I find letters from Lang imploring me not to kill Allan Quatermain。 But when he wrote Allan had already been killed； and how could the end of the story be altered？ Besides his day was done and his tale told。 But he left others behind him。
Before finally leaving the subject of “Cleopatra” I will quote a couple of letters that I received from W。 E。 Henley。 I should here mention that I was well acquainted with this able and interesting man； some of whose poems will； I think； survive in our literature。
I remember once driving to the British Museum with him and Lang； or it may have been Gosse； or both of them； in a four…wheeled cab； to see some Japanese prints that were on show。 On the way I told him that personally I admired statuary； and especially Greek statuary； much more than I did pictorial art。 He was greatly astonished。
“I think it wonderful；” he said； “that you being what you are； and your work what it is； you should prefer form to colour。”
It seemed curious to him that a man who wrote romances should have other sides to his nature。 He was extremely fond of war and fighting； witness his Ode to the Sword； and at the club would insist upon my telling him stories by the yard about the Zulus and their blood…thirsty battles and customs。 With it all he was very domestic； and much attached to his “placens uxor” and the little girl whom； most unhappily； he lost。 The last note I ever received from him； written some years after our acquaintance had practically ceased； was on this sad subject。
The first of the three letters which I am going to quote is not on the subject of “Cleopatra” but in answer to one of mine expressing my admiration of his volume of verses。 As it is； however； the earliest in date it shall have preference。
June 9； 1888。
My dear Haggard； — I found yours at the Club last night。 I do care for your approbation very much； for I do not think I should have it if my verses hadn’t a kind of basis of life。
Lang hates ’em； I believe； and I shall tell him of your note with pride and glee。
For myself I prefer the “Life and Death” lot。 But the In Hospital sets forth a special experience and is； of course； of particular interest。
Always yours sincerely；
W。 E。 H。
The next letter is written from 11 Howard Place； Edinburgh； July 20； 1889。
My dear Haggard； — I got a week at Windermere and took “Cleopatra” with me。 I was alone； and I found her very good pany。
You were terribly handicapped by the inevitable parison； but you came off better （to be frank） than I’d expected you would。 The invention throughout is admirable — is good enough； indeed； to carry off the archaeology and the archaical style； though they are both large orders。
And in Charmion you have given us； I think； your best creation； or if not that； a creation fit to rank with Umslopogaas and the King in “Solomon’s Mines。” And you know that I mean a good deal when I say that。
I am glad to have read the book； and glad to have it by me to read again。 It has plenty of faults； but it has an abundance of promise and some excellent — some really excellent — achievement。 There is never a sign of exhaustion； but on the contrary no end of proof that you have scarce got into your stride。
Always yours；
W。 E。 H。
The third letter is evidently in answer to one of mine。 It is headed： The Scots Observer： A Record and Review； 2 Thistle Street； Edinburgh； July 26； 1889：
My dear Haggard； — It is pleasant to know that I have paid a very little of my debt。 I think the Romance and Fame in the current S。O。 will not displease you。 The writer is a strange； old； brilliant creature whom I have found here； and whose opinion is worth having。 Meanwhile； you may put down the attacks partly to envy （for you can’t deny that you’ve had a dam good innings） and partly to the inevitable reaction — for I don’t know that your admirers have praised you in quite the right way。 And you need bother yourself no more about them。 Why should you？ You are bound to win； and you need not care three straws for anything they say。 You need only do your best； and leave the rest to time。
That I believe to be the right philosophy of things。 And so farewell。
Ever yours；
W。 E。 H。
Archer has just writ the loveliest review of my second edition； and the P。M。G。； after accepting and printing； declines to publish！ So you see ——！
