Scott’s own ‘autobiographic fragment,’ printed in Lockhart’s first volume, has made other accounts of his youth mostly superfluous, even to a day which persists in knowing better about everything and everybody than it or they knew about themselves.  No one ever recorded his genealogy more minutely, with greater pride, or with a more saving sense of humour than Sir Walter.  He was connected, though remotely, with gentle families on both sides.  That is to say, his great-grandfather was son of the Laird of Raeburn, who was grandson of Walter Scott of Harden and the ‘Flower of Yarrow.’  The great-grandson, ‘Beardie,’ acquired that cognomen by letting his beard grow like General Dalziel, though for the exile of James ii., instead of the death of Charles I. ­’whilk was the waur reason,’ as Sir Walter himself might have said.

Beardie’s second son, being more thoroughly sickened of the sea in his first voyage than Robinson Crusoe, took to farming and Whiggery, and married the daughter of Haliburton of Newmains ­there was also Macdougal and Campbell blood on the spindle side of the older generations of the family.  Their eldest son Walter, father of Sir Walter, was born in 1729, and, being bred to the law, became the original, according to undisputed tradition, of the ‘Saunders Fairford’ of Redgauntlet, the most autobiographical as well as not the least charming of the novels.  He married Anne Rutherford, who, through her mother, brought the blood of the Swintons of Swinton to enrich the joint strain; and from her father, a member of a family distinguished in the annals of the University of Edinburgh, may have transmitted some of the love for books which was not the most prominent feature of the other ingredients.

Walter himself was the third ‘permanent child’ (to adopt an agreeable phrase of Mr. Traill’s about another person) of a family of twelve, only five of whom survived infancy.  His three brothers, John, Thomas, and Daniel, and his sister Anne, all figure in the records; but little is heard of John and not much of Anne.  Thomas, the second, either had, or was thought by his indulgent brother to have, literary talents, and was at one time put up to father the novels; while Daniel (whose misconduct in money matters, and still more in showing the white feather, brought on him the only display of anything that can be called rancour recorded in Sir Walter’s history) concerns us even less.  The date of the novelist’s birth was 15th August 1771, the place, ’the top of the College Wynd,’ a locality now whelmed in the actual Chambers Street face of the present Old University buildings, and near that of Kirk of Field.  Escaping the real or supposed dangers of a consumptive wet-nurse, he was at first healthy enough; but teething or something else developed the famous lameness, which at first seemed to threaten loss of all use of the right leg.  The child was sent to the house of his grandfather, the Whig farmer of Sandyknowe, where he abode for some years under the shadow of Smailholm Tower, reading a little, listening to Border legends a great deal, and making one long journey to London and Bath.  This first blessed period of ’making himself’ lasted till his eighth year, and ended with a course of sea-bathing at Prestonpans, where he met the original in name and perhaps in nature of Captain Dalgetty, and the original in character of the Antiquary.  Then he returned (circ. 1779) to his father’s house, now in George Square, to his numerous, if impermanent, family of brothers and sisters, and to the High School.  The most memorable incident of this part of his career is the famous episode of ’Greenbreeks.’

His health, as he grew up, becoming again weak, the boy was sent once more Borderwards ­this time to Kelso, where he lived with an aunt, went to the town school, and made the acquaintance there, whether for good or ill, who shall say? of the Ballantynes.  And he had to return to Kelso for the same cause, at least once during his experiences at College, where he did not take the full usual number of courses, and acquired no name as a scholar.  But he always read.

As it had not been decided whether he was to adopt the superior or the inferior branch of the law, he was apprenticed to his father at the age of fifteen, as a useful preparation for either career.  He naturally enough did not love ‘engrossing,’ but he did not cross his father’s soul by refusing it, and though returns of illness occurred now and then, his constitution appeared to be gradually strengthening itself, partly, as he thought, owing to the habit of very long walks, in which he took great delight.  He tried various accomplishments; but he could neither draw, nor make music, nor (at this time) write.  Still he always read ­irregularly, uncritically, but enormously, so that to this day Sir Walter’s real learning is under-estimated.  And he formed a very noteworthy circle of friends ­William Clerk, ‘Darsie Latimer,’ the chief of them all.  It must have been just after he entered his father’s office that he met Burns, during that poet’s famous visit to Edinburgh in 1786-87.

