Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism Introduction

Introduction Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. scotl and in romanticism “What a hobbling pace the Scottish Pegasus seems to have adopted in these days,” grumbled William Wordsworth in a letter to R. P. Gillies (February 14, 1815). Wordsworth condemns the “insupportable slovenliness and neglect of syntax and grammar, by which James Hogg’s writings are disfigured”; such solecisms may be “excusable in [Hogg] from his education, but Walter Scott knows, and ought to do, better.” Both poets can be summarily dismissed: “They neither of them write a language which has any pretension to be called English.”1 Wordsworth’s complaint cuts across distinct if overlapping conceptions of the institutional framework of British Romantic literature: as a market, in which Scottish writing enjoys a notable success, and as a canon, from which it must be purged – on the grounds of a national deficiency, a linguistic unfitness “to be called English.”2 Wordsworth’s verdict has proven remarkably durable. Modern literary criticism in Great Britain and North America adopted the view of Romanticism as a unitary phenomenon, the agon of a mighty handful of lyric poets with a Kantian (later Heideggerian) problematic of the transcendental imagination.3 Some Romanticisms are more Romantic than others: some are the real thing, while others are premature or belated, or simply false – anachronistic or fraudulent simulacra. British Romanticism is English, from Blake and Lyrical Ballads in the 1790s to Keats, Shelley, and Byron (cut off from his own Scottish roots), prematurely dead in the early 1820s. Scotland, neither English nor foreign, stands for an inauthentic Romanticism, defined by a mystified – purely ideological – commitment to history and folklore. Rather than being a site of Romantic production, Scotland’s fate is to have become a Romantic object or commodity: glamorous scenery visited by the Wordsworths, Turner, Queen Victoria, steamtrain parties of tourists; a series of kitsch, fake, more or less reactionary “inventions of tradition,” from Ossian and Scott to Fiona MacLeod and Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. 1 Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. 2 Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen Brigadoon.4 Nor is this simply an English story, since Scottish nationalist critics have devised a compelling variant, denouncing their modern tradition as inorganic, self-divided, alienated from its vital sources – the proof of that alienation (as we shall see) being Scotland’s lack of a genuine Romantic movement. The term “Romanticism” has come under intense scrutiny and debate in literary studies in Great Britain and North America in the last couple of decades.5 Only very recently has that debate begun to address the term’s anglocentric underpinnings. While post-structuralist, feminist, and New Historicist critiques have opened some of the aesthetic boundaries that defined Romantic-era writing, the likeliest instruments for rethinking its geopolitical borders would seem to be provided by post-colonial theory. As critical projects within Scottish studies itself have made clear, though, Scotland occupies an anomalous position in the topology of postcolonialism – shifting between the coordinates of colonized and colonizer, the producer as much as recipient of a “global English.”6 Although England was unquestionably the dominant partner, politically and economically, at the Treaty of Union (1707), Scotland enjoyed far more opportunity to capitalize on the new arrangement than the other ancient nations (Ireland, Wales) absorbed into the British state. The articles of Union allowed Scots to participate in the new imperial economy, and preserved the key national institutions – the Presbyterian church, banking and legal systems, schools and universities – that supported a dynamic entrepreneurial and professional middle class. The Lowland burghs – especially the four university cities, above all Edinburgh – accommodated one of the most advanced civil societies in Europe. At the same time, Scotland held within its borders a culturally alien, increasingly “backward” “Celtic fringe,” the Highlands, in which something like colonial conditions prevailed: military and legal repression, economic underdevelopment. Scotland itself reproduced the split condition both of an imperial Great Britain and of the nascent world-system of which Britain was the political-economic core. Far from being peripheral, then, Lowland Scotland became one of the generative centers of European and North Atlantic literary culture in the century between David Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature (1739–40) and Thomas Carlyle’s The French Revolution (1837). In the balance of an emerging imperial world order, Scottish innovations in moral philosophy, the social sciences, history, rhetoric, poetry, periodical journalism, and the novel matched or outweighed their English counterparts. The intellectuals of the so-called Scottish Enlightenment – David Hume, Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson, John Millar, William Robertson, Thomas Reid, Dugald Stewart, Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 3 Lord Kames, and others – developed a new, synthetic account of human nature, historical process, and the dynamics of social formation, in a cosmopolitan or universal order of modernity. At the same time, poets and scholars began to invoke the national past, ancestral origins, and regional popular traditions in a series of attempts to reimagine Scottish identity in the conditions of imperial Union. In the early 1760s James Macpherson’s collections of “Poems of Ossian” founded European Romanticism on a scandalous invention of lost cultural origins. In the 1780s Robert Burns crafted the first modern vernacular style in British poetry. In the first quarter of the nineteenth century, Scott’s historical novels combined those distinctively Scottish inventions, a universal modernity and a national past, to define the governing form of Western narrative for the next hundred years. At the same time, a succession of Edinburgh periodicals – The Edinburgh Review (1802), Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine (1817), Chambers’s Edinburgh Journal (1832) – established the main medium of nineteenth-century public discussion. And to list these epoch-making achievements is to overlook such strikingly original experiments as Joanna Baillie’s theatre of the passions and the anti-novelistic fictions of James Hogg and John Galt. This Scottish literary history describes rhythms of continuity, change, and disjunction quite different from the English model to which it has been subordinated. Against that English model, Scotland could only loom as an intermittent, shadowy anachronism, a temporal as well as spatial border of Romanticism. In Scotland, “Classical” and “Romantic” cultural forms occupy the same historical moment and institutional base, rather than defining successive