The Life of George Borrow Part 39

Borrow had much time upon his hands in London, which he occupied largely in walking. He visited the Metropolitan Gypsyries at Wandsworth, "the Potteries," and "the Mounts," as described in Romano Lavo-Lil. Sometimes he would be present at some sporting event, such as the race between the Indian Deerfoot and Jackson, styled the American Deer--tame sport in comparison with the "mills" of his boyhood. He did very little writing, and from 1862, when Wild Wales appeared, until he published The Romano Lavo-Lil in 1874, his literary output consisted of only some translations contributed to Once a Week (January 1862 to December 1863).

In 1865 he was to lose his stepdaughter, who married a William MacOubrey, M.D., described in the marriage register as a physician of Sloane Street, London, and subsequently upon his tombstone as a barrister. In the July of 1866 Borrow and his wife went to Belfast on a visit to the newly married pair. From Belfast Borrow took another trip into Scotland, crossing over to Stranraer. From there he proceeded to Glen Luce and subsequently to Newton Stewart, Castle Douglas, Dumfries, Ecclefechan, Gretna Green, Carlisle, Langholm, Hawick, Jedburgh, Yetholm (where he saw Esther Blyth of Kirk Yetholm), Kelso, Abbotsford, Melrose, Berwick, Edinburgh, Glasgow, and so back to Belfast, having been absent for nearly four weeks.

Mrs Borrow's health had been the cause of the family leaving Oulton for Great Yarmouth, and about the time of the Irish visit it seems to have become worse. When Borrow was away upon his excursion he received a letter at Carlisle in which his wife informed him that she was not so well; but urging him not to return if he were enjoying his trip and it were benefiting his health.

In the autumn of the following year (1867) they were at Bognor, Mrs Borrow taking the sea air, her husband tramping about the country and penetrating into the New Forest. On their return to town Mrs Borrow appears to have become worse. There was much correspondence to be attended to with regard to the Oulton Estate, and she had to go down to Suffolk to give her personal attention to certain important details. Miss Cobbe throws a little light on the period in a letter to a friend, in which she says:

"Mr Borrow says his wife is very ill and anxious to keep the peace with C. (a litigious neighbour). Poor old B. was very sad at first, but I cheered him up and sent him off quite brisk last night. He talked all about the Fathers again, arguing that their quotations went to prove that it was NOT our gospels they had in their hands. I knew most of it before, but it was admirably done. I talked a little theology to him in a serious way (finding him talk of his 'horrors') and he abounded in my sense of the non-existence of h.e.l.l, and of the presence and action on the soul of _A_ Spirit, rewarding and punis.h.i.+ng. He would not say 'G.o.d'; but repeated over and over again that he spoke not from books but from his own personal experience."

{456a}

On 24th January (1869) Mrs Borrow was taken suddenly ill and the family doctor being out of town, Borrow sent for Dr W. S. Playfair of 5 Curzon Street. A letter from Dr Playfair, 25th January, to the family doctor is the only coherent testimony in existence as to what was actually the matter with Mrs Borrow. It runs:-

"I found great difficulty in making out the case exactly," he writes, "since Mr Borrow himself was so agitated that I could get no very clear account of it. I could detect no marked organic affection about the heart or lungs, of which she chiefly complained. It seemed to me to be either a very aggravated form of hysteria, or, what appears more likely, some more serious mental affection. In any case, the chief requisite seemed very careful and intelligent nursing or management, and I doubt very much, from what I saw, whether she gets that with her present surroundings. If it is really the more serious mental affection, I should fancy that the sooner means are taken to have her properly taken care of, the better."

Dr Playfair saw in Borrow's highly nervous excitable nature, if not the cause of his wife's breakdown, at least an obstacle to her recovery, and was of opinion that Mrs Borrow's disorder had been greatly aggravated by her husband's presence.

Mrs Borrow never rallied from the attack, and on the 30th she died of "valvular disease of the heart and dropsy," being then in her seventy-seventh year. On 4th February she was buried in Brompton Cemetery, and the lonely man, her husband, returned to Hereford Square. The grave bears the inscription, "To the Beloved Memory of My Mother, Mary Borrow, who fell asleep in Jesus, 30th January 1869."

It is strange that this should be in Henrietta's and not Borrow's name.

Mrs Borrow evidently made over her property to her husband during her lifetime, as there is no will in existence, and no application appears to have been made either by Borrow or anyone else for letters of administration.

