes.  Oswald Doughty, a modern b i o g r a p h e r described  journals  an a u t h o r i t y  does a modern w r i t e r attempt to  spoken o f when a l i v e , or how  small  imagined them-  a ready-made forum i n the  S c o t t ' s r e p u t a t i o n as a man,  o f him w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n .  who  by  and  e d i t o r o f R o s s e t t i , has  the posthumous treatment of R o s s e t t i i n terms o f an  Romantic R o s s e t t i l e g e n d , "  In h i s p r e f a c e  to the r e c e n t  L e t t e r s , Doughty a c c u s e s Theodore Watts and i n the d e c l i n i n g y e a r s  R o s s e t t i as a " d a r k l y b r o o d i n g ,  a Byronic  hero who  was  e d i t i o n of R o s s e t t i  Thomas H a l l C a i n e of b e i n g  of Dante R o s s e t t i ' s l i f e . " ' "  presented  "absurdly  Their  mysterious,  biographies  mystical  a l s o a Vates Sacer, a P o e t - S e e r . "  "acolytes"  poet-recluse,  Elsewhere Doughty  describes the "scramble" for biographical p r i o r i t y which resulted i n the work of Caine and Sharp (A V i c t o r i a n Romantic, pp. 5-6).  Caine, who  was  first  i n p r i n t , "exploited Rossetti as sensational 'news'," while Sharp "buried him under a mass of verbose adulation." dismissed  Joseph Knight's study of 1887  was  as unsatisfactory by Rossetti's friends and, Doughty says, William  B e l l Scott was  one of Knight's severest c r i t i c s .  Scott's Notes of 1892  c i t e d , f i n a l l y , as another approach to Rossetti which was  are  found unsatisfactory  by his contemporaries because of " b i t t e r comments on R o s s e t t i . " Because Doughty, unfortunately, does not give the sources of h i s conclusions, i t i s impossible of Knight's harshest  critics.  to v e r i f y h i s suggestion  that Scott was  one  Yet there are. other sources which support  the deduction that Scott made h i s revisions because of current l i t e r a t u r e on Rossetti.  A b r i e f survey of w r i t i n g on R o s s e t t i between 1882  w i l l give i n s i g h t into three aspects of t h i s s i t u a t i o n :  and  1890  the influence on  Scott while w r i t i n g his r e v i s i o n s , the powerful response met by  Scott's  Notes, and the r e s u l t i n g e f f e c t on h i s reputation. Thomas H a l l Caine, who  knew Rossetti only i n the l a s t three year of 2  h i s l i f e , was  the f i r s t to present  a book-length work on him.  There i s  l i t t l e i n the text to suggest that Caine considered Rossetti "sensational" material, but perhaps Doughty's statement refers to the public a t t i t u d e , rather than to the intent of the writer.  Caine prefaces his book with the  declaration that h i s i s not a biographical work, as he would not dare to  3 trespass on Watts' prerogative as an o f f i c i a l biographer.  Caine i n i t i a l l y  stresses that his i n t e n t i o n i n w r i t i n g the book i s to give l e t t e r s between himself and R o s s e t t i , but l a t e r he restates his aim as: purpose i s now man"  (p. 267).  ... to a f f o r d the best view at my  "My  primary  command of Rossetti as a  With t h i s statement of intent i t i s much easier to a l i g n  many of Caine's remarks, e s p e c i a l l y those which seem the s t u f f of "legends." Caine quotes Canon Dixon's estimation that Rossetti. had "an a r t i s t i c temperament as exquisite as was  ever bestowed on.man" (p.. 38)..  His  q u a l i t i e s were fearlessness, k i n d l i n e s s , concentration and It was  "impossible  was  self-reliance.  to have been more free from captiousness,  or any other form of pettiness than this t r u l y noble man"  personal  jealousy, envy,  (p. 39).  "the greatest inventor of abstract beauty,, both i n form and  Rossetti  colour,  that t h i s age, perhaps that the world, has.seen" (p. 38). Caine's book i s a v i t a l l i n k in. understanding not..only the R o s s e t t i legend, but e s p e c i a l l y W.B,  Scott's a t t i t u d e s toward i t . In the  controversy  over Scott's Notes, an i n t e r e s t i n g and relevant . a r t i c l e appeared i n The Daily Chronicle i n January, 1893.  The w r i t e r (signed J.A.N..) owned Scott's  copy of Caine's Recollections, and the a r t i c l e i s woven around the marginal comments written i n by Scott.  The comments are described as s a t i r i c a l  and  objugatory, with Scott's "contemptuous d i s l i k e " of H a l l Caine most evident. To Caine's a s s e r t i o n that Rossetti's b o d i l y sensations  "were as naught unless  they were s a n c t i f i e d by the concurrence of the s o u l , " Scott responded "nonsense."  Assertions about the e t h i c a l q u a l i t y of Rossetti's poetry  marked "preposterous." Scott i s most s c o r n f u l . "Jenny" was Scott was  are  When Caine i s most e u l o g i s t i c , the w r i t e r says, S p e c i f i c d e t a i l s , such as Scott's assertion that  written " a f t e r reading my  'Rosabell'," leave l i t t l e question  antagonistic to H a l l Caine's approach, and that h i s reading  that  was  prompting him to some r e t a l i a t o r y a c t i o n . The other important biography of 1882 Sharp, and although the focus was  written by William  a study of Rossetti's work, Sharp also  became over-effusive about R o s s e t t i . supporter  was  Because Watts adopted Scott as a  soon a f t e r Rossetti's death, Scott knew of Sharp's book while the  w r i t i n g was  under way.  While Scott considered  Caine's w r i t i n g about Rossetti  a pretentious act a f t e r such a short acquaintance, he became quite at the subject chosen by William Sharp:  "The  Character  of DGR's Art and  Poetry and i t s influence on English Art and L i t e r a t u r e . " "Gabriel's e f f e c t on art was his paintings.  indignant  In Scott's  opinion  n i l " because only h i s close friends had seen  The great public i n t e r e s t i n Gabriel i s due,  Scott f e e l s ,  to c u r i o s i t y about h i s secretiveness and to a desire to know what has been hidden.  Scott hopes that this r e v e l a t i o n won't "break up the charm" (P.P.,  June 12, 1882). These sentiments of early June were revised by early J u l y , a f t e r Scott had been v i s i t e d by Sharp. he was am."  Sharp had convinced a reluctant Scott that  not an "imposter l i k e Caine" and he was  " i n society as much as I  Scott apparently had arranged a v i s i t with Sharp i n order to make  him understand Rossetti's i n t e n t i o n i n p r i n t i n g p r i v a t e l y , and the "due portance [of] the P e n k i l l period of incubation."  Scott showed him the volume  of proofs from P e n k i l l , and Sharp d i p l o m a t i c a l l y enquired of "The  Stream's Secret."  about the writing  Also, a v i s i t to P e n k i l l by Sharp was t e n t a t i v e l y  arranged (P.P., July 3, 1882).  While i t appeared to Scott i n 1882  Sharp had adopted his point of view, the published book was Sharp was  im-  as eager as Caine to present  that  to show that  a g l o r i f i e d picture of R o s s e t t i .  In h i s book, he praises Rossetti for h i s greatness i n "both.the great arts of Poetry and P a i n t i n g . "  The stature he attained w i l l appear "more remarkable as  i t w i l l gain more recognition i n days to come." extravagant about Rossetti's v i r t u e s :  Like Caine, Sharp becomes  "A l o f t y s p i r i t , a subtle and  b e a u t i f u l i n t e l l e c t , a poet and a r t i s t such as the world does not often see, a generous c r i t i c , and a h e l p f u l f r i e n d ..."  (p. 3).  In addition to the books of Sharp and Caine, William E. Fredeman l i s t s a t h i r d book by W.E.  Tirebuck published i n 1882.  The book, about  Rossetti's work and influence, e l i c i t e d these comments from Scott on J u l y 10th: "Eloquent i n i t s own way, character of D.G. his  and good, yet wholly i n the dark about the r e a l  However i t i s only about h i s painting, very l i t t l e  about  poetry." The p e r i o d i c a l a r t i c l e s f o r the two years a f t e r Rossetti's death  are another r i c h source of the Rossetti legend.  Perhaps Theodore Watts'  a r t i c l e s are most important, as h i s claim to be o f f i c i a l biographer was upheld by William Michael R o s s e t t i .  On June 12, 1882,  Scott wrote A l i c e  that Watts had v i s i t e d " i n a state of simmer ... b o i l i n g over, about Sharp and Caine having prepared themselves as r i v a l acrobats to write books about D.G.R. ... write a l i f e —  He says Gabriel on h i s deathbed begged him to l e t no one else to write i t himself i f i t was necessary."  Watts reportedly  bewailed, 'Rossetti has f a l l e n among P h i l i s t i n e s ... and I can't help him!' Watts' short a r t i c l e of 1882, of  the dominant themes of the legend:  "Mr. D.G.  Rossetti,"  c a r r i e s one  "wonderful as was R o s s e t t i as an  a r t i s t and poet, he was s t i l l more wonderful, I think, as a man."  Identifying  c h l o r a l as the cause of Rossetti's reclusiveness, Watts proceeds to j u s t i f y his  disclosure by l a v i s h p r a i s e :  "No man  ever l i v e d ... who was  so generous  as he i n sympathizing with other men's work, save only when the cruel fumes of  c h l o r a l turned him against everything."  Frederic Stephens, a former  Pre-Raphaelite brother and art c r i t i c f o r the Athenaeum, appends h i s own comments to Watts' a r t i c l e .  Rossetti's dual a r t i s t i c a b i l i t i e s ,  cause him "to stand alone, a genius unique and unparalleled." another young man who  will  Edmund Gosse,  v i s i t e d R o s s e t t i , wrote an a r t i c l e on Rossetti f o r  53 the Century Magazine t i v e reader.  which indulges the romantic tendencies of the imagina-  To Gosse, R o s s e t t i had a s t r i k i n g magnetism:  "He was  essentially  a point of f i r e ... not a person of wide circumference ... but a nucleus of  pure imagination that never s t i r r e d or s h i f t e d , but s c i n t i l l a t e d i n a l l  directions."  In this passage, by one who was "within the pale," the  i d e a l i z a t i o n of Rossetti as a kind of a r t i s t - p r i e s t i s obvious.  The function  of Gabriel R o s s e t t i , or at least h i s most obvious function, was "to s i t i n i s o l a t i o n , and to have vaguely glimmering s p i r i t s presented to him for complete illumination.  11  The most s i g n i f i c a n t of the R o s s e t t i a r t i c l e s published i n 1883 i s Theodore Watts' twelve-page a r t i c l e "The Truth about R o s s e t t i . " ^  Watts  opens i n reaction against the e f f e c t s of public c u r i o s i t y on a man's image and proposes to correct the misconceptions about the meaning of Rossetti's a r t , h i s personal character and h i s influence as a man. i n some personal Rossetti legend-making.  Watts f i r s t  indulges  His "brotherly intimacy" with h i s  subject makes i t d i f f i c u l t to describe R o s s e t t i , who was a "character so f a s c i n a t i n g , so o r i g i n a l , and yet so contradictory."  To Watts and other  friends of R o s s e t t i , his name was l i k e "a word of music." could these friends lose t h e i r a f f e c t i o n for him: so winsome and a f f e c t i o n a t e , so open of heart  Never, he asserts,  "so i r r e s i s t i b l e was he,  ... so generous i n his  appreciation of other men's work, so free from a l l r i v a l r i e s and jealousies and vulgar greed for fame."  Even the flaw i n his i d e a l p i c t u r e , the grip of  the " t e r r i b l e and unmanning drug," does not d i s i l l u s i o n Watts. spell-bound  He describes  evenings spent i n Rossetti's studio where through the power of  R o s s e t t i , Michelangelo and Dante A l i g h i e r i were f e l t by those p r i v i l e g e d to be  present. Watts did contribute to the excessiveness  of the R o s s e t t i legend,  but consideration must be given to the tone of comparative reason he employs i n h i s discussions. while presenting  He does control h i s impulse to make e u l o g i s t i c extremes  the r e a l i t i e s of Rossetti's l i f e .  In company with Caine and  Sharp, Watts does, however, make statements that Scott could not e a s i l y  accept.  Even a cursory reading of Scott's Notes gives evidence that h i s t r e a t -  ment of Rossetti i s based on a point of view d r a s t i c a l l y c r i t i c a l of that taken by Caine, Sharp, and Watts. It has been suggested that Scott was Joseph Knight's biography of R o s s e t t i . ^  s p e c i f i c a l l y annoyed by  It i s most probably i n the area of  personality evaluation that Scott and Knight would disagree. R o s s e t t i as being sustained and resolute when action was  Knight praises  forced upon him,  and declares that cowardice and selfishness were not among h i s defects. Scott knew R o s s e t t i well enough to prevent him seeing such a perfect p i c t u r e . In a l e t t e r to A l i c e of October 1880,  he made a perceptive comment about other  people's f a i l u r e to admit Rossetti's s e l f i s h n e s s .  Watts had been t e l l i n g  people that Rossetti had treated Dunn, h i s servant, very poorly, by  letting  him go for months without pay.  A mutual friend had asked Scott to i n t e r f e r e  but he refused, observing,  idea of D.G.  "The  being s e l f i s h or t y r a n n i c a l  when he i s generous of what he does not value — comprehend."  money, i s what he  can't  Knight writes with conviction about Rossetti's f a s c i n a t i o n ,  influence and power over his f r i e n d s , but where Knight saw a following, Scott saw  "a dangerous p o s i t i o n to the man  (Notes, I, 289). Raphaelite  whose temperament takes advantage of i t "  Knight's treatment of Rossetti's "Found," the  Pre-  Brotherhood, and Elizabeth Siddal would c e r t a i n l y have been unsatis-  factory to Scott.  The catalogue of differences could be continued,  but  without documented proof that Scott did object to Knight's book, one  can  only suppose the extent of Scott's disagreement. Of the several works on Dante Gabriel Rossetti published by h i s brother previous  to W.B.  Scott's death i n 1890,  a series of a r t i c l e s i n the  Art Journal were most l i k e l y to have influenced revisions i n the Notes. 1884  a r t i c l e s i n the Art Journal attempt to c l a r i f y conjectures about  The  Rossetti.  A straightforward, blunt s t y l e i s used by William, perhaps as an  attempt to underplay the "legend" q u a l i t y of writing about his brother. Necessary f a c t s are t o l d , but without elaboration or excessive r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n . William describes the beginning of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Rossetti and Scott.  [They] were n a t u r a l l y , and almost n e c e s s a r i l y , drawn together by a s p e c i a l l y strong l i n k of common endeavour and a s p i r a t i o n — being both of them poets ... as well as professional painters of a p o e t i c a l or inventive aim.  The word "necessarily," as used by William Michael, would have prompted Scott to discourage such assumptions about his r e l a t i o n s h i p with G a b r i e l , and h i s discussion of a " c o o l " period about 1853 such a response.  i s an example of  A second passage traceable to Scott's Notes i s William's  disclaiming the connection  between his brother's picture "Found," and  Scott's poem "Mary Anne" (or "Rosabell"). somehow got abroad" that the picture was  Although e a r l i e r "a notion  done as an i l l u s t r a t i o n to the poem, g  William r e l a t e s that he had p u b l i c l y denied the connection. apparently  underplayed the matter.  had  Scott too had  However, i n h i s Notes, he encourages the  view of a "more or less d i r e c t " r e l a t i o n s h i p between the  two.  Perhaps the d e t a i l s of the Rossetti legend are not as important as the fact that the public concept of Rossetti was  not l i k e the r e a l man whom  William B e l l Scott v i s i t e d , worked with, l i s t e n e d to, and helped through the f o r t y years of t h e i r acquaintance.  Scott had a strong sense of his  importance to R o s s e t t i on c e r t a i n s p e c i f i c occasions, and t h i s was  own being  p u b l i c l y undermined by an obvious authority, the dead poet's brother. I d e a l i z a t i o n of Rossetti was f i r m l y established i n Scott's p o t e n t i a l readers, and there i s evidence which shows that Scott was highly motivated against i t .  He meant h i s manuscript to be published and gave i t to William Minto with the knowledge that i t would s t a r t l e many.  What he could not a n t i c i p a t e was  the s p e c i f i c antagonism which developed i n 1892,  and the l a s t i n g e f f e c t of  such c r i t i c i s m on h i s reputation.  II  As the previous chapter has shown, the r e s u l t i n g quarrel anticipated before the book came out. L i f e of William B e l l Scott was  was  The Autobiographical Notes of the  published on November 15, 1892.  Essentially,  the controversy on Scott's Notes was waged among four p a r t i e s : the offensive and one on the defensive.  three on  On the offensive were the poet  Swinburne (supported by Watts, h i s secretary), the Rossetti William Sharp, and William Michael R o s s e t t i .  biographer  William Minto was  the chief  voice raised i n defence of Scott, and the emphasis of h i s arguments suggests that personal as w e l l as p r o f e s s i o n a l pride was The controversy may November 1892  A l i c e Boyd kept a scrapbook of reviews  i n the P e n k i l l C o l l e c t i o n at U.B.C), which  contains approximately forty-two a r t i c l e s . found, and probably  several others exist.''"'''  Scott's book were published. journals, and none was  stake.^  be traced through contemporary journals from  u n t i l February, 1893.  of her friend's book (now  at  Another four a r t i c l e s have been In November, nine a r t i c l e s on  About f i v e of these were i n major London  signed by men  of l i t e r a r y prominence.  Their general  tenor i s appreciative of the Notes and sympathetic to Scott as a man a r t i s t , and to his i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h i s experiences. November 17 c r i t i c i z e s Scott's s t r i c t u r e s on T.G. "was  The Times review of  Hake because Scott's poetry  not supremely good" as to give him t h i s c r i t i c a l prerogative.  