seem an integral portion of the original mechanism of all our ancient
ballads . . . " By selecting the most beautiful and striking
passages from each copy, and making those cohere, an editor, he says,
may produce a more perfect and ornate version than any that exists in
tradition. Of the originals "the individuality entirely disappears."

Motherwell disapproved of this method, which, as a rule, is Scott's,
and, scientifically, the method is not defensible. Thus, having
three ballads of rescues, in similar circumstances, with a river to
ford, Scott confessedly places that incident where he thinks it most
"poetically appropriate"; and in all probability, by a single touch,
he gives poetry in place of rough humour. Of all this Motherwell
disapproved. (See Kinmont Willie, infra.)

Aytoun, in The Ballads of Scotland, thought Motherwell hypercritical;
and also, in his practice inconsistent with his preaching. Aytoun
observed, "with much regret and not a little indignation" (1859),
"that later editors insinuated a doubt as to the fidelity of Sir
Walter's rendering. My firm belief, resting on documentary evidence,
is that Scott was most scrupulous in adhering to the very letter of
his transcripts, whenever copies of ballads, previously taken down,
were submitted to him." As an example, Aytoun, using a now lost MS.
copy of about 1689-1702, of The Outlaw Murray, says "Sir Walter has
given it throughout just as he received it." Yet Scott's copy,
mainly from a lost Cockburn MS., contains a humorous passage on
Buccleuch which Child half suspects to be by Sir Walter himself.
{15a} It is impossible for me to know whether Child's hesitating
conjecture is right or wrong. Certainly we shall see, when Scott had
but one MS. copy, as of Auld Maitland, his editing left little or
nothing to be desired.