"The Atlas" ran a review which stated, "It is long since such a work as this has been produced – the author exhibits ability of no ordinary kind." In terms of classification and judgment, Leo Mason, in 1939, claimed that ""Rookwood", "Jack Sheppard", and "Crichton" [...] are historical romances and must take their chances as such." Keith Hollingsworth, in his 1963 analysis of the Newgate novels, declared, ""Rookwood" is a story by Mrs. Radcliffe transplanted [...] ' Substituting' is the accurate word for Ainsworth's process. There is probably no single item of originality in all the profession of Gothic elements." In 1972, George Worth argued for the importance of the gothic elements in "Rookwood": "There is no better representative of the Gothic strain in Ainsworth's work than "Rookwood" [...] which begins with shudders that do not often abate as the novel continues. David Punter, in 1996, as focused on the novel as part of the gothic genre when he argued that "Rookwood" and "Jack Sheppard" "are important only as another link in the uneven chain which leads from Godwin, via Lytton, onto Reynolds and Dickens, and which thus produces a form of Gothic connected with the proletarian and the contemporary." In 2003, Stephen Carver argued, ""Rookwood" was one of the most successful novels of the nineteenth century. The fact that it has now been largely forgotten is in part an indication of the dynamic nature of literary production during this period, the star of 1834–5, Ainsworth, being rapidly eclipsed by Dickens in 1836." He continued by pointing out, "Stylistically, "Rookwood" is a wonderful enthusiastic amalgam: blending gothic with Newgate, historical romance with underworld anti-heroes, 'flash' dialogue and song, all luridly illustrated by George Cruikshank. This was what made "Rookwood" such a novelty in 1838 although, in many ways, the parts could be said to be greater than the whole."