Detailed Record
Edinburgh Review, The;
vol 1 no 1, 10 Oct 1802 - vol 250 [no 510], Oct 1929//
Edinburgh,Edinburghshire (1802-1826)
London,Middlesex (1827-1929)
Editor:
Henry Brougham (Lord)
Freeman Burton
Greg Burton
Hayward Burton
J.H. Burton
Archibald Montgomery Campbell
Jeffery Cook
Harold Cox (1929)
Duke of Argyle
Arthur Ralph Douglas Elliot (Jan 1896 - Apr 1912)
William Empson (Apr 1847 - Oct 1852)
Macauly Jeffery
Price Jeffery
Senior Jeffery
Spencer Jeffery
Tait Jeffery
Francis Jeffrey (1802 - Jun 1829)
Napier Jeffrey (1830+)
George Cornewall Lewis (Jan 1853 - Jan 1855, co-editor Apr 1855)
Napier MacVey (1829 - 1847)
Macvey Napier (Oct 1829 - Jan 1847)
Henry Reeve (co-editor Apr 1855 - Oct 1895)
Sydney Smith (1802)
Freeman Burton
Greg Burton
Hayward Burton
J.H. Burton
Archibald Montgomery Campbell
Jeffery Cook
Harold Cox (1929)
Duke of Argyle
Arthur Ralph Douglas Elliot (Jan 1896 - Apr 1912)
William Empson (Apr 1847 - Oct 1852)
Macauly Jeffery
Price Jeffery
Senior Jeffery
Spencer Jeffery
Tait Jeffery
Francis Jeffrey (1802 - Jun 1829)
Napier Jeffrey (1830+)
George Cornewall Lewis (Jan 1853 - Jan 1855, co-editor Apr 1855)
Napier MacVey (1829 - 1847)
Macvey Napier (Oct 1829 - Jan 1847)
Henry Reeve (co-editor Apr 1855 - Oct 1895)
Sydney Smith (1802)
Proprietor:
Longman and Co
Publisher:
A. and C. Black (1803-1900+)
Archibald Constable and Co (Edinburgh Oct 1802 - Oct 1826)
Constable Holyoake (1802)
T.N. [T.B?] Longman (London vols 45+)
Longman & Hurst & Rees & Orme & Brown and Green (London 1824)
Longman Foundation
Longmans, Green and Co (London Jan 1827 - Oct 1929)
Longman Mackie
O. Rees (London vols 45+)
Archibald Constable and Co (Edinburgh Oct 1802 - Oct 1826)
Constable Holyoake (1802)
T.N. [T.B?] Longman (London vols 45+)
Longman & Hurst & Rees & Orme & Brown and Green (London 1824)
Longman Foundation
Longmans, Green and Co (London Jan 1827 - Oct 1929)
Longman Mackie
O. Rees (London vols 45+)
Printer:
Ballantyne and Co (1833)
J. Hutchison
Spottiswoode and Co Ltd
D. Willison (1802)
J. Hutchison
Spottiswoode and Co Ltd
D. Willison (1802)
Contributors:
Robert Ainslie
John Allen (1806)
Matthew Arnold
Thomas Arnold (1836)
Sarah Taylor Austin
Thomas Spencer Baines
Augustine Birrell (1896)
Alexander Blair
C.J. Bloomfield
Charles Boner
David Brewster (Sir) 1833, 1835)
Charlotte Brontë
Henry Brougham
Henry Peter Brougham (1802 - 1833)
Thomas Brown
James Browne
Robert Browning
Edward George Earle Lytton Bulwer (Sir)
John Hill Burton
Thomas Campbell
Thomas Carlyle
Henry Samuel Chapman
Agnes Mary Clerke
William Cobbett
Henry Cockburn
Henry Cole
Samuel Taylor Coleridge
George Combe
Francis R. Conder
Edward Cooke
Edward Copleston
G.W. Cox (Jan 1871)
John Wilson Croker
W. Boyd Dawkins (1871)
Aubrey De Vere (Jan 1858)
Charlotte Dempster (1861)
William Bodham Donne
Durham (Lord)
George Eliot
George Ellis
William Empson
Alexander Penrose Forbes
James David Forbes (c.1843)
Richard Ford (c.1840?)
John Forster
William Forsyth
Ugo Foscolo
George Robert Gleig (Rev.)
John Gordon
W.R. Greg (1855)
Stephen Gwynn (1899)
Henry Hallam
Macaulay Hallam
William Hamilton (Sir, 1831)
Alexander Hayward (Jan 1848)
William Hazlitt
H.H. Henson (1894)
Matthew J. Higgins (1861)
John C. Hobhouse (Baron Broughton)
Th. J. Hogg
Francis Horner (1802)
Leonard Horner
William Houghton
Leigh Hunt (1841 - 1851 reviewer)
Francis Jeffrey (1802)
Bennet George Johns (Rev.) 1887)
John William Kaye
Charles Lewes (1875)
George Henry Lewes
James Loch
John Gibson Lockhart
Thomas Babington Macaulay (Lord Macaulay)
Patrick L. Macdougall (Sir) 1865)
Charles Kenneth Mackenzie
James Mackintosh (1812)
W.H. Mallock (Oct 1879)
Thomas Robert Malthus (1808-1809)
J.H. Mardsen (1859)
Harriet Martineau (1858 - 1868)
W.N. Massey
J.R. McCulloch (1818 - 1831 economic contributor)
Herman Merivale (1870)
James Mill
John Stuart Mill
Thomas Moore
Frederick Maximilian Müller
Archibald Murry (1802)
Macvey Napier (1806)
Margaret Oliphant (1869)
Robert Owen
Francis Palgrave
H. Parnell
C.H. Parry
Coventry Kersey Dighton Patmore
John Playfair
Bonamy Price
Rowland Prothero
Henry Reeve (1889)
John Hamilton Reynolds
David Ricardo
Henry Rogers (1853)
Romilly
John Ruskin
Alexander Russel
Charles William Russell (Rev.)
Walter Scott (Sir)
Edward Isidore Sears
Nassau Senior
Goldwin Smith (1864)
Sydney Smith (Rev.) 1808)
Robert Southey
Arthur Penhryn Stanley (Rev.)
James Fitzjames Stephen (1857)
William Stigand
Archibald Campbell Tait (Rev.)
Phillip Meadows Taylor
William Makepeace Thackeray
Robert Torrens (Col.)
Charles Trevelyan (anonymous writer)
John Tulloch (Rev.)
F.W. Warre-Cornish (1897)
Richard Whately
Arnold Whitridge
William Wilberforce
William Wordsworth
Andrew Wynter
John Allen (1806)
Matthew Arnold
Thomas Arnold (1836)
Sarah Taylor Austin
Thomas Spencer Baines
Augustine Birrell (1896)
Alexander Blair
C.J. Bloomfield
Charles Boner
David Brewster (Sir) 1833, 1835)
Charlotte Brontë
Henry Brougham
Henry Peter Brougham (1802 - 1833)
Thomas Brown
James Browne
Robert Browning
Edward George Earle Lytton Bulwer (Sir)
John Hill Burton
Thomas Campbell
Thomas Carlyle
Henry Samuel Chapman
Agnes Mary Clerke
William Cobbett
Henry Cockburn
Henry Cole
Samuel Taylor Coleridge
George Combe
Francis R. Conder
Edward Cooke
Edward Copleston
G.W. Cox (Jan 1871)
John Wilson Croker
W. Boyd Dawkins (1871)
Aubrey De Vere (Jan 1858)
Charlotte Dempster (1861)
William Bodham Donne
Durham (Lord)
George Eliot
George Ellis
William Empson
Alexander Penrose Forbes
James David Forbes (c.1843)
Richard Ford (c.1840?)
