12 Regent Terrace, Edinburgh. - Has enjoyed reading Trevelyan's paper [on metre see 18/91] even more than he did hearing it read, as he can 'go more slowly and try the rhythms in [his] own way'; has got 'more understanding' of the subject than he has from anything else, and will 'certainly print' the paper [in the collection of pieces by members of the English Association]. Will probably drop the introduction, and if he may if the space is limited omit Horace's "Ode" and the translation by Milton. Now has several papers from 'Yvor Evans'; Rylands; Sparrow; Wattie; and Dickins; but is 'specially grateful' for Trevelyan's. Sends thanks to Mrs Trevelyan for her card, which he ought to have acknowledged. Will have a proof sent to Trevelyan so that he can check the translation. Hopes that they will see him this winter. Has a 'dreadful incubus' of a paper to prepare for Manchester; is also 'slaving at Scott's letters and getting some interesting new light'. Janet will be married in November; the French relatives will come too so they will be 'pretty full', but if Trevelyan could come up after that it would be 'a great pleasure to have some rational talk'. Thinks [Donald] Tovey is in Germany, but he will be 'looking homeward soon' as the arrangements for his concerts have come out.
12 Regent Terrace, Edinburgh. - If Trevelyan is in Edinburgh in autumn or early winter, the Griersons would always be glad if he stayed with them for a day or two. Has been 'burdened with the duty' of collecting essays and studies by members of the English Association; finds this difficult, as he does not have a 'very wide literary acquaintance', having lived so far from London. Several younger men have promised him articles, but they 'are all rather comers-on than established names' and he has been 'ignored' by the older ones he approached on the Secretary's advice. Realised last night that he should ask Trevelyan whether he would be willing to offer the article on Metre which he read aloud to them, or another; asks him to reply at least since 'M.L. James [sic: M. R. James?] and other Olympians... have not deemed a poor Scottish Professor worth even of that'. Hopes Trevelyan is having a good holiday. He himself lectured eight hours a week at Heidelberg till the end of July, and since then has been busy with 'Scott letters and Carlyle and students' theses' and so on: thinks he needs to get away. Thinks [Donald] Tovey will be in Germany in September; the Griersons had hopes he would come to Heidelberg when they were there and help him entertain his friends; they gave a reception at the Hotel but 'had to rely on Janet for the music'. This went off well, however, and everyone was very kind; Grierson 'struck up quite a friendship with [Friedrich] Gundolf'. Sends regards to Trevelyan's wife and son. Dined with the Dutch poet Boutens on the way home and had a 'great evening'. Notes in a postscript that he had a 'pleasant lunch' in Cambridge with [Goldsworthy] Lowes Dickinson in June.
54 Scarsdale Villas, W.8.—Declines to join the advisory panel for the new Review. Will send for Chambers’s book tomorrow.
—————
Transcript
54 Scarsdale Villas | W.8
Dec. 30
Dear Chambers,
Many thanks for the proof of the Review circular, which I am altogether glad to read; & as many for the invitation to have my name added to the panel. But this, I am sure after reflection I ought not to accept. My powers of work have been diminishing fast in 1923, and I am anxious to finish some things to add to un-collected pamphlets, and to get a volume out while I can. And for this purpose I mean to diminish what I do for the English Assn, and perhaps leave the Publications Sub-committee when the Annual Meeting comes; and, you will see at once, I could not do this and yet undertake anything of at all the same kind. But I am sorry, and none the less grateful.
I am delighted to see that your book is out and shall send for it tomorrow, and I congratulate you. Let us hope that tomorrow will not be so filthy as today, and that 1924 will start fair.
Yours sincerely
A. C. Bradley
(Sheffield.)—Comments on passages in the Works of Nashe. Is thinking of publishing extracts from Gabriel Harvey’s marginalia.
(With an envelope, postmarked at Sheffield.)
—————
Transcript
13 Nov. 1908
Dear McKerrow,
I have been turning over the pages of your Vol IV—It is indeed a marvellous storehouse of out of the way information. Are you going to provide an Index? I suppose so.
At this stage comments are of no use to you—but I will give you one or two. {1}
I 183. 17. In the expression ‘S. Nicholas Clerks’ is it clear that there is any reference to the devil? Chambers Book of Days II p 661 bot. explains the phrase in relation to a legend of St Nicholas.—On the other hand our ‘Old Nick’ is often said to be a name transferred to the Devil from Macchiavelli.
(Your page of Vol IV) 141. mid. {2} ‘at the university town of which’ should be ‘at the university of which town’ I suppose.
