But short of it, it is undeniable that he can do perfectly well without any historical scaffolding.

There is practically nothing of it in his second and third novels, _Guy Mannering_ and _The Antiquary_, each of which good judges have sometimes ranked as his very best: there is as little or less in _St.Ronan's Well_, a very fine thing as it is, and one which, but for James Ballantyne's meddling folly and prudery, would have been much finer.

The incomparable little conversation--scenes and character-sketches scattered among the Introductions to the novels--especially the history of Crystal Croftangry--show that he could perfectly well have dispensed with all out-of-the-way incident had he chosen.

But, as a rule, he did not so choose: and, in the majority of cases, he preferred to take his out-of-the-way incident from historical sources.

Not here, unfortunately, can we allow ourselves even a space proportionate to that given above in Miss Austen's case to the criticism of individual novels: but luckily there is not much need of this.