A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides

by Samuel Johnson, James Boswell, Peter Levi (Editor)

Samuel Johnson's A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and James Boswell's The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides recounts their tour of Scotland in 1773. While Johnson focuses on Scotland itself, Boswell is even keener on presenting his friend to the notables of his homeland. Together they form a complete account of a fascinating journey, two intriguing personalities, and of a society coming to terms with itself after a period of drastic upheaval.

Genres: Travel, Nonfiction, History, Scotland, Classics, Biography, 18th Century

430 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1775

About the author

People note British writer and lexicographer Samuel Johnson, known as "Doctor Johnson," for his Dictionary of the English Language (1755), for Lives of the Poets (1781), and for his series of essays, published under the titles The Rambler (1752) and The Idler (1758).

Samuel Johnson used the first consistent Universal Etymological English Dictionary , first published in 1721, of British lexicographer Nathan Bailey as a reference.

Beginning as a journalist on Grub street, this English author made lasting contributions to English literature as a poet, essayist, moralist, novelist, literary critic, biographer, and editor. People described Johnson as "arguably the most distinguished man of letters in English history." James Boswell subjected him to Life of Samuel Johnson , one of the most celebrated biographies in English. This biography alongside other biographies, documented behavior and mannerisms of Johnson in such detail that they informed the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome (TS), a condition unknown to 18th-century physicians. He presented a tall and robust figure, but his odd gestures and tics confused some persons on their first encounters.

Johnson attended Pembroke college, Oxford for a year before his lack of funds compelled him to leave. After working as a teacher, he moved to London, where he began to write essays for The Gentleman's Magazine. His early works include the biography The Life of Richard Savage and the poem " The Vanity of Human Wishes ." Christian morality permeated works of Johnson, a devout and compassionate man. He, a conservative Anglican, nevertheless respected persons of other denominations that demonstrated a commitment to teachings of Christ.

After nine years of work, people in 1755 published his preeminent Dictionary of the English Language, bringing him popularity and success until the completion of the Oxford English Dictionary in 1905, a century and a half later. In the following years, he published essays, an influential annotated edition of plays of William Shakespeare, and the well-read novel Rasselas . In 1763, he befriended James Boswell, with whom he later travelled to Scotland; A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland , travel narrative of Johnson, described the journey. Towards the end of his life, he produced the massive and influential Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets , which includes biographies and evaluations of 17th- and 18th-century poets.

After a series of illnesses, Johnson died on the evening; people buried his body in Westminster abbey. In the years following death, people began to recognize a lasting effect of Samuel Johnson on literary criticism even as the only great critic of English literature.

Reviews

[Janet Roger · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s a trip through wild, wild country without roads or inns, on horseback, on foot or under sail, where his bed for the night is sometimes a castle, though more often it’s barn straw.

It has a wonderfully alive, first-person narrative, written with quill and candle from the years just before American Independence, and staggering when you consider that Johnson was a man already in his sixties, who ordinarily didn’t leave London.

You may enjoy my other reviews:
Walter Thornbury: Old and New London Vol 1 https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Thomas Frost: The Old Showmen, and the Old London Fairs https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Jason Koivu · Rating 3 out of 5]

Two buds go for a romp in the Highlands of Scotland.

In A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland... we get a glimpse of the bromance between dictionary man Samuel Johnson and lawyer James Boswell as they hike through the hills and lochs down to the isles along the west coast. Boswell, a Scot, plays host to Johnson, showing him the sights, which are nicely described, as well as introducing him to some of the more colorful characters of the area.

This is fairly light reading with a touch of airy philosophizing now and then. Johnson's sometimes jovial, sometimes truculent nature comes in for some good-natured ribbing. He was a larger-than-life character with some strong opinions. It's great to get this candid look at the man, someone who I've been intrigued with since I saw him played by Robbie Coltrane in the Brit comedy Black Adder. Whenever he's portrayed, it's as a blustery big man with even bigger, louder ideas. He's a liver of life, and since so much of his life was spent working with words, a bookworm like myself can't help but love him.

[Roy Lotz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sir, it is surprising how people will go to a distance for what they may have at home.

In 1773, Samuel Johnson and James Boswell set out to explore the Highlands and islands of Scotland. Johnson was already past sixty (old in those days), one of the stars in the firmament of English letters. Boswell was, by comparison, a nobody—primarily distinguished for his ability to flatter his way into befriending famous people. A Scot himself, Boswell had for years been imploring his friend and idol (who was prone to bashing Scotland and all its inhabitants) to visit his home. Johnson, who had traveled very little, spending most of his life in London, finally gave in and accompanied Boswell (thirty years his junior) on this adventure.

So it was that two great authors traveled up and down Scotland for the better part of three months; and both of them produced a book to document the journey. Johnson’s was written and published first. It is briefer and more conventional, documenting the places visited, facts learned, people met, and so on. Boswell’s book, meanwhile—which was published much later, after Johnson’s death—virtually ignores Scotland, focusing the vast majority of its attention on Johnson himself. As such, it was a kind of practice run for his monumental Life of Samuel Johnson, which would be published some years later.

Both books, taken separately, leave a lot to be desired. Johnson’s book is written in his characteristic ringing, sententious prose, alternately enlightening, deadening, insightful, and simply bigoted. A greatly intelligent and learned man, he was also very prone to issue judgments upon things about which he knew little. Boswell’s, meanwhile, is full of just what Johnson lacks: human interest. Whereas Johnson rarely deigns to mention his travel companions, the great curmudgeon comes alive in Boswell’s account, much enlivening the reading. Yet Boswell was, by comparison, a sloppy and inelegant writer; and his enormous admiration for Johnson, when it is not charming, can be tiring.

Lucky for us, the weaknesses of both books are almost perfectly compensated by one another. And, taken together, they form a truly great travel book. (Indeed, an enterprising editor could profitably combine the books, putting the accounts of the same days together, so that Johnson and Boswell alternate.) Both the places and the travelers are interesting. In those days, the north of Scotland was still a remote, sparsely populated, and (arguably) a backward place, with customs and even a language alien to the travelers. For Johnson, it must have been like walking on the moon. And, of course, Johnson himself is one of the great characters in literature, and Boswell was brilliant at painting his portrait. This is, in short, a fascinating book in many respects.

[Smiley · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

I think reading these two journals is a bit different since the first one by Dr Johnson (117 pages) is focused on various cities/towns while the second by Boswell (349 pages) on successive dates along the route. I longed to read both some years ago and when I finished reading them, my verdict is that the one by Boswell is more readable because he's included lots of related details with interesting direct quotes by Dr Johnson and those he/Boswell met. However, you won't be disappointed if you prefer the descriptions narrated by one of the great men of letters/lexicographers in the English language.

I also think there're definitely innumerable Johnsonian/Boswellian scholars worldwide who can cite many insightful dialogues with fascinating interpretations, therefore, I'd be content with my ideas emerging while reading these two formidable, unique journals for my friends who care to read and, hopefully, share their appreciation with me.