stages or periods. Macpherson’s Fingal, founding document of a global Romanticism, is not just contemporary with the scientific projects of the Scottish Enlightenment but one of its typical inventions, in a contemporaneity that defies the English schema of a teleological development of Romanticism proper from Augustan Neoclassicism through a liminal “Pre-romanticism.”7 The French Revolution provides the epochal fulcrum, or rather fracture, in the English story: a metaphysical rather than historical event, an apocalyptic or traumatic break in the flow of history, through which other states of being gleam into visibility, however fugitive. In the time of disillusion that succeeds it, with the stifling resumption of history as usual, the revolutionary rift generates the compensatory Romantic investment in a poetic language which is the trace of a force alien to the normative ordering of social life – some of its names are desire, the imagination, difference.8 Scottish cultural history, according to this model, does not just fail to produce an authentic Romanticism: it manufactures false substitutes, it Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. 4 Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen oppresses the real thing. On the one hand, the theme-park Highland heritage of Macpherson and Scott, simulations of past lost worlds; on the other, the punitive campaigns waged against the Lake and Cockney schools by The Edinburgh Review and Blackwood’s. The Scottish Enlightenment legacy of political economy, propagated in The Edinburgh Review and its utilitarian offshoots, becomes the formidable disciplinary antagonist of a post-Romantic discourse of “culture,” throughout the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth. This opposition was itself an artefact of Scottish Romanticism, an ideological projection of the political conflict between The Edinburgh Review and Blackwood’s.9 In other words, it is as though the differential structure of Scottish cultural history cast a repressive shadow over the English Romantic movement: its signature of developmental blockage, the split between an aridly rational political economy and a lachrymose Ossianism, could only reiterate itself, with an ever heavier ideological and normalizing emphasis. Scotland, in short, produced the Victorians. As Romanticism acquired its conceptual coherence as a “system of norms,” in the retrospect of Victorian cultural criticism, the Scots were closed out of it. Samuel Johnson’s denunciation of Ossian became the standard modern verdict. The success of Macpherson’s translations in translation, from Berlin to Bogota, furnished further proof of their ontological “vacuity,” since poetry is what escapes translation.10 Burns might have anticipated Wordsworth’s commitment to a “language really spoken by men,” but the prematurity (and naı̈veté) of his attempt was marked by its realization in a provincial and rustic dialect, as well as its fixation on the social surfaces of life. Matthew Arnold reinforced the ban with the judgment that Burns lacked “high seriousness,” the epic or rather tragic tone of the metropolis.11 If Scott fared better in the nineteenth century it was because he was a novelist, and the novel, with its mimetic investment in manners and history, was a Victorian rather than a Romantic genre. Victorian forefathers did not wear well in the era of Modernism. F. R. Leavis expelled Scott from the Great Tradition on the grounds of his being “an inspired folklorist.” Georg Lukács, programmatic anti-Modernist, reclaimed Scott as the founder of the historical novel – but by divorcing him from Romanticism.12 Other figures who had enjoyed degrees of success or controversy in their time, such as Baillie and Hogg, sank out of sight altogether by the early twentieth century. Hogg led the half-life of a local curiosity, “the Ettrick Shepherd” or clown-sage of Blackwood’s, until André Gide promoted The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner into a Modernist canon of accursed books. Scholarly interest has returned in very recent years to Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 5 Baillie, whose neglect was dictated by gender rather than nationality: it was a fellow Scot, Francis Jeffrey, who argued that women’s exclusion from public life disqualified them from the genre of tragedy.13 Romanticism was instituted as a critical object, the site of a critical practice, in the university after World War II, especially in the United States, which generated an ideologically potent account of lyric poetry as the authentic utterance or (later) trace of an ontological difference which escaped or resisted the collective pressures of society and history.14 The visionary company of five English poets constituted the bright origins of a Romanticism that (paradoxically) became world-historical by becoming American. Wordsworth remained a touchstone, both for the post-structuralist turn of the 1970s15 and for the New Historicism of the 1980s.16 Meanwhile English criticism, historically and socially attuned much earlier, and anyway less interested in an ideologically substantive category of “Romanticism,” observed nationalist boundaries: its chief subaltern counter-example to mainstream Romanticism is John Clare.17 The most productive rethinking of the Romantic canon over the last decade or so has taken place through feminist projects of reclamation and critique;18 if these too have so far tended to reproduce rather than unsettle a normative anglocentricism, as a glance at recent classroom anthologies will show, they also encourage further attention to what has been left out. Still, “Scotland” as often as not continues to play the role of an oppressive anti-Romanticism in some of these new accounts: a force of mere worldliness, or of imperial ideology, for example, in the person of Scott.19 The strength of the tradition is shown by its persistence even in so scrupulously reflective a study as Jerome Christensen’s recent Romanticism at the End of History. Christensen, the author of notable books on Hume and Byron, reclaims a coherent, indeed authentic “Romantic movement,” if as a continually deferred project rather than a “system of norms,” in the teeth of New Historicist and ideological critiques. Wordsworth and Coleridge remain standard-bearers, thanks to the capable imagination with which both poets continued to reflect upon their predicament, through and after their revolutionary disappointment and accommodation to Pittite reaction. The Edinburgh Review and Scott feature prominently in Christensen’s story, but as figureheads of an official, hegemonic apparatus – even if Scott, technically more resourceful and self-conscious, plays the part of a literary Metternich, chancellor of the new legitimacy, while The Edinburgh Review is more like the police, a relatively unwitting, corporate agency. As representatives of “the novel” and “the Scottish Enlightenment,” respectively, they form the dark wall of “normal history,” or of ideology itself, against Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. 