I p. 274. 21. I dont understand what you mean by saying the real point of the saying against ropemakers has not been explained.—Do you mean their ‘walking backwards’? In a little book I have on Trades &c. (titlepage lost) the ropemaker, it is said, fixes the hemp to his wheel—‘He then runs backwards giving out hemp as he goes!’ {3}
I 285. 21. {4} Better to have said ‘a pedant’ or ‘a scholastic philosopher’ as Pedantius himself is also a pedant, indeed, as a Schoolmaster, a pedant par excellence.
II 184 11. {5} In his MS. notes on Gascoigne’s ‘Notes of instruction on rime. &c’ in the Bodleian copy Harvey dissents from Gascoigne’s approval of monosyllables ‘the more monosyllables you shall use the truer Englishman you shall seem’—‘Non placet. A great Grace and Majesty in longer Wordes, so they be current Inglish. Monosyllables ar good to make up a hobling and hudling verse.’ {6}
III. 16. 10. If you mean St John’s College, Camb.—the Visitor at present is The Bishop of Ely. & he was so from the foundation of the College [without any break I imagine] {7}
III 41. 35 arsedine. {8} Edward Carpenter {9} was telling me the other day that Sheffield grinders say (or did till lately) ‘as thin as an assidine’ tho’ none of them know what an assidine is
III 43 14. There is a well known inn between Whittlesey & Thorney called ‘The dog in a doublet’ with a sign. An uncle of mine had a seizure on the ice & died there.
III 46. 6. The DNB. says that Harvey practised in the Court of Arches I think. I had thought there was some authority—but I dont remember it.
III 116 33. Our Johnian antiquary Thos. Baker has transcribed a lot of notes of Harvey made in a copy of his own Ciceronianus & other books—Among them a letter from Tho. Hatcher remonstrating with him for not having mentioned Haddon in his Ciceronianus—also Harvey’s reply. both in Latin Hatcher’s letter is 23 Nov 1577 and refers to Harvey’s having recently visited him at Careby near Stamford.
III 126 31. {10} Cp. Pedantius l. 194. At occuritur Aristotelem non vidisse verum in spirituali-bus.
I have been looking through my extracts from Harvey’s marginalia—& I believe they would make a very interesting book for a limited audience. {11} One might start with a sketch of Harvey’s life & character, & attainments, as illustrated by the marginalia—& then print a selection of marginalia from each annotated book of his that I have been able to see. It occurred to me today that it would be very nice if Sidgwick & his partner {12} would do it. But I should not wish to involve Sidgwick in any loss over it.
Thank you for your letter about the English Association. {13} Boas is Secretary. It is like the Mod. Language Association, but for English only.
I hope when you have finished with Nashe, you will start an edition of Dekker’s plays.
Ever yours
G. C. Moore Smith
I shall look forward eagerly to your Vol V.
[Added on the back of the envelope:] Ellis has just sent me the Harvey book to copy the notes. Not of much importance.
[Direction on envelope:] R. B. McKerrow Esq. | 4 Phoenix Lodge Mansions | Brook Green | Hammersmith | London W
—————
The envelope was postmarked at Sheffield at 11 a.m. on 14 November 1908, and at Paddington, W, at 5.15 p.m. the same day. Besides the note by Moore Smith mentioned above, the envelope is marked ‘Work | From Prof G. C. Moore-Smith’, and elsewhere ‘See to this’.
{1} The succeeding notes relate to Nashe’s works Pierce Penilesse, Strange Newes, Christ’s Teares over Jerusalem, and Have With You to Saffron-Walden. Several of the suggestions were incorporated in the Errata and Addenda appended to the fifth volume of McKerrow’s edition; see below.
{2} Cf. Works of Nashe, v. 375 (note on i. 227, 3–239, 2).
{3} Closing inverted comma supplied.
{4} Cf. Works of Nashe, v. 376.
{5} Cf. Works of Nashe (1958), v. Supp., p. 32.
{6} Single inverted comma supplied in place of double inverted commas.
{7} The square brackets are original.
{8} See OED, s.v. ‘orsedue’.
{9} Edward Carpenter lived at Millthorpe, between Sheffield and Chesterfield. See ODNB.
{10} Cf. Works of Nashe, v. 379.
{11} Moore Smith’s selection of Gabriel Harvey’s Marginalia was published in 1913.
{12} R. C. Jackson. The firm of Sidgwick & Jackson had only just been established, on the 2nd of the month.