1. I think these journals are formidable and unique because they're the accounts narrated from direct experience while traveling together through Scotland in 1773. They were not ordinary friends but fortune dictated Boswell to meet and befriend Dr Johnson one morning in 1763 in London; moreover, they're not in their 30's, 40's or 50's, just imagine, their ages were unthinkably different. Dr Johnson was 63 but Boswell 32; they were rather like a father and a son.

2. Boswell revered Dr Johnson sincerely and since he often addressed him in his journal as his 'great', 'illustrious' friend. I think, finally, Boswell become Dr Johnson's great friend himself when he decided to write his monumental "Life of Johnson," the groundbreaking biography for the world to read, admire and know Dr Johnson more.

3. Latin then was the language of Western scholars, and now? I think both Latin and Greek have long been instrumental in deepening true knowledge among scholars since the ancient times of Rome and Greece. We can come across Latin as quoted by Dr Johnson and Boswell, of course, it's Greek to me, therefore, it's a relief when I can read its English translation in the Notes section.

In brief, you may find these two journals interesting if you don't mind English as written to record their itineraries in 1773, that is, some 246 years ago (as of 1773 till now).

[J.C. · Rating 5 out of 5]

It’s taken me longer to re-read these two accounts than it took Johnson and Boswell to complete their whole tour in 1773! There are lots of classical, literary and contemporary references to follow up if you have the time and inclination, particularly in Boswell’s journal, which is more concerned with portraying Johnson himself and how people regard him than in documenting their journey and what they discovered. It is Johnson who does the wider social observation, commenting on all aspects of the Highlands and Islands following their subjection after Culloden, especially with regard to the management of the land by the clan chiefs and the high level of rents that was contributing at the time to emigration. Peter Levi in his introduction mentions that this was the very year in which the first emigrant ship left Fort William (my home town, as it happens) with 425 Highlanders. Johnson perceived such depopulation, which led to the infamous forced clearances, as utterly disastrous for the future of the Highlands & Islands. I’m not quite clear about the balance in Johnson of human compassion alongside a rational and intelligent approach to the betterment of an impoverished population, but the subject forms such an important part of his account that something more than an impassioned eye must have directed his denunciation of what was soon to become a national tragedy, still mourned today. One of many quotations from him on this subject is: “a rapacious chief would make a wilderness of his estate” and he agreed with Boswell that “in France (for instance), a chief would not be permitted to force a number of the king’s subjects out of the country” – although it must be said that under France’s Ancien Régime, the populace was subjected to an oppression entirely surpassing any Johnson found in the Highlands!
Peter Levi has this in the introduction:
“Johnson’s Toryism . . . was a refusal of the ugly modern forces that increased their strength throughout his lifetime; corruption, exploitation and powerful cruelty that he felt would once have been inadmissible. He was committedly on the side of American Indians, Negro slaves, the British poor, and every other underdog he knew. It is important to realise that these attitudes could go together with the most progressive analysis of human society. There is a crucial sense in which Johnson belongs outside an English context, to the European Enlightenment.”
Both books reveal much of Samuel Johnson, one of England’s ‘greats’ little known to me, but it was the lesser character, Boswell, that drew me to re-read this, as he has played a part in a book I read recently, called “Fled” (thanks again for the recommendation, Beata, I’ve passed it on to several people). Boswell cheerfully admits he is a bit of a sycophant, and justifies it admirably, even taking a joke against himself in that regard with grace and humour. I can’t find it now but it was something about he and Johnson expecting to be in the same company as a monarch, who, somebody said, would not speak to them, and somebody else remarked that in any case Boswell would most certainly speak to him!
Both men were pious, and there is much discussion on the different ways of worship between the Anglican and Scottish churches, in particular whether prayer should be liturgical, as in the Anglican Church, or extemporary, as in Scottish Presbyterianism. The climax of the their trip was a visit to the Holy Isle of Iona. Boswell, with his usual vivacity and extravagance, throws himself into a romantic declaration of fealty (mostly, I think, to Clan MacLean, whom he had just represented in a legal case against the rapacious Campbells), while Johnson pronounces a solemn statement, making me think of Wordsworth’s “Upon Westminster Bridge” a century later – “Dull would he be of soul . . .”.
Here’s Johnson on Iona:
“We are now treading that illustrious island, which was once the luminary of the Caledonian regions, when savage clans and roving barbarians derived the benefits of knowledge, and the blessings of religion. To abstract the mind from all local emotion would be impossible, if it were endeavoured, and would be foolish if it were possible. Whatever withdraws us from the power of our senses, whatever makes the past, the distant, or the future, predominate over the present, advances us in the dignity of thinking beings. Far from me, and from my friends, be such frigid philosophy as may conduct us indifferent and unmoved over any ground which has been dignified by wisdom, bravery or virtue. That man is little to be envied, whose patriotism would not gain force upon the plain of Marathon, or whose piety would not grow warmer among the ruins of Iona!”
Boswell notes that the “respectable” President of the Royal Society was “so much struck on reading this passage that he clasped his hands together, and remained for some time in attitude of silent admiration.”
Such quotes make this a long review, but let me just choose a few more highlights. One was definitely to have an account, reported by Boswell from the lady herself, of Flora MacDonald’s adventure when she helped Bonnie Prince Charlie escape pursuit after Culloden. She dressed him up as her maid. Boswell delights in the story:
“Upon the road was a small rivulet which they were obliged to cross. The Wanderer, forgetting his assumed sex, that his clothes might not be wet, held them up a great deal too high . . . He was very awkward in his female dress. His size was so large, and his strides so great, that some women whom they met reported that they had seen a very big woman, who looked like a man in woman’s clothes, and that perhaps it was (as they expressed themselves) the Prince, after whom so much search was making.”
I must admit I always thought this was a bit of a risky plan! They were lucky to have got away with it. Boswell’s reporting of the story is lengthy and detailed, but here is all that Samuel Johnson writes of it:
“We were entertained with the usual hospitality by Mr MacDonald and his lady, Flora MacDonald, a name that will be mentioned in history, and if courage and fidelity be virtues, mentioned with honour. She is a woman of middle stature, soft features, gentle manners and elegant presence.”