6 Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen which an ethical and anti-ideological “Romantic hope” may be flickeringly visible.20 Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. romanticism in scotl and Scotland as the lack, or simulation, or repression of Romanticism: the theme pervades the cultural histories produced by Scottish critics. Indeed, it provides the historiographic crux of the modern nationalist analysis of Scottish literature, the “Caledonian Antisyzygy” or diagnostic figure of a self-divided, internally contradictory national character.21 The schizoid figure of Romanticism’s negation is itself, of course, quintessentially “Romantic” – and typical of “semi-peripheral” national representations, from Hoffmann and Hogg to Poe and Dostoevksy. What differentiates the Scottish from the English analysis is the insistent Scots identification of the nation as the excluded category that bears Romantic value – that numinous condition exiled from “normal history,” authentic because of exile. Thus Edwin Muir, writing at the height of the modern nationalist “Renaissance” in the 1930s, identifies a fatal “dissociation of sensibility” in Scottish culture, its primary symptom a linguistic split between thought (English, the language of Enlightenment philosophy) and feeling (Scots, the language of the folk and Burns’s lyrics).22 A generation later David Craig deplores Scotland’s lack of a “Great Tradition,” the representation of an organic national society, so that its literature can only chart the widening gulf between literati and populace.23 As Cairns Craig has argued, such narratives create their image of a divided Scottish culture by projecting it against an idealized English model: Muir adapts T. S. Eliot’s account of English poetry, with Scott in the place of Milton, while David Craig draws on Leavis.24 These models of a split tradition may yield different appraisals of particular figures. David Craig, for example, joins in the mission to salvage an attractively bawdy, rough, insurgent Burns from the Victorian cult of sentimentality that had so exasperated Hugh MacDiarmid.25 This newmodelled Burns (drawn by a woman novelist and critic, Catherine Carswell, in her 1930 biography of the poet) personified the masculine values of muscular assertiveness, virile heterosexuality, and “horizontal brotherhood” that typify emergent nationalisms.26 More recently, in work that is beginning to transform our understanding of the period, scholars have recovered the contexts of a “Radical Burns” in eighteenth-century popular democratic politics.27 With remarkable unanimity, nationalist cultural histories identify the nineteenth century as the era when the Scottish tradition became Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 7 extinct – or at the very least, went into hibernation. They converge, in particular, on Scott, anathematized for replacing a living heritage with a reactionary effigy. Muir’s evocation of Scott in post-Enlightenment Edinburgh – elaborate invention screening “a very curious emptiness” – recalls the Johnsonian verdict on Macpherson (“let us not fill the vacuity with Ossian”).28 Scott combines both tendencies already described, Enlightenment anti-Romanticism and a sentimental pseudo-Romanticism, in a lethal synthesis. Even Tom Nairn, who mounts a scathing critique of “Antisyzygy” historiography in order to rescue the Scottish Enlightenment from nationalist proscription, reiterates its discovery of a disappearance of national tradition, “a very curious emptiness,” at the opening of the nineteenth century. Adapting Lukács’s thesis, Nairn finds Scott to be a “valedictory realist” whose works invoke the national past not to revive it, as a source of alternative possibility for the present, but to pronounce it dead. Here, though, the historiographic principle is made explicit: Scott personifies a larger emptiness, the lack of a Scottish Romantic movement, which in Nairn’s analysis must be defined by an oppositional nationalist politics.29 Not only Scott, then, but the resplendent literary production of Scott’s Edinburgh – Constable, Blackwood and their reviews, the fictions of Hogg, Galt, Mary Brunton, Susan Ferrier, Christian Johnstone, John Lockhart – all this fails to constitute a “Romanticism,” or rather, it amplifies an antiRomanticism born of the socioeconomic prematurity of post-Union civil society and its cultural expression, the Scottish Enlightenment. In other words, the very vitality of Enlightenment mortified the successive developmental stage, by rendering it superfluous – a mortification already evident in the contemporaneous excrescence of “Ossian.” Dissident voices, even Burns’s, were censored, ignored, or patronized by an increasingly conservative Edinburgh establishment. After 1794, and a more bitter repression of Jacobin sympathizers even than occurred in England, the Scots intelligentsia could only choose from among different counter-revolutionary postures: the post-Enlightenment liberal positivism of The Edinburgh Review or the reactionary pseudo-Romanticism of Blackwood’s. Nairn has been perhaps the most influential figure in a notable “return to Scotland” in British cultural studies of the last decade or so. The Break-Up of Britain, provoked by the 1970s devolution controversy, framed Scotland’s status in the Union as exemplary of modern nationalist development through its very contradictions. Nairn’s analysis helped instigate a rethinking of the categories of nation, nationality, and nationalism, at first by historians and political scientists and then by literary critics, given massive Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. 8 Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen impetus by the end of the Cold War. Nairn’s more recent work revisits the question in the wake of the 1999 referendum and its defiance of longstanding assumptions about Scotland’s destiny in the United Kingdom.30 The political and historiographic debates around devolution have nourished accounts of a Scottish cultural history in which the Union need no longer represent a “metaphysical disaster” (Nairn’s term) or even an “end of history.” Some of these accounts, while making better sense of “subaltern” figures such as Burns and Hogg, have continued to produce Macpherson and Scott as touchstones for an inauthentic nationalism, a negative Romanticism. In a series of powerful, often revelatory recastings of a variegatedly British rather than monolithically English cultural history, Murray Pittock finds Scott completing Macpherson’s task by ringing down the “tartan curtain” upon a populist and revolutionary Jacobitism – an authentic national tradition – and replacing it with a nostalgic facsimile. Colin Kidd stresses the Enlightenment rather than Romantic genealogy of a Whig historiographic repudiation of Scotland’s pre-modern past, to which Scott gives popular legitimacy.31 Other commentators construct their versions of Scottish literary history on principles of heterogeneous inclusiveness and continuity. Cairns