Early Reviews of English Poets | Page 6

Museum, conducted for five years a New Review (1782-86), often
called Maty's Review, and dealing principally with learned works. It
apparently enjoyed some authority, but both Walpole and Gibbon
spoke unfavorably of Maty's critical pretensions. The English Review;
or, an Abstract of English and Foreign Literature (1783-96), extended
to twenty-eight volumes modelled upon the plan of the older
periodicals. In 1796 it was incorporated with the Analytical Review
(1788) and survived under the latter title until 1799. The Analytical
Review deprecated the self-sufficient attitude of contemporary criticism
and advocated extensive quotations from the works under consideration
so that readers might be able to judge for themselves. It likewise hinted
at the tacit understanding then existing between certain authors,
publishers and reviews for their mutual advantage, but which was

arousing a growing feeling of distrust on the part of the public. The
British Critic (1793-1843) was edited by William Beloe and Robert
Nares as the organ of the High Church Party. This "dull mass of
orthodoxy" concerned itself extensively with literary reviews; but its
articles were best known for their lack of interest and authority. The
foibles of the British Critic were satirized in Bishop Copleston's Advice
to a Young Reviewer (1807) with an appended mock critique of
Milton's L'Allegro. In 1826 it was united with the Quarterly
Theological Review and continued until 1843.
The Anti-Jacobin Review and Magazine; or, Monthly Political and
Literary Censor (1799-1821) played a strenuous rôle in the troublous
times of the Napoleonic wars. It continued the policy of the
Anti-Jacobin, or Weekly Examiner (1797-98) conducted with such
marked vigor by William Gifford, but it numbered among its
contributors none of the brilliant men whose witty verses for the
weekly paper are still read in the popular Poetry of the Anti-Jacobin.
The Review was conducted by John Richards Green, better known as
John Gifford. Its articles were at times sensational in character,
viciously abusing writers of known or suspected republican sentiments.
From its pages could be culled a new series of "Beauties of the
Anti-Jacobin" which for sheer vituperation and relentless abuse would
be without a rival among such anthologies.
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the principal reviews in
course of publication were the Monthly, the Critical, the British Critic,
and the Anti-Jacobin. The latter was preëminently vulgar in its appeal,
the Critical had lost its former prestige, and the other two had never
risen above a level of mediocrity. There was more than a lurking
suspicion that these periodicals were, to a certain extent, booksellers'
organs, quite unreliable on account of the partial and biassed criticisms
which they offered the dissatisfied public. The time was evidently ripe
for a new departure in literary reviews--for the establishment of a
trustworthy critical journal, conducted by capable editors and printing
readable notices of important books. People were quite willing to have
an unfortunate author assailed and flayed for their entertainment; but
they did not care to be deceived by laudatory criticisms that were

inspired by the publisher's name instead of the intrinsic merits of the
work itself.
Such was the state of affairs when Francis Jeffrey, Henry Brougham
and Sydney Smith launched the Edinburgh Review in 1802, choosing a
name that had been borne in 1755-56 by a short-lived semi-annual
review. There were several significant facts associated with the new
enterprise. It was the first important literary periodical to be published
beyond the metropolis. It was the first review to appear quarterly--an
interval that most contemporary journalists would have condemned as
too long for a successful review. Moreover, it was conducted upon an
entirely different principle than any previous review; by restricting its
attention to the most important works of each quarter, it gave extensive
critiques of only a few books in each number and thus avoided the
multitude of perfunctory notices that had made previous reviews so
dreary and unreadable.
The idea of founding the Edinburgh Review was apparently suggested
by Sydney Smith in March, 1802. Jeffrey and Francis Horner were his
immediate associates; but during the period of preparation Henry
Brougham, Dr. Thomas Brown, Dr. John Thomson and others became
interested. After some delay, the first number appeared on October 10,
1802, containing among its twenty-nine articles three by Brougham,
five by Horner, six by Jeffrey and nine by Smith. Although there was a
slight feeling of disappointment over the mild political tone of the new
review, its success was immediate. The edition of 750 copies was
speedily disposed of, and within a month a second edition of equal size
was printed. There was no regular editor at first, although the
publication of the first three numbers was practically superintended by
Smith. Afterwards Jeffrey became editor at a salary of £300. He had
previously written some articles (including a critique of Southey's
Thalaba) for the Monthly Review