{13} The English Association was founded in 1906 by a small group of English teachers and scholars including F. S. Boas, A. C. Bradley, and Israel Gollancz.
90 Regent’s Park Road, N.W.1.—Suggests means of increasing the circulation of the Review.
—————
Transcript
90 Regents Park Rd., N.W.1.
June 3 1925 {1}
Many thanks. I will do anything I can to help. There must be no question of failing to make good! {2} Could you not get at the English Association? I was disappointed to see that they referred to the R.E.S. in such a cold and colourless way in their last Bulletin. I should have thought it was their first business to give you all the support in their power. Boas might help you here. Would it not be worth the expense to send your circular to all the 6500 members? a goodly proportion of them ought to be among your subscribers. You have, no doubt, circularised all professors of English in the universities of the world; but it might be a good thing to send them—or the most promising of them—a dozen circulars and ask them to bring the journal to the notice of their staff and students. Chambers ought, for instance, to lay a number of the prospectuses on the table of the Engl. library at Univ. Coll. Perhaps he has done so; if not, I will suggest it to him.
Always yours sincerely
J.G.R.
[Direction:] Dr R. B. McKerrow | Messrs. Sidgwick & Jackson Ltd | 3 Adam St | W.C.2.
—————
Postmarked at London, N.W.1, at 3.15 p.m. on 3 June 1925. There is also a postmark advertising the British Exhibition, May-October 1925.
{1} The first two figures of the year are printed. The printed address, ‘University College, London’, has been struck through.
{2} The reference is evidently to the financial difficulties mentioned in McKerrow’s circular letter of 1 April (MCKW A3/34).
Board of Education.—Suggests sending copies of the prospectus to the English Association’s Publications Committee. Is concerned that the position of Bradley’s name may lead correspondents to write to him.
—————
Transcript
Board of Education
28. ii. 24
Dear McKerrow,
The Prospectus looks very imposing with its enlarged list of names, and I think your proposed procedure is quite sound.
Might you now send a batch to Houghton {1} for distribution to the Publications Committee of the E. Assn at their next meeting (2nd Thursday in March, I think), with a covering letter bespeaking the welcome and support of the Assn?
It is a little awkward that Bradley’s name comes first (although it looks well), because it may lead people who get copies, if anyone does, without a covering letter, to write to him.
I rather wish you had added on the print, even at this stage, “Communications to R.B.McK. and your address”. It might be well to tell B., if anything not clearly meant as personal does come to him, to send it to you for acknowledgment and reply.
Yrs sincerely
E. K. Chambers
—————
{1} A. V. Houghton, secretary of the English Association from 1912 or 1913 to 1938.
The Clarendon Press, Oxford.—The misunderstanding as to the relationship between the Press and the new journal came about in a natural way. Offers to discuss the matter further, and expresses the Press’s goodwill towards the enterprise.
—————
Transcript
P 4509
The Clarendon Press, Oxford
9 Jan. 1924 {1}
My dear McKerrow
This is a private letter in the sense that it expresses only a personal opinion. But I am filing a copy of it for convenience—I have no means of keeping papers in order outside this office!
Thank you very much indeed for writing so friendly and so frank a letter. Like you I regret the turn events have taken, in one respect; but it happened very naturally. We understood that we should hear again, if any thing were projected; but we were then talking to representatives of the English Association; and I understand that the Assn as such has nothing to say, so hasnt said it. I see, too, the way in which the conclusion was arrived at, that it would be useless to ask me to consider the later scheme; though I think that conclusion was not really deducible from the previous discussion about an editor. I wish you had asked!
Now I have been wondering whether I ought to ask if we can do any thing to assist you e.g. in the USA and Dominions. I hesitate to do so—much as I should like to help—because I dont want even to seem to poach; because I see that if we had ‘a foot in it’ we should be somewhat committed if (say) you went in to liquidation with a view to reconstruction; lastly, because it is clear to me that the Review would be much more attractive to us if it were offered as a new thing than if it were relinquished by its original publishers—because of course such relinquishing must suggest (to purchasers and advertisers) a financial loss and a disappointing circulation.
I may already have written either too much or too little! If you make no reply I shall not be surprised or offended. But if you would like to have some further discussion, I dont think it could do any harm—you know that we are well-disposed to the enterprise in any event.
I shall be at Amen Corner {2} on Monday, {3} and could be free 11–1, or after 3.
Yours sincerely
R. W. Chapman
R. B. McKerrow Esq.
—————
{1} The first two figures of the year are printed.
{2} The address of the Press’s London warehouse.
{3} 14th.
