“Boto was used on similar grounds, and as it is recognised by the Voc. della, Crusca, I think I may venture to keep it, having a weakness for those indications of the processes by which language is modified.

[Boto for voto is a Florentinism which may be heard to the present day, though the vast majority of strangers would never hear it, or understand it if they did.  George Eliot no doubt met with it in some of those old chroniclers who wrote exactly as not only the lower orders, but the generality of their fellow citizens, were speaking around them.  And her use of it testifies to the minuteness of her care to reproduce the form and pressure of the time of which she was writing.]

“Once more thank you, though my gratitude is in danger of looking too much like a lively sense of anticipated favours, for I mean to ask you to take other trouble yet.

“Yours very truly,

“MARION E. LEWES.”

* * * * *

The following letter, written from Blandford Square on the 5th July, 1861, is, as regards the first three pages, from him, and the last from her.

* * * * *

“MY DEAR TROLLOPE,—­We have now read La Beata [my first novel], and must tell you how charmed we have been with it. Nina herself is perfectly exquisite and individual, and her story is full of poetry and pathos.  Also one feels a breath from the Val d’Arno rustling amid the pages, and a sense of Florentine life, such as one rarely gets out of books.  The critical objection I should make to it, apart from minor points, is that often you spoil the artistic attitude by adopting a critical antagonistic attitude, by which I mean that instead of painting the thing objectively, you present it critically, with an eye to the opinions likely to be formed by certain readers; thus, instead of relying on the simple presentation of the fact of Nina’s innocence you call up the objection you desire to anticipate by side glances at the worldly and ‘knowing’ reader’s opinions.  In a word I feel as if you were not engrossed by your subject, but were sufficiently aloof from it to contemplate it as a spectator, which is an error in art.  Many of the remarks are delicately felt and finely written.  The whole book comes from a noble nature, and so it impresses the reader.  But I may tell you what Mrs. Carlyle said last night, which will in some sense corroborate what I have said.  In her opinion you would have done better to make two books of it, one the love story, and one a description of Florentine life.  She admires the book very much I should add.  Now, although I cannot by any means agree with that criticism of hers, I fancy the origin of it was some such feeling, as I have endeavoured to indicate in saying you are often critical when you should be simply objective.

“We had a pleasant journey home over the St. Gothard, and found our boy very well and happy at Hofwyl, and our bigger boy ditto awaiting us here.  Polly is very well, and as you may imagine talks daily of Florence and our delightful trip, our closer acquaintance with you and yours being among the most delightful of our reminiscences.