introduce  and  Scott as a p a r t i c i p a n t i n the Pre-Raphaelite  Most  movement, and  quite  openly recommend his autobiography for d e t a i l s about Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i .  The  Times r e v i e w e r ,  movement had  f o r example, says the impulse o f the  Pre-Raphaelite  w i d e r e f f e c t s which have "almost r e c o n s t r u c t e d  the a r t  and  r  profoundly  modified  the  l i t e r a t u r e o f our  A g a i n the contemporary r e a d e r about the c o n t r o v e r s y M i n t o and  A l i c e Boyd.  concern with  personal  information  l e t t e r s between W i l l i a m  These l e t t e r s , a l s o p a r t of the P e n k i l l  Papers,  r e a c t i o n to the p u b l i c c o n t r o v e r s y ,  and  the " b a c k s t a g e " p o l i t i c s which d i r e c t e d v a r i o u s  d i s p l a y s of c r i t i c i s m . The  i s g i v e n b o t h i n s i g h t and  from the d e t a i l e d and  c h r o n i c l e M i n t o ' s p a r t i n and his  time."  However, a t t h i s e a r l y s t a g e , M i n t o was  Times r e v i e w , which he  a p p r e c i a t i v e , i f not  found a v e r y  extravagent,  and  respectable beginning,  disclose  public elated  by  fairly  a good i n d i c a t i o n of keen i n t e r e s t .  The  l o c a l j o u r n a l s were a l s o g l a d l y r e c e i v e d by M i n t o , from the Birmingham Gazette  ("better  than the Times r e v i e w " ) to the Glasgow H e r a l d  This last achievements and  r e v i e w i s one  sometimes t e l l s  i n no way Richard  of Scott f o r h i s  shows s p e c i f i c a p p r e c i a t i o n o f h i s l i f e  r e v i e w e r does o b j e c t he  o f the most a d m i r i n g  ("excellent").  and  work.  The  t h a t "the w r i t e r ' s v e r a c i t y i s somewhat r u t h l e s s " and  too much, but h i s a d m i r a t i o n  foreshadows the r e c r i m i n a t i o n s a g a i n s t  of S c o t t ' s book i s genuine  p r a i s e s S c o t t ' s common sense about P r e - R a p h a e l i t i s m ,  and  advises  to understand i t s unique v a l u e  own  extremely pleased  M i n t o was  with  as a r e c o r d o f  the r e v i e w , and  Of  the e a r l y r e v i e w s , t h a t i n the Sunday Sun  the most condescending to S c o t t . paragraphs c o n c e r n S c o t t w h i l e Rossetti.  reader  Scott i s described  Scott's  hoped t h a t  La G a l l i e n n e ' s view would be more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the g e n e r a l verdict.  the  He  the book as more than a c o l l e c t i o n of anecdotes about more  renowned p e o p l e , but life.  reader's  of November 20  In an a r t i c l e of over f o u r pages,  the r e s t o f the a r t i c l e as one  that and  S c o t t which were to f o l l o w .  Le G a l l i e n n e a l s o wrote an a p p r e c i a t i v e r e v i e w o f the N o t e s .  to c o n s i d e r  own  i s devoted  of the B r o t h e r h o o d , and  is two  to  his writing  s t y l e i s characterized as having "Pre-Raphaelite asserts that although Scott was was  minuteness."  The writer  not a r i c h or fascinating personality, he  a good companion and f r i e n d , and he had the sense to know the value of  h i s famous acquaintances. pages of the review.  The  "tragedy of R o s s e t t i " claims the l a s t four  Minto c a l l e d the review a "poor advertisement" but  made no guess as to the author "G"  (P.P., Nov.  27, 1892).  At t h i s point, Minto showed great i n t e r e s t i n what the journals would bring.  When Swinburne's f i r s t a r t i c l e was  A l i c e that i t might be fun, f o r Swinburne was never knows how  he w i l l take things."  announced, Minto wrote  "such an i r r i t a b l e bard —  one  He suggested that perhaps a l l u s i o n s to  the poet's s i z e (which he, as e d i t o r , could have eliminated) have "maddened" Swinburne.  Minto also t o l d A l i c e that the reviewing  the Athenaeum, before any notice of Scott's book, was s l i g h t manoeuvered by Watts.  of Hake's Memoirs i n probably a deliberate  In the same l e t t e r of November 27 Minto a n t i c i -  pated the attack by Watts which did not come u n t i l January, for he warned A l i c e about "a c a r e f u l l y d i s t i l l e d venom disguised i n irony or perhaps undisguised."  ^  December 1 brought Swinburne's notorious a r t i c l e , "The New  Terror"  (Fortnightly Review, LVII, 830-33) which gave impulse and form to the barrage of attacks and defences that followed.  Of the twenty-three a r t i c l e s on  Scott's Notes published i n December, over ten are d i r e c t l y related to Swinburne's outburst.  Among the writers who  are not known to have a vested  i n t e r e s t i n the r e s u l t s , opinion i s equally divided for and against Swinburne's opinions of Scott. the controversy  However, i t was  the well-known writers who  over Scott, and the a r t i c l e s of these men  Minto and William Rossetti) brought about the now Scott's  reputation.  controlled  (Swinburne, Sharp,  accepted maligning  of  Swinburne's f i r s t  a t t a c k was e n t i t l e d "The New T e r r o r " i n  t o the " h o r r o r " o f s u r v i v i n g an a u t o b i o g r a p h e r sarcasm,  Swinburne f i n d s i t  represented  pitiful  u l t i m a t e l y the one who s u f f e r s most. the p u b l i c ,  it  Scott.  or b e l i e d " o t h e r men i n h i s work, Yet,  i s h i s duty to p r o t e s t and c o r r e c t  of harmful i n t e n t  to c o n s i d e r the  is  as much as he d i s l i k e s p u t t i n g  f a l s e h o o d s and b l u n d e r i n g a b s u r d i t i e s " where he i s a b l e . he says he i s w i l l i n g  With l u x u r i o u s  t h a t an a u t o b i o g r a p h e r who has m i s -  " b e s l a v e r e d or b e s p a t t e r e d  himself before  such as  reference  "posthumous  F o r h i s own p a r t ,  " i n v e n t i o n s " i n the book as  and the p r o d u c t o f a s e n i l e m i n d .  b l u n d e r i n g w i t h the d e t a i l s o f S w i n b u r n e ' s l i f e a r e  The cases o f cited:  innocent Scott's  S c o t t never  saw  him on a p o n y ; S c o t t i n s i n u a t e s wrongly t h a t Swinburne had o n l y one s u c c e s s at  s c h o o l and l a s t l y ,  the  S c o t t was a b s u r d to b e l i e v e t h a t Swinburne a c t u a l l y  " r a i n b o w " i n S c o t t ' s sonnet r e f e r r e d  to h i s h a i r .  Thus Swinburne d i s p e n s e s  w i t h " t h e u n h a p p i l y i n e v i t a b l e duty o f e x p o s i n g and c h a s t i s i n g such hoods as c o n c e r n m y s e l f . " Minto i s accused "deceased  In S w i n b u r n e ' s o p i n i o n ,  on more i m p o r t a n t and worthy men, and  on the impudence o f " p o e t a s t e r s , " Swinburne s u g g e s t s  S c o t t s h o u l d have been happy  w i t h the l i t t l e n o t i c e he d i d g e t .  s t a t e s t h a t he never wished to b e l i e v e t h a t S c o t t ,  in life,  has exposed t h i s s i d e by " r e l e n t l e s s  was sometimes  an i l l u s i o n ,  he s a y s ,  reveals  it  attack.  It  to be e s s e n t i a l l y  Minto  to  acknowledge  deserves.  a n a l y s i s of S w i n b u r n e ' s case a g a i n s t  trivial.  a  a d m i r i n g , poem  i s worse to r e f u s e  than to t h i n k b e t t e r of a man than he  A c a r e f u l and o b j e c t i v e  he  f i d e l i t y , " and Swinburne can ho l o n g e r  In c o n c l u s i o n , he defends as s i n c e r e h i s e a r l i e r ,  on S c o t t i n s p i t e o f the p r e s e n t  that  Finally,  h i g h - m i n d e d and k i n d l y - n a t u r e d man than he c o u l d have b e e n ,  ignore i t .  outrage,  of v u l g a r i t y and i m p e r t i n e n c e f o r a l l o w i n g t h e exposure o f a  S c o t t was never more than a p a r a s i t e  less  false-  The second l i n e o f a t t a c k i s one o f m o r a l  e l d e r ' s m o r a l and s p i r i t u a l n a k e d n e s s . "  after a tirade  thought  Three minor d e t a i l s ,  Scott  which i n the  text  a r e q u i t e openly life,  and  it  and  leaves  evidence  i t on  of moral d e b i l i t y .  the Academy.  The  Swinburne's p e t u l a n t  c o m b i n a t i o n o f Sharp's s t a n c e  the s p e c i f i c a c c u s a t i o n s  m a n u s c r i p t and  exaggeration  memoir.  time.  o f the most  Scott's death.  Scott's a r t i s t i c  F o r example, the i l l u s t r a t i o n s  interest  skill,  and  three standards  to a c c e p t  assessan  the Notes which  concrete  through h i s form. are r i g h t f u l l y  He  asked,  Sharp a f t e r h i s argument, and make m o r a l  assumption, f o r example, t h a t s c r u p u l o u s  objective criticism.  I t i s Sharp's  freedom from g u i l e " b e f i t s a r e c o r d  from the shadow o f the g r a v e . "  of i t , t h a t a man  to h i s  As he d i d w i t h h i s more  h i s reader  judgments w h i c h have no p l a c e i n honest and  pretense  f o r judging  t h a t the t h r e e q u e s t i o n s  w h i l e a c t u a l l y they a r e d e v i s e d by  come to l i g h t  references  to the r e a d e r , p u r i t y o f motive i n the w r i t e r ,  Sharp i s a g a i n m a n i p u l a t i n g  l e a d s the r e a d e r  the  Scott's  t h a t some o f h i s eminent f r i e n d s  d i s c r e e t honesty i n the r e v e l a t i o n s made.  observations,  His e a r l y  to the Notes " p r o v e " t h a t S c o t t was  a "much l e s s a b l e " a r t i s t  "naturally" arise:  the  a d d i t i o n a l " a u t h o r i t y " as a c r i t i c o f  blow i s a g a i n s t  Sharp then s e t s up  Scott's  Sharp e s t a b l i s h e s the  the a c t u a l volumes under d i s c u s s i o n g i v e a sense o f r e a l i t y  believed.  Scott's  potentially  by s t r e s s i n g h i s knowledge of  S c o t t ' s hopes f o r i t , l o n g b e f o r e  His f i r s t  a r t i f i c e r , and  to  as. an i n t i m a t e of  he makes, r e s u l t s i n one  b i o g r a p h y o f R o s s e t t i g i v e s him  ment.  aberrations,  days l a t e r , W i l l i a m Sharp p u b l i s h e d a l o n g r e v i e w of the Notes  c r e d i b i l i t y of h i s l a t e r o b s e r v a t i o n s  and  as  position in  senility.  damaging p i e c e s w r i t t e n about S c o t t a t the  to  ( h i s age,  the s i d e o f o f f e n s i v e a c c u s a t i o n through r e f e r e n c e s  to h i s p o s s i b l e Two  and  p o i n t o f view  the q u e s t i o n o f S c o t t ' s " g u i l t " to the p o i n t o f r i d i c u l o u s n e s s , but  m o r a l s and  in  S c o t t ' s own  r e c e n t i n t r o d u c t i o n to Swinburne) a r e r e p r e s e n t e d  falsehoods, takes  c o l o u r e d by  must become t o t a l l y  He  assumes, where S c o t t made no  f a i r as o l d age  and  death  become r e a l i t i e s . intended  by  Sharp charges t h a t the m i s s t a t e m e n t s made i n the book were  the w r i t e r :  pondered b e f o r e  i t has  "each has  been c r i t i c a l l y  examined, w e l l - w e i g h e d ,  been wrought to i t s f i n a l shape .. has  under the a t t e n t i v e ...  l a i n f o r years  c o n t i n u o u s s u p e r v i s i o n of the a r t i f i c e r . "  a u t h o r i t y f o r t h i s charge i s based on h i s a s s e r t i o n t h a t he had m a n u s c r i p t when i t was b a l a n c e d and  still  constructed  i n Scott's  control.  to appear j u d i c i a l and  Sharp's i n i t i a l b i a s t h a t  S c o t t was  g r a c e to keep to h i s p r o p e r p l a c e .  an  Academy on  the  tenth.  even Sharp's c l e v e r l y  The  attacks  Another j o u r n a l , r e f e r r i n g  " s t u p i d " and  infatuated  ass of h i m s e l f accusing  His  become the  l e t t e r o f the  Sharp":  g e n i u s can  not  upset h e r .  published  to  in  "How  the dear o l d man  of  act l i k e a On He  fourth i s confident  they w i l l  the  a poem  Swinburne's  the  "coalthird,  calls  " s c u r r i l o u s l i t t l e p o e t " who  the  extravagances.  has  over-  of h i s s u c c e s s  against  swear at poor Sharp f o r making such  i n h i s b l u n d e r s over M i s s S i d d a l and  misinterpretations." and  constructed  s u g g e s t s t h a t they answer themselves i n t h e i r  Swinburne, however, has  "the  misleading  unchallenged.  M i n t o ' s l e t t e r s to A l i c e seem c o n f i d e n t .  Sharp's " f o o l i s h " a r t i c l e has  reached h i m s e l f .  would go  the  P a l l M a l l G a z e t t e of 6 December, p u b l i s h e d  " s i l l y mood," laments t h a t an undoubtedly g r e a t  he hopes t h a t  d i d not have  p r e p a r e d December f o u r t h and  parody o f Swinburne's a t t a c k .  heaver or b a r g e e . "  who  i t betrays  In the meantime the j o u r n a l s were t a k i n g n o t i c e  Swinburne's a c c u s a t i o n s . in  the  article i s carefully  This bias r e s u l t s i n several  guarantee t h a t t h e s e a c c u s a t i o n s  M i n t o ' s " d e f e n c e " was  seen  r e a s o n a b l e ; but  " i n f e r i o r " man  s u g g e s t i o n s about S c o t t ' s a t t i t u d e s , and arguments c o u l d not  The  Sharp's  the R o s s e t t i  of v i l e i n s i n u a t i o n s which e x i s t o n l y  an  family, i n his  However, M i n t o i s s t i l l wary of Watts' expected  own attack  wishes he would soon b r i n g i t f o r t h . M i n t o ' s l e t t e r to the Academy makes, through calm l o g i c , a  answer to the p r e v i o u s  attacks.  He  defends h i s a u t h o r by  successful  d e s c r i b i n g him  not  as a s a i n t b u t as a man w i t h a keen sense o f t h e r i d i c u l o u s . i s prepared to apologize f o r p a i n i n f l i c t e d not  As e d i t o r , he  by h i s c a r e l e s s n e s s , b u t he w i l l  a c c e p t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r m i s c o n c e p t i o n s about what i s r e a l l y i n t h e  text.  That Sharp's  z e a l on b e h a l f o f h i s f r i e n d s has l e d him i n t o  serious  m i s r e a d i n g s o f t h e a c t u a l c o n t e n t i s the b a s i s o f M i n t o ' s d e f e n c e . through t h e p o i n t s r a i s e d by Sharp s y s t e m a t i c a l l y . S i d d a l he i s most emphatic;  He goes  About t h e s l u r on E l i z a b e t h  even had S c o t t w r i t t e n such a t h i n g , h e , M i n t o ,  would never have p r i n t e d i t .  He a l s o defends  S c o t t ' s statements about  and f a m i l y n e g l e c t i n g R o s s e t t i , by r e f e r e n c e t o o t h e r passages which t h a t t h e s u g g e s t i o n was n o t meant as a s l u r on t h e s e p e o p l e . Swinburne as they f i g u r e i n Sharp's a r t i c l e , s a y s , has d i s t o r t e d t h e t r i v i a l  are dismissed.  i n t o stupendous  M i n t o c o n c l u d e s h i s a r t i c l e by matching assertion of intimacy with Scott.  affirm  Watts and Swinburne, he  and r e v o l u t i o n a r y  offences.  Sharp's a p p e a l t o a u t h o r i t y by h i s own  By t h i s t i m e , however, t h e i d e a o f a con-  t r o v e r s y had t a k e n h o l d , and t h e anonymous w r i t e r s began a l i g n i n g with the p r i n c i p a l  friends  themselves  contenders.  An a r t i c l e  i n t h e Saturday Review o f 10 December, f o r example, i s a  r a t h e r u n i n s p i r e d r e v i e w , commenting on unnecessary m a t e r i a l , and t a k i n g t h e s t a n d t h a t the book was o f most i n t e r e s t when about o t h e r men t h a n At  t h e end o f t h e a r t i c l e ,  s a y i n g o f t h e Notes: the  Scott.  the w r i t e r s u d d e n l y employs t h e Swinburne "theme,"  " T h e i r tendency, w i t h a few e x c e p t i o n s , i s n o t t o d i g n i f y  persons o f whom they t r e a t , and t h e r e i s no one whom they b e l i t t l e more  than t h e a u t h o r h i m s e l f . " funny and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c — ' d i g n i f i e d ' indeed!  M i n t o thought  t h e a r t i c l e was by Gosse:  the l i t t l e backbitings p a r t i c u l a r l y .  What about W. M o r r i s and B u r n e J o n e s ? " -  "Very Nobody  (P.P., Dec. 15,  1892). A r e v i e w o f 18 December i n t h e Weekly D i s p a t c h takes an o p p o s i t e view to  t h e S a t u r d a y Review a r t i c l e .  S c o t t was known and r e s p e c t e d by many, b u t  sometimes he  throws " p a i n f u l l i g h t " on  to Swinburne i s c l e a r :  "Of Mr.  f u r i o u s a r t i c l e shows, not  Scott  criticized  Scott i s praised  "of which he must have known much."  the g e n e r a l  Swinburne, however, was  M i n t o has printing  the  excessive living  neglected  preparing  reading  o f the Notes to go The  presumably by  denunciation  Notes a r e  Swinburne's e p i t a p h  "a f a r from memorable man." that innocent  men  should  be  Swinburne's  From t h i s p o i n t  then  biased  r e e k w i t h e q u a l and  f o r Scott  to whom he  follows:  The  " s o c i a l l y " i n f e r i o r to h i s inscribed a  "Here l i e s no Envy l i e s . "  most s e r i o u s q u e s t i o n ,  involved  Swinburne moves to  i m p a r t i a l impertinence"  Swinburne u l t i m a t e l y h i n t s The  the  g a i n Swinburne easy sympathy.  i n t h i s grave i n c a r n a t e  from t h i s a t t a c k ,  Minto  of m i s c o n c e p t i o n s about E l i z a b e t h S i d d a l i s  S c o t t i s b o t h p o e t i c a l l y and  For  ideas.  unchallenged.  found to "seethe and  restrain surprise;/ softening  p r e v i o u s l y exposed.  r e f u s i n g to a l l o w  a c q u a i n t a n c e s , e s p e c i a l l y to those t h r e e sonnet.  of h i s  crimes of a dead " p a r a s i t e . "  the a n g l e of a t t a c k does not now  towards s u p e r i o r s .  Again, h i s s t y l e i s  a "drivelling idiot," for replying i n  only worthwhile t h i n g i n Minto's l e t t e r . S c o t t , and  on  d e c e n c i e s n a t u r a l to a gentleman" i n  becomes a " d u l l a r d , " a "born f o o l " and —  argument,  f o r another f o r a y , and  the h e i n o u s l i e s which Swinburne had  t h a t he had  lacking in  Both s i d e s o f the  as to d e t r a c t from the s e r i o u s n e s s  d u t i e s and  the way  Although  critics.  scapegoat f o r the  "the  latter's  the younger  " c e r t a i n l y not  December 24 h i s second a r t i c l e appeared i n the Academy.  