John Forster
William Forsyth
Ugo Foscolo
George Robert Gleig (Rev.)
John Gordon
W.R. Greg (1855)
Stephen Gwynn (1899)
Henry Hallam
Macaulay Hallam
William Hamilton (Sir, 1831)
Alexander Hayward (Jan 1848)
William Hazlitt
H.H. Henson (1894)
Matthew J. Higgins (1861)
John C. Hobhouse (Baron Broughton)
Th. J. Hogg
Francis Horner (1802)
Leonard Horner
William Houghton
Leigh Hunt (1841 - 1851 reviewer)
Francis Jeffrey (1802)
Bennet George Johns (Rev.) 1887)
John William Kaye
Charles Lewes (1875)
George Henry Lewes
James Loch
John Gibson Lockhart
Thomas Babington Macaulay (Lord Macaulay)
Patrick L. Macdougall (Sir) 1865)
Charles Kenneth Mackenzie
James Mackintosh (1812)
W.H. Mallock (Oct 1879)
Thomas Robert Malthus (1808-1809)
J.H. Mardsen (1859)
Harriet Martineau (1858 - 1868)
W.N. Massey
J.R. McCulloch (1818 - 1831 economic contributor)
Herman Merivale (1870)
James Mill
John Stuart Mill
Thomas Moore
Frederick Maximilian Müller
Archibald Murry (1802)
Macvey Napier (1806)
Margaret Oliphant (1869)
Robert Owen
Francis Palgrave
H. Parnell
C.H. Parry
Coventry Kersey Dighton Patmore
John Playfair
Bonamy Price
Rowland Prothero
Henry Reeve (1889)
John Hamilton Reynolds
David Ricardo
Henry Rogers (1853)
Romilly
John Ruskin
Alexander Russel
Charles William Russell (Rev.)
Walter Scott (Sir)
Edward Isidore Sears
Nassau Senior
Goldwin Smith (1864)
Sydney Smith (Rev.) 1808)
Robert Southey
Arthur Penhryn Stanley (Rev.)
James Fitzjames Stephen (1857)
William Stigand
Archibald Campbell Tait (Rev.)
Phillip Meadows Taylor
William Makepeace Thackeray
Robert Torrens (Col.)
Charles Trevelyan (anonymous writer)
John Tulloch (Rev.)
F.W. Warre-Cornish (1897)
Richard Whately
Arnold Whitridge
William Wilberforce
William Wordsworth
Andrew Wynter
Names:
Adam Black (agent)
George Cranstoun (supporter)
William Gifford
Charles Grey (Lord)
Francis Horner
James Moncrieff (supporter)
George Cranstoun (supporter)
William Gifford
Charles Grey (Lord)
Francis Horner
James Moncrieff (supporter)
Size:
21cm, 272pp (1803); 250-300pp
Price:
5s (1802); 5s20s/a (1808); 6s (1809-1814+, 1834, 1912); 2s6d (1860); 5d
Circulation:
750 (no 1); 2,000 (no 3); 800 (1802); 2,500 (1803); 4,000 (1805); 7,000 (1807); 8,000-9,000 (1808); 13,000 (1814); 20,000; 13,500 (1817 - 1818); 12,000-14,000 (1818); 11,000 (1824 - 1826); 9,000 (1832); 7,000/no (1860); 7,500 (1868); 3,000 (1890); 2,100 (1899)
Frequency:
every two months; monthly; quarterly
Indexing:
T of C/vol, index/vol; general index [vol 1-170, 6 vols]; index 1-20, 21-50, 51-80, 81-110, 111-140, 141-170; Cushing; Poole's Index; Jones Index to Legal Periodical Literature, 1888-1892; Wellesley Index, v.1. for addenda see Curran; 19th Century Readers Guide to Periodical Literature 1898- . N. America: ULS (3rd ed.); indexes (1813, 1832, 1850, 1862 etc.); Harden. A Checklist of Contributions by...Thackeray; Periodicals Contents Index (1802-1929); Tof C and index/vol; general index [vol 1-170.6 vols]; index 1-20,21-50,51-80,81-110,111-140,141-170; Cushing; Poole's; Qureshi, A.H., Edinburgh Review and Poetic Truth, Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1979, 61pp.; Jones Index to Legal Periodical Literature, 1888-1892; The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals, vol 1; 19th Century Readers Guide to Periodical Literature 1898+
Departments:
play reviews, politics, science, literature, social, agriculture, economics, military policy, letters, education, plans, memoranda, reviews, Englightenment thought, important books, Irish question, Catholic emancipation, travel books
Orientation:
Whig; "Jacobin"
Sources:
Adams, James Eli. A History of Victorian Literature. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, p.80.; Brown, Ireland's Literature, p.22.; Chitnis, Anand C. The Scottish Enlightenment. London: Croom Helm, 1976.; Cooper, Dictionary of Contemporaries.; COPAC; Curran, Eileen. "The Wellesley Index: 'Additions and Corrections". VPR 30:4 (1997): 318-329; Cushing, Morris, 19th Century Readers' Guide.; Cutmore, Jonathan. "Recent Studies in Religion and Society." VSAN 46 (Spring 1990): 17.; Faustus. A Detailed Catalogue of Recently Acquired Literary Journals Relating to British and Continental Studies. 1791-1969 52. London: Faustus, Back Issues Department.; Harden, Contributions by Thackeray.; Henry, Nancy and Cannon Schmitt. Victorian Investments: New Perspectives on Finance and Culture. Indiana University Press, 2009, p.1-219.; Henson et al. Culture and Science.; Larson, Shirley,, p.139.; Liddle, Dallas. The Dynamics of Genre: Journalism and the Practice of Literature in Mid-Victorian Britain., University of Virginia Press, 2009, p.1-175.; Lightman, Bernard. Victorian Popularizers of Science. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2007.; Logan, Deborah A. Harriet Martineau, Victorian Imperialism, and the Civilizing Mission. Farnham, England: Ashgate,2010; Mitchell's; Murdoch, Alexander and Richard B. Sher. "Literary and Learned Culture" in People and Society in Scotland, vol 1: 1760-1830. T.M. Devine and R. Mitchison (Eds.). 1988. pp.127-142.; Nash, Sarah. “What’s in a Name? Signature, Criticism, and Authority in The Fortnightly Review.” Victorian Periodicals Review. 43:1. Baltimore: John Hopkins Univ Press, 2010. p.58.; PCI.; Prince, Kathryn. Shakespeare in the Victorian Periodicals. Routledge, 2008, p.1-149; Sutherland Longman Companion to Victorian Fiction.; Tye, Periodicals of the Nineties.; Uffelman, 1992.; White's The English Literary Journal to 1900.; Williams, "British Reportage on the Irish Famine," p.305.; Williams, Judith Blow. A Guide to the Printed Materials for English Social and Economic History 1750-1850. 2 vols. New York: Octagon Books, 1966.; ix, p.941-944; vii, p.398, 421-422, 1303-1304; x, p.706-713; xvi, p.849-851; xxii, p.993); Williams, Contentious Crown: 129.; Wilson, Ben. The Making of Victorian Values: Decency and Dissent in Britain, 1789-1837. New York: Penguin Press, 2007.;
Histories:
Alloway, "Agencies and Joint Ventures" p.388-392.; Altick, English Common Reader.; Aspinall, Arthur. Politics and the Press c.1780-1850. Brighton, Eng.: The Harvester Press Limited, 1973.; Baldwin, British Short Story.; Barnard, H.C. A History of English Education from 1760. 2nd ed. London: University of London Press, 1969.; Basch, Relative Creatures.; Bell, A.S. "An Unpublished Letter on the Edinburgh Review." TLS (09 Apr 1970): p.388.; Bell, "The Age of the Periodical" p.341.; Blagden, Cyprian. "Edinburgh Review Authors, 1830-49." Library, p.7 (1952): 212-14.; Brazen Head no. 1, p.2.; Brogan, D.W. "The Intellectual Review." Encounter 21:5 (November 1963): 7-15.; Buckingham, Leroy H. "Authorship of Articles in the Edinburgh Review, 1802-1808." Diss. Yale Univ., 1938.; Burke, Martin J. "Irish-American Publishing." Oxford History of the Irish Book. vol 4. 98-112.; Burnett, John, ed. Useful Toil. London: Allen Lane, 1974.; Camlot, Jason. Style and the Nineteenth-Century British Critic. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008: pp.1-194.; Christie, The Edinburgh Review in the Literary Culture of Romantic Britain, 2009.; Clive John L. "The Edinburgh Review, 1802-1815, and Its Background." Diss. Harvard Univ., 1952.; Clive, John, Scotch Reviewers: The Edinburgh Review, 1802-1815, Bibliography, (1957).; Connolly, "Irish Romanticism, 1800-1830".; Cooke et al., Transformation of Scotland, pp.45, 213-214.; Cooter, Cultural Meaning of Science.; County Histories of Scotland—Inverness, pp.291-293.; Couper, SNQ 9:3s (Apr 1931).; Cranfield, G.A. The Press and Society: From Caxton to Northcliffe London and New York: Longman, 1978; Crawford, "Dickens the Edinburgh Review and Editing Household Words".; Crawford, Thomas. "The Edinburgh Review and Romantic Poetry (1802-29)." Auckland University College Bulletin 47, English Series 8. Auckland, 1955.; Curran, Eileen [now ed. Gary Simmons]. The Curran Index: Additions, Corrections, and Expansions of The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals.; Curran, Eileen M. "The Wellesley Index: Additions and Corrections" In VPR 34:4 (Winter 2001): 324-358. County Histories of Scotland: Inverness, pp. 291-293.; Cutmore, Jonathan. Contributors to the Quarterly Review. Pickering & Chatto, 2008, pp.1-260.; Davie, Scotland and Her Universities.; Dawson, Gowan. "Intrinsic Earthliness: Science, Materialism, and the Fleshly School of Poetry." Victorian Poetry. 41:1, 2003.; Demata, Massimiliano and Wu, Duncan (Eds.). British Romanticism and the Edinburgh Review. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.; Dudek, Literature and the Press.; Elliot, Arthur R.D. "The Edinburgh Review." Edinburgh Review 196 (1902): 275-318.; Erickson, Economy of Literary Form.; Escott, Masters of English Journalism.; Fetter, Frank Whitson, "The Authorship of Economic Articles in the Edinburgh Review. 1802-47" Political Econ 61:232-259 (Jun •53).; Finkelstein, "Early Nineteenth-Century Scottish Publishing" p.80.; Finkelstein, "Publishing 1830-80" p.100.; Finkelstein, "Periodicals in Scotland" pp.186-187.; Flynn, Philip. "Francis Jeffrey and the Scottish Critical Tradition." British Romanticism and the Edinburgh Review.; Fontana, B. Rethinking the Politics of Commercial Society: the 'Edinburgh Review' of 1802-1832. Cambridge, 1985.; Franklin, "Poetry, Patriotism, and Literary Institutions".; Gallagher, Catherine. The Industrial Reformation of English Fiction. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1985.; Gates, Leigh Hunt.; Gilmartin, Kevin. "The Press on Trial: Form and Imagination in Early Nineteenth-Century Radical Culture." The Wordsworth Circle 24.3 (1993): 144-147.; Goldman, Taylor, Retrospective Adventures, Forrest Reid.; Graham, British Literary Periodicals, p.274.; Greig, James A. Francis Jeffrey of the 'Edinburgh Review'. Edinburgh, 1948.; Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1977.; Harris, Lee, Press in English Society.; Harrison, Stanley. Poor Men's Guardians: A Record of the Struggles for a Democratic Newspaper Press, 1763-1973. London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1974.; Herd, March of Journalism.; Hines, W.D. English Legal History. Garland Publishing Inc., 1990.; Houghton, "Periodical Literature and the Articulate Classes".;
Houghton, The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals 1824-1900, vol 1, pp.416421.; Hughes, Linda K. and Michael Lund The Victorian Serial London: University Press of Virginia, 1991.; Kent, "Higher Journalism".; Kinealy, Great Calamity.; James, Fiction for the Working Man.; Johnson, L.G. "On Some Authors of Edinburgh Review, 1830-1849." Library 7 (1952): 38-50.; Kerr, Famine Ireland 1846-1852, p.27.; King, Andrew and John Plunkett "Victorian Print Media: a Reader" Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.; Layton, Handy Newspaper List.; Lee, Origins of Popular Press; Lewis, "Edinburgh and Quarterly Reviews in 1848." VPR, 47:2 (2014):208-233.; Lilly, S. "Nicholson's Journal." Annals of Science. vol 6. 15 Oct 1948. 78-101.; Lipkes, Jeff. Politics, Religion, and Classical Political Economy in Britain: John Stuart Mill and his Followers. London: MacMillian Press Ltd., 1999.; Loeber, Rolf and Magda Stouthamer Loeber. "Popular Reading Practice." Oxford History of the Irish Book. Vol 4. 211-240.; Lopatin, Nancy P. "Refining the Limits of Political Reporting: The Provincial Press, Political Unions, and The Great Reform Act." VPR 31.4 (Winter 1998): 337-55.; Mason, Literary Advertising and British Romanticism.; Meadows. A.J. "Access to the Results of Scientific Research: Developments in Victorian Britain." Development of Science Publishing in Europe. Ed., A. J. Meadows. New York: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1980: 43-62.; Mill, James. "Periodical Literature: Edinburgh Review." Westminster review 1 (Jan. 1824): 206-49.; Mineka, Dissidence of Dissent.; Mitchell, Visions of Britain, pp.207, 221.; Mussell, Press in the Digital Age.; Nelson, Fatherhood in Victorian Periodicals .; New Monthly Magazine 2 (Aug 1814): 55; vol 14 (Sep 1820): 304,305.; On the Authorship of the First Hundred Numbers of the 'Edinburgh Review'. Ed. W. A. Copinger. 29, 58pp. (Manchester, 1895), Bibliographiana 2, Privately printed.; Peers, Douglas M. "'Those Noble Exemplars of the True Military Tradition': Constructions of the Indian Army in the Mid-Victorian Press." Modern Asian Studies 31.1 (1997): 109-42.; Perkins, Women Writers and the Edinburgh Enlightenment.; Rees, Dr. Thomas. Reminiscences of Literary London from 1779 - 1853; Rivalain, Odile Boucher. "'Bringing Out the Sympathies of Mankind': Reviewing Radical Poetry in Tait's Edinburgh Magazine and The Westminster's Review in the 1830s and 1840s."; Rogers, Henry. Essays Selected From Contributions to the Edinburgh Review 2 vols (1850); Roll-Hansen, Victorian Intellectuals in Revolt.; Sanders, Harriet Martineau and the Victorian Novel .; Schoenfield, British Periodicals and Romantic Identity.; Scott, SNQ 5:9 (Feb 1892): 132-134.; Selections from Edinburgh Review (1833), vols 1-4.; Shattock, Joanne. Politics and Reviewers: The Edinburgh and the Quarterly, in the early Victorian age. London: Leicester University Press, 1989.; Shattock, Joanne. "Politics and