T H E LI F E A N D WRI T I N G S OF A LE X A N D RE DUM AS T H E LI FE A N D W R IT I N G S A LE XA N D RE DUM A S ( 1 802 4 870) RR H A RRY A . S PU “ " OR F A cocxmzv m A RCAD A ET C. A UT H O I , WITH MKN‘ Y ILLUSTRATION S N E W Y ORK RE DE CK A STOK E S COM P NY F RI . , A P UBLISH E R S T E O COM E O F M A N Y YE A RS OF LOV I N G I S R E SPE CT F U LLY D E DICATE D V GRA T E FU L R EC OGN IT ION O F H ’ " SY M PA I H Y A N D H E LP. P R E F A C E T H E centenary of the birth of Alexandre D umas ‘ ere fi occurred in J uly of this year. As no satis factory “ Life of the great Frenchman exists in English , this was thought an appropriate moment for giving the public, with whom his romances are so ’ D u mas s p opular , an account of life , character, and u writings , which sho ld be both interesting to the r r o dinary reader , and trustwo thy as a book of r reference . The autho has endeavoured to tell the general reader the man in the public library D u w who mas was , hat he did , which books he did w w w write and hich he did not rite , and finally , hat ‘ c n reres his o f and the great critics have said of him . t wo One or points may be dealt with here , by way of anticipating obvious criticism . The first relates to the omission from the following pages of M a s M M . C the spiteful libels of de irecourt , de s a nac . g , etc I t is almost impossible at this date for any one , particularly an Englishman , to take the circumstantial allegations of these gentlemen and It refute them in detail . is now over sixty years since they were made : they had their sou rce in y admitted enmity , and their medium was equall vii viii PR E FACE contemptible . Dumas ignored them his colleagues in the higher ranks of literature discredited them ; w his enemies accepted them illingly, without de M " M . manding proof. de irecourt was sentenced to imprisonment for publishing his statements ; but their improbability is still stronger proof of their ' “ W Du mas s falseness . hen collaborators denied “ ” “ M . the allegations made on their behalf, de M irecourt ” impudently accused them of having allowed Dumas to dictate their denials ; when he “ ' D a proved mas s illiteracy , by an anecdote in M M . which he cited aquet in support, that gentle man promptly gave the libeller the lie ! We make no apology for dwelling on this point , M for the charges of this . J acquot have been u ér accepted almost universally as the truth . O ard ‘cites the gentleman with obvious complacency ; Larousse in his Dictionnaire quotes him con ’ stantl M r z y, and Fit gerald condemns the man s testimony almost as often as he makes use of it ’ ’ M r Henley s article in Cha mbers s Encyclopae dia is probably the only biographical account of Dumas which is trustworthy . That in the ninth edition of a M r z the Encyclop edia Britannica is by Fit gerald . “ Of M . u é rard S e Q , who in his uperch ries proves to his own satisfaction that with one or two i nsig nificant exceptions Dumas never wrote anything at all , it is sufficient to point out that he considered PREFA CE that author as merely “ a clever arranger of the ” thoughts of others . When a ne w edition of the “ e ‘ M ez oses . Superch ries was i ssued , the fi of u érard ( 8 8 w Q , which stopped at 4 , ere not con tinu e d , and the editors formally expressed their regret that the great writer had received such treat ment from the critic . They further hinted that only a determination to use the material of the fi rst edition of the work i n its entirety prevented them M ’ u r rd s . from dealing with . O é a accusations W e have referred to M r Fitz gerald H is Life and Adventures of Alexander Dumas was written ’ shortly after the novelist s death , is now forgotten , u s and is probably out of print . This relieves from the necessity of saying more than that M r Lang “ " M r M in his Essays in Little , Brander atthews “ M r W . in his French Novelists , . H Pollock in ' t /z r N zne eenZ Centu M r . W in the y, A . B alkley “ ” Playhouse I mpressions , and others , have all con de mne d the book as being inaccurate and u nworthy of the subject and the writer . A great change has taken place in the literary estimation of Dumas d u ring the past thirty years ; and it is o ur aim to convey this desirable revolution in Opinion to the mind of the ordinary reader . C onsistent with the declaration made above , we have ignored the charges brought against Dumas with reference to his attitude toward Louis Philippe x PR E FACE The ex-employee of the D uke of Orleans is accused of having alternately abused and fawned upon that W e dignitary when he became king. p refer to take the responsibility of suppressing the allegations ’ respecting this episode in D u mas s career as utterly at variance with his practice and his nature . W e Another omission requires explanation . D have dealt with the plays of umas , so far as they I f . af ected his career, in Part ; we have touched on them in general terms in other portions of the book ; but have refrained from dealing with them at all extensively . The general reader of the ’ English - speaking p ublic does not know D u mas s plays, and has had no opportunity of seeing them or of reading them , therefore one cannot hope to interest him in them and at the risk of throwing the subject out of its proper proportion we have omitted to treat the m fully . To those who do w ca n kno and appreciate him as a dramatist , we “ ' A r D r d . D a M . ecommend Le ame um s by H . Cal mann- e Parigot , published by L vy . There is a general confusion in books of reference ’ concerni ng the year of D u mas s birth . As Gl ine l w u sho s , by reprod cing the certificate of birth , the rn 2 author wa s bo in 1 8 0 . The author has tried to make his book as accurate f as possible , but the task has been di ficult , as no D impartial and complete biography of umas exists , PR E FA CE even in French . H e will therefore be grateful to a n y critic , friendly or otherwise, who will point out any errors of fact in the text . — N ol a M y thanks are due to M adame Dumas ’ /s M . D H au te rive fi for her kind assistance ; to , her - in - M r M r son law, for similar kindness ; to Lang, \V R M . M r . ossetti and Swinburne for courteous replies to inquiries ; to M r Robert Garnett for M M Calmann - e valuable advice and help ; to . L vy M r M . D for information given ; to F . uncan for his photographs of illustrations in the British M useum M R Library ; and to . E . och , secretary of the -C C e Villers otterets entenary F tes Committee . C O N T E N T S rA cz PRE FACE LIST or I LLUST RAl' l-ON S PART I . H IS LIF E A N D CH A RACT ER H D E B IRT , M AI N HOO A N D A R I A S U sssas 1802 T H E REI GN or D' UM'A S I ' W A N D E R IN GS. D E CLIN I: A ND D EATH PART II. H IS GEN IUS xiv CO NTE N TS A PPE N D ICE S. A H ISTORY AN D ICT I N A COM PA R I SON . F O : ’ B. CH RONOLOGY OF DU M A S S LI F E ’ C. TABULA R A N ALY SI S OF D UM A S S W R IT I N GS D . LIST OF BOOK S CON SU LT E D IN DEX P A RT I — BIRTH M AN H OOD A N D E A R LY SUCCE SSE S ( 1 802 -3O) T HE R E IGN - - OF D UMA S I . 1 : A N E ND ( 830 48) W N DE R IN GS, D ECLI A DEATH I 8 3é 0 —CH RA TER ( 4 7 ) A, C F \ \ N II N - RO M B I RT H TO l I . OOD A D F A M E ( 1 80 2 3 0 ) I F D f , like efoe , we were about to of er fiction in the guise of biography , instead of biography in a more u re or less romantic form , we sho ld be tempted to p face the story o f D u mas with o ne of those elaborate su b -titles in which the author of Robinson C ru s oe w w delighted .