ABSTRACT
SO O N E R or later, in any attempt to come to terms with Scott, the question arises whether his 'romanticism' is real and deep or only a superficial wash of colour laid over a structure of thought and feeling which is firmly neo-classical. Patrick Cruttwell has lately decided confidently for the second alternative, but I think he is mistaken. It is worthwhile opening the question afresh, from the point of view of the historiographer, not the literary historian.