Literature: Macaulay, Brougham, and the Edinburgh Review under Napier." The Yearbook of English Studies. Vol. 16. Ed., C. J. Rawson. London: The Modern Humanities Research Association, 1986: 33-50.; Shaw, Margaret L. "Constructing the 'Literate Woman': Nineteenth-Century Reviews and Emerging Literacies." Dickens Studies Annual 21 (1992): 195-212.; Schoenfied, Mark."Novel Marriges, Romantic Labor and the Quarterly press."proseStud 25 (2002):62-83.; Shattock, "Problems of Parentage".; Shattock, "Reviews and Monthlies" pp.343-350.; Skilton, Anthony Trollope.; Smart, William. Economic Annals of the Nineteenth Century: 1801-1820. (vol 1). New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1964.; Spurgeon, Dickie A. in Sullivan, British Literary Magazines, vol 2, pp.139-144.; Swaim, "Edinburgh is a Talking Town".; Tener, Robert H., and Malcolm Woodfield, eds. A Victorian Spectator: Uncollected Writings of R. H. Hutton. Bristol: The Bristol Press, 1989.; The Authorship of the First Twenty-five Numbers of the 'Edinburgh Review', 1802-1808. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1938.; The Ballantyne Press, pp.42-43.; Thompson, “Gender and Reception”.; Timperley, C.H. Encyclopaedia of Literary and Typographical Anecdote. New York: Garland Publishing Company, 1977.; Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Littlefield, c.1976.; Uffelman, p.46.; VPR (11:2, p.63, 67, 68, 84; VPR 30.4 (Winter 1997): 350-367.; Ward, The Factory Movement.; Webb, Working Class Reader.; Welker, John J. A Study of the 'Quarterly' and 'Edinburgh' Reviews, 1802-1827. Univ. of Chicago, 1938.; Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals (vol 1, pp.416-546; DNB 11:3, p.113; 11:4, p.133-35; 12:3, p.95-97, 102, 106, 110-1, 19, 124-25; 12:4, p.132, 144; 13:1/2, p.28; 13:3, p.111; 13:4, p.121; 14:2, p.51-58; 14:4, p.141-42, 157; 15:3, p.88; 15:4, p.150; 16:1, p.20-27; 16:3/4, p.90-103, 106; 17:1/2, p.67; 17:3, p.110; 18:3, p.100; 18:4, p.162; 19:1, p.34, 35; 19:4, p.131, 133).; White, p.82.; Williams, Mcdonald. 'Blackwood's Magazine': A Selective and Critical Bibliography of Reviews (with Introductory Essay), 1850-1880. Diss. Ohio State Univ., 1954.; with interesting anecdotes of publishers, authors and book auctioneers of that period, &c.. Detroit, Michigan: Gale Research Company, 1969.
Comments:
Dedicated to "large and Original views of all the important questions" (Francis Jeffrey).
"Their aim was to select only a few outstanding books in all fields of interest and to examine them with more care than had been customary in previous reviewing...perhaps the chief innovation was the independence of the contributors. [The writers] were free to speak their minds....A striking feature of the new journal was the introduction of political economy...it kept its readers abreast of the most important thinking in the field....Also notable was the amount of space devoted to practical and theoretical science....But it was primarily as an instrument of political enlightenment and social reform that the Edinburgh deserved its fame....Of great importance to the success of the review was the decision to use as contributors only gentleman writers (at first unpaid) and to encourage them to develop their personal views and style....Between 1802 and 1850 the Edinburgh published more than 250 articles on economics, favouring among other things more equitable taxation, the gold standard, and, of course, free trade....In scientific matters the Edinburgh's reviewers usually provide an encyclopaedic survey of the subject, followed by the reviewer's opinion....When the Edinburgh ceased publication...its last editor, Harold Cox, wrote that it did so not only because of the heavy competition from the monthlies, daily press, and radio, but also because there were no more Whigs" (Spurgeon, Dickie A. in Sullivan).
"The Edinburgh Review was a new departure in the history of periodicals. Unlike the Monthly and Critical Reviews it withheld from commenting or reprinting all the productions of the press. Besides being very selective, its editors established the basic guidelines by which 19th century reviewing was to be conducted. These reviewers seized each opportunity to present their own views of the general subject rather than their reactions on the methods or materials of the author. The foremost successful periodical among the organs of literary criticism" (Faustus).
The Edinburgh Review derived from late Scottish Enlightenment thought, which is reflected in its contents. Francis Jeffrey was central to translating this thought to the periodical (Flynn 16).
Cooke et al. say that "the origins of the modern higher journalism can be traced back to the Edinburgh Review" (45) and Houghton explains that the Edinburgh Review "began the system" and "became a model that affected the whole development of the Victorian 'review'" ("Periodical Literature" 5-6).
Swaim: "the founding of the second Edinburgh Review took much the same course, beginning as it did among a group of friends whose mature acquaintance had begun at the Speculative Society" (249).
The "Golden Age of Scottish magazines is often considered to have begun with the appearance of the Edinburgh Review in 1802, which took the literary world by storm, soon enjoying notoriety throughout Britain and overseas" (Bell, Age, p.341). Magazines like the Edinburgh Review "spoke with confidence to and for the increasingly influential 'middling classes,' and for a brief time put Scotland at the centre of literary and political debate" (341).
Finkelstein's article on Scottish Publishing says that there were few "substantial literary journals in Britain" prior to the Edinburgh Review. It was "entirely different...with the avowed intention of enlightening the mind of its readers and guiding their judgement in matters of literature, science, art and politics...the Review's iconoclastic yet stimulating discussions of literature ensured its success throughout Britain" (80).
Sydney Smith suggested to Archibald Constable that he should begin paying contributors. The initiative worked and began attracting some of the best writers and reviewers to the publication (Finkelstein 80).
"Chalmers' writings in the Edinburgh Review and elsewhere were probably the most important single channel whereby the tenets of utilitarianism and political economy were mediated to the evangelical world" (Victorian Studies).
"The Edinburgh addressed and engaged its readers with a unified, authoritative voice...[and it was] a particularly powerful instrument for creating a middle-class reading audience" (Shattock 346).
