Showing 62708 results

Wolverhampton Art and Industrial Exhibition, 1902, Gresham Chambers, Lichfield Street, Wolverhampton. - Was very sorry to miss Trevelyan on Tuesday; the Committee had a 'long jangling quarrel which dragged like an Alexandrine'. Will send the Yeats book tomorrow, and thinks Trevelyan will like it. Has been reading Gorky 'with disappointment'; thinks Bart Kennedy, the author of "Sailor Tramp" which he recommended, is far superior and disapproves of too much philosophy in a tramp.

Titles listed inside: Lovesong; Old Dutch dance; Wish; Sicilian Serenade; Intermezzo; Merry thoughts; Poet's solitude; Wedding march.

George Allen & Unwin Ltd account dated 10 Oct 1919 for copies sent and postage, with list of names; crosses indicate people also to receive Trevelyan's "The Death of Man". Four printed order forms, not filled in, for "The Ajax of Sophocles" and "The Foolishness of Solomon".

Press cuttings, most sent by Durrant's Press Cuttings to R. C. Trevelyan, dating between 30 Oct 1919 and 21 Feb 1920. Reviews of "The Ajax of Sophocles" from the "Times Literary Supplement"; "Manchester Guardian" (two copies, also reviewing "The Death of Man and Other Poems"); the "Tablet" (two copies); the "Yorkshire Observer", the "Daily News & Leader"; the "Athenaeum (two copies); the "Journal of Education"; and the "Southport Guardian".

King's College, Cambridge. - Thanks Trevelyan for granting permission to use his translation of Sophocles' "Antigone": it is just right for the purpose, and Sheppard has 'always ranked it very high'; when he saw it acted by the girls of Hawnes School near Bedford fifteen months ago he was 'delighted'. Glad that Trevelyan agrees with him on the interpretation of [line 523, "οὔτοι συνέχθειν, ἀλλὰ συμφιλεῖν ἔφυν"], which he thinks expresses the 'most important part of the play'. Will go through the text carefully before printing and let Trevelyan know if he thinks of anything else, as well as showing him the introduction. Has just heard from May Lowes Dickinson that she and her sister are very pleased with Trevelyan's poem about [their brother] Goldie; Sheppard did not know it had been printed [in the "New Statesman"] but is pleased that it has; Maynard [Keynes] showed it him a while ago, and they 'agreed that it was very beautiful and true'.

Telegram, 16 July 1947, from Christopher Hassall to R. C. Trevelyan, inviting him to give a twenty-five minute talk on Catullus on 27 August. Reply from Trevelyan regretting that he cannot give the talk. Subsequent reply cancelling previous reply and saying Trevelyan would 'much like to write script' if the offer is still open.

Letter, 5 May 1898, from George Lillie Craik, Macmillan & Co Ltd, St. Martin's Street, London, W.; sent to R. C. Trevelyan at the National Liberal Club, Whitehall Place, S.W.. - They have asked a 'friend' to help them decide about Trevelyan's poems ["Mallow and Asphodel"]; his opinion is 'favourable' and therefore they are willing to publish the work on commission; advises Trevelyan to add some 'poems on modern themes' if he can as this will increase the book's appeal. They will keep the manuscript until Trevelyan says where he would like it to be sent; expects he will want to look through it before it goes to the printers.

Gathering of printed page proofs for the 1898 publication of "Mallow and Asphodel" by Macmillan, with numerous duplicate pages. Date stamp, '28 May '98'; extensive corrections in manuscript.

9 pages (versos blank) from a lined notebook, with the "Archilochus" poems from "Mallow and Asphodel" written out, with corrections, in Trevelyan's hand.

Four copies of galley proofs of poems from "Mallow and Asphodel", with Cambridge University Press date stamps from 11 November 1937 to 4 January 1938. All have extensive corrections in Trevelyan's hand; two copies have attached printed "First Proof" labels from Cambridge University Press. Seemingly from a "Collected Works" or other anthology, but Trevelyan's "Collected Works" was in fact published in two volumes by Longmans in 1939. One copy contains two sides of a typed revision of the final lines of Trevelyan's "Orpheus"; the verso of the second sheet has draft [?] lines in pencil, "Seven years have I now loved you..." in Trevelyan's hand.

Press cuttings, sent to Trevelyan by Macmillan and Co. or cuttings agencies, from the: "Scotsman"; "Academy" (two copies); "Glasgow Herald"; "Literature"; "Speaker"; "Bookman"; "Oxford Magazine"; "Leeds Mercury"; and "Times". Dates between 1 September 1898 and 4 October 1899.