Craig’s probing critique of an Anglo-British, centrist, and organicist model of culture studies the Scottish contribution to a mixed, hybrid, imperial nineteenth-century “English literature.”32 In an analogous project, Robert Crawford reconstitutes a long-durational modern Scottish literary history in which gaps and contradictions, far from being fatal, are generative; its continuities flow across territorial borders to other sites of the imperial anglophone periphery, as “devolution” becomes a global principle.33 The approach was anticipated by Susan Manning’s study (following the pioneering work of Andrew Hook) of the ideological and formal relations between Scottish and North American writing (and between Calvinism and Enlightenment) in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Manning’s more recent work specifies the cultural condition she analyzes – an openended dialectic between principles of organic wholeness and centrifugal fragmentation – as a “Romantic” one (with philosophical roots in Hume).34 Penny Fielding has excavated the ideological foundation of a Romantic national culture in the binary opposition between orality and literacy.35 Meanwhile, recent Burns scholarship is bringing to light a larger tradition of Scottish dissenting literature, with (as Liam McIlvanney shows) indigenous cultural roots as well as links to contemporary English and Irish radicalism.36 Together with Pittock’s work on Jacobitism, this sets Scottish writing in the context of an alternative pan-British Romanticism Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 9 that has been effectively submerged by literary history’s preoccupation with metropolitan models of tradition. North American scholars, meanwhile, have not hesitated to mobilize the insights of post-colonial studies in their more recent (late-1990s) turn to Scotland, with special reliance on the analysis of “internal colonialism.”37 At their most fruitful, such studies have attended to the reciprocal if uneven dynamics of Scotland’s relation to England in the Union. Leith Davis traces the ineluctable, vexed dialectic between English and Scottish constructions of literature and tradition in the century after 1707. Janet Sorensen reads the primary role played by Scottish intellectuals, and by English intellectuals addressing the Scottish case, in the eighteenth-century standardization of English as a national (i.e., imperial) language. In an analogous move, Clifford Siskin discusses the role of Scottish philosophy and the figure of Jacobitism in the modern (i.e., Romantic) formation of a national, literature-based culture.38 These North American projects have tended to absorb the traditional period category of Romanticism into the “long eighteenth century,” a chronological artefact of the New Historicism. The phenomena of periodization already remarked – the contemporaneity of Smith and Ossian, the continuities between the Enlightenment and The Edinburgh Review – suit Scotland especially well to the new diachrony: witness the recent boom in Macpherson studies, or the salience of Scottish cases in recent projects on historicism and the emotions.39 Does this development – the return to intelligibility of Scottish cultural history in the framework of the “long eighteenth century” – signal, then, a definitive abandonment of “Romanticism” as a historical category? – one which, bound to the ideology of cultural nationalism, could only distort the Scottish case, and has outlived its usefulness elsewhere? Recent studies of the novel as national form show that a wholesale abandonment would be premature. Katie Trumpener’s Bardic Nationalism resituates the novel at the center of Romanticism by turning a pervasive assumption – the identification between Romanticism and nationalism – into the object of analysis. Trumpener attends to the geographically dispersed production of “the nation” across the modern British imperium, and the primacy of semi-peripheral sites, notably Ireland and Scotland, in generating the new cultural nationalisms.40 And as nationalism, so historicism: both are Romantic inventions as much as they may be limiting conditions. James Chandler’s England in 1819 reads Scott and the Scottish Enlightenment philosophers as productive rather than blocking forces in the cultural field of British Romanticism. By explicitly framing chronology and periodization as its critical questions, Chandler’s analysis is able to specify Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. 10 Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen anachronism as one of the constitutive tropes of a distinctive practice of Romantic historicism, theorized by Scottish Enlightenment philosophical historians and amplified by Scott – whose writings highlight the “anachronistic” relation between England and Scotland as the discourse’s own historical condition.41 Such projects help us to view Scotland as a critical site for the invention or production of “Romanticism”: not in itself but always as part of a larger political, economic, and cultural geography, encompassing not only “Britain” – London, Northern England, Ireland – but Europe, North America, and an expanding world-horizon of colonized and dominated territories, constituting, in Trumpener’s phrase, “the transcolonial consciousness and transperipheral circuits of influence to which empire gives rise.”42 The case of Scotland may thus provoke a salutary defamiliarization of some of the fundamental categories that structure literary history, including the temporal borders of periodization and the topological borders of nationality. This critical rethinking – rather than an objective survey – is the project of the present volume of essays. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. scotl and and the bord ers of romanticism In the opening chapter of Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism Cairns Craig reopens a famous crux in the early formation of Romanticism as a theoretical project: Coleridge’s dismissal of associationist psychology for a Kantian poetics of the transcendental imagination. Craig shows how Coleridge secured his idealist turn by substituting David Hartley for the more formidable philosophical authority of David Hume. While Coleridge could easily refute Hartley’s reductive, mechanistic account of associationism, Hume’s shadow – in a classic pattern of repression – continued to vex Coleridge’s thought. The Humean model of the imagination as a cognitive and socializing faculty, meanwhile, would pose a “novelistic” alternative, exemplified in Scott’s historical fiction, to the “lyric” model of English Romantic poetry. The double repudiation of Scotland and Enlightenment, condensed in the spectre of Hume, marks a periodic as well as a national border of English Romanticism. Romanticism’s spatial and temporal limits have been drawn, of course, in a set of antinomies familiar to literary scholars: between epistemological categories of theoretical abstraction and material particularity, and their geopolitical and historiographic equivalents – global