As they reached the end of their travels, there was interest for me in the descriptions of the south of Scotland, which I know only slightly. I happened to be travelling to Glasgow recently and tried to spot the houses at Loch Lomondside where they stayed. Unfortunately they’re not visible from the road, but it was nice all the same to pass what Boswell calls “Rosedow” (Rossdhu, from the Gaelic Ros Dubh, meaning Black Headland) and Cameron House, now a hotel. Boswell describes so well the people who lived there and relates their conversations in such detail that I wouldn’t have been at all surprised if they had sallied forth into the A82, bewigged and be-robed, with all the flowing wit and stylish erudition of the eighteenth century!
In Edinburgh Johnson was hugely impressed by visiting Thomas Braidwood’s school for the deaf, the first such establishment, which then had about a dozen pupils. He tested them severely, asking them to spell six-syllabled words, and work out long multiplications, all of which they achieved easily. During a recent trip to a wedding near Edinburgh I met a young teacher of the deaf, who of course knew all about this school, which is still celebrated, especially when today numbers of specialised teachers of the deaf in the United Kingdom have fallen by a third. Again it brought the book alive for me. I’m indebted to Boswell for teaching me why hills are called “Laws” in South Scotland – of course, it was because laws were anciently administered from the tops of hills, as they mention – why didn’t I think of that when one of the wedding guests asked me about hills with names that ended in ‘Law’? Which of us could come close to Johnson’s breadth and depth of knowledge, and powers of moral observation?
It is thought nowadays that Samuel Johnson had Tourette’s Syndrome, unknown in the eighteenth century. He certainly inspired either admiration in people or antipathy, I suppose according to their capacity for seeing beyond his awkward gestures and mannerisms, and occasional silliness (as when he imitated a kangaroo) to the greatness of his soul. He was hindered all his life by lack of money and by his unsuitability for the teaching career he attempted. As a result of this we have the Dictionary, which is so much more than a set of definitions. Boswell refers to the famous comment in the Dictionary on oats – “Elsewhere fed to horses, in Scotland to people”. Apparently Johnson was partial to a bowl of porridge oats himself and this was just his little joke. And I nearly missed it.
There will be attitudes and comments in Johnson’s accounts that are likely to annoy the modern Scot (as they did Boswell, who was Scottish). If you are a Scot, read this with an open mind, as the Englishman Johnson wrote it. I really appreciated the relevance of his comments about politics to today’s political scene. At a time when we are encouraged not to 'follow' our more outrageous politicians on Twitter or LinkedIn, Johnson observes that
“a man, whose business it is to be talked of, is much helped at being attacked.”
Some sections of these accounts are slightly tedious for the modern reader (lists of who they had dinner with, for instance) but so, so much, like the above remark, is incisive and pertinent. Incidentally, if you wonder, as I did, why they left their trip so late in the year (August to November) and were consequently prevented by weather from visiting more islands, it was because Boswell had to attend the Court of Session in Edinburgh and go by its dates.

[Belinda · Rating 3 out of 5]

Let's just say that going on holidays with Samuel Johnson would be a peculiar form of torture. Absolutely fascinating historically though!

[Leah · Rating 3 out of 5]

One journey, two accounts...

In 1774, well-known Scotophobe Samuel Johnson undertook a journey to the Hebridean Islands off the west coast of Scotland with his younger, Scottish friend, James Boswell. The result was two books – the first by Johnson, a kind of travelogue, commenting on the post-Union, post-Jacobite Rebellion Scotland; the second by James Boswell, a hagiographic account of his older friend’s conversations with a myriad of people as they travelled.

A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland
by Samuel Johnson

Their journey begins in Edinburgh and heads quickly up to Aberdeen via Arbroath, St Andrews, Dundee, etc., about all of which Johnson tells us almost nothing. Here’s his in-depth, insightful commentary on Dundee…

We stopped a while at Dundee, where I remember nothing remarkable, and mounting our chaise again, came about the close of the day to Aberbrothick (now Arbroath).

They then head across country to the west, where we get such descriptions as:

Of Fort George I shall not attempt to give any account. I cannot delineate it scientifically, and a loose and popular description is of use only when the imagination is to be amused.

Well. My imagination was certainly not amused at this point. While Johnson has largely refrained from the rudeness towards Scotland for which he is famed, it’s pretty clear he’s unimpressed. The thing that seems to depress him most is the absence of trees. The man is truly obsessed by trees. And rocks. Fortunately, we have lots of rocks.

Happily once we get to the Highlands, he becomes more interesting, if no more flattering. He finds the country bare and ‘sterile’. He informs us that the Scots have no national trait towards innovation, and all modernities are learned from the English. *chokes* He is surprised by the contrast between the intellectual life – admirable – and the living conditions – miserable. (Note: he’s talking about the rich people here – wait till he starts describing the savages!)

He discusses how natural terrain affects the growth or otherwise of civilisation, this to explain why the mountain-dwellers of the Highlands are still rudely uncivilised, and have kept their original language (as opposed to learning English, like civilised people do). I can’t help my sarcasm, but actually he is quite interesting on this topic, and throughout on language generally, which is probably not surprising from a man best remembered for compiling a dictionary. He also discusses the clan system, now in its death throes following the ‘pacification’ of the Highlands after Culloden (Battle of, 1746). These were the early days of what we now call the Highland Clearances, and Johnson shows that people were keen to emigrate, mostly to what are now the US and Canada, to escape the grinding poverty of their lives. He doesn’t mention sheep in this context, which usually get the blame for the Clearances in popular legend, and suggests that often the minor lairds left with their tenants to set up new communities in colonies filled with sunshine and free land. (I’m guessing nobody told them about the crocodiles and tornadoes.)

At last we sail over the sea to Sky (now Skye), and on to many of the large and small islands that make up the Hebrides. Most of the time they are hosted by lairds or academics – Boswell, as an Edinburgh advocate and a member of a high-ranked Scottish family, was clearly well-known in Scottish society, and Johnson’s fame was such that he was lionised wherever he travelled – so both men led me to believe anyway.

To do him justice, however, Johnson seems quite willing to rough it when necessary and is an adventurous traveller, especially since he would have been in his sixties at this time – elderly, in that era. And although he happily accepts the relative luxury he is offered in the way of accommodation and fare, he is far from blind to the very different living conditions of the poor. He discusses depopulation at length, both causes and effects – a problem with which modern Scotland is still grappling. Apart from the effects on Scotland, he perceptively suggests that sending thousands of disaffected men to the colonies, especially America, doesn’t bode well for future relations between the colonies and the mother-country (England, he means).

He is not an enthusiast for the oral tradition and feels that the lack of a written language is another reason for the savagery of the Highlanders and Islanders. Each generation, he points out, has to memorise what previous generations knew, and therefore much knowledge is lost along the way. This means learning never advances beyond what people can retain and transmit orally, and he suggests that language remains under-developed until it is written, when it begins to be polished, expanded and standardised. (A selling point for a dictionary?) Also it means that history is forgotten or distorted, and is so mixed with myth and legend that the truth is hard to discover.

Overall, I wouldn’t call this a scintillating read, but his ideas are interesting and occasionally thought-provoking and he’s not quite as rude about my country as I anticipated. For this book, I’d stretch to a generous three-and-a-half stars, and am glad to have read it even if it was a struggle in parts.

The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides
by James Boswell

Oh, dear! Imagine I wrote you a letter about a dinner party I held, the guest list including Michael Gove, Professor Whitty, Clive Myrie and Ian Hislop. (American version: Josh Hawley, Anderson Cooper, Dr. Fauci and Stephen Colbert.) You might be quite impressed! (Or horrified.) Now imagine your descendants finding that letter two hundred and fifty years from now – do you think they’d know who any of these people are?

I fear that’s Boswell’s book in a nutshell. He is an over-enthusiastic name-dropper, and if one recognised the names I’m sure one would be impressed at the quality, celebrity and variety of people he could attract to his dinner-table, or who would invite him into their homes. But time is cruel and the vast majority of these once-famous people are long forgotten, and so his lists of notables are now as dull as ditchwater.