M i n t o i s now  as the  f o r speaking f r a n k l y , while  a p p r e c i a t i o n o f the work and worth o f o t h e r s . "  so p r e p o s t e r o u s l y  writer's attitude  Swinburne he wrote k i n d l y , b u t ,  f r e e l y , says t h i s w r i t e r , he was  t h e n , a r e r e f l e c t e d by  The  i n terms e x t r a v a g a n t enough to s a t i s f y  poet's i n o r d i n a t e v a n i t y . " k e e p i n g f r e e from s c a n d a l ,  t h e i r weaknesses.  dedicatory envious  man!  Deceptively  at the s e n i l i t y he  of  concludes, i s  i n " m a l i g n i t y " j u s t because a w r i t e r  chose  to i n c l u d e them. t o the  f  " B a r d " i s an o f f e n c e  society." of  M i n t o s f a i l u r e to g a i n p e r m i s s i o n " a g a i n s t honour, a g a i n s t  I t i s a p u b l i c v i o l a t i o n o f p r i v a c y and  to use  each  courtesy,  reference  and  against  a public prostitution  confidence. William Michael  r e l u c t a n t l y c o n t r i b u t e s h i s c o m p l a i n t s to  same i s s u e o f the Academy.  B a s i c a l l y , he o b j e c t s  to much w r i t t e n by  about h i s b r o t h e r Dante which i s "unkind, unhandsome, i n a c c u r a t e leading,"  but  he a l s o s u g g e s t s c o r r e c t i o n s to be made i n a new  William Michael request  disputes  the f a c t  for a £ 2 0 0 loan.  Germ b e f o r e  publication.  for pre-arranging  t h a t R o s s e t t i was  Second, he q u e s t i o n s  this Scott  ... and  mis-  edition.  First,  " t e s t i n g " Scott i n h i s  S c o t t ' s knowledge o f  the  T h i r d , he o b j e c t s to S c o t t ' s c r i t i c i s m o f R o s s e t t i  r e v i e w s of h i s POems (1870).  And  fourth, William  Michael  • i  denies  t h a t he h i m s e l f became i l l  down, and  had  as a r e s u l t o f Dante's 1872  to e n t r u s t f i n a n c i a l m a t t e r s to Ford Madox Brown.  among o t h e r s , W i l l i a m would have r e v i s e d , and M i n t o was new  nervous b r e a k -  e d i t i o n the changes would be made.  the f o u r t h p o i n t , W i l l i a m ' s  These p o i n t s ,  to a s s e r t t h a t i n a  However, a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e shows t h a t  i l l n e s s over Dante's breakdown, was  not  untrue.  A l e t t e r i n the P e n k i l l C o l l e c t i o n from S c o t t to A l i c e remarks on C h r i s t i n a and Mrs.  Rossetti's r e l i e f  depression  o f 1872  had  t h a t W i l l i a m was  g e t t i n g married,  s e r i o u s l y alarmed them (P.P., Oct.  30,  d i a r i e s of F o r d Madox Brown are another s o u r c e which v e r i f i e s  as h i s  intense  1873). that  The  William's  12 i l l n e s s was  serious.  William Michael,  t h e n , was  r e c o r d events as he wished them to be known, and  asking  not  that h i s t o r y  should  as t h e y a c t u a l l y took  place. Of  the t h r e e r e v i e w s which mention the c o n t r o v e r s y  none i s swayed by another l e t t e r  Swinburne's a t t a c k on M i n t o .  to the Academy o f December 31st.  Nevertheless, Minto had  i n l a t e December, Minto  submitted  been warned  before  Swinburne's  second l e t t e r appeared that i t was "intemperate" and "uncom-  plimentary" and he had decided to take no notice of i t , unless Swinburne had l e f t some opening too good to be missed.  At this point too, he was s t i l l  a n t i c i p a t i n g a "venomous" attack from Watts (P.P., Dec. 18, 1892).  Minto's  immediate response to the " i r a t e Bard's s i l l y over-charged foul-mouthed abuse" was that i t was laughable: vulgar s t u f f "  "he can only make himself r i d i c u l o u s by such  (P.P., Dec. 24, 1892).  However, he does f e e l concern f o r A l i c e ' s  s e n s i t i v i t y to the accusations, and asserts h i s d i s t r e s s at "rousing the hornet" i f i t causes her pain.  He describes William Micheal's a r t i c l e as  "disappointing" because of the t r i v i a l nature of the errors he exposes.  Minto  allows f o r the correction about William's anxious i l l n e s s over Gabriel (which was i n fact t r u e ) , "But the statement about the diplomatising p r i v a t e l y I can substantiate.  I l i g h t e d today upon a l e t t e r i n which the expression  occurs" (P.P., Dec. 24, 1892). Minto's second reply to Swinburne i n many ways repeats h i s previous stand.  Swinburne has s t i l l not made s p e c i f i c charges of s u f f i c i e n t importance.  Minto d e t a i l s the circumstances of h i s requesting Swinburne's permission to p r i n t l e t t e r s , and of being permitted to use the "Memorial Verses," thus answering Swinburne's In but  insinuation of ungentlemanly conduct i n Scott's e d i t o r .  h i s reply to William Michael, Minto i s c o n t r i t e about the inaccuracies, refuses to allow Scott's motives as hypocrisy and envy.  His emphatic  argument i s that biographers should be able to c r i t i c i z e as w e l l as g l o r i f y : "Has i t come to t h i s , that we cannot, on pain of being accused of envious s p i t e , admire a mans' genius i n arts or l e t t e r s without ascribing to him every v i r t u e and physical perfection under heaven?"  Minto asserts that  although Scott d i d c r i t i c i z e R o s s e t t i , i t i s not the Notes which give prominence to Gabriel's f a u l t s .  I t i s the "outcry of injudicious f r i e n d s " , who  w i l l not allow t h i s balanced view of a beloved man,  which has forced these  f a u l t s into the public notice. In h i s l a s t l e t t e r to A l i c e i n 1892, Minto i s awaiting the r e s u l t s of h i s l a t e s t a r t i c l e . s t i l l haunts him"  The p o t e n t i a l , unrevealed venom of Theodore Watts  "I am i n excellent trim for a scrimmage, i f only Theodore  would come out of h i s hole."  Minto asserts that Watts i s the r e a l antagonist,  and i s only pushing Swinburne forward.  He encloses favourable reviews for  the Times and Morning Post and i s g r a t e f u l that "the Stockdollagers have not nobbled  these great organs or indeed produced any impression on them"  (P.P., Dec.  3, 1892).  Minto became i l l i n early January, and h i s next  letter  to A l i c e i s dated e a r l y i n February, three weeks a f t e r Watts' a r t i c l e had appeared. Previous to Watts' Athenaeum a r t i c l e of January 28, 1893  (No. 3405,  113-5) several other reviews of the Notes were published which i l l u s t r a t e the public's a t t i t u d e to the controversy.  The Bookman reviewer takes Scott's  side, laughing at Swinburne's pomposity and decrying h i s lack of sense of humor.  He praises both Minto's assessment of Scott's p e r s o n a l i t y , and h i s  d i s c r e t i o n as e d i t o r .  In the Black and White, the Notes are c r i t i c i z e d for  " e r r o r s " of taste, but are found valuable for t h e i r p i c t u r e of nineteenth century a r t i s t i c l i f e .  In a Daily Chronicle a r t i c l e , previously discussed,  the writer admits that although Scott i s extremely h o s t i l e towards Caine, he shows l i t t l e malice towards R o s s e t t i .  The C r i t i c , an American j o u r n a l ,  accepts Scott's version at face value with no mention of Swinburne's i n t e r e s t . By contrast, Speed's L i t e r a r y Notes, a second American p u b l i c a t i o n , c a r r i e s an a r t i c l e which deals e x c l u s i v e l y with the c o n f l i c t .  This c r i t i c ' s  sympathies are d e f i n i t e l y not with Swinburne, and he traces the antagonism to Sharp, who  made war on a dead man,  and drew the "high-strung" poet Swinburne  along with him.  The l a t t e r ' s vituperation has only confirmed f o r this writer,  the truth of Scott's anecdotes.  A short notice i n Figaro deals b l u n t l y with  the R o s s e t t i "mystique" as a factor i n the controversy and defends Scott f o r his  r e a l i s t i c treatment.  A review e n t i t l e d "English Bards and Scottish  Reviewings" i n the Speaker has the tone of one who knew Scott. for  Scott's regret  never quite having succeeded i s acknowledged but so i s h i s " r a r e " intimacy  with the more important figures of h i s time. Watts' unsigned Athenaeum a r t i c l e i s by f a r the most important to the controversy of those printed i n January 1893.  His themes were not  new.  Watts' i n d i v i d u a l touch i s to labor the suggestion that Scott was a complete unknown, unimportant but for h i s famous f r i e n d s .  Scott's lack of a sense of  humour i s scorned as a p a r t i c u l a r l y S c o t t i s h t r a i t , and the Notes are represented as readable only by those with a "high sense of duty."  Scott's  n a t u r a l l y grudging mood, Watts says, l e d him to state "grotesque untruths" about R o s s e t t i .  The r e a l R o s s e t t i , f u l l of humour and g e n i a l i t y , had a large  and splendid nature, as h i s l e t t e r s show. chorus that Scott i s the one who t i o n i n h i s autobiography. ends.  F i n a l l y Watts restates the f a m i l i a r  suffers most from the i l l - n a t u r e d representa-  I t i s here that the damaging controversy e s s e n t i a l l y  John Skelton, i n Blackwoods, attempts to incriminate Scott further  by h i s discussion of Rossetti "working the o r a c l e , " but a contemporary  was  quick to suggest that Skelton had proved Scott t r u t h f u l by p r i n t i n g Rossetti's l e t t e r s , and had not demonstrated Rossetti's innocence. Minto did not take up any challenge offered by the long-awaited Watts' a r t i c l e .  His i l l n e s s (which foreshadowed  h i s death on March 1st, 1893)  had l e f t him l i t t l e s p i r i t for such combat, and this was i n t e n s i f i e d by h i s f e e l i n g that Watts had cunningly l e f t him no grounds f o r reply by remaining anonymous  and by avoiding statement of f a c t .  Minto intended to take on Watts  i n an introductory chapter i f there was, a second e d i t i o n .  On February 4th, he  mentioned the Skelton a r t i c l e to A l i c e , f i n d i n g the crossed purposes one of the funniest incidents i n the controversy. informed Minto that sale was correspondence.  Apparently  readers to the book was  Publisher Mcllwaine had  "not b r i s k " i n s p i t e of a l l the advertising and Minto's hope that the accusations would draw  not be be  fulfilled.  Although the c r i t i c i s m of Scott's Notes did l i t t l e to increase i t s appeal to buyers, the controversy had a d i s t i n c t impact i n e s t a b l i s h i n g William B e l l Scott's long-range reputation.  The h i s t o r i c a l picture of  Scott has been l i t t l e affected by the statements of those f r i e n d l y to  him,  or by the many reviews which praised his l i f e and appreciated h i s book for what i t contained.  This controversy, with a l l i t s pettiness and hearsay,  has apparently coloured permanently the judgment of William B e l l Scott. R o s s e t t i became a v i c t i m of a legend of p e r f e c t i o n , but Scott has become a v i l l a i m i n a legend of malice and envy. Ill  By 1895,  the men  noise had opened two new  who  created the scandal were s i l e n t , but  areas of speculation:  that P.ossetti had  their  detractors  as w e l l as admirers; and that although one could r e j e c t h i s a t t i t u d e s , William B e l l Scott could not be ignored as an authority on R o s s e t t i .  It i s  not too strong to assert that a l l subsequent l i t e r a t u r e on R o s s e t t i and Pre-Raphaelites  c a r r i e s Scott's influence.  the  In c r i t i c i z i n g Scott's choice  of anecdotes, William Michael Rossetti and others have only succeeded i n bringing them into prominence. Aside from William Michael's books, the l i t e r a t u r e u n t i l the 1930's allows Scott h i s due.  While they f i n d h i s scorn regrettable, such  writers as Hueffer, M a r i l l i e r , and Benson are interested i n the new  material  in Scott's Notes.  Holman Hunt says nothing of the controversy, but praises  Scott as "ever-pleasant" and a "good-hearted man of letters."  And the  Memoirs, Lives, and Letters of such acquaintances as Shields, Woolner, Caine and even Watts, hold no animosity toward Scott.  Perhaps this i s because  William Michael was s t i l l living, and i t was properly his task to correct any misconceptions about his brother.  However, i t i s also possible that  this restraint comes from being close to the subject.  A l l these writers  had lived through the controversy in f u l l flower some ten years earlier. It i s plausible that Swinburne's public reputation, and his proclivity for journalistic quarrels, could have prompted these writers to reserve their opinions of Scott's "parasitic foulness." It could also be conjectured that William Michael had simply worn the subject out hy making no startling proof of Scott's dishonesty.  In his  Memoir (1895) of Dante Gabriel, William i n i t i a l l y treates Scott coolly, but becomes more impassioned as his criticism of Scott spreads from the merely factual to the level of attitudes and opinions.  First, he praises Scott for  his friendship and defends him as a poet, but suggests that Scott is not always correct in chronological and other details.  William's technique,  i t seems, i s that ignoring Scott's attitudes while correcting his facts w i l l diminish him in stature and eliminate him as an authority.  When matters of  opinion arise, however, William shifts into the controversy theme that "Scott debases no one but himself by his criticism," a point of view which demands the higher involvement he then begins to give.  As his arguments degenerate  into mere quibbles about time or place, and are less crucially corrections of essential facts, William loses ground. ,^200  In several cases, including the  incident, he claims the ability to discredit Scott's version but William  Michael does hot himself advance the evidence to refute William Bell Scott's  assertions. The main motif i n William's Memoir a t t i t u d e to Scott's Notes  is  that although there occur expressions which i n d i c a t e genuine f r i e n d s h i p , there are others which seem "incompatible with anything to disparage  and besmirch" (p. 367).  save a resolute desire  C h l o r a l and love a f f a i r s are f a i l i n g s  which have a saving "romantic" tinge to them.  D i f f i c u l t i e s with money  and fear of c r i t i c i s m are f a i l i n g s which William would rather have kept unobtrusive.  He admits that throughout h i s Memoir he has used Scott's book  as the lowest degree of w r i t i n g about R o s s e t t i . the misstatement of a "thoughtful" man  He regrets having to stress  about h i s "dearest f r i e n d s , " but feels  should have made allowances for G a b r i e l .  Sco  His f i n a l attack on Scott i s h i s j  grandest and perhaps h i s most l o g i c a l l y suspect.  Scott refused to comment  on "the repulsive elements" of Rossetti's l a s t months, and William reacts powerfully to the adjective used.  His anger leads him to the rather petulant  suggestion  that Scott should have said nothing at a l l about things he did  not l i k e .  The coup de grace i s f r u s t r a t i n g l y weak.  What, he asks, are s t o r i e s  about R o s s e t t i doing i n an autobiography of William B e l l Scott?  The book should  be about Scott, not R o s s e t t i . In the next book, Ruskin:  Rossetti:  Pre-Raphaelitism,  published  four years l a t e r , William Michael uses the editor's prerogative to make less vehement comments about Scott. l e t t e r s printed.  Scott, who  He exposes him on several subjects by  the  c r i t i c i z e d Rossetti for "working the o r a c l e , "  i s shown as himself worried about public reception of his poetry.  Further  paranoia i s indicated i n a l e t t e r about a s l i g h t Scott f e l t he had suffered from some o f f i c i a l s .  However, William Michael's  gentle than i n the previous book.  He quotes Brown's praise of Scott, and  acknowledges his debt to Scott for his own Whitman.  approach here i s more  i n t e r e s t i n Shelley and Walt  By 1906, When Some Reminiscences appeared, William had softened from h i s e a r l i e s t anger with Scott and was ready to r a t i o n a l i z e his natured" exposures of R o s s e t t i .  "ill-  William reasserts h i s a f f e c t i o n f o r Scott  and his b e l i e f that Scott was both sympathetic and a f f e c t i o n a t e to G a b r i e l . But, again, he acknowledges that Scott conceived Gabriel which had a reasonable foundation.  of some "soreness" toward  He believes that Scott wrote  about Gabriel " i n a s p i r i t of d e t r a c t i o n " f o r two reasons. desire to treat a "man of mark" with t r u t h . Scott considered misrepresenting  almost a l l biographies  He continues:  F i r s t was h i s " I know ... that  untrustworthy, as ignoring or  matters of importance; and he aimed at compassing a contrary  r e s u l t " (p. 60). Second was jealousy, which arose a f t e r Rossetti's death when highly laudatory material was published about him. This image of Scott as jealous, u n f u l f i l l e d , and b l i n d l y envious p e r s i s t s to the present. In 1928, Scott gained a champion of s o r t s , when Oswald Doughty 13 published  the l e t t e r s of Rossetti. to his publisher, F.S. E l l i s .  A major  charge against Scott's treatment of Rossetti was that he exaggerated h i s friend's s e n s i t i v i t y to c r i t i c i s m and his concern with pre-arranging of forthcoming work.  reviews  The material Doughty publishes proves that Gabriel d i d  seriously obtain the support of friends before publishing Poems i n 1870. Doughty also defends Scott f o r thinking that h i s admonition to R o s s e t t i , " l i v e for your poetry," was his contribution to Gabriel's peace of mind i n 1869.  Doughty allows that Scott "undoubtedly exaggerates" his part i n  Rossetti's poetic r e v i v a l , but i n s i s t s that the P e n k i l l v i s i t was important. Even the w a t e r f a l l " s u i c i d e " incident i s considered  p l a u s i b l e by Doughty,  although i t was "embroidered by Scott's somewhat romantic  imagination."  Evelyn Waugh's book on Rossetti contributes another damaging blow to Scott's reputation.  