versus local knowledges, universal versus culturally specific histories; between social exchange and alienated individualism as the matrix of experience and Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 11 feeling; between orality and literacy, writing and speech or song. If we have grown used to the deconstruction of binary oppositions as a procedure within Romantic writing (until, as Marc Redfield puts it, “any entity marked as romantic will turn out to resist its own romanticism”),43 the larger national-period boundary remains in place: Scottish Enlightenment, English Romanticism. The essays in this volume explore an Enlightenment that was always, in these terms, Romantic, and a Romanticism that did not need to cast off Enlightenment to come into its own – at least, not until quite late in the game. The Scottish universities nourished both those archetypal projects of Romanticism and Enlightenment, the Poems of Ossian and the treatises of Adam Smith, the philosophical links between which are traced in Ian Duncan’s chapter. Macpherson matriculated at King’s College, Aberdeen, which (close to the Highlands) pioneered a curricular attention to “primitive” cultural conditions; his quest for an ancient Gaelic epic was promoted by urban intellectuals like Hugh Blair, the first Regius Professor of Rhetoric and Belles Lettres at Edinburgh.44 Smith himself had founded this new branch of the “science of man” at mid-century, extending the conjectural and comparative methods of philosophical history to the discipline of national language formation. The institutional framework of eighteenthcentury Scottish civil society – religious, financial, legal, and academic – sustained a broadly dispersed “Republic of Letters,” from working-men’s reading and debating clubs in the Lowland parishes and market towns to the universities and polite literary societies in the cities. In contrast, as John Brewer has emphasized, English literature in the “Age of Johnson” was overwhelmingly commercial and entrepreneurial, with its main institutional base in booksellers’ shops.45 The adjacency of the English market, with new colonial markets looming beyond it, provided a dynamic opening for Scottish literary production; philosophical blockbusters such as The Wealth of Nations and Hume’s History of England were incubated in the Scottish universities (and accessory institutions, such as the Speculative Society and Faculty of Advocates’ Library) and sold to the English book trade.46 The French Revolution provoked a crisis of ideological legitimation in this Scottish republic of letters. The Anti-Jacobin crackdown, strengthened by the monopolistic control of institutions under William Pitt’s “Scotch manager,” Secretary of State Henry Dundas, issued in a general repression: the transportation of “Friends of the People,” official warnings to philorevolutionary professors like Dugald Stewart and John Millar, and a Tory stranglehold on appointments and promotions. Accordingly, the projects of Enlightenment shifted their institutional base, from the university Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. 12 Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen curriculum to an industrializing literary marketplace. After 1800 Edinburgh became the British centre for innovative publishing in periodicals and fiction, the ascendant – booksellers’ – genres of the post-Enlightenment. The Edinburgh Review was founded by a set of young Whig lawyers blocked from preferment under the Dundas regime and financed by an enterprising Whig bookseller, Archibald Constable, who would also go on to publish the Waverley novels. Post-Enlightenment cultural production was increasingly typified, in addition, by those private, amateur, quasi-illegitimate discourses that had grown up on the fringes of the university curricula: overlapping with them, disavowed by the professors, but by now infiltrating the approaches of philosophical history and conjectural anthropology. Antiquarian research, ballad and song collection, and vernacular poetry revival made up a broad continuum, the matrix of the nationalist genres of the post-Enlightenment. Susan Manning’s chapter in the present volume shows how antiquarianism came to exert a contaminating if not disintegrating pressure on the field of philosophical history that had officially rejected it; while Ina Ferris gives a complementary view of the ironical and melancholy inflexions of historicism carried by the “private” genre of the novel. After all, the discourse of rhetoric and belles lettres had strained in contrary directions. On the one hand, recognizing the historical integrity of primitive cultural conditions, it opened philosophical space for “Romantic” projects of revival. On the other, its ideological commitment to politeness tended to condemn regional vernacular forms, those contemporaneous “relics” of traditional ways of life, as “rude and barbarous,” obsolescent and moribund. Language marked the fault-line of class difference disguised as historical destiny: Blair defended the dead Gaelic of Ossian, preserved in English prose, and exhorted Burns to abandon live Scots for English. The consolidation and diversification of the vernacular revival brought no release – quite the contrary – of the structural tension between its (vulgar, heterogeneous, dissident) materials and the official frames (nationalist, historicist, canonical, philological) set up to contain them. Leith Davis’s chapter finds Burns speculating on the double valency written into eighteenthcentury collections of Scottish song: between the affirmation of a universal Britishness (downplaying social and political differences) and the counterclaim of an irreducible, potentially unruly Scottishness. Ann Rowland studies the formalism of the ballad revival in Scott’s generation as a technique with which collectors sought to neutralize a scandalous content – in this case, maternal infanticide – that troubled their legitimating myth of national memory and cultural transmission. In Adriana Craciun’s discussion Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 13 it is the poet herself – Anne Bannerman – who bears the stigma of illegitimacy in the sign of her gender, as a masculine critical establishment relegates her work to a decadent, “Gothic” branch of the ballad tradition, obliterating a general milieu of female cultural production. The cultural breach with Enlightenment, defined by the antagonistic formation of a “Romantic ideology,” came late in Scotland, with the founding of Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine in 1817: the post-war battle over Reform precipitated rival, Whig and Tory ideological constellations, Romanticism as (at last) Counter-Enlightenment. In programmatic contrast to The Edinburgh Review, Blackwood’s formally embraced the nationalist discourses of the post-Enlightenment – antiquarianism, vernacular poetry, prose fiction. Along with its spin-offs, notably Lockhart’s polemical anatomy of Scottish culture Peter’s Letters to his Kinsfolk (1819), Blackwood’s founded a