Byron wrote "English Bards and Scotch Reviewers" in response to a savage attack made by Brougham in the Edinburgh Review on Byron's "Hours of Idleness". Sydney Smith said that the genius of the Edinburgh Review "seems to consist in stroking the animal the contrary way to that in which the fur lies" (Smart, William; p.209).
Scott wrote that " 'independent of its politics, it gives the only valuable literary criticism which can be met with.' It owed its great sale, he thought, merely to the fact that there was no other respectable and independent publication of the kind. The Edinburgh had become very strongly partisan and even bitter in politics, and it now [1809] adopted Grenville's unpopular attitude towards Spain. In the twenty-sixth number appeared 'Don Cevallos', the article by Brougham which was interpreted as 'an attack upon the titled orders.' 'The Tories, having got a handle, are running us down with all their might,' wrote Jeffrey to Horner, 'and the hosts of all the miserables we have slain are rising to join the vengeance. Walter Scott and William Erskine, and about twenty-five persons of consideration, have forbidden the Review to enter their door...Then, Cumberland is going to start an anonymous rival; and, what is worse, I have reason to believe that...some others, are plotting another.' The 'other' was the Quarterly Review (Smart, William; p.209).
More information about this quarrel is available in The Ballantyne Press.
Chitnis discusses the Review's intimate connection with the Scottish Enlightenment, and especially its role in education reform, referring to a period between 1808-10, "when a series of articles in the Edinburgh Review by, among others, John Playfair, attacked the English Universities." (218) He goes on the say that these articles "appear to have struck home, for that great nineteenth-century influence on university education, John Henry Newman, (wrongly) regarded the Review as 'the organ of the University of Edinburgh'" and that "the Review attacks reflected the concern for effective university education that had been so marked a feature of the Scottish Enlightenment in the mid-to late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth centuries." (218)
The partnership between Constable and Longman opened the London market and helped to offset production costs and "his extensive distribution networks would ensure that the markets in souther England and Wales were well supplies" (Alloway 388-389).
Another partnership with London agent John Murray II increased circulation because Murray was able to sell copies to London booksellers before Longman, thus increasing competition. The competition became so fierce that Longman approached Edinburgh editor Francis Jeffrey about creating a new publication, but was ultimately unsuccessful (Alloway 391).
This periodical had lots of traction in Ireland, and it was one of two popular English periodicals (the other being the Quarterly Review) in southern Ireland. This meant that many Irishmen were exposed, engaged with, and enjoyed English literature (Loeber 225).
Kinealy writes that Thomas Robert Malthus published anonymous articles in 1808-1809 for the Edinburgh Review which expressed a concern that "the excess population in Ireland would eventually have serious implications for Britain" (16).
In 1820, Smith's "immortal quip" on British taxation appears in the Edinburgh Review: "...Taxes upon every article which enters the mouth...upon everything which is pleasant to see, hear, feel, smell, or taste...on everything that comes from abroad, or is grown at home...and the dying Englishman, pouring his medicine, which has paid 7 per cent., into a spoon that has paid 15 per cent.,...expires in the arms of an apothecary who has paid a license of a hundred pounds...His whole property is then immediately taxed from 2 to 10 per cent....and he is then gathered to his fathers,--to be taxed no more" (Smart, William; p.685).
In the Edinburgh Review, Sydney Smith asked "who reads an American book?," which precipitated a lengthy debate in both North America, the UK, and Ireland from prominent authors such as Washington Irving and James Fenimore Cooper (Burke 111).
Nelson discusses articles on Darwin and human reproduction, education (at Eton College), reform schools, public schools and pauper schools. Blackwood's Edinburgh Review was founded as a Tory rival to the Edinburgh Review (Nelson, Claudia; p.212).
"Lewes constructs a place for the literate woman in his pantheon of great writers, a position 'second only to the first rate men of their day,' for writers like Jane Austen, Charlotte Bronte, and George Sand". Lewes expressed a belief in 'universal truth' and defines literary as "that which expresses all human experience" (Shaw, p.203).
It became a violent political partisan and eventually a London periodical exclusively. (Couper, SNQ 8:3s).
154 volumes were published between 1810-1881, 10 between 1882-1886, 10 between 1887-1891, 10 between 1892-1896, and 10 between 1897-1901, making 194 volumes in all from its inception to 1901 (Poole's Index).
"Begun on the suggestion of Sydney Smith" (Smart, William; p.61).
Jeffrey, in 1806, made a "slashing attack" on Moore's "Odes and Epistles," and was subsequently challenged by Moore to a duel (Smart, William; p.129).
One of the leading Victorian periodicals of the 1870's that had comments on the scientific field; it devoted at least 8% of its space to science (Meadows, A.J.; p.54).
Lewes devoted six pages of a review of "Shirley" by Brontë to the characteristics of women and women's literature (Basch, p.108).
In the beginning, the aim was "to erect a standard of merit, and secure a bolder and purer taste in literature, and to apply philosophical principles and the maxims of truth and humanity to politics" (Herd, Harold; p.188).
"What most impressed readers of the early numbers and was the main reason for the success of the review was the independence of its literary judgments. Nothing like the quality of its critical work had been known before; previously criticism had mostly been indistinguishable from puffery" (Herd, Harold; p.190).
Founded in Scotland it moved to London in 1847 where, "under the forty-year guidance of Times political writer and conservative Liberal Henry Reeve, it settled into a moderate Whiggery" (Nelson, Claudia; p.212).
Article's addressing women's issues include Margaret Oliphant's "Mill on the Subjection of Women."
Important reviews such as Edinburgh Review "prospered with small circulations in spite of the so-called "taxes on knowledge" designed to limit the influence of the press" (Baldwin 25).
The Edinburgh Review demanded that "specialization be extended to the popular press in order to end radical domination" (Gilmartin 145).
Perkins argues that the Edinburgh Review was largely responsible for minimalizing women writers since it often denounced the Romantic genre in which many women writers became prominent (19).
"Ebenezer Elliot, remaining at one with his lower-class origins in his little iron-foundry in Sheffield, became a symbol of the emerging workers: Carlyle gave him a rousing notice in The Edinburgh Review, and he prompted The London Review's respectful exploratory article, "The Poetry of the Poor" (James, Louis; p.43).
References to the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge were inspired, if not always written, by Brougham. A June 1827 issue commented that "no opposition to the S.D.U.K. could be expected while it confined itself to natural science and ancient history; but, once modern history and particularly the history of England were approached, objections would surely appear" (Webb, R.K.; p.86).
"The war in America has suspended the progress of learning...Literary periodical works are scarce, and made up in great measure from the Edinburgh and Quarterly Reviews. Other publications are occasionally to be seen there in the houses of the opulent - such as the Monthly Review; British Critic; Scottish Review; Monthly Magazine" (New Monthly) p.55.
"Though its power is now on the wane - has perhaps, on the whole, produced a deeper and more extensive impression on the public mind than any other work of its species...It has one extraordinary merit, that instead of partially illustrating only one set of doctrines, it contains disquisitions equally convincing on almost all sides of almost all questions or literature or state policy...the mightiest offense...is the willful injustice which it has done to Wordsworth...To effect this malignant design, Wordsworth. Coleridge, and Southey, have been constantly represented as forming one perverse school or band of innovators" (New Monthly p.304-305).