I give you one extract (so you know what I suffered to bring this review to you):

We returned to my house, where there met him, at dinner, the Duchess of Douglas, Sir Adolphus Oughton, Lord Chief Baron, Sir William Forbes, Principal Robertson, Mr Cullen, advocate . . . At supper we had Dr Cullen, his son the advocate, Dr Adam Fergusson, and Mr Crosby, advocate.

This kind of thing, combined with Boswell’s nauseating sycophancy towards Johnson, persuaded me that I’d rather poke a stick in my eye than read on. Not having a stick handy, I abandoned the book and had cake instead. Only one star, I fear, for poor Boswell and his forgotten friends.

www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com

[Jackson Cyril · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read Dr Johnson's part of this volume; don't care enough about Boswell to read his. Johnson's is, as expected, full of witty insights and powerful moral judgments.

[Vicky Hunt · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Dungeon of Wit

"But whoever surveys the world must see many things that give him pain."

This double memoir contains the companion journals of Samuel Johnson and James Boswell. Johnson was a literary (and physical) giant of a man of 64 when the younger by half Boswell, aged 32, convinced him to tour his homeland with him.

Inverness is called the capital of the Highlands, and the Castle of Macbeth is in Inverness. But, there is much more to admire in the rugged landscape of the Hebrides: nature, weather, history, and the people who live in and love the land. It was quite a difficult journey for an older man like Johnson. But, as a man of great humor he seemed to enjoy much of the journey, if not the people so much.

"From the windows the eye wanders over the sea that separates Scotland from Norway, and when the winds beat with violence must enjoy all the terrifick grandeur of the tempestuous ocean. I would not for my amusement wish for a storm; but as storms, weather wished or not, will sometimes happen, I may say, without violation of humanity, that I should willingly look out upon them from Slanes Castle."

Johnson seemed to have bought into the British propaganda of civilizing the natives, despite the fact that his eyes saw and despised their poverty. He said clearly that he hated low living, and resented that the Scottish people had the bad manners to live poorly.

"Yet what the Romans did to other nations, was in a great degree done by Cromwell to the Scotts; he civilized them by conquest, and introduced by useful violence the arts of peace."

It seems Johnson subscribed to the old Roman idea of Pax Romana... Rome's kind of continental peace by domination and bloodshed. But, one must remember that some men are a product of their century. He seemed to be clinging to some of the lowest ideas in his habits of high living.

"...recent evils affect with greater force... The distance of a calamity from the present time seems to preclude the mind from contact or sympathy. Events long past are barely known; they are not considered."

"Yet men thus ingenious and inquisitive were content to live in total ignorance of the trades by which human wants are supplied , and to supply them by the grossest means . Till the Union made them acquainted with English manners , the culture of their lands was unskilful , and their domestick life unformed ; their tables were coarse as the feasts of Eskimeaux , and their houses filthy as the cottages of Hottentots ."

But, where does Boswell fit in all of this? That is the irony of it all. Boswell is only remembered mostly for his trip and book here and his later biography of the big man Johnson. Boswell himself seems to fit well in any century.

"Mrs. M'Sweyn, who officiated as our landlady here, had never been on the mainland. On hearing this, Dr. Johnson said to me, before her, 'That is rather being behind-hand with life. I would at least go and see Glenelg.'
—Boswell: 'You yourself, sir, have never seen, till now, any thing but your native island.'
—Johnson: 'But, sir, by seeing London, I have seen as much of life as the world can share.'
—Boswell: 'You have not seen Pekin.'
—Johnson: 'What is Pekin? Ten thousand Londoners would drive all the people of Pekin: they would drive them like deer.'"

Boswell had a great admiration for his mentor, despite his quaint ideas. He saw a very learned man who was of great value for his way with words. He felt that Johnson's words were worth remembering, and he shared them for posterity; even the lowest of his ideas as can be seen here.

"I have only to add that I shall ever reflect with great pleasure on a tour, which has been the means of preserving so much of the enlightened and instructive conversation of one whose virtues will, I hope, ever be an object of imitation, and whose powers of mind were so extraordinary, that ages may revolve before such a man shall again appear."

As Johnson himself said "The world always lets a man tell what he thinks in his own way." Here we can see by example how much a man is influenced by his geography his station in the world, his friends, and his century. But, there is much to be gleaned about Scotland's islands as well.

I found this set in a single hardback edition, very nicely presented in high quality. I think it is well worth reading, as much for the psychology as for the geography. I might add that this classic Journey was made in 1773.

[Holly Lindquist · Rating 3 out of 5]

Best of friends, James Boswell and Samuel Johnson, venture into the wild, barbarous country of Scotland. (It turns out not to be quite so barbarous, but they meet a lot of wonderful people along the way.)
As travelogues go, I have to say that I found it a bit on the dull side. Still, there are some good points:

1.) While Johnson is busy observing the country and its people, Boswell is busy observing Johnson, leading to some great anecdotes regarding that grand character.

2.) It's an interesting view of 18th century Scotland, contrasted between the view of a native eager to share his culture (Boswell) and that of an extremely intelligent, but judgmental and contumacious personage (Johnson).

P.S: If Johnson was a magnificent frigate of high British culture, then Boswell was the sometimes annoying, self-important barnacle clinging to his hull. Never-the-less, without Boswell, we wouldn't know so much about Johnson, so we'll take what we can get.

[Edward · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the autumn of l773 Boswell convinced Johnson, who was usually highly critical of all things Scottish, to go on a voyage to Scotland, traveling from the cities of Edinburgh and Aberdeen and the lowlands to the Highlands and then to some of the Hebrides islands, off the west coast of Scotland, an expedition that took 83 days. Johnson was a sedentary type so to go on this rugged trip, by carriage, horseback, and boat, was a major undertaking for a 63 year old man.

At one point when they were briefly stranded on one of the islands due to rough seas and the inability to travel by boat, Johnson remarked, “I want to be on the main land and go on with existence. This is a waste of life.” That was undoubtedly the low point of the trip.

For the most part, though, Johnson is in reasonably good humor as he makes often sweeping remarks about how the natives live, frequently comparing them to the superior customs of Englishmen. At the end of the trip, and in a much better mood now that he’s nearly back home in England, he sums up his travel experiences; “All travel has its advantages. If the passenger visits better countries, he may learn to improve his own, and if fortune carries him to worse, he may learn to enjoy it.” In Johnson’s often perverse way, I think Johnson “enjoyed” his trip.

Boswell’s comments tend to report the conditions they found themselves in, and he often reports on how the great man is doing as well. It’s as if they split up the writing, Johnson doing the philosophizing and Boswell more of the day-to-day descriptions of the journey. Boswell did all of the organizing as well, some of which he describes in detail.

More on Johnson’s mixed reactions. On the one hand, he is often favorably impressed, and surprised, by books and evidence of learning shown by lords who lived in remote areas. On the other hand, his prejudices come through clearly. He has a low opinion of the barbaric language, “Earse,” that he hears many of the highlanders using. He is highly critical of the gouging of tenant farmers by landlords, an aftermath of the Scottish defeat by the English at the Battle of Culloden less than 30 years earlier. It was a practice that led to widespread immigration to America and a depopulating of the Highlands. He is skeptical of Scottish folklore as well, regarding much of it as superstitious nonsense, adding that if “falsehood flatters his vanity, then he [a Scotchman] will not be diligent to detect it.”