modern (Romantic) discourse of cultural nationalism, which included the “Antisyzygy” critique of a divided tradition, as well as the apotheosis of Scott as national man-of-letters hero – an operation that required, however, the excision of Scott’s own philosophical roots in Humean empiricism. The centrality of Scott to the post-Enlightenment phase of Scottish Romanticism, appropriated as it was by Blackwood’s, needs to be understood rather than retroactively debunked. Scott played a “Johnsonian” role in the cultural politics of early nineteenth-century Edinburgh, exploiting Tory patronage networks and weaving networks of his own. The cultural position he occupied, mediating between (traditional) Whig–Enlightenment and (new) Tory–Romantic formations, has often been misconstrued as a psychological complex of “Hanoverian head and Jacobite heart,” a commitment to progress tempered (or subverted) by baronial nostalgia. The situation was at once more objective and more productive than such formulations tend to allow. Scott’s late experiments with representing national difference along an imperial axis, as James Watt argues in these pages, draw on Enlightenment stadial history while dismantling both its “pre-ordained, homogenizing trajectory of societal development” and an emergent, racializing discourse of Romantic Orientalism. Scott’s centrality installs the “Border” chronotope of a dynamic liminality rather than an imperial dead centre, the space-time of an historical modernity that (in Ina Ferris’s account) looks backwards in order to move forwards; figured in the relentlessly reflexive, ironical strategies of an aesthetic that Jerome McGann, in his contribution to this volume, calls “Romantic postmodernity.” Scholarly editors as well as critics are doing invaluable work recovering marginalized and dissenting figures from the nineteenth-century shadow Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. 14 Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen of Scott’s reputation, and bringing to light the alternative aesthetic and political possibilities opened in their writings.47 Of the cases addressed in the present collection, Baillie and Hogg figured prominently among Scott’s network of friends and protégés. Scott was the dominant figure in both their literary careers, although Baillie’s reputation anteceded Scott’s (and her friendship with him), while some of Hogg’s most distinctive works articulate a fierce, intimate struggle with his patron, involving – as John Barrell suggests in these pages – a repudiation of the Enlightenment consensus Scott represented. If gentlewoman and ex-shepherd produced their work, in Hogg’s case vexatiously, within the aegis of polite literary circles, Anne Bannerman wrote decisively from outside. The location of these figures poses, in another register, the question with which Penny Fielding opens her chapter: “Where was Scottish Romanticism?” Their literary production occupies a topology not just of formal institutions but (as Craciun insists) of informal networks of patronage, friendship, influence – “residual” but especially potent in the tightly-knit society of post-Enlightenment Edinburgh, coexisting with its “advanced” cultural formations (entrepreneurial publishers, a proto-professional public sphere). Modern and archaic at once, yet again: Scotland’s temporal unevenness found its spatial equivalence in the dialectic between discourses of locality and abstraction, the former representing ancient, traditionally embedded ways of life, the latter a scientific, universalizing framework of taxonomies and systems. If (as Duncan’s chapter suggests) Enlightenment writing invested powerfully in an abstraction of time and space, a Romantic attention to locality (as Fielding shows) continued to invoke that abstract horizon, whether or not it was specified, historically and geographically, as the globalizing political economy of empire. Blackwoodian cultural nationalism sought to fix an affirmative, synecdochic relation between an intensively local chronotope and what Saree Makdisi (describing the dialectic) has called “universal empire.”48 Fielding finds a productive unsettling of that relation in Burns’s poems, which dissolve the binary opposition between a particular geography of enunciation and an unspecified human universality to apprehend, instead, the here and now through “global structures which are themselves the product of writing and naming.” Alyson Bardsley explores the formal tension between place and space in Baillie’s writing: the imaginary, abstract, mobile potentiality claimed for both theatre and nation runs aground as soon as dramatic action is historically and materially specified. And Peter Manning discusses two visits to Scotland by eminent English authors at the time of the great Reform bill. North of the border, Cobbett glimpses signs of a British political future, while Wordsworth Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Introduction 15 escapes – not just from a troubling historical present, but from his own former poetic practice – into the reverie of a pure pastness, the form of memory without content: Romantic Scotland as the blank of a poet’s mind. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. notes 1. The Letters of William and Dorothy Wordsworth, ed. Ernest de Selincourt, 8 vols., iii, The Middle Years, Part 2: 1812–1820, 2nd edn, rev. Mary Moorman and Alan G. Hill (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970), 196–7. 2. On the linguistic politics of “English” in the period see Janet Sorensen, The Grammar of Empire in Eighteenth-Century British Writing (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). On the relations between canon and market see, e.g., Michael Gamer, Romanticism and the Gothic: Genre, Reception, and Canon Formation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). 3. In a formative exchange, René Wellek affirmed the authority of a Kantian– Coleridgean “system of norms” against Arthur O. Lovejoy’s proposal for a diversity of local practices: Lovejoy, “On the Discrimination of Romanticisms,” PMLA 39 (1924): 229–53; Wellek, “The Concept of ‘Romanticism’ in Literary History,” Comparative Literature 1 (1949): 1–23; 147–72. 4. See Andrew Hook’s account of Scotland’s emergence “as a kind of romantic archetype, its very existence offering confirmation of what were becoming key aspects of the ideology of romanticism”: “Scotland and Romanticism: The International Scene,” in Hook (ed.), The History of Scottish Literature: Volume 2, 1660–1800, 4 vols. (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1987), 307–21 (316). 