Brougham contributed 80 articles to the first 20 numbers of the Edinburgh Review. Romilly's last printed matter was a contribution to the Edinburgh Review -- a review of Bentham's "Papers Relative to Codification and Public Instruction".
Leigh Hunt was a reviewer for the Edinburgh Review, and ending with a review of James Dennistoun's "Memoirs of the Dukes of Urbino" (Gates, Eleanor; p.519).
John William Kaye contributed articles especially on Indian affairs and British exploits therein, and G. R. Gleig contributed articles on "the army" and other aspects of India. Phillip Meadows Taylor "would be singled out as an authority on India" (Peers, pp.124-5).
For an extended list of contributors, consult the Curran Index.
Burton wrote on the subjects of "law, history, and political economy" (Cooper, Thompson; p.170).
Price contributed an article called "The Anglo-Catholic Theory" (Cooper, Thompson; p.782).
Tulloch contributed "important articles" on "Positive Philosophy" in April 1868, and "Dr. Newman's Grammar of Assent" in October 1870, (Cooper, Thompson; p.925).
"The founders of The Edinburgh Review had studied under Dugald Stewart at Edinburgh University and had attempted to educate the public on the principles of political economy." (Wilson, p.327).
"'On domestic subjects the history of the first thirty years of the nineteenth century is a species of duel between the Edinburgh Review and Lord [Chancellor] Eldon.'" (Bagehot, p.12 in Schoenfield, p.39).
"In the Biographia Literaria, Coleridge acknowledges the Edinburgh's epistemological and professionalizing effect on the periodical industry." (Schoenfield, p.51).
In its day, "there was no literary organ, in other words, to offset, by the artful mingling of politics with literature, the partisan influence of the Edinburgh Review" (Graham 274).
Schoenfield explains that the Edinburgh Review's oppositional relation to the Tory government motivated the construction of an alternative public arena outside the formal political spaces of government. The success of the Edinburgh, therefore, spawned imitative and opposed journals" (7).
"[The Quarterly Review] used the Edinburgh's objectionable literary and religious articles and its reviews of Cobbett, Whitbread and Don Pedro Cevallos to marshal political support and inspire contributors." (Cutmore, p.9).
Contained debates about "genius...the effects of periodical literature upon contemporary writing and conceptions of authorship...the status of the 'man of letters'" (Camlot, p.16)
"In [James Mill's] article on the ['characteristic malady of the periodical press'] published in the Westminster in 1824, where he argues that '[p]eriodical literature depends upon immediate success' and 'must, therefore, patronize the opinions which are now in vogue, the opinions of those who are now in power.' For James Mill the reigning power is the Edinburgh Review, which he believes is in service of an aristocratic conception of parliament." (Camlot, p.19).
"...had [an] identifiable stylistic and political personalit[y] that [was] attributable to [its] editors." (Camlot, p.78).
The aim of the publication was to select only a few outstanding books in all fields of interest and to examine them with more care than had been customary in previous reviewing.... Perhaps the chief innovation was the independence of the contributors. [The writers] were free to speak their minds. ...A striking feature of the new journal was the introduction of political economy. It kept its readers abreast of the most important thinking in the field.... Also notable was the amount of space devoted to practical and theoretical science.... But it was primarily as an instrument of political enlightenment and social reform that the Edinburgh deserved its fame. [Although its colours were Whig, it managed] to keep somewhat aloof from political controversy.... Almost half of the Review from 1802 to 1824 was written by Brougham, Jeffrey, and Smith.... Occasional contributors [included] Walter Scott, William Wilberforce, Thomas Arnold, Thomas Carlyle, ... William Hazlitt ... and Macaulay" (Houghton).
Poole's index notes 154 volumes were published between 1810-1881, l0 between 1882-1886, 10 between 1887-1891, 10 between 1892-1896, and 10 between 1897-1901, making 194 vols in all from its inception to 1901. "The Review became a violent political partisan and eventually a London periodical exclusively" (Couper. SNQ 8:3s).
Nassau Senior, a prominent Whig with an interest in Irish affairs, published several articles about Irish reform and promoted nationalist party values (Kerr 27).
The Edinburgh Review was culturally opposed by the Anti-Jacobin Review and Magazine, which disagreed with its military, economic, and army policies (Schoenfield 5).
Although the Edinburgh Review was politically engaged and represented Whig interests, the people associated with the publication "did not see themselves as spokesmen for the new middle class" (Cooke et al. 213).
Shattock writes that "Robert Vaughan, writing at mid-century, shrewdly identified the beginning of the Edinburgh's decline in political influence with the Whigs' assumption of power in 1830 and the passing of the Reform Bill in 1832. After nearly three decades as a vigorous organ of the opposition, the Edinburgh became in effect a government review, a relationship that was neither straightforward nor comfortable" (349).
"Their aim was to select only a few outstanding books in all fields of interest and to examine them with more care than had been customary in previous reviewing...perhaps the chief innovation was the independence of the contributors. [The writers] were free to speak their minds....A striking feature of the new journal was the introduction of political economy...it kept its readers abreast of the most important thinking in the field....Also notable was the amount of space devoted to practical and theoretical science....But it was primarily as an instrument of political enlightenment and social reform that the Edinburgh deserved its fame....Of great importance to the success of the review was the decision to use as contributors only gentleman writers (at first unpaid) and to encourage them to develop their personal views and style....Between 1802 and 1850 the Edinburgh published more than 250 articles on economics, favouring among other things more equitable taxation, the gold standard, and, of course, free trade....In scientific matters the Edinburgh's reviewers usually provide an encyclopaedic survey of the subject, followed by the reviewer's opinion....When the Edinburgh ceased publication...its last editor, Harold Cox, wrote that it did so not only because of the heavy competition from the monthlies, daily press, and radio, but also because there were no more Whigs" (Spurgeon, Dickie A. in Sullivan).
"The Edinburgh Review was a new departure in the history of periodicals. Unlike the Monthly and Critical Reviews it withheld from commenting or reprinting all the productions of the press. Besides being very selective, its editors established the basic guidelines by which 19th century reviewing was to be conducted. These reviewers seized each opportunity to present their own views of the general subject rather than their reactions on the methods or materials of the author. The foremost successful periodical among the organs of literary criticism" (Faustus).
The Edinburgh Review derived from late Scottish Enlightenment thought, which is reflected in its contents. Francis Jeffrey was central to translating this thought to the periodical (Flynn 16).
Cooke et al. say that "the origins of the modern higher journalism can be traced back to the Edinburgh Review" (45) and Houghton explains that the Edinburgh Review "began the system" and "became a model that affected the whole development of the Victorian 'review'" ("Periodical Literature" 5-6).
Swaim: "the founding of the second Edinburgh Review took much the same course, beginning as it did among a group of friends whose mature acquaintance had begun at the Speculative Society" (249).
The "Golden Age of Scottish magazines is often considered to have begun with the appearance of the Edinburgh Review in 1802, which took the literary world by storm, soon enjoying notoriety throughout Britain and overseas" (Bell, Age, p.341). Magazines like the Edinburgh Review "spoke with confidence to and for the increasingly influential 'middling classes,' and for a brief time put Scotland at the centre of literary and political debate" (341).