Trevelyan's address c/o G[ordon] Bottomley, The Sheiling, Silverdale, near Carnforth. - Strachey's article in last week's "Spectator" [see 26/12/5] gave Trevelyan much pleasure: it is a 'rare experience to be appreciated at once so generously and so understandingly'. Was very glad Strachey quoted the chorus on Man from the "Antigone", as he thinks his own 'somewhat dangerous experiment of trying to reproduce the Greek metre comes nearest to success' there. What Strachey says about his translation of Theocritus is also 'very gratifying': Trevelyan had worried that the 'expectations and the absence of rhyme in that metre would prove a stumbling block'. Expected that few people would agree with his comment about [Theocritus's] "Sorceress" being the 'greatest of love poems": perhaps he 'went too far', but did not intend to compare it with dramas, short lyrics and sonnets; even among long poems he admits Chaucer's "Troilus [and Criseyde]" and Marlowe's "Hero and Leander" could be argued to be 'greater'. Hoped to 'provoke dissent' but so far Strachey is the only critic to have challenged his assertion. Very pleased to find someone who understands and generally agrees with what he says about metre in "Thamyris"; thinks he could have been more convincing with more space for illustrations, and would also have liked to have given some examples of 'good and bad poetic rhetoric'. Has always thought Campion's ' "Rose-cheeked Laura" was a 'very remarkable invention"; Strachey may have noticed that he translated several Theocritean epigrams into it. Is himself 'no enemy of rhyme' but thinks there are 'great possibilities in unrhymed lyrical verse in English' which modern vers libre writers have not explored fully.

Lines copied out by Trevelyan from the 1833 publication of Tennyson’s “The Lotos Eaters” and “The Lady of Shalott” [perhaps comparing the differences with the 1842 edition?]. Draft verse addressed to Thanatos; prose about Meliance of Lys.
Notebook also used from opposite end in: draft prose narrative; notes on Wilson’s “Hindu Theatre” [Horace Hayman Wilson’s “Specimens of the Theatre of the Hindus” and [Charles Henry] Tawney’s translation of “Mālavikāgnimitra”; draft verse [or translation] on the Grail myth.

Text of play on recto only, with additions and corrections on facing pages. Inside covers also used.

Also contains notes for Trevelyan's toast to 'Absent Brothers' [at the annual dinner of the Cambridge Apostles], in which he explains that [his brother] George is 'in the Balkans, visiting battlefields' [during the Second Balkan War]; Brooke is in America, and Dickinson in China. Trevelyan suggests that Brooke should instead go to India as '9th reincarnation of Vishnu', play the flute and be followed by 'troops of adoring Gopi maidens. He would make a wonderful God'. If this new religion should prove a nuisance to the government, McTaggart, Russell and Moore should be 'at hand to check and expose him'; they would also find helpful roles in India, as would Fry, Lytton Strachey, George Trevelyan, and Mayor.

Roundhurst, Haslemere. - Expects he will be at Wallington on 12 [April]; Edward could come then, or earlier in the week; there will be a 'mob of people' he hardly knows such as the Spence Watsons early on but 'the coast will be cleared' after Tuesday; he will get there on Wednesday or Thursday next week. Asks Edward to send Kitty's address [Kitson added in pencil]; they could 'do something to rag him' such as sending a letter 'enclosing a beautiful epithalamium'. 'Here is a fan for Roger [Fry] to paint, which 'may be used to support whichever side of the temperance question you may choose'; includes the text of Bob's poem "For a Fan", with a reference to the Homeric Hymn to Pan.

Irish Office, Gt. Queen St, S.W. [headed notepaper] - Sends this 'by way of a Valentine'; glad Bob was first in his Latin class.

29 Beaufort Street, Chelsea SW. - Jokes that his treatment of Bob has been 'shameful', especially after the 'splendid sonnet' which he compares to 'a piece of very neat cabinet work, not the highest praise perhaps but just what [he] wanted for an occasional thing like this'. Has been ill since he left Bob at Bristol but is now recovering. Has begun his Brighton lectures [for the Cambridge Extension Movement], with a 'large & enthusiastic audience of elderly ladies who palpitate with emotion'; sometimes stays with his sister [Isabel?] and feels it shows 'great nerve to stay at a girls school [Miss Lawrence's School, later Roedean] & have meals in the common room'. Wishes he were with Bob in the sun though agrees Taormina is not the 'best possible' place in Sicily to stay; warns him not to copy his relative [Florence Trevelyan, who married a Taorminan doctor] and marry the innkeeper's daughter. Remembers coming round a hill onto a terrace by the sea and seeing 'the monster' Etna for the first time. Syracuse is nice but he supposes not convenient to stay at. [Dugald] MacColl has just come for dinner.

Returns to the letter after two days. Went to the Fletchers' last night and heard some good music; [Hercules] Brabazon was there, and 'rather pathetic': has been too much for him to 'become at the age of 70 a great artist & consequently an authority on art has been too much for him'. Some good pictures at the Old Masters [exhibition at the Royal Academy], especially a Tintoretto. Has begun the "Odyssey" with the help of Bob's translation. Has 'some manuscript poems of Gerald Hopkins' [sic: Gerard Manley Hopkins] which would make Bob 'tear his hair'; quotes three lines [the opening of "The Windhover"], but won't disturb Bob's 'Sicilian vespers with the clash of footed metres'.

(Draft of A3/21/2. Cf. A3/22/3.)