Waugh praises Ruskin's influence on Rossetti  and asserts, " I t i s a l a s t i n g testimony to the s t u p i d i t y and bias of William  B e l l Scott that he welcomed t h i s decline as 'emancipation' from the oldmaidenly fussiness of Ruskin." Earth) published  Megroz' book on Rossetti (Painter Poet of Heaven on  the next year, finds Scott " s a r c a s t i c " but acknowledges that  the "boldness" of Scott's ideas was  a genuine stimulus to R o s s e t t i .  p o s i t i v e contribution by Megroz i s h i s notice of Scott's poem t i t l e d  A "The  Witches B a l l a d " which, he suggests, outdoes any of Rossetti's poems for a "macabre and dionysian s p i r i t of romance."  F i f t e e n years l a t e r , another  c r i t i c regrets that Scott i s a poet forgotten by the moderns, and describes same poem as a "miracle of atavism —  a v i s i o n , as e l d r i t c h a- witch's dance  as there i s record of i n our l i t e r a t u r e " (p. 288):^ as more than a biographical demon are rare. Romantics 1850-70 (London: who  Howe, 1929)  Such glimpses of Scott  T. Earle Welby, i n The V i c t o r i a n  represents  the unimaginative writers  lack the c u r i o s i t y to see Scott i n depth, and are content to use him  a f o i l for R o s s e t t i .  the  as  He defends Scott against Swinburne's t i r a d e , and  concludes, "Strenuous, unachieving  Scott, i f hardly deserving of study, remains  above contempt" (p. 29). The 1930's brought several ambitious books on Rossetti which to develop and l i m i t the picture of Scott.  In The Wife of Rossetti (1932),  V i o l e t Hunt treats Scott i n accord with her f a n c i f u l and of R o s s e t t i .  continued  "romantic" treatment  She describes him as dour and carping, an "arrant  gossip"  apt to "lash h i s erstwhile competitors i n the race with a bitterness they did not r e l i s h . "  Scott's marriage puzzles this w r i t e r , as does his  of Fanny Cornforth.  Yet, for his treatment of Rosabell Bonally, she  him the "most cantankerous and chivalrous of men,"  "hatred" calls  a paradoxical state which  obviously s a t i s f i e s the romantic excitement necessary to her n a r r a t i v e . Frances Winwar i n Poor Splendid Wings (1933) also treats Scott as envious: "so embittered friends."  by his f a i l u r e s that he was  affronted by the success of his  Spitefulness and an unforgiving nature become Scott's main t r a i t s ,  while h i s encouragement of Rossetti's poetry i n 1869  i s described as having  a "gruff p r a c t i c a l i t y . " A more s a t i s f a c t o r y view of Scott .Is given by Ifor Evans i n h i s discussion of poetry i n the l a t e nineteenth century e d i t i o n of the book appeared i n 1966,  (1933).^  A second  with a considerably changed approach.  In the f i r s t e d i t i o n Scott i s c l a s s i f i e d as a minor Pre-Raphaelite, whose "sluggish" mind was  i n s p i r e d by R o s s e t t i .  Scott's Notes are valuable as  a personal record, and for Pre-Raphaelite p o r t r a i t s . work  Scott's ambition  However, i n h i s a r t i s t i c  f a r outweighed h i s achievement.  Any sparks of genius  i n Scott's work derive from h i s contact with Rossetti and the others of h i s group.  In the 1966  e d i t i o n , Evans i s d e f i n i t e l y influenced by Professor  Packer's treatment of Scott i n her biography of C h r i s t i n a R o s s e t t i .  Her  approach shows Scott to have been "of greater importance than previously realized."  However, Evans does not suggest a new  study of Scott himself on  the basis of this importance. Janet Camp T r o x e l l ' s Three Rossettis (1937) i s at the core of modern Rossetti l i t e r a t u r e , but her treatment of Scott goes back to the Memoir of William Michael. "Found," and P e n k i l l 1869 personality.  Such old issues as Miss Losh, the subject of are presented  as being harshly c r i t i c a l of Scott's  Mrs. T r o x e l l asserts that from the time of GUabriel's death, .  Scott's l e t t e r s are f u l l of s l i g h t i n g references to him.  The l e t t e r s  publishes, however, hardly convey the i n t e n s i t y of f e e l i n g she  she  suggests,  and a sympathetic reader would see them as evident of honesty rather than envy.  Although Mrs. T r o x e l l allows that there must have been something  "endearing"  i n Scott's p e r s o n a l i t y , she asserts that the q u a l i t y i s " u t t e r l y  lacking when one meets him only through h i s autobiography or h i s l e t t e r s . " A sympathetic reader, e s p e c i a l l y one with a knowledge of the P e n k i l l l e t t e r s , would disagree.  Scott i s an important  f i g u r e i n this book, but he i s kept  within the l i m i t s of h i s t r a d i t i o n a l  stereotype.  Both William Gaunt (1942) and Oswald Doughty (1949) accept much of Scott's Notes at face value, although they warn the reader about Scott's reputation.  Doughty's book, A V i c t o r i a n Romantic, i s the more important,- and the  more generous to Scott, f o r the writer attempts to f i l l out the f l a t picture of an envious " p i c t o r ignotus" by an understanding of h i s s i t u a t i o n . art  to ambitious Novacastrians  Teaching  was not adequate solace for one who "combined  strong l i t e r a r y and a r t i s t i c aspirations with no mean opinion of himself" (p. 52). On a l l of the usual issues (Miss Losh;^£200), Doughty defends Scott, although he finds i t strange that Scott should have written i n a derogatory tone about Swinburne. U n t i l Lona Packer's book i n 1963, the most thorough discussion of Scott was i n Helen R o s s e t t i Angeli's Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i : and Enemies (1949). a friend.  His Friends  In Mrs. Angeli's view, Scott i s an enemy disguised as  Each of the o l d issues i s presented  to support the contention  that Scott was s p i t e f u l and envious, and that he owed much to R o s s e t t i f o r praise and help given his a r t i s t i c attempts.  William Michael's  used to n u l l i f y Scott's version of events i n Rossetti's l i f e .  report i s The e s s e n t i a l  argument of the chapter on Scott i s that the misunderstanding of Rossetti as morbid, s e l f i s h and ungrateful i s traceable to Scott's picture of him, and was created by Scott when an aging, jealous man, obsessed by h i s own sense of f a i l u r e .  I t seems that Scott's reputation i n this century has indeed  suffered from becoming a worn-out subject.  When h i s t o r i c a l perspective  seems to endow one person with common sense about the issues, the next writer i n v a r i a b l y returns to the o l d , emotionally prejudiced arguments and " f a c t s . " Writers on the Pre-Raphaelites  have generally made l i t t l e use of unpublished  material i n t h e i r treatment of Scott, p r e f e r r i n g the old anecdotes and  a t t i t u d e s to new  possibilities.  A biography of C h r i s t i n a R o s s e t t i , published 1963,  promised to c o r r e c t t h i s  tendency.  The  James C o l l i n s o n nor  Charles  poems.  must have been i n v o l v e d ,  was  A t h i r d man  William  Bell  Scott.  interest  E v i d e n c e f o r the  v a n q u i s h e d by  had  never read  William  strong  i n C h r i s t i n a waned.  was  and Mrs.  love a f f a i r the  Her  l o v e f o r him  i s found i n  times when she  similarities  saw  Scott.  A l i c e Boyd h i s but  the p u b l i c a t i o n o f h i s Notes when C h r i s t i n a ( a l t h o u g h  she  loved  an  "unworthy"  p r i m a r i l y from the p o e t r y i s not  "Circumstantial  makes i m p o s s i b l e  a s i n g l e scrap  contention  apparently  evidence  derived  of p o s i t i v e and  d i r e c t proof."  The  t h e s i s . Professor  theory  t h a t S c o t t was  a "demon l o v e r "  delighted  i n maintaining  r e l a t i o n s with  t h a t he  two  found echoes i n I f o r Evans' r e f e r e n c e  has  numerous o u t l e t s h i s amorous n a t u r e r e q u i r e d . " A v e r y D a v i d Sonstroem tags S c o t t as  "an  a t t i t u d e s and  mores'^ has  to  "the  r e c e n t book (1970), i n which  a c t i v e , warm, v i r i l e and  "conducted h i s e m o t i o n a l a f f a i r s w i t h a b o l d and  Scott's  He  P a c k e r ' s book  i n C h r i s t i n a ' s mythology and  of conventional  theory  w i t h e v i d e n c e from the P e n k i l l C o l l e c t i o n .  gained a f o l l o w i n g .  women s i m u l t a n e o u s l y  discounts  the p r e c i s e documentation o f a  I n s p i t e o f the d i s c r e d i t i n g o f the  who  man.  E. Fredeman, i n a r e v i e w o f the book f o r V i c t o r i a n S t u d i e s ,  supports t h i s  The  endured u n t i l h i s d e a t h ,  h i s book) r e a l i z e d t h a t she had  f o r which t h e r e  neither  P a c k e r deduces t h a t i t  f o r a t i m e , but when S c o t t met  Lona P a c k e r ' s t h e s i s s a t i s f a c t o r i l y :  has  a u t h o r contends t h a t  C a y l e y i n s p i r e d C h r i s t i n a R o s s e t t i ' s more e m o t i o n a l  between the d a t e s o f C h r i s t i n a ' s poems and bond between them was  by Lona Packer i n  energetic  truly regal  begun to c r e a t e a new  man"  disregard  annex  to  the F a i r Lady, does seem to  be  "legend." Sonstroem's book, R o s s e t t i and  g i v i n g Scott  some of the r e s p e c t  other \  contemporary w r i t e r s have d e n i e d .  him.  At least he credits Scott as a reliable source of information and opinion. Inevitably, the traditional treatment of Scott impinges:  "Although Scott  was notoriously unkind to his old friend i n his evaluation of him, and very bad on dates, his recounting of simple incidents, for a spiteful and disappointed old man, was remarkably f a i r " (p. 216). The modern tendency to use Scott's more sensational disclosures while derogating the man for making them should, perhaps, be traced to ignorance of the real man.  Much closer  examination of Scott's relationship with Rossetti i s necessary, and w i l l be made possible by the documents i n the Penkill Collection.  \ \  FOOTNOTES CHAPTER 3  (Oxford:  "'"Oswald Doughty and J.R. Wahl, L e t t e r s of Dante G a b r i e l C l a r e n d o n , 1965-67) I , x i x .  Rossetti  I  2 (London:  Thomas H a l l C a i n e , R e c o l l e c t i o n s S t o c k , 1882).  o f Dante G a b r i e l  Rossetti  3 Theodore Watts c l a i m e d t h a t R o s s e t t i had asked him,.among h i s a c q u a i n t a n c e s , to be h i s o f f i c i a l b i o g r a p h e r . The c l a i m was u p h e l d by W i l l i a m R o s s e t t i (Memoir I , i x ) .  ^Theodore Watts, "Mr. 1882). 480-82.  D.G.  R o s s e t t i , " Athenaeum no.  2842 ( A p r i l  15,  ^Edmund Gosse, "Dante G a b r i e l R o s s e t t i , " Century Magazine XXIV (Sept. 1882) 718-725. -  XIII  Theodore Watts "The (March 1883) 404-423. 7  Truth  about R o s s e t t i , " N i n e t e e n t h C e n t u r y ,  J o s e p h K n i g h t , L i f e o f Dante G a b r i e l R o s s e t t i  (London:  Scott,  1887).  W i l l i a m R o s s e t t i , "Notes on R o s s e t t i and H i s Works," A r t J o u r n a l , XLVI (May-July 1884) p. 165. The " p u b l i c s t a t e m e n t s " r e f e r r e d to by W i l l i a m R o s s e t t i were made i n the Athenaeum of J a n u a r y , 1883. On J a n . 21, W i l l i a m wrote "... the d e e p l y moving b a l l a d of 'Mary Anne', by ... Mr. S c o t t , does not c o n t a i n any i n c i d e n t o r 'passage' on w h i c h t h i s scene o r p i c t u r e i s based. On J a n . 27, W.B. S c o t t wrote t h a t R o s s e t t i , on r e a d i n g "Mary Anne" (then t i t l e d " R o s a b e l l " ) o f f e r e d to add an i l l u s t r a t i v e e t c h i n g to be i n c l u d e d i n the f o r t h c o m i n g book. long' a f t e r the book came o u t , R o s s e t t i d i d do a p i c t u r e on the s u b j e c t , a water c o l o u r e n t i t l e d "The Gate o f Memory." However he and S c o t t d i d d i s c u s s the s i t u a t i o n of the poem, and R o s s e t t i d e c i d e d to p a i n t a p i c t u r e of the " t e r r i b l e meeting o f the o l d l o v e r s now parted f o r ever." S c o t t f e l t t h a t a l t h o u g h the s i t u a t i o n p r e s e n t e d i n "Found" was not a c t u a l l y i n h i s poem, h i s d i s c u s s i o n of i t w i t h R o s s e t t i had l e d to the p a i n t i n g . /' 9 In C h r i s t i n a R o s s e t t i , Lona P a c k e r ' q u o t e s a l e t t e r from F r e d e r i c k George Stephens to W.M. R o s s e t t i (p. 387-8). I t h i n k you are i n v a r i a b l y r i g h t about S c o t t ' s unhappy book, and I am not s u r e you know t h a t h i s mixed c o n c e r n was o r i g i n a l l y f a r more i n j u r i o u s than i t i s now. S c o t t h i m s e l f , a good w h i l e b e f o r e h i s d e a t h , t o l d me t h a t he i n t e n d e d to t e l l , w i t h o u t r e s e r v e o r mercy, a l l he knew (or thought he  knew) about G. He was resolved, he I remonstrated i n the most stringent with a remark that whatever he knew he spoke o f , had come to him i n the h i s purpose as strongly as I could,  said to l e t the world know the 'truth.' manner as to t h i s , and f i n a l l y l e f t him (or thought he knew) as to these matters confidence of friendship, and I denounced  "^William E. Fredeman gives a b r i e f outline of the controversy i n h i s monograph "A Pre-Raphaelite Gazette: The P e n k i l l Letters of Arthur Hughes to William B e l l Scott and A l i c e Boyd, 1886-97" (Manchester: John Rylands, 1967) p. 41-49. •^These four a r t i c l e s are not among those i n the Scrapbook now i n the P e n k i l l C o l l e c t i o n : Anonymous "The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood" The Nation, Feb. 23, 1893. E.G.J. "A C i r c l e of Famous A r t i s t s and Poets" The D i a l , Dec. 16, 1893. W. Robertson N i e l l , "William B e l l Scott", The Bookman, January, 1893. A.C. Swinburne, "The New Terror" Fortnightly Review, Dec. 1, 1892. 12 Ford Madox Hueffer, Ford Madox Brown (London: Longmans,  p. 273.  1896)  13 Oswald Doughty, ed. The Letters of Dante Gabriel Rossetti to h i s Publisher, F.j>. E l l i s , (London: S c h o l a r t i s , 1928) 14 Cornelius Weygandt, The Time of Tennyson (New York: Lend: Century, 1936).  (London:  Appleton-  ^~*B. Ifor Evans, English Poetry i n the Later Nineteenth Century Methuen, 1933).  . "^Lona Mosk Packer, C h r i s t i n a R o s s e t t i (Berkeley: C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1963).  University of  Defense of Scott Based On New Material In P e n k i l l Papers  A f t e r the f i r s t meeting between Scott and Rossetti i n 1847, perhaps at a studio Rossetti shared with Holman Hunt^. there i s no d e f i n i t e record of any personal contact u n t i l 1853.*  Other d e t a i l s suggest at l e a s t yearly  meetings when Scott made h i s accustomed t r i p s to London.  William Michael  R o s s e t t i v i s i t e d Scott at Newcastle i n the summer of 1848, and at t h i s time Scott heard the barest d e t a i l s about the Pre-Raphaelite conversation  about Pre-Raphaelite  Brotherhood.  A  techniques at M i l l a i s ' studio, related by  Scott, also suggests his awareness of and his part i n the formulation of PreRaphaelite p r i n c i p l e s .  Scott also met the sculptor Thomas Woolner about 1850,  and expressed doubt as to the success of Woolner's romantic adventure to the g o l d - f i e l d s of A u s t r a l i a .  Scott says that he f i r s t knew of the Germ, the PRB  p e r i o d i c a l , i n 1849 when requests  for material began to come his way. The  PRB Journal for January 1850 records with enthusiasm the receipt of two sonnets by Scott f o r the Germ. Although William Michael had paid at l e a s t two v i s i t s to Newcastle by 1851, Gabriel's v i s i t of 1853 was probably the f i r s t extended contact between him and Scott.  At this time, Scott learned much about h i s younger  f r i e n d which contradicted his e a r l i e r perceptions  of him. About 1853,  Scott probably met Rossetti's fiancee. Elizabeth Siddal, but no friendship developed between them.  A period of undetermined, length existed i n the 1850's  when Scott was less affectionate toward R o s s e t t i .  During this period both  men were busy with t h e i r separate careers and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s .  Rossetti  was occupied  not only with Elizabeth Siddal, but also with the patronage of  John Ruskin.  In addition, he had made several e x c i t i n g new friends, which  included William Morris and Burne-Jones.  Scott's connections with the  Trevelyans of Wallington  H a l l began i n the m i d - f i f t i e s , and by the end  of  the decade Scott had begun his deep and l a s t i n g friendship with A l i c e Boyd. In s p i t e of Scott's suggestion  of estrangement, (Notes, I, 317)  several instances of contact during t h i s time. Scott was  there are  When Deverell died i n  1854,  s e n s i t i v e to Rossetti's l o s s , and records i n h i s Notes that Rossetti  expressed h i s a f f e c t i o n for Deverell i n t r y i n g to s e l l some of h i s paintings for  the benefit of h i s family.  On a l i g h t e r subject, Scott records Dante  Gabriel's teasing over his poem Journey of Prince Legion.  In 1853,  Rossetti  had e x c i t e d l y promised an etching to i l l u s t r a t e Scott's forthcoming Poems by a Painter.  However, he had not done the etchings by 1854  Scott for h i s neglect.  and apologized  to  Rossetti also knew that a Scott p i c t u r e had been  rejected by "the I n s t i t u t i o n snobs" and defended h i s f r i e n d s ' "present ideas and l a t e r doings" to Thomas Woolner (Letters, I, 174-5). Scott's avowal that he and Rossetti were less close for a period i n the f i f t i e s should, however, not be ignored.  Rossetti's increasing  commitment to Ruskin probably influenced Scott's f e e l i n g s .  In h i s Notes,  Scott emphasizes that he f e l t neither friendship nor conventional for Ruskin, e i t h e r as man career, Ruskin was  friends who  At this early stage i n Rossetti's  extremely h e l p f u l , and even extended his influence to  include Elizabeth Siddal. two  or teacher.  Rossetti's d i f f i c u l t y i n  were not compatible can be imagined.  praised Scott to such men Browning's order"  respect  expressing  l o y a l t y to  However, R o s s e t t i s t i l l  as Allingham, describing him as "a man  (Letters, I, 248).  