Finkelstein's article on Scottish Publishing says that there were few "substantial literary journals in Britain" prior to the Edinburgh Review. It was "entirely different...with the avowed intention of enlightening the mind of its readers and guiding their judgement in matters of literature, science, art and politics...the Review's iconoclastic yet stimulating discussions of literature ensured its success throughout Britain" (80).
Sydney Smith suggested to Archibald Constable that he should begin paying contributors. The initiative worked and began attracting some of the best writers and reviewers to the publication (Finkelstein 80).
"Chalmers' writings in the Edinburgh Review and elsewhere were probably the most important single channel whereby the tenets of utilitarianism and political economy were mediated to the evangelical world" (Victorian Studies).
"The Edinburgh addressed and engaged its readers with a unified, authoritative voice...[and it was] a particularly powerful instrument for creating a middle-class reading audience" (Shattock 346).
Byron wrote "English Bards and Scotch Reviewers" in response to a savage attack made by Brougham in the Edinburgh Review on Byron's "Hours of Idleness". Sydney Smith said that the genius of the Edinburgh Review "seems to consist in stroking the animal the contrary way to that in which the fur lies" (Smart, William; p.209).
Scott wrote that " 'independent of its politics, it gives the only valuable literary criticism which can be met with.' It owed its great sale, he thought, merely to the fact that there was no other respectable and independent publication of the kind. The Edinburgh had become very strongly partisan and even bitter in politics, and it now [1809] adopted Grenville's unpopular attitude towards Spain. In the twenty-sixth number appeared 'Don Cevallos', the article by Brougham which was interpreted as 'an attack upon the titled orders.' 'The Tories, having got a handle, are running us down with all their might,' wrote Jeffrey to Horner, 'and the hosts of all the miserables we have slain are rising to join the vengeance. Walter Scott and William Erskine, and about twenty-five persons of consideration, have forbidden the Review to enter their door...Then, Cumberland is going to start an anonymous rival; and, what is worse, I have reason to believe that...some others, are plotting another.' The 'other' was the Quarterly Review (Smart, William; p.209).
More information about this quarrel is available in The Ballantyne Press.
Chitnis discusses the Review's intimate connection with the Scottish Enlightenment, and especially its role in education reform, referring to a period between 1808-10, "when a series of articles in the Edinburgh Review by, among others, John Playfair, attacked the English Universities." (218) He goes on the say that these articles "appear to have struck home, for that great nineteenth-century influence on university education, John Henry Newman, (wrongly) regarded the Review as 'the organ of the University of Edinburgh'" and that "the Review attacks reflected the concern for effective university education that had been so marked a feature of the Scottish Enlightenment in the mid-to late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth centuries." (218)
The partnership between Constable and Longman opened the London market and helped to offset production costs and "his extensive distribution networks would ensure that the markets in souther England and Wales were well supplies" (Alloway 388-389).
Another partnership with London agent John Murray II increased circulation because Murray was able to sell copies to London booksellers before Longman, thus increasing competition. The competition became so fierce that Longman approached Edinburgh editor Francis Jeffrey about creating a new publication, but was ultimately unsuccessful (Alloway 391).
This periodical had lots of traction in Ireland, and it was one of two popular English periodicals (the other being the Quarterly Review) in southern Ireland. This meant that many Irishmen were exposed, engaged with, and enjoyed English literature (Loeber 225).
Kinealy writes that Thomas Robert Malthus published anonymous articles in 1808-1809 for the Edinburgh Review which expressed a concern that "the excess population in Ireland would eventually have serious implications for Britain" (16).
In 1820, Smith's "immortal quip" on British taxation appears in the Edinburgh Review: "...Taxes upon every article which enters the mouth...upon everything which is pleasant to see, hear, feel, smell, or taste...on everything that comes from abroad, or is grown at home...and the dying Englishman, pouring his medicine, which has paid 7 per cent., into a spoon that has paid 15 per cent.,...expires in the arms of an apothecary who has paid a license of a hundred pounds...His whole property is then immediately taxed from 2 to 10 per cent....and he is then gathered to his fathers,--to be taxed no more" (Smart, William; p.685).
In the Edinburgh Review, Sydney Smith asked "who reads an American book?," which precipitated a lengthy debate in both North America, the UK, and Ireland from prominent authors such as Washington Irving and James Fenimore Cooper (Burke 111).
Nelson discusses articles on Darwin and human reproduction, education (at Eton College), reform schools, public schools and pauper schools. Blackwood's Edinburgh Review was founded as a Tory rival to the Edinburgh Review (Nelson, Claudia; p.212).
"Lewes constructs a place for the literate woman in his pantheon of great writers, a position 'second only to the first rate men of their day,' for writers like Jane Austen, Charlotte Bronte, and George Sand". Lewes expressed a belief in 'universal truth' and defines literary as "that which expresses all human experience" (Shaw, p.203).
It became a violent political partisan and eventually a London periodical exclusively. (Couper, SNQ 8:3s).
154 volumes were published between 1810-1881, 10 between 1882-1886, 10 between 1887-1891, 10 between 1892-1896, and 10 between 1897-1901, making 194 volumes in all from its inception to 1901 (Poole's Index).
"Begun on the suggestion of Sydney Smith" (Smart, William; p.61).
Jeffrey, in 1806, made a "slashing attack" on Moore's "Odes and Epistles," and was subsequently challenged by Moore to a duel (Smart, William; p.129).
One of the leading Victorian periodicals of the 1870's that had comments on the scientific field; it devoted at least 8% of its space to science (Meadows, A.J.; p.54).
Lewes devoted six pages of a review of "Shirley" by Brontë to the characteristics of women and women's literature (Basch, p.108).
In the beginning, the aim was "to erect a standard of merit, and secure a bolder and purer taste in literature, and to apply philosophical principles and the maxims of truth and humanity to politics" (Herd, Harold; p.188).
"What most impressed readers of the early numbers and was the main reason for the success of the review was the independence of its literary judgments. Nothing like the quality of its critical work had been known before; previously criticism had mostly been indistinguishable from puffery" (Herd, Harold; p.190).
Founded in Scotland it moved to London in 1847 where, "under the forty-year guidance of Times political writer and conservative Liberal Henry Reeve, it settled into a moderate Whiggery" (Nelson, Claudia; p.212).
Article's addressing women's issues include Margaret Oliphant's "Mill on the Subjection of Women."
Important reviews such as Edinburgh Review "prospered with small circulations in spite of the so-called "taxes on knowledge" designed to limit the influence of the press" (Baldwin 25).
The Edinburgh Review demanded that "specialization be extended to the popular press in order to end radical domination" (Gilmartin 145).
Perkins argues that the Edinburgh Review was largely responsible for minimalizing women writers since it often denounced the Romantic genre in which many women writers became prominent (19).
"Ebenezer Elliot, remaining at one with his lower-class origins in his little iron-foundry in Sheffield, became a symbol of the emerging workers: Carlyle gave him a rousing notice in The Edinburgh Review, and he prompted The London Review's respectful exploratory article, "The Poetry of the Poor" (James, Louis; p.43).