(Official.) The Governor of Bombay [Lloyd] has recommended that Gandhi should be prosecuted immediately, and has sought the Governor-General [Reading]’s approval. The Governor thinks the main charge should be based on certain articles by Gandhi, particularly ‘A Puzzle and its Solution’, the object of which is to create disaffection against, and so overthrow, the Government. In reply, the Government of India have signified their general agreement with this view, but as they believe that Gandhi’s next move must involve a more direct challenge to the Government than any hitherto attempted, and as they wish to avoid the idea that Gandhi is being prosecuted because he has made a conference impossible, they suggest that prosecution should be deferred till after 31 January, when Gandhi will probably institute civil disobedience. They also prefer that prosecution should be based on more recent statements than those mentioned by the Governor. No fresh reference need be made to them before prosecuting, if Gandhi embarks on an active campaign of civil disobedience.

(Carbon copy.)

(Carbon copy of A3/25/11.)

Part 1. Reports the contents of a letter received from Gandhi describing the circumstances of the resolution taken at Bardoli to embark on mass civil disobedience, and urging the Viceroy to free non-co-operators imprisoned for non-violent activities, declare a policy of non-interference in all non-violent activities, free the press from administrative control, and restore the recently-imposed fines and forfeitures; if the Viceroy complies within seven days, civil disobedience will be postponed.

(Typed.)

(Text as A3/31/1–2. Leaves from a larger document.)

Refers to Montagu’s telegram of the 7th. Has stopped Lloyd coming to him, since it is essential that he should be at Bombay when action is taken. Lloyd has been in Kathiawar, and his health appears to have improved.

(Typed.)

The Bombay Government will arrest Gandhi on 14 February, and Montagu can announce the arrest that afternoon. The Bombay lawyers have voted against taking action on the manifesto of 4 February or the Bardoli proceedings.

(Typed.)

(i) Refers to A3/46/3 and trusts that the Cabinet will understand his reasons for postpon-ing Gandhi’s arrest. The present situation is unclear, except that the resolutions show a great change in the non-co-operators’ attitude, which he attributes to a realisation of the danger and difficulties of carrying out civil disobedience. Reiterates his belief that civil disobedience is ‘the best battle-ground for us’, particularly this year, when the crops are good. Reports indicate dissension in non-co-operation ranks. His decision to postpone the arrest was influenced by a feeling that he could not risk the resignation of Sapru and other Indians, and that the division of the European and Indian elements in Council would be awkward at present, particularly with the Budget question before them. He has been advised that a general railway strike may take place when Gandhi’s arrest is announced, and that mill-hands in various centres will come out. Sapru says he will discover the real meaning of the latest move within two or three days, but believes that it means something ‘really good and lasting’ and that Indians generally regard it as a confession of failure by Gandhi.

(Typed. (ii) is a draft of A3/42/2.)

10 Downing Street, Whitehall, S.W.—Thanks him for visiting and cheering her up. Criticises the attitude of the young people around her, including Venetia. Suggests going for a drive on Friday.

24 Queen Anne’s Gate, S.W.— Thanks him for his letter explaining the position. He does not think the differentiation between cotton Customs and Excise Duties in India could ever be prevented, and as it has been done it does not matter. But he does not regard Interest and Sinking Fund of £100 million a year as a sufficient burden for India with her almost insignificant unproductive debt, and does not think India entitled to special consideration when compared with the burdens laid on other parts of the Empire. Points out that the increased pay of the Indian Army has been practically paid for by allowances for services abroad. Those who make cotton goods in India must, as a result of the differentiation, be allowed to increase the price of their goods. If the State protects any industry it ought to share in the profits, but the question with regard to cotton manufacture in India is very difficult. He wishes that it had been possible to make a policy for the whole Empire before dealing with it in India.

(Carbon copy.)

34 Portland Place, W.1.—Is sorry that what he said in the House should have disturbed Montagu in his travels. [He had apparently referred to criticisms of the India Office made by Montagu before he was made Secretary of State.] The reports Montagu received must have conveyed a different impression from the actual words of his speech. He admits that he was surprised that a man of Montagu’s calibre and experience should have criti-cised the India Office and the Indian Government so heavily, and believes that he would not now suggest that the Secretary of State should be more amenable to the Commons, which is a poor judge of Indian affairs. But he guarded himself against the suggestion that Montagu had any idea of becoming Secretary when he made the speech, and points out that it might be as-sumed from his appointment to that post not long afterwards that he had been sent there to give effect to the views he expressed. It was for this reason that the called the speech into question. Emphasises his desire to remain on friendly terms with Montagu and to co-operate with the Government. He has spent six months trying to assuage the situation in Ireland, but the old feuds have broken out again.

Sheets 16–22, 34–57, 76–108, 185–98, 296, 468[a], 469–84, 484a, 485–520, and 523–43. There are illustrations on sheets 106 (Umar Khayat Khan) and 107 (‘His Holiness’).

Most of the letters are from people noted in the fields of literary studies and bibliography.

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.

Given at the Foreign Office, London, with signature of Sir Edward Grey, Foreign Secretary.
Various stamps in Cyrillic, one will additional cursive Cyrillic filled in by hand, Apr 13.