After “Cleopatra” was finished I undertook various things。 One was a tale called “Nesta Amor；” which was never published； although I finished it。 Indeed I agree with Lang that it was not worth publishing in its existing form； though it might have been； perhaps； if rewritten； which I have never found time to do。 Another was a romance of Helen； to be written jointly with Lang； which； after many vicissitudes and adventures； ultimately materialised as “The World’s Desire。” Also I conceived the idea of writing a saga； but determined that before I attempted this； I would visit Iceland and study the local colouring on the spot。
I remember that I was a good deal sneered at for my habit of actually investigating the countries where the events had happened about which I intended to write。 Literature； I was told； should be independent of such base actualities。 I do not at all agree with those critics。 If a man wishes to produce a really good romance dealing with some past epoch； the best thing he can do is to see the land in which the folk lived of whom he means to tell； and； as it were； to soak himself in the surroundings that were their surroundings。 So he may hope to catch some of the atmosphere which doubtless they took from their native earth and skies。 Then； if he possesses any； imagination may do the rest。 Who could write a saga who had not visited Iceland； or an Egyptian novel who did not know Egypt — I mean one worth reading？
Also I wrote a very successful little African story called “Maiwa’s Revenge” and my novel “Beatrice；” which I think one of the best bits of work I ever did。 Here is Charles Longman on “Beatrice；” no doubt after he had read the MS。 His letters are dated August 2 and August 4； 1888。
I was very much interested in “Beatrice。” It is of course a terrible tragedy — unrelieved in its gloom which increases from start to finish。 Still there is no denying its power 。 。 。 。
From the letter of August 4th：
I think； too； that “Beatrice” is your best piece of purely modern； nieenth century work。 I believe I like you best among the caves of old Kor； or looking back over King Solomon’s great road to the old civilisations dead two thousand years ago。 But it is a great thing to have several strings and not always harp on the same。 And there is the same feeling in all your books — that of a power or Fate or whatever it is behind man controlling his actions and driving him blindly forward。 All ages have felt it and have tried to explain it in their own way。 But what the facts may be — we may know some day。 。 。 。
We are thinking of beginning to set the type of “Quaritch； V。C。” on Sept。 1st。 You will give us your finally corrected sheets； I suppose。 We have sold 20；000 copies of “Maiwa” on day of publication。
But of “Beatrice” more later； let us return to “The World’s Desire；” “The Song of the Bow” as it was called at first。
Roughly the history of this tale； which I like as well as any with which I have had to do； is that Lang and I discussed it。 Then I wrote a part of it； which part he altered or rewrote。 Next in his casual manner he lost the whole MS。 for a year or so； then it was unexpectedly found； and encouraged thereby I went on and wrote the rest。
The MS。 in its final form I have； bound up； and with it a very interesting preface or rather postscript by Lang which was never published； eight sheets long； also notes of his as to the scheme of the story and the originals of his verses； some of which I drafted in prose。 The MS。 contains fifty…three sheets at the beginning written or re…written by Lang； and about 130 sheets in my writing； together with various addenda。 The best history of the thing is to extracted from Lang’s letters； from which I make some quotations。
The first of these that I can find is dated from an hotel in Paris on March 8th； probably 1888。
It occurs to me that you had better read the Helen of Euripides in a prose crib。 There’s a bad one。 I have forgotten the play； all but half a dozen lines； but it is about Helen in Egypt and may suggest something。 The name “The Wanderer” is already taken by one of Lord Lytton’s poems。 I had thought of “A Priestess of Isis。”
The next is from Florence on March 25th：
Just had your letter on the Jews。 Do you think it worth while； if it won’t run easily？ You have so much on hand； and I am afraid you will tire out your invention。 The idea of Odysseus and Helen is a good one； but don’t thrash a willing and perhaps weary Pegasus。
Then es one from Marloes Road — he is back again in England now — without the slightest indication of a date。
Odysseus calls himself Eperitus； as a by…name； in Od。 24。 Or Laertiades。
Helen should be a priestess in Egypt； say of Pasht。
You won’t want much help from me。 All the local colour is in the Odyssey。
After this I believe that I worked away at the story； of which I did a good deal； and sent it to Lang； who promptly lost it s