References to the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge were inspired, if not always written, by Brougham. A June 1827 issue commented that "no opposition to the S.D.U.K. could be expected while it confined itself to natural science and ancient history; but, once modern history and particularly the history of England were approached, objections would surely appear" (Webb, R.K.; p.86).
"The war in America has suspended the progress of learning...Literary periodical works are scarce, and made up in great measure from the Edinburgh and Quarterly Reviews. Other publications are occasionally to be seen there in the houses of the opulent - such as the Monthly Review; British Critic; Scottish Review; Monthly Magazine" (New Monthly) p.55.
"Though its power is now on the wane - has perhaps, on the whole, produced a deeper and more extensive impression on the public mind than any other work of its species...It has one extraordinary merit, that instead of partially illustrating only one set of doctrines, it contains disquisitions equally convincing on almost all sides of almost all questions or literature or state policy...the mightiest offense...is the willful injustice which it has done to Wordsworth...To effect this malignant design, Wordsworth. Coleridge, and Southey, have been constantly represented as forming one perverse school or band of innovators" (New Monthly p.304-305).
Brougham contributed 80 articles to the first 20 numbers of the Edinburgh Review. Romilly's last printed matter was a contribution to the Edinburgh Review -- a review of Bentham's "Papers Relative to Codification and Public Instruction".
Leigh Hunt was a reviewer for the Edinburgh Review, and ending with a review of James Dennistoun's "Memoirs of the Dukes of Urbino" (Gates, Eleanor; p.519).
John William Kaye contributed articles especially on Indian affairs and British exploits therein, and G. R. Gleig contributed articles on "the army" and other aspects of India. Phillip Meadows Taylor "would be singled out as an authority on India" (Peers, pp.124-5).
For an extended list of contributors, consult the Curran Index.
Burton wrote on the subjects of "law, history, and political economy" (Cooper, Thompson; p.170).
Price contributed an article called "The Anglo-Catholic Theory" (Cooper, Thompson; p.782).
Tulloch contributed "important articles" on "Positive Philosophy" in April 1868, and "Dr. Newman's Grammar of Assent" in October 1870, (Cooper, Thompson; p.925).
"The founders of The Edinburgh Review had studied under Dugald Stewart at Edinburgh University and had attempted to educate the public on the principles of political economy." (Wilson, p.327).
"'On domestic subjects the history of the first thirty years of the nineteenth century is a species of duel between the Edinburgh Review and Lord [Chancellor] Eldon.'" (Bagehot, p.12 in Schoenfield, p.39).
"In the Biographia Literaria, Coleridge acknowledges the Edinburgh's epistemological and professionalizing effect on the periodical industry." (Schoenfield, p.51).
In its day, "there was no literary organ, in other words, to offset, by the artful mingling of politics with literature, the partisan influence of the Edinburgh Review" (Graham 274).
Schoenfield explains that the Edinburgh Review's oppositional relation to the Tory government motivated the construction of an alternative public arena outside the formal political spaces of government. The success of the Edinburgh, therefore, spawned imitative and opposed journals" (7).
"[The Quarterly Review] used the Edinburgh's objectionable literary and religious articles and its reviews of Cobbett, Whitbread and Don Pedro Cevallos to marshal political support and inspire contributors." (Cutmore, p.9).
Contained debates about "genius...the effects of periodical literature upon contemporary writing and conceptions of authorship...the status of the 'man of letters'" (Camlot, p.16)
"In [James Mill's] article on the ['characteristic malady of the periodical press'] published in the Westminster in 1824, where he argues that '[p]eriodical literature depends upon immediate success' and 'must, therefore, patronize the opinions which are now in vogue, the opinions of those who are now in power.' For James Mill the reigning power is the Edinburgh Review, which he believes is in service of an aristocratic conception of parliament." (Camlot, p.19).
"...had [an] identifiable stylistic and political personalit[y] that [was] attributable to [its] editors." (Camlot, p.78).
The aim of the publication was to select only a few outstanding books in all fields of interest and to examine them with more care than had been customary in previous reviewing.... Perhaps the chief innovation was the independence of the contributors. [The writers] were free to speak their minds. ...A striking feature of the new journal was the introduction of political economy. It kept its readers abreast of the most important thinking in the field.... Also notable was the amount of space devoted to practical and theoretical science.... But it was primarily as an instrument of political enlightenment and social reform that the Edinburgh deserved its fame. [Although its colours were Whig, it managed] to keep somewhat aloof from political controversy.... Almost half of the Review from 1802 to 1824 was written by Brougham, Jeffrey, and Smith.... Occasional contributors [included] Walter Scott, William Wilberforce, Thomas Arnold, Thomas Carlyle, ... William Hazlitt ... and Macaulay" (Houghton).
Poole's index notes 154 volumes were published between 1810-1881, l0 between 1882-1886, 10 between 1887-1891, 10 between 1892-1896, and 10 between 1897-1901, making 194 vols in all from its inception to 1901. "The Review became a violent political partisan and eventually a London periodical exclusively" (Couper. SNQ 8:3s).
Nassau Senior, a prominent Whig with an interest in Irish affairs, published several articles about Irish reform and promoted nationalist party values (Kerr 27).
The Edinburgh Review was culturally opposed by the Anti-Jacobin Review and Magazine, which disagreed with its military, economic, and army policies (Schoenfield 5).
Although the Edinburgh Review was politically engaged and represented Whig interests, the people associated with the publication "did not see themselves as spokesmen for the new middle class" (Cooke et al. 213).
Shattock writes that "Robert Vaughan, writing at mid-century, shrewdly identified the beginning of the Edinburgh's decline in political influence with the Whigs' assumption of power in 1830 and the passing of the Reform Bill in 1832. After nearly three decades as a vigorous organ of the opposition, the Edinburgh became in effect a government review, a relationship that was neither straightforward nor comfortable" (349).
Location:
complete runs: QZ/P-1 vols 1-250 (1802-1929); ED/N-1 A vols 1-250 (Oct 1802-Oct 1929); ED/U18 G vols 1-167:341+(Oct 1802-Jan 1888+); OX/U-1 A (1802-1929); GL/U-1 (1802-1929); SA/U-1 vols 1-250 (1802-1929); QZ/P99 vols 1-250(1802-1929); LO/N-1 A, NN, MB; partial runs: ED/M-1 E vols 1-183 (1802-1897), DN/U-1 (1802-1917); ED/M-1 G vols 1-183 (1802-1897); Sandeman Lib vols 26-75 (1816-1842): ED/U-1 G (1818); QZ/P-8 (Apr 1814-Sep 1814); AD/U-1 (Oct 1805, Oct 1847, Apr 1850); QZ/P10 vol 48 (1828); Reprint Editions: Microform: Academic Archives, Raleigh, N.C. Bell & Howell Co., Wooster, Ohio; Datamics Inc., New York; Early British Publications (MiU), reels 427-457; Princeton Microfilm Corp., Princeton, N.J.; U.S. Library of Congress Photo Duplication Service, Washington, D.C.; See BUCOP; See Waterloo Directory of Scottish Periodicals; N.America: see Fulton; ULS 2&3; PCI; Tye, Periodicals of the Nineties. The full text is available at ProQuest, Google Books (1833)
Reproduced by permission, Archbishop Marsh's Library
Reproduced by permission, Archbishop Marsh's Library
Reproduced by permission, the Presbyterian Historical Society