In 1856,  something of  the meeting between Scott  and  Ruskin at the Working Man's College took place, and Rossetti acted as a catalyst to the opposing sides of t h e i r p e r s o n a l i t i e s .  Scott evidently  to some degree betrayed by Dante Gabriel's f a i l u r e to support In 1857,  felt  him.  R o s s e t t i became friends with Edward Burne-Jones and  Morris, and became involved with the Oxford and Cambridge Magazine.  William  In March,  he sent Scott three copies of the magazine which contained  poems by him,  and  i n June asked Scott without r e s u l t to send pictures to the e x h i b i t i o n i n F i t z r o y Place, held by the "set." *\  1857,  The Oxford Union Murals were painted i n  and although Scott says he was  eventually glad not to have been involved  with the fading p i c t u r e s , h i s Notes contain a review of the murals which gives highest praise to R o s s e t t i .  Scott showed the f i r s t of h i s Wallington  paintings  i n this year and Gabriel praised i t s i n c e r e l y , although he found some flaws. The Hogarth Club was the Royal Academy.  formed i n 1858,  Both Scott and Rossetti were members, and Scott laments  the early d i s s o l u t i o n of the club. Raphaelites was  as an attempt to weaken the power of  Scott's r o l e as a " f r i e n d " to the  strengthened i n 1858,  when he advised James Leathart  Newcastle to c o l l e c t the work of the group. Rossetti received from Leathart was year, 1859,  Scott was  pleased  of  The commission for "Found" which  due to Scott's influence.  The next  to learn that Rossetti had abandoned the practice  of s t i p p l i n g the f l e s h i n h i s paintings. had been a constant  Pre-  The inadequacy of the technique  theme i n Scott's c r i t i c i s m of Rossetti's work, and  f e l t that the change was  Scott  "of i n f i n i t e importance" i n the h i s t o r y of Rossetti's  painting. The year 1860 contact was  was  important to both men,  not a necessary part of the events.  to P e n k i l l Castle, home of A l i c e Boyd.  although t h e i r  personal  Scott paid h i s f i r s t v i s i t  This Scottish home became increasingly  important to Scott's l i f e and work, and on two occasions became a useful sanctuary for R o s s e t t i .  The marriage of Rossetti to Elizabeth Siddal  a p i v o t a l event i n the course of Gabriel's l i f e . he never did v i s i t the young couple.  was  Although Scott was i n v i t e d ,  Nevertheless he became very aware of  the e f f e c t s of the marriage on R o s s e t t i , which suggests that they were i n contact during the two years of Rossetti's marriage. e x h i b i t i o n of his Wallington  pictures i n 1861  provided  Perhaps Scott's London the  opportunity.  A l t h o u g h S c o t t says n o t h i n g  i n h i s Notes, W i l l i a m M i c h a e l  t h a t R o s s e t t i spent t h r e e weeks a t C h r i s t m a s , 1862, death, with painted  the  a portrait  duced t o him. due  S c o t t s , i n Newcastle.  on New  The  o f Mrs.  (Memoir, I , 259).  the w i f e o f the p a t r o n  and  t r y i n g to s e l l  R o s s e t t i had  W i l l i a m o r D a v i d S c o t t i s not  he  S c o t t had  intro-  a l s o mentions a as  bill  repayment  moved i n t o Tudor House,  h i s l e t t e r s i n d i c a t e that h i s l i f e  some p i c t u r e s "by  wife's  While there,  f o r which G a b r i e l gave S c o t t ^ 2 6 , p r o b a b l y  ( L e t t e r s , I I , 464)  i n mid-October 1862, He was  the y e a r o f h i s  l e t t e r which g i v e s t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n  Y e a r ' s Day,  of a loan.  Leathart,  discloses  Chelsea,  then was  chaotic.  S c o t t , " but whether they were by  specified.  In h i s Notes, S c o t t says  little  t h a t i s s p e c i f i c about the seven-year p e r i o d between the d e a t h o f E l i z a b e t h , and  R o s s e t t i ' s r e t u r n to poetry  i n 1869.  a d i f f e r e n t person a f t e r h i s wife's Scott r e t i r e d  In S c o t t ' s o p i n i o n , G a b r i e l became  death.  from h i s Government post  i n 1864,  and  moved to a  house i n E u s t o n Road C h e l s e a .  Proximity  much e a s i e r , and much deeper.  G a b r i e l ' s menagerie, h i s i n t e r e s t i n s p i r i t u a l i s m ,  and  his reluctance  the y e a r s  keep him  to e x h i b i t became p a r t of S c o t t ' s knowledge of him  immediately a f t e r 1864.  housekeeper  to R o s s e t t i made c o n t a c t w i t h  The  Gabriel's  d e f i n i t e l y d i d not have S c o t t ' s a p p r o v a l , but n e i t h e r , d i d i t  d i s t u r b i n g tendencies r e a l i t i e s and  d i d , however, see  other  " c o n f u s i o n between e x t e r n a l  which p o r t e n d e d an unhappy f u t u r e .  G a b r i e l became d e p r e s s e d because o f d i f f i c u l t y w i t h  through S c o t t , o b t a i n e d  Penkill Castle.  He  i n G a b r i e l , such as the  mental impressions,"  In 1868,  an i n v i t a t i o n from M i s s Boyd to  D u r i n g the month o f J u l y , R o s s e t t i was  l e a v i n g f o r P e n k i l l , but is vividly  in  p r e s e n c e o f Fanny C o r n f o r t h as  away from h i s i n t e r e s t i n g f r i e n d .  v i s i o n and,  him  d i d not  finally  c h r o n i c l e d i n S c o t t ' s Notes.  go u n t i l  o f t e n on  September 21.  I t became, to S c o t t , an  his  visit  the verge of The  visit  important  s t a g e i n t h e i r f r i e n d s h i p because he was a b l e t o comfort and encourage h i s despondent f r i e n d .  An e l d e r l y c o u s i n o f A l i c e Boyd's, M i s s L o s h , was a l s o  v i s i t i n g P e n k i l l w h i l e G a b r i e l was t h e r e .  She had much sympathy f o r R o s s e t t i ' s  p r a c t i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s and, unknown t o S c o t t , she persuaded R o s s e t t i t o accept a loan.  He r e c e i v e d  when he d i s c o v e r e d  t h e money a f t e r r e t u r n i n g t o London.  Scott,  t h a t G a b r i e l had taken a l o a n , was e x t r e m e l y angry.  W i l l i a m R o s s e t t i suggests t h a t S c o t t never f o r g a v e G a b r i e l f o r t h i s action.  According  t o h i s own r e p o r t o f t h e v i s i t ,  trans-  S c o t t was much more  i n t e r e s t e d i n R o s s e t t i ' s a r t i s t i c problems than i n h i s money d i f f i c u l t i e s . Impressed by t h e power o f R o s s e t t i r e a d i n g earnest  t o persuade him t o a g a i n  h i s e a r l y poems, S c o t t began i n  t a k e up p o e t r y JtIS«i]iu.d. abandoned s i n c e h i s  2 wife's saw  death.  R o s s e t t i returned  t o London i n e a r l y November, but when S c o t t  him a few weeks l a t e r , he s t i l l had n o t begun t o work. In e a r l y 1869, as the l e t t e r s t o A l i c e Boyd i n d i c a t e , R o s s e t t i was  d e p r e s s e d many times when S c o t t v i s i t e d him.  He d i d w r i t e A l i c e h i m s e l f ,  however, g i v i n g news o f S c o t t which would p l e a s e was p r e p a r i n g  to leave  By mid-August, R o s s e t t i  f o r P e n k i l l a g a i n , h a v i n g got t h e p r o o f s  " T r i a l books" underway.  f o r the  H i s v i s i t was e v e n t f u l , as i s w e l l known t o s t u d e n t s  o f R o s s e t t i through W i l l i a m M i c h a e l ' s q u e s t i o n i n g considered  her.  o f Scott's account.  Scott  h i s f r i e n d t o be i n a s t r a n g e s t a t e o f b e h a v i o u r , and he was  drawn i n t o s e v e r a l u n u s u a l a c t i v i t i e s on h i s a c c o u n t .  He a l s o found him v e r y  s e l f - c r i t i c a l , and he suggests t h a t t h i s was p a r t l y due t o the p l a n f o r exhuming t h e m a n u s c r i p t s b u r i e d w i t h E l i z a b e t h . In 1870 S c o t t and G a b r i e l c o n t i n u e d arrangement, and t h e i r s o c i a l c o n t a c t  included  t o develop t h e i r w r i t e r - c r i t i c frequent  dinner-parties.  When about t o p u b l i s h h i s Poems i n t h i s y e a r , R o s s e t t i s o l i c i t e d h i s f r i e n d s as r e v i e w e r s o f the book.  S c o t t was v e r y much a g a i n s t  t h i s p r a c t i c e and s a i d  so i n h i s Notes.  Yet he rejoiced i n 1870 with Rossetti when public recep-  t i o n of the book was  good.  Also i n 1870,  Chelsea, close to Rossetti's own significantly.  Scott bought Bellevue House i n  Tudor House, and  By mid-summer 1871,  t h e i r contact  increased  Rossetti had journeyed to Kelmscott  Manor House, the home he rented j o i n t l y with William Morris.  He stayed with  Jane Morris, her c h i l d r e n , and several servants while William Morris was Iceland, and the period was  one of poetic p r o d u c t i v i t y .  in  In the Notes, Scott  p r i n t s several l e t t e r s from Rossetti at Kelmscott, a l l very enthusiastic about the poetry Scott has sent him for c r i t i c i s m , and encouraging about the public success of the poems, should Scott decide to publish.  Rossetti's l a s t  letter  from Kelmscott, r e f e r r i n g to the coming Contemporary Review a r t i c l e on himself, indicates that he was  quite unprepared for the venom of the attack.  On  the  20th of October, Scott described the a r t i c l e to A l i c e Boyd as "The most deadly attack on the morality of the set and school that could be penned." A week l a t e r he t e l l s that Gabriel was the author of the a r t i c l e .  b u s i l y making "rhymes" against Buchanan,  Scott also knew of the warm r e l a t i o n s h i p between  Jane Morris and Gabriel at this time. In 1872,  ten years a f t e r the death of.Rossetti's wife, Scott saw  him  involved i n another serious emotional s i t u a t i o n which brought a d r a s t i c change, i n Scott's mind, to Gabriel's way  of l i f e .  Deep feelings of v i c t i m i -  zation had developed from the Buchanan a r t i c l e and pamphlet. imagination insomnia.  Rossetti's  prevented sleep, and he turned to using c h l o r a l as an end  to  The P e n k i l l Letters suggest that his r e l a t i o n s h i p with Jane Morris 3  was  also an influence.  Michael decided  When Rossetti's paranoia became very severe,  William  to t r a v e l with him to Roehampton, to the home of Dr. Hake.  Scott, when n o t i f i e d , "acted i n a s p i r i t of true f r i e n d s h i p , " according William Michael.  to  On the evening of June 9th, Dante Gabriel went into a deep  sleep which his friends f i r s t thought was  a sign of returning health.  Later  they discovered  that i t was  caused by laudanum poisoning, and that Rossetti  had consumed a b o t t l e of the same drug which k i l l e d his wife.  When he  recovered  Scotland,  and  enough to t r a v e l , Rossetti was  taken to Perthshire,  had  Scott r e l i e v e d Madox Brown as a companion to Rossetti at Stobhall for about  four weeks u n t i l mid-July.  In h i s published account of t h i s time, Scott  omits what he does not know from personal experience, underplays Gabriel's i l l n e s s , and stresses his amazing recovery. period d i s c l o s e that he knew much which was  Unpublished l e t t e r s for t h i s never given to the p u b l i c .  v i s i t e d Gabriel at Kelmscott i n early December 1872,  Scott  f i n d i n g him quite healthy  and determined to remain at Kelmscott f o r a long while. The l a s t extended mention of Rossetti i n Scott's Notes suggests that he, l i k e Rossetti's brother William, saw the waters" i n Dante Gabriel's l i f e . asking for 200 pounds.  the 1872  breakdown as "a parting of  In early 1874,  Rossetti wrote Scott  Scott sent i t , but the money was  immediately  returned.  Scott, rather s u s p i c i o u s l y , took the incident as a test of friendship, and obviously thought less of Gabriel a f t e r i t .  In 1874,  Gabriel returned  to  Chelsea where, Scott declares, he did not move from his house, "never going \,  even into the s t r e e t , never seeing anyone." suggested, had ceased to see him.  •  Nearly a l l h i s f r i e n d s , Scott  William Michael was  l a t e r to take  exception  to t h i s statement as a l i t e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . In 1875,  Scott published his Poems, containing a dedicatory poem  i n praise of Swinburne, Morris, and R o s s e t t i .  Gabriel r e p l i e d with a c o r d i a l  l e t t e r containing d e t a i l e d c r i t i c i s m which showed c a r e f u l reading.  Late i n  1875,  Gabriel moved to Aldwick Lodge, Sussex,where he remained u n t i l June of  1876.  He wrote Scott from Sussex, and the content of the l e t t e r s suggests  that they had  frequent  contact.  Rossetti was  out of London for most of  going to Broadlands i n Hampshire soon a f t e r returning from Sussex. significant  1876,  Little  contact between Rossetti and Scott i s evident i n a v a i l a b l e  l e t t e r s from 1876 u n t i l 1879. In 1877 Gabriel had an operation for hydrocele, and when Scott v i s i t e d , he found him unusually peaceful.  Scott knew, a l s o ,  that R o s s e t t i was having h i s walls soundproofed against the " b e l l i g e r e n t " noisiness of h i s musical neighbours.  In November, 1879, R o s s e t t i wrote a  long l e t t e r to A l i c e Boyd about h i s own i l l health and Scott's r e l a t i v e w e l l being.  He says that Scott's v i s i t s have been e s p e c i a l l y  cheering  to him.  In October, Scott v i s i t e d Gabriel with the purpose of getting from him a testimonial which would support of Fine A r t s .  Scott's a p p l i c a t i o n for the Edinburgh Chair  R o s s e t t i did not think the idea a good one, c i t i n g Scott's  changeable health and d i s l i k e of l e c t u r i n g as reasons.  Later i n the year,  Scott found Rossetti i n better health, interested again i n poetry, and confident that the " s p i e s " who preyed upon him had been f o i l e d . Rossetti's published l e t t e r s f o r 1880, although containing minor references to Scott, r e i n f o r c e the idea that the r e l a t i o n s h i p was not e s p e c i a l l y open at the time.  Rossetti i s s e n s i t i v e of a need to "handle" Scott with  care, and he avoids p o t e n t i a l f r i c t i o n between Watts and Scott. Scott was v i s i t e d by Samuel Haydon, alarmed because Gabriel.had  In October, confided a  conspiracy to him. Haydon wanted Scott to warn William Michael of the s i t u a t i o n , but Scott was reluctant,suggesting that h i s interference might make matters worse. Before Scott l e f t for P e n k i l l i n the summer of 1881 he v i s i t e d G a b r i e l , f i n d i n g him i n a depressed state about h i s health.  Rossetti  was  taken to Cumberland for a month i n the autumn while Scott v i s i t e d P e n k i l l , and on Scott's return he v i s i t e d the a i l i n g R o s s e t t i i n Chelsea. Two v i s i t s of l a t e October are described i n the P e n k i l l Papers. Caine had v i s i t e d Scott to warn him that Gabriel was quite i l l .  Although  dubious, Scott c a l l e d to f i n d Gabriel despondent and coughing badly.  He  returned the next day and spent part of the time reading some of his own poetry  to Dante G a b r i e l .  Scott f e l t that although Gabriel was i n a nervous and  "shattered" state, there was, nevertheless, a "good deal of a kind of pretence about h i s quivering hand and continuous cough."  He closed h i s next l e t t e r to  A l i c e by saying that "This f r i g h t f u l spectacle of D.G. depresses one" (P.P., Oct. 28, 1881).  Again the private l e t t e r s d i s c l o s e that Scott under-  played, i n h i s public version, the r e a l concern he f e l t about Gabriel's s t a b i l i t y and mental health. By the end of October, 1881, Scott was facing a personal c r i s i s which was d i r e c t l y t i e d to his friendship with R o s s e t t i . paranoid him.  Scott became increasingly  and g u i l t - r i d d e n as he f e l t h i s acquaintances were turning against  Five years e a r l i e r he had written an a r t i c l e which, apparently  reason, had been published anonymously.  f o r good  The a r t i c l e (which Scott c a l l s "the  i n f e r n a l a r t i c l e " and "the skeleton i n the closet") probably contained of some men connected with the Royal Academy.  criticism  Scott's usually e x p l i c i t  l e t t e r s are vague about the d e t a i l s , but h i s anxiety i s most clear from the excited, s e l f - i n v o l v e d , despairing tone the letters.convey. however, i s openly stated to A l i c e :  His worst fear,  "What am I to do i f ever Gabriel when he  finds out about the a r t i c l e , disowns my society, I don't know. course be dragged down with me, a l a s . "  You w i l l of  Scott was h o r r i f i e d as he anticipated  the shame of discovery, and he wrote A l i c e that he would, i f exposed, winter i n I t a l y and spend the summer at P e n k i l l , never coming to London alone.  When  Scott f i n a l l y summoned the courage to confront G a b r i e l , he r e a l i z e d that h i s fears had been groundless, for i f Gabriel knew of Scott's a r t i c l e he was not i n c l i n e d to "disown" him. R o s s e t t i moved to Birchington i n February 1882, and died there on A p r i l 6, 1882.  Scott says i n h i s Notes that he did not see him i n the l a s t  few months, and did not attend Rossetti's funeral through " i n d i s p o s i t i o n . " A l i c e Boyd's Day D i a r i e s (in the P e n k i l l C o l l e c t i o n ) , d i s c l o s e that i f he did  not see him at Birchington, Scott v i s i t e d Rossetti many times i n London, and saw him even on the day he l e f t for Birchington.  In h i s Notes for the  year, Scott f i r s t describes the p u b l i c a t i o n of his A Poet's Harvest Home, and then mentions Gabriel's death.  This i s i n keeping with Scott's statement that  he took less of an i n t e r e s t i n Rossetti's d e c l i n i n g years, and reinforces one's knowledge that Scott abhorred the scavengers who his  death-bed, i n order to make t h e i r "memoirs" of him more i n t e r e s t i n g to  the p u b l i c . his  clung to R o s s e t t i on  In the l a s t eight years l e f t him,  Scott put h i s energy into  poetry, a r c h i t e c t u r e , and the r e v i s i o n s of his Notes.  He died at eighty-  nine, but two years l a t e r he became a v i t a l part of the l i t e r a r y scene, with the posthumous p u b l i c a t i o n of his Autobiographical Notes.  