Founded in 1809 by John Murray of the powerful publishing house of the same name, as a Tory rival to the Whig periodical The Edinburgh Review, the Quarterly Review was distinguished through association with Sir Walter Scott, among others. Many readers felt the tone of The Edinburgh Review had grown too pompous, ignoring good taste and offending readers in its articles on national affairs. Thus, the conservative Quarterly Review debuted with much support and fanfare. While clearly Tory in nature, it inherited a devotion to literature and the arts from publications such as The European during its last decade of print, which critically proclaimed that the new Quarterly Review advocated “every antiquated system of government.”

Murray received a letter declaring that The Edinburgh Review had lost its “proper character and usefulness,” spurring him to found a competitor. Centuries later, despite criticism against its contents, the critical work produced by the Quarterly Review stood the test of time in terms of its quality. However, in its early years, it gained a reputation for heaping unmerited criticism on some artists in an attempt to counter Whig opinion. One of its nastiest reviews focused on the poet John Keats’s famous work, Endymion, in 1818, and supposedly contributed to his early death.

Scott himself had been an important reviewer for The Edinburgh Review until he also became disgusted with it. Taking interest in the rival venture, he helped develop the focus of Quarterly Review, which would carry work by him, Robert Southey, Samuel Rogers, Prime Minister Gladstone, William Makepeace Thackeray, and Edward Bulwer-Lytton. Scott’s letters indicate he was the single most important force during the periodical’s first years. Until he felt confident that the new venture would succeed, he proved its leading editorial spirit.

The first public praise of Jane Austen, in a review of her novel Emma (1814) by Scott, appeared in Quarterly Review, as did Scott’s review of his own works, Tales of My Landlord. The periodical had a long chain of general editors, some of whom decreased its emphasis on literary criticism. By 1895, when editor Arthur R. D. Elliot took over the editorship, its once high standings had diminished. It regained them again and became one of the longest-published quality periodicals, contributing significantly to the development of literary criticism. With its rival The Edinburgh Review, it dominated 19th-century letters and continued to be read through 1967.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Graham, Walter. English Literary Periodicals. New York: Octagon Books, 1966.

Categories: British Literature, Literature

Tags: 1809, 19th-century letters, antiquated government systems, Arthur R. D. Elliot, criticism of national affairs, Edinburgh Review, Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Emma, Endymion, English literary criticism, English literary history, English periodicals, European publication, Jane Austen, John Keats, John Murray, Literary Criticism, literary history, literary periodicals, literature and arts, periodical reviews, poet reviews, Quarterly Review, Robert Southey, Samuel Rogers, Scott's editorial influence, Sir Walter Scott, Tory rival, Victorian Periodicals, William Makepeace Thackeray