5. See Marc Redfield’s recent summary and critique: “Both as a term and a field, romanticism has suffered instabilities to the degree that it has functioned as a trope for aesthetics – as, that is, the figurative locus of ‘aesthetic ideology’ and ‘theory’ ”: The Politics of Aesthetics: Nationalism, Gender, Romanticism (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), 9–34 (9). Highlights of the (broadly) historicist critique of “Romanticism” include: Jerome McGann, The Romantic Ideology: A Critical Investigation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983); Clifford Siskin, The Historicity of Romantic Discourse (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988); David Simpson, Romanticism, Nationalism, and the Revolt Against Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993); and the essays in Mary A. Favret and Nicola J. Watson (eds.), At the Limits of Romanticism: Essays in Cultural, Feminist, and Materialist Criticism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994). See also the works listed in endnotes to follow. More recent work in Romantic historicism has followed John Guillory’s redirection of the canonicity debate from issues of representation to relations of literary production: see Cultural Capital: The Problem of Literary Canon Formation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993). 6. Exemplary here is Leith Davis, Acts of Union: Scotland and the Literary Negotiation of the British Nation, 1707–1830 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998). On Scotland as matrix of “global English” see Robert Crawford, Devolving English Literature (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992). Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. 16 Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen 7. For a forthright defence of the model see Marshall Brown, Preromanticism (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991). 8. The standard critique is McGann, Romantic Ideology. Among later studies that restore historical and critical complexity to this Romantic project see, e.g., Frances Ferguson, Solitude and the Sublime: Romanticism and the Aesthetics of Individuation (New York: Routledge, 1992); Steven Goldsmith, Unbuilding Jerusalem: Apocalypse and Romantic Representation (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993); Forest Pyle, The Ideology of Imagination: Subject and Society in the Discourse of Romanticism (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995); Paul H. Fry, A Defense of Poetry: Reflections on the Occasion of Writing (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995). 9. See Ian Duncan, “Edinburgh, Capital of the Nineteenth Century,” in James Chandler and Kevin Gilmartin (eds.), Romantic Metropolis: Cultural Productions of the City (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming). The classic account of the tradition is Raymond Williams, Culture and Society, 1780–1950 (New York: Harper and Row, 1966). 10. “If we know little of the ancient highlanders, let us not fill the vacuity with Ossian”: Samuel Johnson, A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1984), 119. See Howard Gaskill and Fiona Stafford (eds.), From Gaelic to Romantic: Ossianic Translations (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1988). 11. Matthew Arnold, “The Study of Poetry” (1880), in W. E. Houghton and G. R. Stange (eds.), Victorian Poetry and Poetics (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1968), 543. For an overview of Burns’s posthumous reception see Donald A. Low (ed.), Robert Burns: The Critical Heritage (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974). 12. F. R. Leavis, The Great Tradition (New York: New York University Press, 1963), 5, n.2. Georg Lukács, The Historical Novel (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1983), 3–34. 13. See the materials assembled by Peter Duthie in his selection from Baillie, Plays on the Passions (Peterborough: Broadview, 2001), 429–39. 14. See, canonically, M. H. Abrams, The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition (New York: Norton, 1958); also Harold Bloom, The Visionary Company: A Reading of English Romantic Poetry (New York: Doubleday, 1961). 15. Some landmarks: Geoffrey Hartman, Beyond Formalism: Literary Essays, 1958–1970 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970) and The Unremarkable Wordsworth (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987); Thomas Weiskel, The Romantic Sublime: Studies in the Structure and Psychology of Transcendence (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976); Frances Ferguson, Wordsworth: Language as Counter-Spirit (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977); Paul de Man, The Rhetoric of Romanticism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984). 16. James K. Chandler, Wordsworth’s Second Nature: A Study of the Poetry and Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984); Marjorie Levinson, Wordsworth’s Great Period Poems: Four Essays (Cambridge: Cambridge Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Introduction 17. 18. 19. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 17 University Press, 1986); David Simpson, Wordsworth’s Historical Imagination: The Poetry of Displacement (New York: Methuen, 1987); Alan Liu, Wordsworth: The Sense of History (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1989); Alan Bewell, Wordsworth and the Enlightenment (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989). Following the cue of John Barrell, The Idea of Landscape and the Sense of Place, 1740–1830: An Approach to the Poetry of John Clare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972). Anne Mellor, Romanticism and Gender (New York: Routledge, 1993); Gary Kelly, Women, Writing and Revolution, 1770–1827 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993); Carol Shiner Wilson and Joel Haefner (eds.), Re-visioning Romanticism: British Women Writers, 1776–1837 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994); Paula Feldman and Theresa Kelley (eds.), Romantic Women Writers: Voices and Counter-Voices (Hanover: University Press of New England, 1995). See, e.g., Saree Makdisi, Romantic Imperialism: Universal Empire and the Culture of Modernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 70–99. Four out of the five case-studies are Scottish in Peter Murphy’s Poetry as an Occupation and an Art in Britain, 1760–1830 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); however, Murphy restates a traditional evaluation of the careers, with Wordsworth providing the foil for Macpherson’s, Scott’s, and Hogg’s varieties of failure to realize an “authentic” poetic vocation; Burns is the partial exception. Jerome Christensen, Romanticism at the End of History (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), 107–28, 153–75. The term was coined by G. Gregory Smith, in Scottish Literature: Character and Influence (London: Macmillan, 1919), 4, and taken up by Hugh MacDiarmid. See Robert Crawford, “Scottish Literature and English Studies,” in Crawford (ed.), The Scottish Invention of English Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 233–7. Edwin Muir, Scott and Scotland: The Predicament of the Scottish Writer (London: Routledge, 1936). David Craig, Scottish Literature and the Scottish People, 1680–1830 (London: Chatto & Windus, 1961). Cairns Craig, Out of History: Narrative Paradigms in Scottish and British Culture (Edinburgh: Polygon, 1996), 82–118. See also Ian Duncan, “North Britain, Inc.,” Victorian Literature and Culture 23 (1995): 339–50. See the summary by Low, Robert Burns: The Critical Heritage, 47–9; Andrew Nash, “The Cotter’s Kailyard,” and Alan Riach, “MacDiarmid’s Burns,” in Robert Crawford (ed.), Robert Burns and Cultural Authority (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997), 180–97, 198–215; Richard Finlay, “The Burns Cult and Scottish Identity in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries,” in Kenneth Simpson (ed.), Love and Liberty: Robert Burns. A Bicentenary Celebration (East Linton: Tuckwell, 1997), 69–78. See Mary Louise Pratt, “Women, Literature and National Brotherhood,” Nineteenth-Century Contexts 18: 1 (1994): 27–47; Catherine Carswell, The Life Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. 