II  i• i  The controversy over the Notes has been discussed, and the e f f e c t on Scott's reputation has been traced i n the previous  chapter.  evident from the survey of Scott's reputation that most of the  It i s negative  attitudes towards him are based on William Michael Rossetti's s p e c i f i c I. '\  arguments of a l a s t v i s i t to Rossetti i n  1881.  To me i t seems Mr. Scott was at some pains to make the scene more repulsive than i n fact i t was. But, i f he found the p i c t u r e a p a i n f u l one to i n d i c a t e i n n a r r a t i v e , a very obvious question a r i s e s — Why did he indicate i t ? He was professing to write 'Autobiographical Notes' and the doings or misdoings of Dante Gabriel Rossetti — apart from the aid which he most constantly and determinately lent to this friend's reputation as poet and painter, among acquaintances and with the p u b l i c — formed no part of the Autobiography of William B e l l Scott. (Memoir, 388-9).  William's contention throughout his book i s that Scott purposely, with intent to disparage, wrote about h i s brother i n an unhandsome, unkind fashion.  In  almost every instance where Scott writes about R o s s e t t i , William Michael takes exception, often with extremely inconclusive r e s u l t s .  I t i s therefore  i n t e r e s t i n g to f i n d i n the P e n k i l l Letters from Scott to A l i c e Boyd, information which proves that William Michael was revisions to the Notes.  concealing the t r u t h i n  suggesting  In other cases, the l e t t e r s , which have the value of  being straightforward comments on experience to a trusted f r i e n d , demonstrate that Scott's immediate reactions to a s i t u a t i o n were very s i m i l a r to the version published  i n h i s Notes.  They show that Scott's retrospective view, which has  been t r a d i t i o n a l l y characterized as "soured" and  " b i t t e r , " was  from h i s o r i g i n a l statements on most important issues.  not revised  William Michael, for  one, would have his readers believe that the Notes are u n r e l i a b l e because the writer's point of view was  changed i n h i s years of i l l n e s s a f t e r R o s s e t t i died.  The t h i r d point made obvious i n the P e n k i l l Letters i s v i t a l to the r e s t o r i n g of Scott's reputation:  Scott had much more material than he used.  There i s no evidence that the editor found i t necessary to suppress large or v i t a l passages about R o s s e t t i , although anecdotes about both Ruskin and L e t i t i a Scott were eliminated.  Scott obviously used h i s own  deciding what to p r i n t about R o s s e t t i . there was  discretion in  The P e n k i l l Letters d i s c l o s e that  much of sensational value i n Scott's experience of R o s s e t t i .  The  l e t t e r s also contain many anecdotes which would have supported Scott's generalizations about his friend's l i f e , had Scott decided  to use them.  For  the sake of d i s c r e t i o n , or honour to Dante G a b r i e l , Scott decided not to include these anecdotes.  For the sake of Scott's reputation, this fact  should  be made known. The most blatant example of William Michael's desire to replace o r i g i n a l events with h i s own  version i s his denial of i l l n e s s r e s u l t i n g from  Dante Gabriel's breakdown i n 1872. and disputes the idea'that F.M.  He c a l l s Scott's reference  "highly erroneous,"  Brown had to take over the business a f f a i r s of  Rossetti.  I f Scott was wrong i n saying that Gabriel did not know about the  sale of his blue china, he was events of 1872.  F.M.  not wrong about William's reaction to the  Brown's diary for the year corroborates  that William became i l l  (Hueffer, 273).  A l i c e from Scott i n 1873  Scott's assertion  In addition there i s a l e t t e r to  ( P e n k i l l Papers, Oct. 31), when William Rossetti's  engagement to Lucy Brown was  announced.  Scott had been to see C h r i s t i n a  Rossetti and her mother, and together they confided i n Scott how  very much  alarmed they had been for William ever since Gabriel's i l l n e s s , and that they were t r u l y glad of h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p with Lucy. had been i n a " s p e l l " :  They considered that William  "For weeks they said he never uttered a word to any  of them." William also disputes the report of Gabriel's v i s i t s to P e n k i l l i n 1868  and 1869.  Scott says that i n 1868,  Gabriel was  " i n a depression of mind  from the idea that h i s eyes were f a i l i n g , " implying that the impending b l i n d ness was  an "idea" which caused undue anxiety.  that the condition was and nervous upset."  William Michael points out  quite r e a l , even i f caused by "general overstrain  He ends with a statement obviously directed at those  looking for other causes to Rossetti's anxiety: less uneasy conscience was  "To suggest that a more or  at the bottom of i t a l l does not improve the  This only adds a shadowy i n s i n u a t i o n of wrongdoing to a d i r e c t of f r a c t i o u s or pusillanimous  f a n c i e s " (Memoir, I, 270).  implying other causes to Gabriel's unrest, the unpublished prove that he had much evidence.  case.  imputation  I f Scott were l e t t e r s to A l i c e  Certainly the conclusions are h i s  own,  but the instances which shaped his point of view undoubtedly took place. The subject i s Gabriel's a f f e c t i o n for Jane Morris, wife of William Morris.  In a l e t t e r to A l i c e dated Thursday the twenty-sixth,  describes a dinner party attended by the Morrises and G a b r i e l .  1868,  Scott  Janey Morris  and Gabriel sat together, and i n Scott's opinion Gabriel acted " l i k e a  perfect f o o l i f he wished to conceal h i s attachment."  He made h i s a f f e c t i o n s  quite obvious by attending to her constantly, and once blundered i n attempting to escort her downstairs when i t was  not h i s part to do so.  Morris  was  quite aware of the events, and Scott hopes that Gabriel and Janey w i l l not "go further than they have gone." i n November 1868, life.  A l e t t e r to A l i c e a f t e r Rossetti's v i s i t ,  reaffirms the complication as important to Gabriel's  Scott r e l a t e s that Gabriel has not t r i e d painting, nor has he seen a  doctor or "the sweet L u c r e t i a Borgia."  The continuing paragraphs of this  l e t t e r make i t c l e a r that L u c r e t i a Borgia  i s Scott's name f o r Jane Morris.  Apparently L e t i t i a had been to v i s i t Jane and informed her of Gabriel's return to town.  Gabriel himself has not been to see her because "they are  being watched."  Scott draws h i s conclusions about Rossetti's state of mind  from these rumors and  from h i s conversations  with G a b r i e l :  "The  disturbance  i n h i s health and temper ... [ i s ] caused by an uncontrollable desire for the possession  of the said L.B."  (P.P., Nov.,  Monday morning, 1868).  there are inferences of other causes to Gabriel's depressions  If  i n Scott's  Notes, they are neither manufactured out of malice, nor without basis i n f a c t . \ The extracts make i t obvious that not only did Scott have reasons for implying other causes to Gabriel's depression, but also that William Michael  was  attempting to allow only one p o s s i b i l i t y for Gabriel's depressed state of mind. William Michael took exception also to Scott's suggestions that on Rossetti's 1869  v i s i t to P e n k i l l , he was  depressed and s u i c i d a l .  He  counters Scott's d e s c r i p t i o n of Rossetti's "ferocious" look by c i t i n g a f r i e n d l y l e t t e r to Shields written at approximately the same time and suggests, "Look here upon this p i c t u r e , and on t h i s . "  The l e t t e r s of R o s s e t t i published  by Doughty and Wahl for this year conclusively show that William Michael again presenting only a part of the s i t u a t i o n , while suggesting  was  that i t was  whole.  These Doughty-Wahl l e t t e r s surely i n d i c a t e a more r e f l e c t i v e and  even melancholy mood than was usual with R o s s e t t i .  Certainly Gabriel's  l e t t e r s to h i s brother are f u l l of the d e t a i l s of proof reading, and t h e i r serious tone could be interpreted as no more than evidence of strenuous work.  However, c e r t a i n phrases and topics i n l e t t e r s to other people do  suggest that R o s s e t t i was undergoing much s e l f - c r i t i c i s m , and was himself and h i s future with unusual thoroughness. Aglaia Coronia he explains his presence at P e n k i l l :  assessing  In a short l e t t e r to Mrs. "II]  shot here as rubbish quite used up" (Letters, I I , 717).  have merely ... been Several friends had  recently died, or had had death i n the family, and this subject i s part of nearly a l l of Rossetti's l e t t e r s at this time. adding:  He writes to Brown of t h i s ,  "However I am not i n a very b r i l l i a n t state of s p i r i t s to think  about other people's i l l luck" (Letters, I I . p. 719).  Again Rossetti's  mental involvement with death comes through i n a l e t t e r to h i s mother of the same day as that to Brown.  The s a l u t a t i o n , "My dearest Mother," i s unusually  serious, and the subjects discussed i n the l e t t e r receive none of the usual playfulness. his  The l e t t e r ends on a discussion of a prospective addition to  house, with the sentiment, "Time may be no longer f o r one, f o r anything  one knows."  (Letters, I I , 722).  The following day, August 27th, he wrote  to Frederic Shields and t h i s l e t t e r also contains an unusual amount of self-analysis.  Again the subject of other men's g r i e f s i s discussed, with  Rossetti's comment that "the dreadful tidings ... have furnished us with some sad thoughts and t a l k . "  The a r t i c l e on him i n Tinsley's Magazine for  September e l i c i t s these comments:  I have no cause to complain, since I have a l l I need of an e s s e n t i a l kind, and have taken l i t t l e trouble about i t — except always i n the nature of my work — the poetry e s p e c i a l l y i n which I have done no potboiling at any rate.  So I am g r a t e f u l to that a r t , and nourish against the other that base grudge which we bear those whom we have treated shabbily.  He apologizes for " a l l this t i r a d e about myself."  Advising h i s f r i e n d to  f i n d r e l a x a t i o n from excitement, Rossetti comments about "the matrimonial 4  question" i n which Shields was involved.  And once more the subject i s  brought close to h i s own, very personal f e e l i n g s :  "though here I know one  i s f a r from being master of the s i t u a t i o n according to one's pleasure." Even a cursory reading of these l e t t e r s impresses one that the usually buoyant and rather carefree l e t t e r - w r i t i n g of Rossetti, i n autumn 1869, r e f l e c t e d h i s subdued s p i r i t s .  That William Michael's  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s questionable  seems obvious from these extracts. Among other examples of William's attacks on Scott proving basel e s s , i s his objection to Scott's assigning a "women and flowers" period to Rossetti's a r t ; he e s p e c i a l l y d i s l i k e s Scott's dramatic f l o u r i s h that these were "the only objects worth p a i n t i n g . "  This technique of seeming to  dispute the subject while having only the power to question the wording, i s used by William throughout the Memoir.  Most often i t serves to make much of  an otherwise n e g l i g i b l e point i n Scott's book.  About Rossetti's marriage,  for example, William Michael r a i s e s objections to Scott's account, but concludes by agreeing with Scott.  He implies that Scott was exaggerating  Gabriel's suicide attempt i n 1872, but only succeeds i n correcting the p r a c t i c a l d e t a i l s while i n the main agreeing with Scott.  He finds Scott  g u i l t y of betrayal for h i s comments on Rossetti "working the o r a c l e , " but can only r e a l l y quibble over the l i t e r a l meaning of "ready-made under h i s own eyes."  In many cases where he raises objections to Scott, William  Michael has been over-scrupulous  i n defence of his brother.  By i n t e r p r e t i n g  "detraction" where none was meant he has succeeded i n bringing f o r t h as }  memorable many of the less noble q u a l i t i e s of Rossetti's personality. William Michael Rossetti accuses Scott of "a resolute desire to disparage and besmirch" (Memoir, 366), and this d e s c r i p t i o n from the authorit a t i v e pen of Rossetti's brother has convinced readers to the present Scott's r e a l motives. f e e l s Scott intended  of  Yet i n another book, William Michael admits that he only to show an honest picture of a man  obscured through p u b l i c i n t e r e s t (Some Reminiscences I, 60).  who  was  being  The P e n k i l l  Letters do show that Scott's d e s c r i p t i o n of scenes i n h i s Notes d i f f e r e d very l i t t l e from the immediate d e s c r i p t i o n of the same scenes i n his l e t t e r s to A l i c e .  But was  there a "sour" and " b i t t e r " i n v a l i d , s c r i b b l i n g v i n d i c t i v e l y  about Gabriel from h i s sick bed?  Minto occasionally encountered "the  dreadful c y n i c a l Hermit" at work, i n his e d i t i n g of the Notes, but h i s l e t t e r s to A l i c e betray no r e a l shock at the w r i t i n g of h i s f r i e n d . William Michael suggest u l t e r i o r motives by Scott on several issues.  He points out, f o r example, that while Scott says that A l i c e , Miss  Losh,and he prompted Gabriel to resume poetry, Gabriel had already made e f f o r t s to publish i n spring of that year. Scott was  He implies, therefore, that v.  either l y i n g about h i s influence, or not as close to R o s s e t t i as he  pretended.  Scott's l e t t e r s to William Michael a f t e r Gabriel's return from  P e n k i l l convey Scott's s i n c e r i t y about this subject, and prove that William was  a t t r i b u t i n g to Scott's Notes s e l f i s h motives which he knew Scott did not,  i n 1868,  hold.  On November 30th, Scott asked William, "Don't you  think  Gabriel's beginning to take an i n t e r e s t i n his poetry.a very good thing?" He reports that Gabriel and he had h i s powers of painting — you.  "most serious talks about the chances of  a matter on which I may  write or speak to none but  I t r i e d by every means to make him revive his poetry, but  without e f f e c t .  Now,  however, he i s r e a l l y doing so.  apparently  Of course one t r u s t s  the defective sight i s only temporary• . .. " (Rossetti Papers, p. 372). December 2nd, "The  Scott again stressed h i s sincere concern for Gabriel's future:  short ending to h i s i l l s , i n the worst case, was  spoken of by him.  of course often  But we must not think of the p o s s i b i l i t y of that, even  under the d i r e misfortune. i t must not be thought of." thought:  I could not strongly dissuade him, but I f e e l that He f i n i s h e s his l e t t e r with a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c  " I t would be a great thing to get him to be the poet again."  sincere tone of these extracts indicates that Scott was puffing h i s importance to Gabriel out of proportion. i n 1868,  About  as w e l l as a f t e r Gabriel's death, Scott was  poetry was  The  not, i n retrospect,  The l e t t e r s show that sure i n h i s b e l i e f that  Gabriel's f o r t e . The important conclusion to be drawn from these comparisons i s that  Scott's retrospective view, popularly characterized as b i t t e r and envious, i s , on a l l e s s e n t i a l matters, the same as that expressed i n h i s l e t t e r s to A l i c e and others, at the time of the event.  Several other examples are  extant.  For instance, i n h i s Notes he described the Rossetti brothers' i n t e r e s t i n s p i r i t u a l i s m i n rather s c o r n f u l , or at least superior, terms. i s comparable to that i n a l e t t e r of October 22, 1865  This a t t i t u d e  to A l i c e , i n which  Scott describes a seance he had attended with Gabriel and William: was  simply c h i l d i s h , and lowers my  i n my judgment."  two very dear friends Wm.  "It  and D.G.  immensely  Another example of this correspondence between Scott's  published and unpublished version, i s his report of Gabriel's i n t e n s i t y over Buchanan's Contemporary Preview a r t i c l e "was says he was breaking  article.  to him l i k e a slow poison." witness to "one  In his Notes Scott says that the In the following months, Scott  of the greatest geniuses of the age,  down under the p a l t r y i n f l i c t i o n of 'an a r t i c l e ' . "  visibly  Scott's dating  i n the Notes i s r i g h t l y corrected by William R o s s e t t i , but unpublished l e t t e r s show that the preoccupation  he saw  i n Gabriel was  not fabricated i n retrospect.  In mid-October Scott wrote e x c i t e d l y to A l i c e about the a r t i c l e : l i k e i t has ever been done i n c r i t i c i s m of l a t e years.  "Nothing  Gabriel pretends to  be rather amused than hurt by i t , and makes rhymes without end on author and publisher.  Everyone i s asking who Rob Maitland i s ... but now as you w i l l  hear the mystery i s solved" (P.P., Oct, 20, 1871).  A week l a t e r , Scott  reports that this information has given Gabriel new purpose:  "He i s not only  making rhymes against Buchanan, but i s i n d i t i n g a pamphlet which very possibly he w i l l p r i n t despite the dissuasion of everybody."  The discrepancy between  Scott's published accounts and h i s d e s c r i p t i o n of the events to A l i c e , to whom he would have no reason to l i e , e x i s t only i n a matter of dating, and perhaps i n some extra dramatization f o r reader The most  interest.  prominent example of Scott's retrospective view being  the same as his immediate point of view was made important by William Michael's  outcry against i t i n h i s Memoir.  William focuses his argument  against Scott w r i t i n g at a l l of R o s s e t t i , on Scott's d e s c r i p t i o n of a v i s i t he paid R o s s e t t i i n l a t e 1881. Scott described Gabriel as being i l l , and asking f o r absolution by a p r i e s t .  depressed  William anatomizes the passage from  the Notes i n which Scott expresses his f e e l i n g that Gabriel t r i e d to "wound" him.  