Considerably less is known of his late youth and early manhood than either of his childhood or of his later life.  His letters ­those invaluable and unparalleled sources of biographical information ­do not begin till 1792, the year of his majority, when (on July 11) he was called to the Bar.  But it is a universal tradition that, in these years of apprenticeship, in more senses than one, he, partly in gratifying his own love of wandering, and partly in serving his father’s business by errands to clients, etc., did more than lay the foundation of that unrivalled knowledge of Scotland, and of all classes in it, which plays so important a part in his literary work.  I say ‘of all classes in it,’ and this point is of the greatest weight.  Scott has been accused (for the most part foolishly) of paying an exaggerated respect to rank.  If this had been true, it would at least not have been due to late or imperfect acquaintance with persons of rank.  Democratic as the Scotland of this century has sometimes been called, it is not uncommon to find a considerable respect for aristocracy in the greatest Scotch Radicals; and Scott was notoriously not a Radical.  But his familiarity with all ranks from an early age is undoubted, and only very shallow or prejudiced observers will doubt the beneficial effect which this had on his study of humanity. The uneasy caricature which mars Dickens’s picture of the upper, and even the upper middle, classes is as much absent from his work as the complete want of familiarity with the lower which appears, for instance, in Bulwer.  It is certain that before he had written anything, he was on familiar terms with many persons, both men and women, of the highest rank ­the most noteworthy among his feminine correspondents being Lady Louisa Stuart (sister of the Marquis of Bute and grand-daughter of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu) and Lady Abercorn.  With the former the correspondence is always on the footing of mere though close friendship, literary and other; in part at least of that with Lady Abercorn, I cannot help suspecting the presence, especially on the lady’s side, of that feeling,

    ‘Too warm for friendship and too pure for love,’

which undoubtedly sometimes does exist between men and women who cannot, and perhaps who would not if they could, turn love into marriage.

However this may be, it is, let it be repeated, certain that Scott, in the six years from his fifteenth, when he is said to have first visited the Highlands and seen Rob Roy’s country, to his majority, and yet again in the five or six between his call to the Bar and his marriage, visited many, if not all, parts of Scotland; knew high and low, rich and poor, with the amiable interest of his temperament and the keen observation of his genius; took part in business and amusement and conviviality (he accuses himself later of having been not quite free from the prevalent peccadillo of rather deep drinking); and still and always read.  He joined the ‘Speculative Society’ in January 1791, and, besides taking part in the debates on general subjects, read papers on Feudalism, Ossian, and Northern Mythology, in what were to be his more special lines.

His young lawyer friends called him ‘Colonel Grogg,’ a sobriquet not difficult to interpret on one of the hints just given, and ’Duns Scotus,’ which concerns the other; while yet a third characteristic, which can surprise nobody, is indicated in the famous introduction of him to a boisterous party of midshipmen of the Marryat type by James Clerk, the brother of Darsie Latimer, who kept a yacht, and was fond of the sea:  ’You may take Mr. Scott for a poor lamiter, gentlemen, but he is the first to begin a row and the last to end it.’

It appears that it was from a time somewhat before the call that the beginning of Scott’s famous, his unfortunate, and (it has been the fashion, rightly or wrongly, to add) his only love affair dates.  Some persons have taken the trouble to piece together and eke out the references to ‘Green Mantle,’ otherwise Miss Stuart of Belches, later Lady Forbes.  It is better to respect Scott’s own reticence on a subject of which very little is really known, and of which he, like most gentlemen, preferred to say little or nothing.  The affection appears to have been mutual; but the lady was probably not very eager to incur family displeasure by making a match decidedly below her in rank, and, at that time, distinctly imprudent in point of fortune.  But the courtship, such as it was, appears to have been long, and the effects of the loss indelible.  Scott speaks of his heart as ’handsomely pieced’ ­’pieced,’ it may be observed, not ‘healed.’  A healed wound sometimes does not show; a pieced garment or article of furniture reminds us of the piecing till the day when it goes to fire or dustbin.  But it has been supposed, with some reason, that those heroines of Scott’s who show most touch of personal sympathy ­Catherine Seyton, Die Vernon, Lilias Redgauntlet ­bear features, physical or mental or both, of this Astarte, this

    ‘Lost woman of his youth, yet unpossessed.’

And no one can read the Diary without perceiving the strange bitter-sweet, at the moment of his greatest calamity, of the fact that Sir William Forbes, who rendered him invaluable service at his greatest need, was his successful rival thirty years before, and the widower of ‘Green Mantle.’

This affair came to an end in October 1796; and it may astonish some wise people, accustomed to regard Scott as a rather humdrum and prosaic person, who escaped the scandals so often associated with the memory of men of letters from sheer want of temptation, to hear that one of his most intimate friends of his own age at the time ’shuddered at the violence of his most irritable and ungovernable mind.’  There is no reason to doubt the fidelity of this description.  And those who know something of human nature will be disposed to assign the disappearance of the irritableness and ungovernableness precisely to this incident, and to the working of a strong mind, confronted by fate with the question whether it was to be the victim or the master of its own passions, fighting out the battle once for all, and thenceforward keeping its house armed against them, it may be with some loss, but certainly with much gain.