Johnson likes to generalize, usually at the expense of the Scottish, as when he comments, “Of these islands it must be confessed that they have not many allurements, but to the mere lover of naked nature. The inhabitants are thin, provisions are scarce, and desolation and penury gives little pleasure.”

Johnson laments that they have come “too late to see what we expected, a people of peculiar appearance, and a system of antiquated life. The clans retain little now of their original character, their ferocity of temper is is softened . . . there remain only their language and their poverty.”

Boswell, on the other hand, is good at describing details, one compelling image being the large and ungainly Johnson riding awkwardly on a small Shetland pony. He describes in harrowing detail, a very rough boat passage during a storm, one that had him fearing for their lives. Johnson doesn’t mention the incident at all – he was asleep below deck. And of course as he does in his LIFE OF JOHNSON, Boswell recounts as much of Johnson’s conversation with the Scottish as he can remember.

Either piece can stand by itself (Boswell’s is much longer than Johnson’s), but read together they’re much more interesting. They make a reader want to follow the journey, if for no other reason than to see what changes have taken place in these parts of Scotland over the past 250 years. I think that much of what Johnson disliked or was indifferent to, the remote ruggedness of the area, is what a visitor would admire today.

[Anne · Rating 3 out of 5]

Right, I promise I will put a book up soon that I didn't have to read for English, but since we had one almost every week, I haven't had time for reading much else lately, and they're also the ones on my shelves. As for "Journey to the Western Islands", there's a lot more to say about it than you'd think. To some extent, it really is just a fairly long and sometimes tedious catalogue of road conditions and food eaten. Maybe I'm biased as I'm currently in Scotland (and he visisted St Andrews, where I am), but I found it actually quite interesting. Johnson was traveling round Scotland at a time of great change. You can see the great clash of cultures from the gentrified Edinburgh and well-kept roads of the lowlands, to the roadless and wild Highlands. The Highlands were vast and fairly empty at the time thanks to the Highland Clearances, but what little there was left was like a throwback from a much earlier century. Even in Johnson's time their languages and customs were being lost and stamped out, so it's interesting to read about the last hold-outs. Another layer of interest lies in the fact that the account is by Johnson, who was an older man who had never really ventured far from London before, so his perspective as an outsider mirrors that of the reader. Oh dear, I need to stop this. You can tell I revised this one for my exam. But bear with me for one more point. I would recommend reading "A Tour of the Hebrides" and Henry Boswell's biography of Johnson along with this one, and the first tells the story of the same trip, and the second tells the story of the man himself. Boswell was about half the age of Johnson, yet chose to follow him around and devote much of his life to making sure people would remember who this guy was. This leads me to believe that Johnson must have been pretty darn interesting, and makes me want to read more about him. Anyway, I'm stopping now.

[Emily · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly enjoyed reading this!

[Derek · Rating 4 out of 5]

This short book convinced me that I wanted to spend as much time as possible in the company of Boswell and Dr. Johnson. It says something that right after finishing the book I leapt into Boswell’s full biography of Dr. Johnson. And still I want more…

[James Klagge · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not sure why this appeared at the top of my to-read pile...I guess it was a lark. I enjoyed The Life of Samuel Johnson and wanted to hear more of the language and wit of these 2 men.
Here are some of their memorable lines:
p. 325 (Boswell): "...every man should keep minutes of whatever he reads. Every circumstance of his studies should be recorded: what books he has consulted; how much of them he has read; at what times; how often the same authors; and what opinions he formed of them, at different periods of his life. Such an account would much illustrate the history of his mind." I can't think of a better advertisement for Goodreads!
p. 325 (Johnson; and p. 408): "[Johnson] remarked that attacks on authors did them much service. 'A man who tells me my play is very bad, is less my enemy than he who lets it die in silence. A man whose business it is to be talked of, is much helped at being attacked.'" I'll try to keep that in mind while reading any bad reviews of my books!
p. 365 (Boswell): "I have often experienced that scenes through which a man has passed, improve by lying in memory: they grow mellow. ... Even harsh scenes acquire a softness by length of time..... Perhaps there is so much evil in every human enjoyment when present...that it requires to be refined by time; and yet I do not see why time should not melt away the good and the evil in equal proportions; why the shade should decay and the light remain in preservation." I guess memory is partly a teacher from experience, but also partly a defense mechanism for the self. When it comes to our own past, we understand extending grace and compassion to our past selves by, in a sense, rewriting our own history. Yet we don't endorse the same rewriting of our communal history--or at any rate, this is what causes conflicts over teaching of black history and confederate monuments. And this reminds me of the story "Truth of Fact, Truth of Feeling" in Exhalation.
p. 140-1 (Johnson; and p. 366 in Boswell): "Whatever withdraws us from the power of our senses; whatever makes the past, the distant or the future predominate over the present, advances us in the dignity of thinking beings. ... That man is little to be envied, whose patriotism would not gain force upon the plain of Marathon, or whose piety would not grow warmer among the ruins of Iona." Kathy visited Iona with a clergy group some dozen years ago and it made quite an impression on her. We want to go back together sometime. It was Johnson & Boswell's last stop in the Hebrides.
p. 403 (Johnson): "[Johnson] owned that the Methodists [in their missionary work] had done good; had spread religious impression among the vulgar part of mankind; but, he said, they had great bitterness against other Christians, and that he never could get a Methodist to explain in what he excelled others; that it always ended up in the indispensible necessity of hearing one of their preachers." As a Methodist myself, I can admit that the differences are not so obvious, but there are some good Methodist preachers!
And having spent some time myself in the Highlands and Skye in 1980, I guess I wanted to be reminded of the land and people as well.

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good company on my own recent vacation travels. In 1773, Johnson and his trusty pal Boswell took a trip to the Highlands and Inner Hebrides of Scotland, a world Johnson clearly viewed as wild and dangerous (as it mostly was then). His account is part of a long tradition, of course, from the Romans to the present-day English, of describing the country as the last (quasi) wilderness to either vanquish or escape to. Although Johnson takes a somewhat anthropological approach, investigating the curious ways and mores of the primitive Hebrideans, there's no science to it, and he comes off as a tourist, albeit a fairly well-read and patient one. He's careful to compliment his hosts, the various island lairds who provide the two travelers with beds, meals, whisky, boats, and tour guides, stressing their (surprising) gentility and sophistication in this wild northern frontier -- as of course he must, since he does want further invitations and knows these literate Highlanders will probably read his book -- while still commenting pretty critically on the backwardness of the ordinary folks and the general state of the islands. He has a lot to say about the "genuine improvidence of savages," the "rude speech of a barbarous people" (Gaelic), and the "negligence and laziness" of the Scots, primarily in not reforesting and managing their land better, a real pet peeve with Johnson from the first chapter on. In other words, he's annoyed at the lack of trees in Scotland. Here's one of many comments in the same vein: "It will very readily occur, that this uniformity of barrenness [in the landscape] can afford very little amusement to the traveller; that it is easy to sit at home and conceive rocks and heath, and waterfalls; and that these journeys are useless labours, which neither impregnate the imagination, nor enlarge the understanding." He just doesn't get why they don't try to transform this scrubby moorland into a nice English-style garden of flowers and big trees. If only he could have seen a couple of centuries into the future, when the wild moors and heather-covered mountainsides of Scotland would be sought out as romantic and beautiful.