He  concludes, I leave i t to the reader to judge whether the s p i r i t shown i n the foregoing extract i s or i s not such as might have been expected from the author with regard to his "dearest of f r i e n d s " ... who was dead long before the Autobiographical Notes were put i n form for p u b l i c a t i o n . Curious indeed are the lurking-places and b l i n d corners i n the heart of man. (Memoir, 367).  Two l e t t e r s written by Scott on October 27 and 28 probably  describe the  v i s i t on which t h i s passage was based and although, no mention i s made of "The  Sphinx" or of Gabriel's desire f o r confession, the d e s c r i p t i o n of Rossetti's  s t a t e of mind and Caine's report  health i s consistent.  S c o t t , who  was  prompted to v i s i t  of R o s s e t t i ' s d i r e i l l n e s s , s u s p e c t e d a c h l o r a l  by  "attack."  There I found him h a l f d r e s s e d , t w i s t e d up on the s o f a and a t t e n d e d by Fanny. At f i r s t I was h o r r i f i e d , he seemed, emaciated, and worn out, a mere wreck, p e r s p i r i n g and coughing t h a t o l d cough ,.. [with] no r e s u l t and.no apparent cause. He p r o t e s t e d t h a t he was d y i n g , t h a t such a s u c c e s s as he had had w i t h both, book and p i c t u r e , was the f o r e r u n n e r o f death — I thought of the former time and f e a r e d h i s mind was gone a g a i n , but g r a d u a l l y a f t e r a l o n g time he became v e r y much b e t t e r .  Scott v i s i t e d who  again  wept over i t :  anything,  the next day "He  I think."  never b e f o r e  "The  state."  read  some o f h i s p o e t r y  ... e x p r e s s e d h i m s e l f  R o s s e t t i ' s weeping was  o f more than a p p r e c i a t i o n , and shattered  and  he  considered  by  to R o s s e t t i ,  so s t r o n g l y about S c o t t as  r e a l i z e s that R o s s e t t i i s i n a "very  When t a l k turned  to R o s s e t t i ' s p o e t r y ,  and  the w r i t i n g o f t h a t had  t o r n h i s v i t a l s out  and  T y p i c a l l y , S c o t t a n a l y z e s the r e a c t i o n as " a n x i e t y and  nervous,  the s u c c e s s of  King's T r a g e d y , " S c o t t says t h a t R o s s e t t i became "almost  s a i d that  symptomatic  paralytic,  f a i r l y b r o k e down."  deranged  sensibility  about the e x h i b i t i o n of h i s p i c t u r e at L i v e r p o o l , and h i s volume coming at the same moment."  Most i m p o r t a n t , t h i s l e t t e r proves t h a t not  S c o t t have e n c o u n t e r s w i t h G a b r i e l such as he but  described  a l s o t h a t h i s immediate r e a c t i o n to the scene was  r e t r o s p e c t i v e report of i t . Scott  suggest a " s p i r i t The  Scott's  the passage  by  meant.  to A l i c e w h i c h proves  that  i s i n need o f r e p a i r , i s the f a c t t h a t f o r e v e r y d i s c l o s u r e  S c o t t made about R o s s e t t i , he kept much more back. (the o n l y  Notes,  of d e t r a c t i o n " where v e r y p r o b a b l y none was letters  did  consistent with his  W i l l i a m M i c h a e l ' s comments on  main r e v e l a t i o n i n S c o t t ' s  reputation  i n the  only  out  r e a l l y o r i g i n a l one  shown, have been m a g n i f i e d out  Even the  disclosures  i s the s t o r y o f M i s s Losh's l o a n ) , i t has o f p r o p o r t i o n by  been  Scott's detractors, rather  than  by the w r i t e r himself.  On the subject of Gabriel's women, e s p e c i a l l y Fanny,  Scott could become very indignant, but i n h i s Notes he i s always moderate or s i l e n t .  His d i s l i k e of the e f f e c t marriage had on R o s s e t t i i s obvious,  but Scott does not, as William Sharp suggested, cast a s l u r on Elizabeth Siddal's name.  He does say, however, that Rossetti's devotion  to "women  and flowers" i n art had the "paradoxical conclusion" of bringing other l a d i e s beside h i s o r i g i n a l "muse" i n t o h i s world.  This statement of Scott's i s  made i n connection with h i s assertion that for some time i n the 1850's he f e l t a l e s s e r a f f e c t i o n for R o s s e t t i . Although Scott's v e i l e d statements i d e n t i f y i n g Fanny are flimsy evidence for assigning her a r o l e i n the cool period, h i s l a t e r comments about her to A l i c e suggest that indeed t h i s was the case.  Of course Rossetti's allegiance to Ruskin must also be allowed as  an influence on t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p at this time. Fanny became Gabriel's housekeeper i n 1863,  but i f Rossetti's  l e t t e r s for the period are a r e l i a b l e i n d i c a t i o n , she did l i t t l e to ease Rossetti's mind of mundane worries.  Scott, i n h i s Notes, wryly says that she  "must have had some overpowering a t t r a c t i o n s f o r him, although I could never see what they were."  Later, i n a discussion of s p i r i t u a l i s m , Scott probably  alludes again to Fanny Cornforth. and mentally  unfurnished  (Notes, I I , 81).  He describes the medium as "uncultivated  as the e v i l genius of D.G.R. already mentioned"  While Scott says nothing of i t i n h i s Notes, he obviously  associated Gabriel's " c h i l d i s h " i n t e r e s t i n s p i r i t u a l i s m with Fanny's encouragement.  A f t e r h i s report of the "table-rapping" incident of 1865  (quoted above, p.  94), he adds a reference to Fanny:  " I t i s a l l that  three-  waisted creature who makes society there i n t o l e r a b l e . " Another reference  to Fanny occurs i n connection with Scott's  infamous v i s i t i n 1881 to the s i c k R o s s e t t i , previously discussed pp.  95-96 ).  During their conversation,  (above,  Scott heard that Fanny had accompanied  R o s s e t t i and  C a i n e to Cumberland.  o f the s i t u a t i o n ,  Learning  disapproval  S c o t t e x p r e s s e d his.own, s t i m u l a t i n g another a t t a c k  "shattered nerves" i n G a b r i e l .  Fanny's h o t e l had  dependent on R o s s e t t i f o r s u p p o r t . renewal o f an i n f l i c t i o n Rossetti's a f f a i r with their  of W i l l i a m Michael's  one  f a i l e d , and  of  she was  again  S c o t t a s s e r t s t h a t h e r p r e s e n c e i s "a  can't  r e a l l y bargain  Jane M o r r i s  for."  Scott's  is. likewise d i s c r e e t .  treatment  That he knew of  c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p i s o b v i o u s from the l e t t e r s p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d ,  h i s d e s c r i p t i o n i n the Notes o f R o s s e t t i ' s s t a y a t K e l m s c o t t s u g g e s t s unconventional.  On  M o r r i s ' which d i d not  i n c l u d e G a b r i e l and  Jane was  G a b r i e l had out  O c t o b e r 23rd, 1871,  Jane.  s t a y i n g the n i g h t a t h i s house.  quit Morris'  o f the b u s i n e s s  P.O.  The  a dinner  r e a s o n , he had  Four y e a r s  f i r m , Scott exclaimed:  the same as Brown and  the money on J a n e y ! ! ! " could probably  Scott described  "He  had  f o r unambiguous s u g g e s t i o n s  Nevertheless  at  heard,  made M o r r i s  he had  The is  evident  1872.by  Scott  many o p p o r t u n i t i e s  about G a b r i e l ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and,  although  most i m p o r t a n t example o f S c o t t ' s r e s t r a i n t on a v i t a l  i n the u n p u b l i s h e d  r e p l a c e him. 25th.  He  Dunn.  to U r r a r d  J u s t as  i n S c o t l a n d , he was  to  subject  i n the l a s t week o f  l e t t e r s w r i t t e n to  P e n k i l l C o l l e c t i o n ) cover a p e r i o d  accompanied  they were to l e a v e f o r S t o b h a l l i n  i t n e c e s s a r y to r e t u r n home and  j o i n e d the p a r t y  A p a c k e t of 72  he  m a t e r i a l about R o s s e t t i ' s mental breakdown i n  taken n o r t h  George Hake, Brown and Brown f e l t  had  '  When G a b r i e l was  Scotland,  him  settled  d i s c e r n e d Jane's importance to G a b r i e l ' s s t a t e o f mind, S c o t t chose not use h i s knowledge.  was  that  pay  Because o f l i b e l problems, t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n  not have been p r i n t e d .  visit  l a t e r , hearing  M a r s h a l l , and has  but  nothing  S c o t t d i d know, however, o f a more u n u s u a l o v e r - n i g h t  by Janey to G a b r i e l .  that  of  and  S c o t t was June  by W i l l i a m B e l l  asked  to  probably  on  Scott  the  ( i n the  from e a r l y June u n t i l autumn o f 1872.  Many  of these l e t t e r s are d i r e c t and  r e p o r t s by  S c o t t to h i s t r u s t e d f r i e n d  Alice,  they p r o v e S c o t t ' s immediate involvement w i t h G a b r i e l ' s breakdown.  June 8th  S c o t t wrote a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of R o s s e t t i ' s s t a t e of mind, f o r  h i s paranoia opinions  On  are  was  manifested  i n an i n t e n s e d e s i r e to l e a v e town.  Scott's  specific:  At f i r s t h i s d i s e a s e was wounded e g o t i s m and monomania about the pamphlet and i t s a u t h o r , by and by h i s c o n s t a n t c r y was t h a t he c o u l d not f i g h t , he had no manhood and would have to d i e i n shame ... H i s next d e l u s i o n , because we a l l saw t h a t he was s u f f e r i n g under d e l u s i o n s , even p h y s i c a l d e l u s i o n s ... was t h a t a c o n s p i r a c y was formed to c r u s h him. Browning's new book came w i t h an a f f e c t i o n a t e word from Browning i n the f r o n t o f i t , and G a b r i e l ... soon began to f i n d a l l u s i o n s to h i m s e l f i n i t , and then Browning was h i s g r e a t e s t enemy .. The next s t e p was d e c i s i v e , he d e c l a r e d the w a l l s to be mined and p e r f o r a t e d by s p i e s , and t h a t a l l he d i d and s a i d was known to the c o n s p i r a tors.  Scott notes that W i l l i a m Michael c o n d i t i o n f o r some time.  On  Roehampton, the home o f Dr. on  had  known the s e r i o u s n e s s  the c o u n s e l Hake.  the m a t t e r prove t h a t he had  no  of  Gabriel's  o f h i s d o c t o r s , R o s s e t t i was  Scott's  f i n a l words i n h i s l e t t e r to A l i c e  i n t e n t i o n of exposing h i s f r i e n d :  hope he w i l l g r a d u a l l y become r i g h t a g a i n ,  and  very  about  c a r e f u l o f the w o r l d knowing a n y t h i n g  t a k e n to  then we  " l e t us  w i l l a l l have to  it."  He wrote a g a i n Monday morning w i t h news o f G a b r i e l ' s o u t b u r s t p a s s e r s b y i n Roehampton. which G a b r i e l had not  gone.  S c o t t does not does say  Perhaps h i s a s s e r t i o n t h a t he  a s i g n to A l i c e o f how the p r e v i o u s  at some  There f o l l o w s a d e s c r i p t i o n o f a deep s l e e p i n t o  to a l a r m A l i c e , a l t h o u g h he  William.  be  deeply  he was  e v e n i n g a t Roehampton.  l e t h a r g y w h i c h a l l the d o c t o r s  seem d i s t u r b e d , or perhaps i s t r y i n g t h a t R o s s e t t i women were summoned by f e e l s "so queer and  worried.  On  G a b r i e l had  thought was  June 12th  shaky" i s meant as he w r i t e s  q u i t e recovered  from  s u f f u s i o n of the b r a i n . "  of  being  "the However,  a l l i s not w e l l , for now  "his delusions are more dreadful than ever."  William Michael, Scott records, was  "desponding as to the r e s u l t " for he  the burden of Gabriel's precarious f i n a n c i a l s i t u a t i o n heavy on h i s  had  shoulders.  On Thursday, June 13th, Scott writes of "a break i n the cloud, which I hope may  be the beginning of better times."  Two  days before, he had  Roehampton with Dunn, to have a most unhappy discussion with William. account of  his brother was  On the day when the c r u c i a l step was  for i t but to send him to an asylum." to be decided, Brown suggested that he  take Gabriel to Cheyne Walk, as an experiment.  The attempt seems to have had  a good e f f e c t , for Scott, on v i s i t i n g that evening, f e l t Rossetti's  delusions  He has highest praise for Brown's independence of view, and  for h i s determination  to keep Gabriel away from an asylum.  Scott, finding  Gabriel improved, hopes that they have a l l been too much excited by dreadful a f f a i r . "  His  "that of a maniac with so many and such dreadful  delusions that there seemed nothing  were less serious.  visited  "the  For i n the next two days Scott i s able to describe  improvement i n G a b r i e l , evidence of h i s l o y a l v i s i t s to Cheyne Walk. A l e t t e r of June 17th makes c e r t a i n Scott's knowledge of, involvement i n , and certainty about Jane Morris' e f f e c t on Rossetti's mind. On Friday the 14th, Jane was  brought to see Gabriel by "her more than amiable  husband," and.the v i s i t threw Rossetti into a "miserable state f o r a while," as Scott assumed i t would. l i t t l e to "Mrs.  M."  ancient Fanny" who  He says, however, that Gabriel has alluded very  during the past two weeks, but seems to "revert to the has been a constant v i s i t o r .  Scott t e l l s of a v i s i t  he  paid Jane the previous Thursday to inform her of Rossetti's i l l n e s s . He found her "not discomposed by my of the state of things." who,  i n t e l l i g e n c e which was This v i s i t was  very p a r t i a l l y i n d i c a t i v e  to give peace of mind to Gabriel  the next morning, took Scott aside to show him a note from Jane, which  he had decided was  a forgery.  She had merely asked him  to v i s i t her on his  way  to the country.  about Jane "has  Scott reports that Gabriel's seeming lack of concern  subsided  ... our a n t i c i p a t i o n and f e a r s , about her rushing  out  to Roehampton or to Chelsea, and about h i s derangement being incurred by thinking of her."  On the 20th of June, G a b r i e l , accompanied by Brown, George  Hake, and the servant A l l a n , t r a v e l l e d North to Urrard House, i n Perthshire, Scotland.  Brown wrote Scott to r e l i e v e him,  and Scott was  to a r r i v e on  Tuesday, the 25th, but a l e t t e r of July 1st says that he was day  spending h i s t h i r d  there. At t h i s time, h i s view was  p e s s i m i s t i c , and he was  the end Brown's idea might not have been best.  f e a r f u l that i n  Rossetti s t i l l suffered the  delusion about a conspiracy, although he concealed i t better.  Scott s p e c i f i e s  that " A l l the birds even on the trees are v i l l a i n s making c a t c a l l s . " was  Rossetti  also becoming b e l l i g e r e n t about the need for whiskey-induced sleep.  When Scott t r i e d to r e s t r a i n him, have repeated."  "the scene of fury was  too p a i n f u l to  On the 4th Scott reports his opinion, seconded by George  Hake, that Gabriel did not seem more composed.  The f a l s e mental impressions  are more confirmed and Gabriel seems preoccupied: himself and l i s t e n i n g to imaginary sounds."  "thinking on them within  He had confided to Scott,  seeking h i s agreement, that the walls were hollowed and contained people  who  heard through the holes made f o r curtain hooks. Scott prepared to leave Stobhall for P e n k i l l by mid-July, and on the 14th, George Hake wrote William that Scott had l e f t .  Having done his  part, Scott was  improvement, and  kept c l o s e l y informed of Rossetti's gradual,  the l e t t e r s continue a f t e r the group's next move to Trowan, C r i e f f .  There  i s much that i s p a i n f u l and even sensational i n these very s p e c i f i c l e t t e r s of 1872.  But i n h i s Notes, Scott merely says, "his delusions had a f a s c i n a t i o n ,  l i k e his p e r s o n a l i t y " (Notes, I I , 174).  Considering what he did know about  Rossetti's mental state, Scott's concentration  i n h i s Notes on the e f f e c t of  Buchanan's a r t i c l e could be interpreted as an attempt to decoy the reader from more l u r i d suppositions about Rossetti's anxieties. ~* period i n t h e i r l i v e s , Scott seems purposely  In writing of the sad  to underplay Rossetti's i l l n e s s  by emphasizing h i s "amazing bodily power of recovery."  Furthermore he presents  the Stobhall v i s i t as i n t e r e s t i n g f o r the a r c h i t e c t u r a l information he was able to gather, t o t a l l y minimizing the more sensational reason for h i s v i s i t . i s important to note also that Rossetti's delusions continued  It  into l a t e r  l i f e , and that Scott, as a v i s i t o r to 16 Cheyne Walk, saw proof that Gabriel never quite recovered  from feelings of i n s e c u r i t y .  C e r t a i n l y one cannot hope to present  Scott as a t o t a l l y benevolent  man whose reputation, by some h o r r i b l e mistake, has been ruined.  He was  known to be harsh and cutting to h i s acquaintances, and he d i d tend toward an i r o n i c view of l i f e which does not e a s i l y t o l e r a t e i l l u s i o n s . he does not mislead  the reader.  But i n h i s Notes  His point of view i s c l e a r l y established, as  i s h i s disavowal of chronological accuracy.  In h i s sections on R o s s e t t i ,  Scott does not write as a man with the same intentions as h i s subject.  He  i s always twenty years older than R o s s e t t i , with that perspective on events working f o r him.  In some passages, Scott i s the survivor, writing about a  man who can no longer change.  But he i s always w r i t i n g about himself, and  about h i s perception of Rossetti i n h i s biographical passages.  His Notes are  reminiscences,  not h i s t o r y , and are throughout informed by the consciousness  of the w r i t e r .  This survey has shown that much of the c r i t i c i s m of Scott's  w r i t i n g about R o s s e t t i i s baseless.  For this reason, and because Scott's  Notes f u l f i l l the purpose for which they are intended,  Scott deserves a  place of respect among the associates of the Pre-Raphaelites.  FOOTNOTES CHAPTER 4  noted.  ^William Rossetti's challenge I t occurs i n Memoir I, 19.  