18 27. 28. 29. 30. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Ian Duncan, with Leith Davis and Janet Sorensen of Robert Burns (London: Chatto & Windus, 1930). A. L. Kennedy discusses the oppressive gendering of this figure in “Love Composition: The Solitary Vice,” in Crawford (ed.), Robert Burns and Cultural Authority, 23–39. Patrick Scott Hogg’s Robert Burns: The Lost Poems (Glasgow: Clydeside Press, 1997), recovering the poet’s work in the Radical press, has been followed by a new edition, The Canongate Burns, ed. Scott Hogg and Andrew Noble (Edinburgh: Canongate, 2001), and Liam McIlvanney’s ground-breaking study, Burns the Radical: Poetry and Politics in Late Eighteenth-Century Scotland (East Linton: Tuckwell, 2002). Muir, Scott and Scotland, 12. Tom Nairn, The Break-Up of Britain: Crisis and Neo-Nationalism (London: Verso, 1981), 114–18. Nairn, After Britain: New Labour and the Return of Scotland (London: Granta Books, 2000). General histories in the wake of 1999 include Tom Devine, The Scottish Nation: A History 1680–2000 (New York: Viking, 1999) and Christopher Harvie, Scotland: A Short History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). Literary-historical overviews include the following: Douglas Gifford, Sarah Dunnigan, and Alan MacGillivray (eds.), Scottish Literature in English and Scots (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2002); forthcoming projects include a single-authored history by Robert Crawford (Penguin) and a multiauthored, multi-volume history edited by Ian Brown, Thomas Clancy, Susan Manning, and Murray Pittock (Edinburgh University Press). Murray Pittock, The Invention of Scotland: The Stuart Myth and the Scottish Identity, 1638 to the Present (London: Routledge, 1991) and Poetry and Jacobite Politics in Eighteenth-Century Great Britain and Ireland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994); Colin Kidd, Subverting Scotland’s Past: Scottish Whig Historians and the Creation of an Anglo-British Identity, 1689c.1830 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). See also Pittock’s recent Scottish Nationality (Houndmills: Palgrave, 2001). Craig, Out of History, 112–118. Robert Crawford, Devolving English Literature (1992; Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000). Susan Manning, The Puritan-Provincial Vision: Scottish and American Literature in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990); Fragments of Union: Making Connections in Scottish and American Literature (Houndmill: Palgrave, 2001); Andrew Hook, Scotland and America: A Study of Cultural Relations, 1750–1835 (Glasgow: Blackie, 1975). Penny Fielding, Writing and Orality: Nationality, Culture and NineteenthCentury Scottish Fiction (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996). See McIlvanney, Burns the Radical, 7–37, 220–40. Michael Hechter, Internal Colonialism: The Celtic Fringe in British National Development, 1536–1966 (London: Routledge, 1975). See, exploring the concept, the set of essays by Matthew Wickman, Ian Duncan, and Charlotte Sussman on “Internal Colonialism” in British and Scottish novels, edited and introduced by Janet Sorensen, in Eighteenth-Century Fiction 15: 1 (October 2002): 51–126. Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31. Copyright © 2004. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 19 38. Leith Davis, Acts of Union; Janet Sorensen, The Grammar of Empire. Clifford Siskin, The Work of Writing: Literature and Social Change in Britain, 1700–1830 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998). 39. See, e.g., Fiona Stafford, The Sublime Savage: A Study of James Macpherson and the Poems of Ossian (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1988); Howard Gaskill (ed.), Ossian Revisited (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1991); Howard D. Weinbrot, Britannia’s Issue: The Rise of British Literature from Dryden to Ossian (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); Adam Potkay, The Fate of Eloquence in the Age of Hume (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994); Adela Pinch, Strange Fits of Passion: Epistemologies of Emotion, Hume to Austen (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996); Mark Salber Phillips, Society and Sentiment: Genres of Historical Writing in Britain, 1740–1800 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000). 40. Katie Trumpener, Bardic Nationalism: The Romantic Novel and the British Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997). See also Ina Ferris, The Achievement of Literary Authority: Gender, History and the Waverley Novels (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991), 105–33. 41. James Chandler, England in 1819: The Politics of Literary Culture and the Case of Romantic Historicism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 127–74. 42. Trumpener, Bardic Nationalism, xiii. 43. Redfield, The Politics of Aesthetics, 32. 44. See Richard Sher, Church and University in the Scottish Enlightenment: The Moderate Literati of Edinburgh (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985), 254. 45. John Brewer, The Pleasures of the Imagination: English Culture in the Eighteenth Century (London: HarperCollins, 1997), 44–50, 125–66. 46. See Richard Sher, “The Book in the Scottish Enlightenment,” in Paul Wood (ed.), The Culture of the Book in the Scottish Enlightenment (Toronto: Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, 2000), 40–60. 47. Such projects include the ongoing Stirling/South Carolina edition of the works of James Hogg, edited by Douglas Mack and Gillian Hughes (Edinburgh University Press), A History of Scottish Women’s Writing, edited by Douglas Gifford and Dorothy McMillan (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997), and the electronic archive Scottish Women Poets of the Romantic Period, edited by Stephen Behrendt and Nancy Kushigian (Alexander Street Press). 48. Makdisi, Romantic Imperialism, 1–22. The phrase is William Blake’s. Scotland and the Borders of Romanticism, edited by Leith Davis, et al., Cambridge University Press, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/berkeley-ebooks/detail.action?docID=266597. Created from berkeley-ebooks on 2018-12-07 18:42:31.