CHAPTER XXIX: JANUARY 1869-1881

The death of his wife was a last blow to Borrow, and he soon retired from the world. At first he appears to have sought consolation in books, to judge from the number of purchases he made about this time; but it was, apparently, with pitiably unsuccessful results. In a letter to a friend Miss Cobbe gives a picture in his lonliness:

"Poor old Borrow is in a sad state," she wrote. "I hope he is starting in a day or two for Scotland. I sent C. with a note begging him to come and eat the Welsh mutton you sent me to-day, and he sent back word, 'Yes.' Then, an hour afterwards, he arrived, and in a most agitated manner said he had come to say 'he would rather not.

He would not trouble anyone with his sorrows.' I made him sit down, and talked as gently to him as possible, saying: 'It won't be a trouble Mr. Borrow, it will be a pleasure to me.' But it was all of no use. He was so cross, so RUDE, I had the greatest difficulty in talking to him. I asked about his servant, and he said I could not help him. I asked him about Bowring, and he said: 'Don't speak of it.' (It was some dispute with Sir John Bowring, who was an acquaintance of mine, and with whom I offered to mediate.) 'I asked him would he look at the photos of the Siamese,' and he said: 'Don't show them to me!' So, in despair, as he sat silent, I told him I had been at a pleasant dinner-party the night before, and had met Mr L-- , who told me of certain curious books of mediaeval history. 'Did he know them?' 'No, and he DARE SAID Mr L-- did not, either! Who was Mr L--?' I described that OBSCURE individual, (one of the foremost writers of the day), and added that he was immensely liked by everybody. Whereupon Borrow repeated at least twelve times, 'Immensely liked! As if a man could be immensely liked!' quite insultingly. To make a diversion (I was very patient with him as he was in trouble), 'I said I had just come home from the Lyell's and had heard--' . . . But there was no time to say what I had heard!

Mr Borrow asked: 'Is that old Lyle I met here once, the man who stands at the door (of some den or other) and BETS?' I explained who Sir Charles was, {459a} (of course he knew very well), but he went on and on, till I said gravely: 'I don't think you will meet those sort of people here, Mr Borrow. We don't a.s.sociate with blacklegs, exactly.'" {459b}

In the Autumn of 1870 Borrow became acquainted with Charles G. Leland ("Hans Breitmann") as the result of receiving from him the following letter:-

BRIGHTON, 24th October 1870.

Dear Sir,--During the eighteen months that I have been in England, my efforts to find some mutual friend who would introduce me to you have been quite in vain. As the author of two or three works which have been kindly received in England, I have made the acquaintance of many literary men and enjoyed much hospitality; but I a.s.sure you very sincerely that my inability to find you out or get at you has been a source of great annoyance to me. As you never published a book which I have not read through five times--excepting The Bible in Spain and Wild Wales, which I have only read once--you will perfectly understand why I should be so desirous of meeting you.

As you have very possibly never heard of me before, I would state that I wrote a collection of Ballads satirising Germany and the Germans under the t.i.tle of Hans Breitmann.

I never before in my life solicited the favour of any man's acquaintance, except through the regular medium of an introduction.

If my request to be allowed the favour of meeting and seeing you does not seem too outre, I would be to glad to go to London, or wherever you may be, if it can be done without causing you any inconvenience, and if I should not be regarded as an intruder. I am an American, and among us such requests are parfaitment (sic) en regle.

I am, . . .

CHARLES G. LELAND.

Borrow replied on 2nd Nov.:

Sir,

I have received your letter and am gratified by the desire you express to make my acquaintance.

Whenever you please to come I shall be happy to see you.

Truly yours, GEORGE BORROW. {460a}

The meeting unquestionably took place at Hereford Square, and Leland found Borrow "a tall, large, fine-looking man who must have been handsome in his youth." {460b} The result of the interview was that Leland sent to Borrow a copy of his Ballads and also The Music Lesson of Confucius, then about to appear. At the same time he wrote to Borrow drawing his attention to one of the ballads written in German Romany jib, and enquiring if it were worth anything. Whilst deprecating his "impudence" in writing a Romany gili and telling, as a pupil might a master, of his interest in and his a.s.sociation with the gypsies, he continues: "My dear Mr Borrow, for all this you are entirely responsible. More than twenty years ago your books had an incredible influence on me, and now you see the results." After telling him that he can NEVER thank him sufficiently for the instructions he has given in The Romany Rye as to how to take care of a horse on a thirty mile ride, he concludes--"With apologies for the careless tone of this letter, and with sincere thanks for your kindness in permitting me to call on you and for your courteous note,--I am your sincere admirer."