of Scott's chronology has been  2 William R o s s e t t i recounts that on the day of Elizabeth's funeral Dante Gabriel "unwitnessed deposited the MSt . i n the c o f f i n . He then joined h i s f r i e n d s , and informed Madox Brown of what he had done ... Rossetti thus not only renounced any early or d e f i n i t e hopes of poetic fame, which had always been a r u l i n g passion with him, but he also abandoned a project already d i s t i n c t l y formulated and n o t i f i e d . " (Memoir I, 225) Of the disinterment of the MS" on 10 October, 1869, William R o s s e t t i says "For some while past some friends had urged R o s s e t t i to recover, the M.S. buried i n h i s wife's c o f f i n , and thus to obtain possession not only of copies of several poems completer than the copies ... which were already i n h i s hands, but also of some compositions of which he retained no example whatever." (Memoir I, 247) 3 W.E. Fredeman, i n a recent monograph, discusses the impact of the "Fleshly School of Poetry" on Rossetti's mental health. He finds a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between the second, pamphlet p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s piece, and the increase i n Rossetti's paranoia. "Prelude to the Last Decade: Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i and the Summer of 1892." (Manchester: B u l l e t i n of John Ryland's L i b r a r y , Vol. 53, Autumn 1970) p. 75-121. 4 In 1874, Shields married h i s model, Mathilda Booth, who was then aged 16. Ernestine M i l l s , i n her L i f e and Letters of Frederic Shields, (London: Longmans, 1912) p. 165, suggests that Shields was influenced to marry the g i r l through the pressure of propriety-conscious people rather than by h i s own, strong desire to do so. Rossetti may have been drawing this p a r a l l e l . See Fredeman'smonograph noted above.  UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL MANUSCRIPT LETTERS IN THE PENKILL PAPERS, U.B.C. PI 74 l e t t e r s r e f e r r i n g t o D.G. R o s s e t t i ' s i l l n e s s i n c l u d i n g 21 from W.B. S c o t t t o A. Boyd 12 from A. Boyd t o W.B. S c o t t P2-59 ~  P2-84  548 l e t t e r s P3-73 —  from W i l l i a m  B e l l Scott  to A l i c e  Boyd  P3-82  43 l e t t e r s  from A l i c e  Boyd t o W i l l i a m  Bell  Scott  P-7 19 l e t t e r s from v a r i o u s c o r r e s p o n d e n t s t o A. Boyd and W.B. P9-85 89 •6 l e t t e r s from W i l l i a m M i n t o t o A. Boyd and W.B. S c o t t P9-90 — 93 112 l e t t e r s  Scott '  from W. M i n t o t o A. Boyd  P-.ll 3 letters  from A. Boyd t o W. Minto  MANUSCRIPT LETTERS IN ANGELI PAPERS, U.B.C. A-l  (Angeli  Papers)  63 l e t t e r s c o n c e r n i n g D.G. R o s s e t t i ' s i l l n e s s R o s s e t t i , 1872) A-112 36 l e t t e r s  t o D.G. R o s s e t t i from W.B.  Scott  (mainly w r i t t e n t o W.M.  ( 2 9 ) , A. Boyd  ( 6 ) , M i s s L o s h (1)  MANUSCRIPT MATERIAL OTHER THAN LETTERS The Day D i a r i e s o f W i l l i a m B e l l S c o t t . The Day D i a r i e s o f A l i c e  The W i l l o f W i l l i a m  Boyd.  B e l l S c o t t 2nd J u l y , 1890 P e n k i l l  Castle.  "Chronological Memoir of W.B.S."  Another memoir headed "W.B.S."  2 pages.  3 pages.  " C r i t i c i s m s cut from Newspapers on my Pictures and Publications Collected occasionally and pasted into t h i s book October 1861 William B e l l Scott". A scrapbook of c l i p p i n g s which has entries u n t i l 1882. Mutilated j o u r n a l which i s a continuation of another begun two years e a r l i e r . F l y - l e a f reads "William B e l l Scott Newcastle-Tyne 1 March 1847". The j o u r n a l contains entries u n t i l 1854.  "Note Book on Passing Incidents  13th August 1878 to A p r i l 16th 1879".  Pages from the MS of the Autobiographical Notes. "The PRB Journal" kept by William Michael R o s s e t t i 15 May 1849 to 21 August 1849. 1 Scrapbook of Reviews of the Autobiographical Notes kept by William Minto. Smith, K.H., "A Biographical and C r i t i c a l Study of William B e l l Scott," Unpub. diss., U n i v e r s i t y of Durham, 1952. Contains a bibliography of Scott's work. CHRONOLOGICAL l i s t of works by William Scott (Parentheses indicate works which cannot be r e l i a b l y documented) Scott, William B e l l .  (Set of etchings of Loch Katrine and the Trossacks 1830?).  "To the Memory of Percy Bysshe Shelley"  T a i t ' s Edinburgh Magazine.  1831. The Edinburgh University Souvenir.Scott contributors. Edinburgh: Dunlop, 1835.  Hades; or, the T r a n s i t : Edinburgh: Last, 1838.  and Shand were chief  And the Progress of Mind.  Two Poems.  "Rosabell"  Monthly Repository, 1838.  The Year of the World: from the F a l l . " Edinburgh:  A Philosophical Poem on "Redemption T a i t , 1846.  (Paper on art i n Monthly Repository before 1848. by R o s s e t t i i n making f i r s t contact.)  Referred to  Memoir of David Scott, R.S.A. Containing His Journals i n I t a l y ; Notes on A r t , and Other Papers. Edinburgh: Black, 1850.  "Morning Sleep," A r t and Poetry: [The Germ]. February 1850.  Being Thoughts towards Nature  "Early A s p i r a t i o n s " A r t and Poetry: Nature [The Germ]. March 1850.  Being Thoughts towards  Antiquarian Gleanings i n the North of England, being Examples of Antique Furniture, Plate, Church decorations. London: George B e l l , [1851]. Chorea Sancti V i t i ; or Steps i n the^ Journey of Prince Legion. London: George B e l l , 1851.  Poems [by a P a i n t e r ] .  London:  Smith Elder, 1854.  Scott, W.B. Half-Hour Lectures on the History and Practice of the Fine and Ornamental A r t s. London: Longmans and Roberts, 1861. i(evised i n 1867 and 1874. Mural Paintings. Chevy Chase at S i r W.C. Trevelyan, Bart's Wallington, Northumberland. The King's Quair at P e n k i l l Castle, Aryshire. Sessional Papers of the Royal I n s t i t u t e of B r i t i s h A r c h i t e c t s , XVII 1867-1868) 31-46 85-93.  "Anthony"  Fortnightly Review  Albert Purer:  1869.  No. xiX  His L i f e and Works.  N  e  w  Series  London:  July 1, 1868.  Longmans,  Green,  Scott, W, [ l e t t e r about Ebenezer Jones!] Notes and Queries. V March 1870. "The A r t Season of 1871"  Gems of French Art.  Fraser's Magazine  London:  "Ornamental Art i n England."  4th Series,  August 1871.  Routledge, 1871.  Fortnightly Review, October 1,  1871. "Report on Miscellaneous Art." O f f i c i a l Reports on the Various Sections of the London International E x h i b i t i o n , 1871. ed. by Lord Houghton.  (Modern Belgian Art.  1872?) [DNB]  The B r i t i s h School of Sculpture I l l u s t r a t e d by Twenty Engravings ... and F i f t y Woodcuts. London: V i r t u e , 1872. Our B r i t i s h Landscape Painters from Samuel Scott to David Cox. London:  V i r t u e , 1872. (Book on modern German A r t , 1873)  [DNB]*  M u r i l l o and the Spanish School of Painting.  London:  Routledge,  1873. The P o e t i c a l Works of John Keats.  London:  Routledge, 1873.  The P o e t i c a l Works of L e t i t i a Elizabeth Landon. Memoir and I l l u s t r a t i o n s . London: Routledge, 1873.  ed. with  4. The Complete P o e t i c a l Works of Lord Byron, London: Routledge, 1874  with a Memoir.  The P o e t i c a l Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, ed. with Memoir and I l l u s t r a t i o n s . London: Routledge, 1874.  Scott, W. The P o e t i c a l Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley, and I l l u s t r a t i o n s . London: Routledge, 1874.  ed. with Memoir  [Review of Letters on Landscape Art by St. John TyrwhittTj The Examiner Jan. 2, 1875. (Edition of Shakespeare's Works,.1875?) [DNB]. [contributor.][ The F a l l of Man by Albert A l t d o r f e . Facsimile Reprint by the Holbein Society. Introduction by Scott. London,  1876. (Poetical Works of S i r Walter Scott. William Blake: and Windus, 1878.  1877)  [DNB].  Etchings from h i s Works.: London: ;  "A P o r t f o l i o of Ancient Engravings." February to March, 1879.  Chatto  Fraser's Magazine XIX  — The L i t t l e Masters v x '. i n "Series of I l l u s t r a t e d Biographies of the Great A r t i s t s . " London: Sampson Low, Marston, 1879. 1 \,  The Art of Engraving on Copper and Wood from the Florentine N i e l l o Workers of the F i f t e e n t h Century to that of William Blake. (1879?) (Pictures by Venetian Painters.  London:  Virtue,  187?)  ( P i c t u r e s by the I t a l i a n M a s t e r s , G r e a t e r and L e s s e r . V i r t u e S p a l d i n g , 187?),  A Poet's Harvest Home: London: Stock, 1882.  London:  Being One Hundred Short Poems.  /Letter about the r e l a t i o n s h i p of Rossetti's "Found" and "Rosabell".J Athenaeum Jan. 27, 1883.  Scott's  [Letter on some l i n e s i n Newman's hymn "Lead Kindly Light".J Notes and Queries 6th Series, v o l . 11, July 17, 1886.  Scott, W. I l l u s t r a t i o n s to the King's Quair of King James 1 of Scotland. Painted on the Staircase of P e n k i l l Castle, Ayrshire, by William B e l l Scott. June 1865 to August 1868. Etched by him i n 1885. Edinburgh: P r i v a t e l y printed by T. & A. Constable, 1887.  Autobiographical Notes of the L i f e of William B e l l Scott With Notices of His A r t i s t i c and Poetic C i r c l e of Friends, 1830-1882. edited by W. Minto. 2 v o l s . London: Osgood, 1892. A Poet's Harvest Home: Being One Hundred Short Poems. With an Aftermath of Twenty Short Poems. London: E l k i n Mathews, 1893.  BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CITED Books A n g e l i , Helen Madox R o s s e t t i . Dante Gabriel Rossetti; His Friends and Enemies. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1949. Bate, Percy H. The English Pre-Raphaelite Painters Their Associates Successors. London: B e l l , 1899. Benson, Arthur, C. Rossetti MacMillan, 1904.  English men of l e t t e r s s e r i e s .  Broers, Bernarda. Mysticism i n the Neo-Romantics. Amsterdam: P a r i s , 1923. Caine, Thomas H a l l .  My Story.  New York:  and  London:  "William B e l l  Scott."  Appleton, 1909.  Recollections of Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i .  London:  Stock, 1882.  Charlesworth, Barbara. Dark passages The Decadent Consciousness i n V i c t o r i a n L i t e r a t u r e . Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin, 1965.  C h a r t e r i s , Evan. L i f e and Letters of S i r Edmund Gosse. Heinemann, 1931. Doughty, Oswald. F.S. E l l i s .  London:  The Letters of Dante Gabriel Rossetti to h i s Publisher, London: S c h o l a r t i s , 1928.  A V i c t o r i a n Romantic: Muller, 1949.  Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i .  London:  Evans, B. I f o r . English Poetry i n the Later Nineteenth Century. Methuen, 1933. 2nd. ed. 1966. Fredeman, William E. VIII, 71-73.  " C h r i s t i n a R o s s e t t i " Review.  London:  V i c t o r i a n Studies  Pre-Raphaelitism; A B i b l i o - c r i t i c a l Study.  Cambridge:  Harvard,  1965. Gaunt, William.  The Pre-Raphaelite Tragedy.  London:  Cape, 1942.  Gere, John and Robin Ironside, eds. The Pre-Raphaelite Painters. Phaidon, 1948.  London:  Hake, Thomas and A. Compton Rickett. The L i f e and Letters of Theodore Watts-Dunton. 2 v o l s . London: Jack, 1916. Hake, Thomas, G.  Memoirs of Eighty Years.  London:  Bentley, 1892.  Hueffer, Ford Madox. Ford Madox Brown: A Record of h i s L i f e and Work. London: Longmans, 1896. Rossetti: 1896?  A C r i t i c a l Essay on His A r t . London: '  Hunt, V i o l e t . The Wife of R o s s e t t i : Lane, 1932.  Her L i f e and Death.  Longmans,  London:  Hunt, William Holman. Pre-Raphaelitism and the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood . 2 v o l s . London: MacMillan, 1905-6.  Knight, Joseph.  Knight, William. p. 341-350.  L i f e of Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i .  London:  Some Nineteenth Century Scotsmen. Edinburgh: Oliphant , 1903.  Scott, 1887.  "William Minto."  Maas, Jeremy.  V i c t o r i a n Painters.  M a r i l l i e r , H.C.  Megroz, R.L. London:  London:  Dante Gabriel Rossetti.  Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i : Faber, 1928.  Barrie and R o c k l i f f , 1969.  London:  Geo. B e l l , 1904.  Painter Poet of Heaven i n Earth.  M i l e s , A l f r e d , H. ed. The Poets and the Poetry of the Century, v o l . IV "William B e l l Scott" by Joseph Knight. London: Hutchinson, [18911897]. ,  M i l l s , Ernestine ed. L i f e and Letters of Frederic J . Shields. Longmans, 1912.  Packer, Lona Mosk. 1963.  Christina Rossetti.  Berkeley:  Univ. of C a l i f o r n i a ,  Pedrick, Gale. L i f e with R o s s e t t i , or No Peacocks Allowed. Macdonald, 1964. Rhys, Ernest  Everyman Remembers.  New York:  London:  London:  Cosmopolitan, 1931.  R o s s e t t i , Dante G a b r i e l . Letters of Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i . ed. by Oswald Doughty and J.R. Wahl. 4 v o l s . Oxford: Clarendon, 196567. R o s s e t t i William Michael. Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i as Designer and Writer. London: C a s s e l l , 1889. Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i : His Family Letters with a Memoir. 2 v o l s . London: E l l i s and Elvey, 1895. "The PRB Journal." Pre-Raphaelite Diaries and L e t t e r s . London: Hurst and Blackett, 1900.  ed.  1862.  Rossetti Papers 1862 to 1870.  ed. Ruskin: R o s s e t t i : London: A l l e n , 1899.  London:  Sands, 1903.  Pre-Raphaelitism Papers 1854 to  R o s s e t t i , William Michael. Sons, 1906.  Some Reminiscences.  Sharp, William. Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i : MacMillan, 1882.  2 vols.  New York:  A Record and a Study.  Sonstroem, David. Rossetti and the F a i r Lady. • Univ. Press, 1970.  London:  Middletown, Conn.:  Swinburne, Algernon Charles. The Swinburne Letters, New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1959.  Scribner  Wesleyan  ed. C e c i l Lang 6 v o l s .  Tirebuck, W.E. Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i , His Work and Influence: Including a B r i e f Survey of Present Art Tendencies. London: Stock, 1882.  T r o x e l l , Janet Camp. Three Rossettis Unpublished Letters to and from Dante G a b r i e l , C h r i s t i n a , William. Cambridge: Harvard, 1937. Waugh, Evelyn. 1928.  Rossetti:  Welby, T. Earle.  His L i f e and Work.  The V i c t o r i a n Romantics  New York:  1850-70.  Weygandt, Cornelius. "The V i c t o r i a n Minors." Appleton-Century, 1936.  Dodd and Mead,  London:  Howe, 1929.  The Time of Tennyson  London:  Winwar, Frances. Poor Splendid Wings [The Rossettis and Their C i r c l e . ] Boston: L i t t l e Brown, 1933.  Periodical Articles:  General  Fredeman, William E. "A Pre-Raphaelite Gazette: The P e n k i l l Letters of Arthur Hughes to William B e l l Scott and A l i c e Boyd: 1886-97." Manchester: John Rylands, 1967.  "Prelude to the Last Decade: Dante Gabriel Rossetti and the Summer of 1872" B u l l e t i n of the John Rylands L i b r a r y , v o l . 53, Autumn 1970, 75-121. [Part I; Part II w i l l appear i n Spring 1971.]  The Germ:  Thoughts  to A p r i l  1850.  towards Nature i n Poetry, L i t e r a t u r e , and A r t .  January  Gosse, Edmund. "Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i " (Sept. 1882) 718-725.  Century Magazine. XXIV  Maitland, Thomas. [Robert Buchanan pseud.] "The Fleshly School of Poetry Mr. D.G. R o s s e t t i . " Contemporary Review XVIII (Oct. 1871) 334-350. Reprinted i n pamphlet form, The Fleshly School o Poetry and Other Phenomena of the Day. London: Strahan, 1872. f  The Oxford and Cambridge Magazine f o r 1856: Conducted by Members of the Two U n i v e r s i t i e s , ed. Wm. F u l f o r d . Oxford: Numbers 1-12, Jan.-Dec. 1856.  R o s s e t t i , William Michael "Notes on Rossetti and His Works." A r t Journal. XLVI (May-June 1884).  Watts, Theodore, "Mr. D.G. R o s s e t t i . " 1882) 480-82. "The Truth about R o s s e t t i . " 1883) 404-423.  Athenaeum.no. 2842 ( A p r i l 15,  Nineteenth Century. XIII (March  P e r i o d i c a l A r t i c l e s Relating to the Controversy Anonymous.  Review.  London Times.  Nov. 17, 1892.  " L i f e History of William B e l l Scott." Nov. 18, 1892. "William B e l l Scott."  Birmingham Gazette.  Glasgow Herald.  Nov. 21 *92.  "Tantaine Animus Caelestis Irae?" P a l l M a l l Gazette. Dec. 6, '92.  Saturday Review. Dec. 10, 1892.  Review Weekly Dispatch. "William B e l l Scott."  Dec. 18, 1892. Times.  Dec. 28, 1892.  "William B e l l Scott." Morning Post.  Dec. 28, 1892.  Anonymous  "Artists  and T h e i r L i v e s , "  "William B e l l Scott." Review.  Speed's  B l a c k and White.  Critic  J a n . 14  L i t e r a r y Notes.  "G."  "The Tragedy o f G e n i u s . "  Le G a l l i e n n e , R i c h a r d . Minto, William.  Sunday Sun.  Correspondence.  Correspondence,  Academy.  Academy.  '93.  Speaker  Nov. 20  "William B e l l Scott."  J a n . 21  Nov. 24  Sharp, W i l l i a m .  Review.  Correspondence. Academy.  Dec. 3  '92.  Academy.  "The New T e r r o r . "  Dec. 24  '93.  '92.  '92.  S k e l t o n , John. "Dante R o s s e t t i and Mr. W.B. Feb. 1893. Swinburne, A.C.  '92.  '92.  J.A.N. " B e l l S c o t t and R o s s e t t i . " D a i l y C h r o n i c l e . . J a n . 12 (almost c e r t a i n l y John A s h c r o f t Noble.) Rossetti, William Michael.  '93.  '92.  London S t a r .  Dec. 3  Dec. 31  '93.  '93.  J a n . 19  " E n g l i s h Bards and Scots R e v i e w i n g s . "  Jan. 7  Scott."  Blackwood's;  F o r t n i g h t l y Review  Dec. 1  '92.  (LVII 830-33). Correspondence. T i n t o , D. Review. Watts, Theodore.  Figaro. Review.  Academy. J a n . 19  Dec. 24  '92.  '93.  Athenaeum.  Jan.  28 '93.  (no.  3405  113-5).  RELATED BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND REFERENCE WORKS B[ayne], Rfonald]. XVII p. 1052.  "Scott, William B e l l . "  Dictionary of National  Biography.  Bryan's Dictionary of Painters and Engravers. V o l . V p. 58. London: G. B e l l , 1921.  "Scott, William B e l l . "  Graves, Algernon. Dictionary of A r t i s t s from 1700 to 1893. Graves, 1895. Hunt, John Dixon. The Pre-Raphaelite Routledge and Regan Paul, 1968. Hough, Graham.  The Last Romantics.  Imagination 1848-1900.  London:  London:  London:  Duckworth, 1949.  Morris, William. The Letters of William Morris, New York: Longmans, ,. 1950.  ed.  P h i l i p Henderson  Packer, Lona Mosk. " C h r i s t i n a Rossetti and A l i c e Boyd of P e n k i l l Castle. TLS (June 26, 1959) p. 389. Purves, John. "Dante Gabriel R o s s e t t i : F o r t n i g h t l y Review. (May 1928). Skelton, John.  Letters to Miss A l i c e Boyd."  The Table-Talk of S h i r l e y .  Welland, D.S.R. The Pre-Raphaelites Harrap, 1953.  London:  Blackwood, 1895.  i n L i t e r a t u r e and A r t .  London:  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093352/manifest

Comment

Related Items