On the title used here: The main title is misprinted; it's supposed to be Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland. The second part, Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides, is actually the separate book that James Boswell wrote, published together with Johnson's account in some editions. I read the Kindle edition of just Johnson, but I'm sure Boswell's views would both complement and contradict his buddy's in interesting ways, since he (Boswell) was Scottish and less of a curmudgeon.

If you're actually still reading, here's one more quote for free: "A man of the Hebrides, for of the women's diet I can give no account, as soon as he appears in the morning, swallows a glass of whisky; yet they are not a drunken race, at least I never was present at much intemperance; but no man is so abstemious as to refuse the morning dram, which they call a skalk." Slainte!

[zunggg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Notes on Johnson

• He's a consummate self-mythologist, a sesquipedalian showman/showoff who knows what's expected of him. Boswell calls a certain mountain "immense". Johnson: 'No; it is no more than a considerable protruberance.' You can just hear him enunciating "protruberance" with fathomless scorn.
• His hilarious, self-aware egotism. On emigration to America: "To a man of mere animal life, you can urge no argument against going to America, but that it will be some time before he will get the earth to produce. But a man of my intellectual enjoyment will not easily go and immerse himself and his posterity for ages in barbarism." [note: Johnson had no posterity other than letters].
• He "maintained the superiority of Homer" (over Virgil). I agree.
• His thoroughgoing contempt for "Ossian" and all believers in the phony Celtic bard is a joy. No flies on Samuel J!
• His relish in mansplaining. "He this morning explained to us all the operation of coining, and, at night, all the operation of brewing, so very clearly, that Mr M'Queen said, when he heard the first, he thought he had been bred in the Mint; when he heard the second, that he had been bred a brewer."
• Certainly the oddest passage in either book, Johnson's thoughts on clean and unclean fabrics and dreams of keeping a harem (in Boswell):

All animal substances are less cleanly than vegetables. Wool, of which flannel is made, is an animal substance; flannel therefore is not so cleanly as linen. I remember I used to think tar dirty; but when I knew it to be only a preparation of the juice of the pine, I thought so no longer. It is not disagreeable to have the gum that oozes from a plumb-tree upon your fingers, because it is vegetable, but if you have any candle-grease, any tallow upon your fingers, you are uneasy till you rub it off. I have often thought, that, if I kept a seraglio, the ladies should all wear linen gowns, or cotton — I mean stuffs made of vegetable substances. I would have no silk; you cannot tell when it is clean: it will be very nasty before it is perceived to be so. Linen detects its own dirtiness.

• His social conscience is in perplexing conflict with his Toryism. He says it is "a problem for politicians" that "those who procure the immediate necessaries of life" (i.e. labourers, workers in general) are the worst paid. He can't agree with raising their wages, because this would increase prices, and lamely suggests that they should be given charity when times are good (he doesn't say what should be done when charity is lacking).
• Johnson is arguably on the spectrum in terms of his near-eidetic textual memory/facility for quotation. It's hard to tell sometimes if his lack of affect is real or affected, but I think it's the latter.

Notes on Boswell

• B loves to play the humble amanuensis, but he uses this cover to get in plenty of cheeky digs at his friend. The relationship is much more bilateral than it seems. They're really partners masquerading as idol and idolator. We're charmed to learn that J calls B "Bozzy".
• You sense that Boz takes a quiet pleasure in Johnson's rare slip-ups. One Pennington, an army man, tells them of the notorious fidelity of the Arabs to those under their protection:

Johnson: Why, sir, I can see no superiour virtue in this. A serjeant and twelve men, who are my guard, will die, rather than that I shall be robbed.
Pennington: But the soldiers are compelled to do this, by fear of punishment.
Johnson: Well, sir, the Arabs are compelled by the fear of infamy.
Pennington: The soldiers have the same fear of infamy, and the fear of punishment besides; so have less virtue, because they act less voluntarily.

• One night he gets absolutely wankered: "we were cordial, and merry to a high degree; but of what passed I have no recollection, with any accuracy." The teetotal Johnson wakes him at noon the next day, laughs at him, and gives him the hair of the dog.
• His occasional plugs for his "forthcoming life of Dr Johnson" are quite endearing. B's ambition is never much disguised.

Notes on Boswell on Johnson (or, per B, "the transit of Johnson over the Caledonian hemisphere")

• Boswell's mission is maximal — he isn't satisfied if he lets a single moment go unrecorded. "Much has thus been irrecoverably lost" he laments, by his having ceased keeping a scrupulous journal at the tail-end of their trip. Johnson is notably thanatophobic, and it's as if Boswell sees his writings not just as a memorial of the great man, but as a way of actually keeping him alive, somehow postponing the inevitable. There's a desperation about Boswell's biography; he writes like a man trapped in a drowning automobile. It's hard to look away.
• Boswell is at heart a romantic. "It was like enchantment" he says of a day spent in cultivated company at a remote army fort, "my warm imagination jumped from the barren sands to the splendid dinner and brilliant company..." Johnson plays the rationalist, but you sense that one of Boswell's main attractions for him is as an outlet for, or reflection of, his own romantic heart. Boswell's life-writing drinks deep from this contrast, and hints or warns how dangerous the beguiling Boswellian romanticism is, if it becomes policy and not just art.
• Even when he (B) is in the right, Boswell makes allowances for Johnson: "I think Dr Johnson mistaken [...] but so great a mind as his cannot be moved by inferior objects: an elephant does not run and skip like lesser animals."
• By portraying his subject in this pointillist fashion, Boswell is able to excavate the real Johnson, deeply concealed beneath layers of bluster and blubber.

Other gleanings

• Johnson: "I was told at Aberdeen that the people learned from Cromwell’s soldiers to make shoes and plant kail." Make shoes and plant kail is surely the 18th century "chew bubble gum and kick ass."
• Boswell: "Every man should keep minutes of whatever he reads. Every circumstance of his studies should be recorded; what books he has consulted; how much of them he has read; at what times; how often the same authors; and what opinions he has formed of them, at different periods of his life. Such an account would much illustrate the history of his mind."
• On Skye, B tells us, they join with the locals in "a dance which [...] the emigration from Sky has occasioned. They call it 'America'. Each of the couples, after the common involutions and evolutions, successively whirls round in a circle, till all are in motion; and the dance seems intended to shew how emigration catches, till a whole neighbourhood is set afloat."
• J's accurate etiology of sea-legs. Boswell: "I felt still the motion of the sea. Dr Johnson said, it was not in imagination [J's rationalism again], but a continuation of motion on the fluids, like that of the sea itself after the storm is over."
• J's impromptu satirical "Meditation on a Pudding" is a highlight.
• I can empathise with Johnson being mistaken (by a half-deaf laird) for a Johnston.
• Insular J’s slander of the Chinese:

Boswell: You yourself, sir, have never seen, till now, any thing but your own native island.
Johnson: But, sir, by seeing London, I have seen as much of life as the world can shew.
Boswell: You have not seen Pekin.
Johnson: What is Pekin? Ten thousand Londoners would drive all the people of Pekin: they would drive them like deer.

