



Produced by Karl Hagen, Juliet Sutherland, Charles Franks
and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team









THE SPLENDID SPUR

Being Memoirs of The Adventures of Mr. John Marvel, A Servant of His
Late Majesty King Charles I., In The Years 1642-3: Written by Himself:
Edited in Modern English by Q (Arthur T. Quiller Couch)

By Arthur T. Quiller Couch

1897



[Illustration: "I loved thee so, boy Jack."]


TO

EDWARD GWYNNE EARDLEY-WILMOT.

_MY DEAR EDDIE,

Whatever view a story-teller may take of his business, 'tis happy when
he can think, "This book of mine will please such and such a friend,"
and may set that friend's name after the title page. For even if to
please (as some are beginning to hold) should be no part of his aim,
at least 'twill always be a reward: and (in unworthier moods) next to a
Writer I would choose to be a Lamplighter, as the only other that gets
so cordial a "God bless him!" in the long winter evenings.

To win such a welcome at such a time from a new friend or two would be
the happiest fortune for my tale. But to you I could wish it to speak
particularly, seeing that under the coat of_ JACK MARVEL _beats the
heart of your friend_

Q.

_Torquay, August 22d_, 1889.





INTRODUCTORY NOTE.

"Q."

A year or two ago it was observed that three writers were using the
curiously popular signature "Q." This was hardly less confusing than
that one writer should use three signatures (Grant Allen, Arbuthnot
Wilson, and Anon), but as none of the three was willing to try another
letter, they had to leave it to the public (whose decision in such
matters is final) to say who is Q to it. The public said, Let him wear
this proud letter who can win it, and for the present at least it is
in the possession of the author of "The Splendid Spur" and "The Blue
Pavilions." It would seem, too, as if it were his "to keep," for "Q" is
like the competition cups that are only yours for a season, unless you
manage to carry them three times in succession. Mr. Quiller-Couch has
been champion Q since 1890.

The interesting question is not so much, What has he done to be the only
prominent Q of these years, as Is he to be the Q of all time? If so, he
will do better work than he has yet done, though several of his latest
sketches--and one in particular--are of very uncommon merit. Mr.
Quiller-Couch is so unlike Mr. Kipling that one immediately wants to
compare them. They are both young, and they have both shown such promise
that it will be almost sad if neither can write a book to live--as,
of course, neither has done as yet. Mr. Kipling is the more audacious,
which is probably a matter of training. He was brought up in India,
where one's beard grows much quicker than at Oxford, and where you not
only become a man (and a cynic) in a hurry, but see and hear strange
things (and print them) such as the youth of Oxford miss, or, becoming
acquainted with, would not dare insert in the local magazine of the
moment. So Mr. Kipling's first work betokened a knowledge of the world
that is by no means to be found in "Dead Man's Rock," the first book
published by Mr. Quiller-Couch. On the other hand, it cannot truly be
said that Mr. Kipling's latest work is stronger than his first, while
the other writer's growth is the most remarkable thing about him. It
is precisely the same Mr. Kipling who is now in the magazines that was
writing some years ago in India (and a rare good Mr. Kipling too), but
the Mr. Quiller-Couch of to-day is the Quiller-Couch of "Dead Man's
Rock" grown out of recognition. To compare their styles is really to
compare the men. Mr. Kipling's is the more startling, the stronger (as