31 Endcliffe Rise Road, Sheffield.—Discusses McKerrow’s plan of establishing a journal devoted solely to English studies.
—————
Transcript
31 Endcliffe Rise Road, Sheffield
Nov. 12. 1923
My dear McKerrow,
Many thanks for your kind letter. I am rejoiced to hear that English studies are to have an organ of their own in this country, and that you are to direct it. I have written again & again—to E. K. Chambers I think among others—urging the inadequacy of the MLR to meet the demands made on it & properly to represent English studies {1}—& I have been surprized not to hear earlier of a movement for a Journal devoted to English studies alone.
I pressed on Robertson {2} some time ago (within the last twelvemonths) the desirability of breaking up the MLR so that the English section could appear as a separate Journal. He was evidently against this (believing I suppose that a MLR without English in it could not pay its way)—but said that he thought the solution was a separate Journal for English.
I have at present matter in hand and reviews due that will take all the space for several numbers to come. This means that a book often does not get reviewed in print till 2 years or more after its appearance. It also means that I have to print particularly articles so abstruse or devoid of general interest that they have no chance of getting in elsewhere—& to turn off a popular well-written article—which may be just as valuable—on to some other journal. I have just succeeded in getting an excellent article of Stoll’s on Hamlet into the Contemporary. {3}—There is such an abundance of good matter crying to be published that I hope you will not commit yourself in a hurry to including so much of the nature of Reports of Societies &c. as to limit your powers of publishing the articles & reviews you want. I hope however you will include as the German journals do a page or so of Necrology when required. It has seemed to me sad that the MLR should not be able to include a word on great scholars such as Raleigh & Ker & Vaughan & H. Bradley when they die. {4}
Of course I think the effect on the MLR will be serious. If your standard is as high as ours has been—& it is likely to be higher rather than lower—why should an English student pay for a journal in which English studies occupy only ⅓ of the space as against one in which they hold the field? This is, if the price of your Journal is the same as that of the MLR. Perhaps you will make it less in order to widen your circulation among people who are not actually scholars themselves.
Am I at liberty to send on your letter to Robertson? or are you writing to him?
I understand from your letter that your Journal will not be specially connected with the English Association. However it will no doubt attract the special interest of the E.A. That Association for the last 2 years has made a grant to the MLR to enable it to give 8 more pages to English Of course it will be important for us to know if we may depend on that grant in the future. I am pleased to see that you do not apparently intend giving another quarterly Bibliography.
I suppose you dont intend to pay your contributors—unless for some special articles.
Writing for myself, not for MLR, I look forward with the greatest interest to your Journal. The less it aims at popularity, the more it aims at representing the best English Scholarship, philological, literary-historical, & literary, in my eyes the better—I suppose you will leave articles of technical bibliography rather to the Library?
(I am glad to see that Herford in today’s Manchester Guardian accepts the conclusions of Maunde Thompson &c. as probably sound.) {5}
I dont know if it would be possible to come to any concordat in order to avoid the duplication of reviews. There are a lot of American books sent out by Milford to which justice wd be done if they were reviewed in one English journal only. On the other hand as things are, many books dont get reviewed in the MLR at all. [Footnote: ‘I have not received a copy of the Sir Thomas More book—nor of Herford’s book on Recent Shakespeare Criticism, nor of All. Nicoll’s book on Restoration Drama.’ {6}] The ideal would be for every book of value to be noticed in one journal or the other. I am afraid if this is to be achieved duplication of reviews should be avoided. It might be difficult however to come to any agreement in the matter.
Ever yours
G. C. Moore Smith
—————
{1} Moore Smith was editor of the English section of the Modern Language Review from 1915 to 1927. See MLR, xxxvi (1941). 246.
{2} J. G. Robertson, founder and chief editor of the MLR. See MLR, xxviii (1933), 19.
{3} ‘Recent Criticism of Hamlet’, Contemporary Review, cxxv (1924), 347–57.
{4} Sir Walter Raleigh and C. E. Vaughan died in 1922, W. P. Ker and Henry Bradley in 1923,
{5} The reference is to a review of Shakespeare’s Hand in the Play of Sir Thomas More, ed. A. W. Pollard (1923), one of the chapters of which was written by the palaeographer Sir Edward Maunde Thompson. C. H. Herford was a regular reviewer for the Manchester Guardian.
{6} The books referred to are Shakespeare’s Hand in the Play of Sir Thomas More (see the previous note), A Sketch of Recent Shakespearean Investigation, 1893–1923, and A History of Restoration Drama, 1600 to 1700, all published in 1923.