• B describes a letter from Garrick as being "as agreeable as a pineapple in a desert".

[William · Rating 4 out of 5]

Johnson's section is easier reading - lofty and latinate, his observations funny when not insightful. Boswell's journal is less considered, recorded primarily as a memory-aid. This is its strength and its weakness: there is much which a retrospective hand might have pruned, countless names and takings of tea, supplementary footnotes addressing minute controversies of only rarefied historical interest. Yet it is also good-humoured and warm, and there were times, many times, when I wanted to lay aside the book and give Boswell a hug.

"He was too proud to submit, even for a moment, to be the object of ridicule, and instantly retaliated with such keen sarcastic wit, and such a variety of degrading images, of every one of which I was the object, that, though I can bear such attacks as well as most men, I yet found myself so much the sport of all the company, that I would gladly expunge from my mind every trace of this severe retort."

I might also add that it contains, in its final pages, one of the funniest footnotes I have read in my life. Boswell has just explained that, when a young buck, overbrimming with 'youthful extravagance' at a Drury Lane playhouse, he stood up in the pit and entertained the audience by imitating a cow. He elaborates below:

"I was so successful in this boyish frolick, that the universal cry of the galleries was, 'Encore the cow! Encore the cow!' In the pride of my heart, I attempted imitations of some other animals, but with very inferior effect. My reverend friend, anxious for my fame, with an air of utmost gravity and earnestness, addressed me thus: 'My dear sir, I would confine myself to the cow!'"

There are times in all our lives when we should confine ourselves to the cow, rather than hazard the whole menagerie.

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 4 out of 5]

The editions which combine both Boswell’s and Johnson’s accounts make for most interesting reading, as they can play off each other. Johnson, of course, always writes with a most manly force.

Observations:
1) Edinburgh didn’t have a pleasant smell, since people emptied their chamber pots onto the street. This was even worse with multiple-storied houses from which different families repeated said action.
2) Boswell has a long account of Lady McDonald’s account of Bonnie Prince Charlie’s escape.
3) Johnson notes that a strong hand by the monarch could stop some of the idiocy involved in clan feuds.

[Lou · Rating 5 out of 5]

Following 2 really clever people on a holiday in a different era was always going to be lovely

sometimes its slightly dull, but its a bit like that line from Waverley "Those who are contented to remain with me will be occasionally exposed to the dulness inseparable from heavy roads, steep hills, sloughs, and other terrestrial retardations; but with tolerable horses and a civil driver (as the advertisements have it), I engage to get as soon as possible into a more picturesque and romantic country, if my passengers incline to have some patience"

[Gavin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Johnson observes Scotland and its islands while Boswell observes Johnson. Boswell must be the original groupie and certainly hung on every word of Johnson's no matter how trivial. The prose style is of its time, which helps a lot because both these men could spin a yarn.

[Stephen Makin]

I read this whilst travelling to my elective in the Hebrides over 10 years ago, and I still remember it today. I brought it from a second hand book shop whilst waiting for a bus in Inverness. Great read and fascinating.

[Bettie]

[Øyvind · Rating 4 out of 5]

An enjoyable travelogue of the Scottish Highlands and Islands, which also shows forth the blustering and John Bullish (but learned) character of Dr Johnson - not easily imitable. One of the high points is the encounter, on the Isle of Skye, with people who were personally involved in helping Bonnie Prince Charlie escape in 1746. Moreover, Johnson and Boswell talking about which of their friends they would put to teach different subjects at a new and improved University of St Andrews is quite humorous. And then there's the terrible lack of trees, the morning dram and best breakfast in the world (apparently), etc. etc.

Dr Johnson's last words can stand as a summary of this work, which has only made me more interested in reading his biography as well.

'Having passed my time almost wholly in cities, I may have been surprised by modes of life and appearances of nature, that are familiar to men of wider survey and more varied conversation. Novelty and ignorance must always be reciprocal, and I cannot but be conscious that my thoughts on national manners, are the thoughts of one who has seen but little.'

[Muaz Jalil · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don't know, I found Johnson insufferable with his prudishness, condescending tone, self-importance, and his judginess of Scotland. Boswell is a true apologetic, trying to make his maestro look good while trying to control his scotish patriotism. According to Boswell, he had a forcible spirit, impetuosity of manners and orthodox. I would not want to travel with Johnson

I have visited St. Andrews, but I did not know there used to be St. Leonard College for undergrads.

As Boswell rightly says, Johnson is too John Bull personified. But then, if you cannot see beyond your border, how can you be so cerebral . Johnson states that Edinburgh Castle looks at best like an English Prison!! R u joking, man.

[Ivan Stoner · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fun, quick read. An 18th century smarty-pants writing casually about his trip into the Scottish Highlands.

Sort of a last look at what the old-school Highlands were like before being (forcibly) integrated into Britain. Interesting to read about the impact of emigration opportunities in America from the other end.

Also hilarious to picture the obese Johnson riding around on a tiny horse bred in the Hebrides. ("The horses of the Islands, as of other barren countries, are very low: they are indeed musculous and strong, beyond what their size gives reason for expecting; but a bulky man upon one of their backs makes a very disproportionate appearance").

[Adam Stevenson · Rating 3 out of 5]

In 1773, a Sixty-two (nearly three) year old Johnson and a thirty-odd year old Boswell went on a trip they had been playfully imagining for ten years, up to the Hebrides in an effort to see what was left of the old Highland way of life. Both of them wrote a book - Johnson’s came first.

In many ways, it’s a traditional travel book, with Johnson describing the key features on the way and often measuring them. He then makes his conclusions and opinions on what he sees and hears. The book is arranged by location, with the odd gallimaufry of discussion and opinion in various parts.

I always enjoy a bit of Johnson, and swimming through his lengthy sentences and sometimes unusual word choice (conglobulated anyone?) was like stepping into a warm bath. Discussing things as inconsequential as scenery with Johnson makes this quite a relaxing book to read but there is a well-spring of anger just underneath. Famous for being disparaging to Scots and Scotland, he quickly finds himself warmed (if not always inspired) by the people’s company and flattered by their welcome. His disgust at how parts of Scotland are then not looked after or developed then shine through the text - not a disgust at the people, but in how they are being let down by their leaders. This disgust comes through his frequent astonishment at the lack of trees, the poor quality of the housing and the huge swathes of people emigrating to America. The Highland Clearances are under way and there is many a deserted village.

There is also the quality that has him called a ‘secret papist’. His dismayed reaction to the seemingly endless array of destroyed churches that he sarcastically describes as ‘a triumph of reformation.’ Not, I think, out of any real Catholic sensibility, but more from a general reverence for churches and holy land. His paragraphs about the ruined Abbey on Iona are worthy of the praise Boswell gave them in his own book.

