xlvi INTRODUCTION

this edition. The sectarian bitterness was the principal fault he found with what he calls in one place “this wretched rant of a book.”¹ The intolerance and bigotry of occasional passages may justify Ruskin’s later strictures. It is, however, worth noting that the circumstances of the time may have afforded some reason, if not a justification, for his emphasis on such points. The architectural revival of the time was associated in the person of some of its leaders with High Ritualism, and Ruskin may on this account have deemed it desirable to emphasise strongly his Protestant standpoint.² The sense, above alluded to, that nothing had come of his book,-that modern progress had gone its way, regardless of his preachings³-was another feeling which made him lose interest in the essay. More material considerations may be added. Ruskin was not yet dependent upon his pen for his livelihood, nor were his works pushed by the publisher with as much energy as their subsequent history showed them to be capable of responding to. These circumstances, added to Ruskin’s distaste for mere revision, when he had so many new works in progress or in contemplation, sufficed to send The Seven Lamps out of print for nearly a quarter of a century. In beginning the republication of some of his books in 1871, Ruskin had some idea of reviving portions of the essay,⁴ but he did not carry it out: The Seven Lamps was not included in his “Works” as then prepared.

To Mr. George Allen is due the credit of bringing back The Seven Lamps of Architecture from the position of a scarce book into current literature. In 1878 Ruskin had purchased from Messrs. Smith, Elder and Co. all the interest in his plates; and those used for the second edition of Seven Lamps were found to be in excellent condition.⁵ The book continued to be much asked for, and in default of any re-issue in England the American pirated editions were largely imported. Mr. Allen pointed these facts out to Ruskin, assuring him at the same time that a new edition would financially be an assured success-a factor in the case which had now become of some importance. “We will talk over the new edition,” wrote Ruskin, “which I am really minded to do-now, for several reasons besides the not despicable £1500.” His mood towards the book and the task of revising it, varied, however, not a little, and the business of

¹ See p. 194.

² See in this connection some remarks in The Christian Observer’s review of the book (Oct. 1850, vol. 1. pp. 684-685).

³ See pp. 66, 106, 110, 117, 127, 128, 159, 194, 245.

⁴ Sesame and Lilies, preface of 1871, § 2.

⁵ “Steel,” writes Mr. Allen, “was good in those days, and did not want anything more done to it. These steels have stood wonderfully well, and up to the present time (September 1889) have not been retouched” (Note in Wise and Smart’s Bibliography, 1889, i. 15).

[Version 0.04: March 2008]