It has been said that he states (with a touch of irony, no doubt) that his heart was ‘handsomely pieced’; and it is not against the theory hinted in the foregoing paragraph, but, on the contrary, in favour of it, that the piecing did not take long.  In exactly a year Scott became engaged to Miss Charlotte Margaret Carpenter or Charpentier, and they were married on Christmas Eve, 1797, at St. Mary’s, Carlisle.  They had met at Gilsland Spa in the previous July, and the courtship had not taken very long.  The lady was of French extraction, had an only brother in the service of the East India Company, and, being an orphan, was the ward of the Marquis of Downshire, ­circumstances on which gossips like Hogg made impertinent remarks.  It is fair, however, to ‘the Shepherd’ to say that he speaks enthusiastically both of Mrs. Scott’s appearance (’one of the most beautiful and handsome creatures I ever saw in my life’; ‘a perfect beauty’) and of her character (’she is cradled in my remembrance, and ever shall be, as a sweet, kind, and affectionate creature’). She was very dark, small, with hair which the Shepherd calls black, Lockhart dark brown; her features not regular, but her complexion, figure, and so forth ‘unusually attractive.’  Not very much is said about her in any of the authentic accounts, and traditional tittle-tattle may be neglected.  She does not seem to have been extremely wise, and was entirely unliterary; but neither of these defects is a causa redhibitionis in marriage; and she was certainly a faithful and affectionate wife.  At any rate, Scott made no complaints, if he had any to make, and nearly the most touching passage in the Diary is that written after her death.

The minor incidents, not literary, of his life, between his call to the Bar and his marriage, require a little notice, for they had a very great influence on the character of his future work.  His success at the Bar was moderate, but his fees increased steadily if slowly.  He defended (unsuccessfully) a Galloway minister who was accused among other counts of ‘toying with a sweetie-wife,’ and it is interesting to find in his defence some casuistry about ebrius and ebriosus, which reminds one of the Baron of Bradwardine.  He took part victoriously in a series of battles with sticks, between Loyalist advocates and writers and Irish Jacobin medical students, in the pit of the Edinburgh theatre during April 1794.  In June 1795 he became a curator of the Advocates’ Library, and a year later engaged (of course on the loyal side) in another great political ‘row,’ this time in the streets.

Above all, in the spring and summer between the loss of his love and his marriage, he engaged eagerly in volunteering, becoming quartermaster, paymaster, secretary, and captain in the Edinburgh Light Horse ­an occupation which has left at least as much impression on his work as Gibbon’s equally famous connection with the Hampshire Militia on his.  His friendships continued and multiplied; and he began with the sisters of some of his friends, especially Miss Cranstoun (his chief confidante in the ‘Green Mantle’ business) and Miss Erskine, the first, or the first known to us, of those interesting correspondences with ladies which show him perhaps at his very best.  For in them he plays neither jack-pudding, nor coxcomb, nor sentimentalist, nor any of the involuntary counterparts which men in such cases are too apt to play; and they form not the least of his titles to the great name of gentleman.

But by far the most important contribution of these six or seven years to his ‘making’ was the further acquaintance with the scenery, and customs, and traditions, and dialects, and local history of his own country, which his greater independence, enlarged circle of friends, and somewhat increased means enabled him to acquire.  It is quite true that to a man with his gifts any microcosm will do for a macrocosm in miniature.  I have heard in conversation (I forget whether it is in any of the books) that he picked up the word ‘whomled’ (= ’bucketed over’ ­’turned like a tub’), which adds so much to the description of the nautical misfortune of Claud Halcro and Triptolemus in The Pirate, by overhearing it from a scold in the Grassmarket.  But still the enlarged experience could not but be of the utmost value.  It was during these years that he saw Glamis Castle in its unspoiled state, during these that, in connection with the case of the unfortunate but rather happily named devotee of Bacchus and Venus, M’Naught, he explored Galloway, and obtained the decorations and scenery, if not the story, of Guy Mannering.  He also repeated his visits to the English side of the Border, not merely on the occasion during which he met Miss Carpenter, but earlier, in a second excursion to Northumberland.

But, above all, these were the years of his famous ‘raids’ into Liddesdale, then one of the most inaccessible districts of Scotland, under the guidance of Mr. Shortreed of Jedburgh ­raids which completed the information for Guy Mannering, which gave him much of the material for the Minstrelsy, and the history of which has, I think, delighted every one of his readers and biographers, except one or two who have been scandalised at the exquisite story of the Arrival of the Keg. Of these let us not speak, but, regarding them with a tender pity not unmixed with wonder, pass to the beginnings of his actual literary life and to the history of his early married years.  The literature a little preceded the life; but the life certainly determined the growth of the literature.