Johnson has a few daydreams, of Macbeth and the witches, of owning his own island, of the existence of a recently past feudal society but he mainly stays in description mode and mainly stays neutral. Things liven up a little when he discusses the power of second sight, of which he says, “I could never advance my credibility to conviction; but came away at last only willing to believe.” - rather like his opinion on ghosts. I also enjoyed his description of his ungainly body on a Shetland pony and the fact he called a single beef cow a ‘beef’, and a group of them, ‘beeves’. (Which it turns out is legit, howabouthat?)

This isn’t prime Johnson, but it is Johnson and so was worth reading… (re-reading, maybe not).



Where Johnson talked about Scotland, Boswell talked about Johnson.

Written up from his journal of the trip, Bozzy published the book to test the waters and try out the style of his proposed Johnson biography, there’s lots of conversation and little details that would have been lost to time otherwise.

This book is arranged by date and is far less interested in what they saw in Scotland as much as it is about Johnson’s reactions to it. Partly this is because of Boswell’s admitted inability to describe how things look in much detail - he is, however, an expert in relating how people chat. Johnson talks to Boswell, to Lairds, to Ladies, to judges, to soldiers, to reverends, to old women living in mud huts - to all sorts of people. There is a lot of talk.

Among other things, we learn that Johnson had read Castiglione’s ‘The Courtier’, that Johnson had ‘often’ imagined what sort of seraglio he might run and had considered how would fight a big dog, that Boswell had once been encored for making a cow noise in Drury Lane, and that Johnson was pretty good on a horse - if it was a decent size.

I also enjoyed the amount of teasing in the book. Boswell teased Johnson on the old lady who thought Johnson’s question of ‘where do you sleep?’ was a come on. Johnson teased Boswell for staying up to drink one or six bowl of punch. They take turns teasing each other over which of them is the wenching ‘young buck’ and which the civilising influence and at night, often share a room and have private conversations in Latin so their discussion wouldn’t be understood through thin walls.

Boswell presents everything as a fun, jolly, adventure - and I’m sure, when it was over, it was. There are times of fear though, when they took the boat to Col in particular. There is also the sense that Boswell has to go before Johnson, smoothing his way and palliating his rudeness to others, all without him noticing. Johnson prides himself on being adaptable and self-sufficient, and the idea that he needs Boswell to do this would have been of great injury to his pride.

There is also the sense that Boswell sees himself as made greater by this adventure tying him closer to Johnson’s ‘brand’. There are moments in the book that are painfully, toe-curlingly, embarrassingly, Boswellian. Especially the footnotes from the third edition which he uses to namedrop and argue little points against other Johnsonians.

I found the book took longer to read than I expected, and there was some repetition in the structure of ‘go somewhere, talk’. That said, I found out things about the two of them I hadn’t known, also, of it were not for this journey and this book then Boswell’s ‘Life of Johnson’ may never have been. So it’s worth celebrating for that alone.

[Elizabeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

October 11th, 2025 — finished A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland, by Samuel Johnson; have not yet read Boswell's The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides.

[Stephen]

Chapman, R. W., editor (1924). Johnson’s Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and Boswell’s Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides with Samuel Johnson LL.D. London: Oxford University Press.

Johnson: A charm of this book as certainly the sequence of names of towns that I heard in my youth but visited only as an adult. Johnson’s account is of a race, using the word in the old British sense, conquered only 27 years earlier than the time of his visit, and of the transition from the tribal and warlike society that prevailed before the Battle of Culloden toward the strictures of the English conquers.

Many of Johnson’s accounts are straightforward descriptions, and despite their very different subjects, have something in common with MacPhee’s descriptions of the Pine Barrens. There are commentaries on the disruptions wrought by emigrations to the American colonies, and emigrations of whole towns of families, not merely individuals.
Beginning on page 78 of my edition, there is a discussion of the role of middlemen (Tacksmen), who managed relations with tenant farmers on behalf of the Laird, which shows considerable economic sophistication. Some criticized the Tacksman as a parasite who took part of the profit that would have gone to the Laird and part of the return that would have gone to the tenant farmer without performing any real service. Johnson first observes that the Laird, who had other duties, typically could not have actively kept track of tenant farmers in the way that was called for, so that the Tacksman did in fact perform a useful service. He goes on to observe that if one applied the logic of the argument broadly, it would lead to the conclusion that all middlemen were parasites, and that if middlemen were abolished, society would be reduced to a state of autarky, with each person self-sufficient in a state of abject poverty. Here he understood something that Karl Marx did not.

Later in August 2015: the difference between Johnson’s and Boswell’s accounts is like the difference between a photograph of a landmark and the photograph of the same landmark with people around it. What Boswell writes is interesting in a way that what Johnson writes is not.
On the first page, Boswell writes that he mentioned the project of a tour of the Hebrides to Voltaire.

It also appears that Boswell was a student of Adam Smith, to whom he refers as “My old Professor of Moral Philosophy.”

10 September 1773. On the Island of Rasay, now Raasay (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raasay), Boswell rose
“between five and six. …[Old Mr. Malcolm M‘Leod] and I, attended by two gentlemen, traversed the country during the whole of the day. Though we had passed over not less than four-and-twenty miles of very rugged ground, and had a Highland dance on top of Dun Can, the highest mountain on the island, we returned in the evening not at all fatigued, and piqued ourselves at not being outdone at the nightly ball by our less active friends, who had remained at home.”
On page 271 appears: “There is a large tract of land, possessed as a common, in Rasay. They have no regulation as to the number of cattle. Every man puts upon it as many as he chooses.”
It is a pity that he does not comment on who the system worked; the “tragedy of the commons” would predict overgrazing, but cases are known in which informal social mechanisms develop that lead to less tragic outcomes.

Some things have not changed: on p. 274, Boswell writes
“I speak as a lawyer. Though I have had clients whose causes I could not, as a private man, approve; yet, if I undertook them, I would not do any thing that might be prejudicial to them, even at their desire, without warning them of their danger.”

For the most part, Boswell’s book, like Johnson’s, is a day-by-day rendition of events, essentially a travelogue. This is convenient if one is able to devote attention to the book intermittently. Exceptionally, however, after the entry for 13 September, there is a 10-page account of the flight of Bonnie Prince Charlie out of Scotland in the aftermath of the Battle of Culloden, fascinating for someone whose mother was born in Scotland.

20 September 1773 (p. 315): Here Johnson’s grasp of economics is perhaps no so keen --- “When all nations are traders, there is nothing to be gained by trade…”. This is, of course, wrong, for it the gains realized when each nation specializes in what it has an advantage in producing, and trades with other nations that have advantages in producing other things. Well, it was fifty years before Ricardo – and three years before The Wealth of Nations.

[marthie !]

I’ll not pretend to have read this but enjoyed skimming it while planning a similar trip to Scotland. i love the intellectual romantic “great tragedy” of the great tour — getting to your destination just slightly too late. surprisingly holds up today