The account that Leland gives of this episode in his Memoirs is puzzling and contradictory in the light of his first letter. He writes:

"There was another hard old character with whom I became acquainted in those days, and one who, though not a Carlyle, still, like him, exercised in a peculiar way a great influence on English literature.

This was George Borrow. I was in the habit of reading a great deal in the British Museum, where he also came, and there I was introduced to him. {461a} [Leland seems to be in error here; see ante, page 460.] He was busy with a venerable-looking volume in old Irish, and made the remark to me that he did not believe there was a man living who could read old Irish with ease (which I now observe to myself was 'fished' out of Sir W. Betham). We discussed several Gypsy words and phrases. I met him in the same place several times." {461b}

Leland states that he sent a note to Borrow, care of John Murray, asking permission to dedicate to him his forthcoming book, The English Gypsies and Their Language; but received no reply, although Murray a.s.sured him that the letter had been received by Borrow. "He received my note on the Sat.u.r.day," Leland writes--"never answered it- -and on Monday morning advertised in all the journals his own forthcoming work on the same subject." {461c} Had Borrow asked him to delay publis.h.i.+ng his own book, Leland says he would have done so, "for I had so great a respect for the Nestor of Gypsyism, that I would have been very glad to have gratified him with such a small sacrifice." {462a}

However Borrow may have heard that Leland had in preparation a book on the English Gypsies, he seemed to feel that it was a trespa.s.s upon ground that was peculiarly his own. Having revised and prepared for the press the new edition of the Gypsy St Luke for the Bible Society (published December 1872), and the one-volume editions of Lavengro and The Romany Rye, he set to work to forestall Leland with his own Romano Lavo-Lil.

In spite of his haste, however, Borrow was beaten in the race, and Leland got his volume out first. When the Romano Lavo-Lil {462b} appeared in March 1874, Borrow found what, in all probability he had not dreamed of, that the thirty-three years intervening between its publication and that of The Zincali, had changed the whole literary world as regards "things of Egypt." In 1841 Borrow had produced a unique book, such as only one man in England could have written, and that man himself {462c}; but in 1874 he found himself not only out of date, but out-cla.s.sed.

The t.i.tle very thoroughly explains the scope of the work. The Vocabulary had existed in ma.n.u.script for many years. For some reason, difficult to explain, Borrow had omitted from this Vocabulary a number of the gypsy words that appeared in Lavengro and The Romany Rye. In spite of this "Mr Borrow's present vocabulary makes a goodly show," wrote F. H. Groome, ". . . containing no fewer than fourteen hundred words, of which about fifty will be entirely new to those who only know Romany in books." {463a}

After praising the Gypsy songs as the best portion of the book, Groome proceeds:

"Of his prose I cannot say so much. It is the Romany of the study rather than of the tents [!] Mr Borrow has attempted to rehabilitate English Romany by enduing it with forms and inflections, of which some are still rarely to be heard, some extinct, and others absolutely incorrect; while Mr Leland has been content to give it as it really is. Of the two methods I cannot doubt that most readers will agree with me in thinking that Mr Leland's is the more satisfactory." {463b}

The Athenaeum sternly rebuked Borrow for seeming "to make the mistake of confounding the amount of Rommanis which he has collected in this book with the actual extent of the language itself." The reviewer pays a somewhat grudging tribute to other portions of the book, the accounts of the Gypsyries and the biographical particulars of the Romany worthies, but the work suffers by comparison with those of Paspati and Leland. He acknowledges that Borrow was one of the pioneers of those who gave accounts of the Gypsies in English, who gave to many their present taste for Gypsy matters,

"but," he proceeds, "we cannot allow merely sentimental considerations to prevent us from telling the honest truth. The fact is that the Romano Lavo-Lil is nothing more than a rechauffe of the materials collected by Mr Borrow at an early stage of his investigations, and nearly every word and every phrase may be found in one form or another in his earlier works. Whether or not Mr Borrow HAS in the course of his long experience become the DEEP Gypsy which he has always been supposed to be, we cannot say; but it is certain that his present book contains little more than he gave to the public forty years ago, and does not by any means represent the present state of knowledge on the subject. But at the present day, when comparative philology has made such strides, and when want of accurate scholars.h.i.+p is as little tolerated in strange and remote languages as in cla.s.sical literature, the Romano Lavo-Lil is, to speak mildly, an anachronism."