Intuitive Sherlockiana

When studying the lives of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson, the devoted scholar carefully pours over the sixty chronicles of accepted lore. The scholar then expands his search to include historical data on the time and place involved. He may consult the wealth of earlier writings on Holmes and Watson, or he may choose to keep his view fresh and unbiased, striking out into the risky realm of original scholarship. But no matter how thorough, knowledgeable, and ingenious our scholar may be, there comes a point past which no data remains.

No matter what Victorian demographics, newspaper archives, or government records you consult, you still won’t find concrete evidence of such things as Sherlock’s father’s first name. You won’t find his birthplace, his childhood friends, or just why he chose that ear-flapped travelling cap. Does this mean we can’t study such things? Or that we shouldn’t?

Nature abhors a vacuum, and so do Sherlockians. Take the matter of Sherlock Holmes’s birthday. A date was needed to provide a proper day for celebrating the great detective, and Christopher Morley came up with January 6. His evidence for this momentous choice? Twelfth Night quotes by the detective. Scientific? Not quite. Good enough for the Baker Street Irregulars to tie their yearly dinner to it? Sure.

Why? Because it just feels right.

James Montgomery claimed in song that his Aunt Clara was Irene Adler. Indisputable fact? Not really. Fun to sing about? You betcha.

The glory days of Sherlockiana are full of what one could call “intuitive scholarship.” It doesn’t produce one-hundred-percent-scientific-method-documented-and-reproducible-results cold hard facts, but that’s half the fun of it. Intuitive scholarship leaves room for future intuitive scholarship. It results in those truths we only know to be true because we believe them to be. Personal truths, the sort of things one knows in one’s heart when all else fails. Why does the study of Sherlock Holmes include such methods, when the study of other historical personages like Napoleon or Wyatt Earp do not? Well, for one thing . . . we’re not kidding ourselves as many an amateur historian has done. We know that the legend of Sherlock Holmes means something to us, and we’re purposefully stacking the deck so the game will comes out the way we’d like best.

True Sherlockiana is a game played by scalawags, and we’re a jolly crew. With this issue, The Holmes & Watson Report is establishing it’s own merry band of Sherlockian crusaders, all bound for that Holy Grail which is the one true life story of Mr. Sherlock Holmes. We’re calling it The Holmes & Watson Report Round Table, and everyone is free to join. There are no dues, just a happy sense of purpose, the details of which you will find elsewhere in this issue.

You’ll also find a few other things in this issue, as usual. One thing you won’t find is the results of the Report’s annual poll . . . we’re saving that for next issue, just to give the ever-present stragglers a chance to have their voices heard. You don’t have to wait long, just two months . . .

The Editor-In-Chief