"Lavengro" in 1851 and "The Romany Rye" in 1857 failed to impress the critics or the public. Men were disappointed because "Lavengro" was "not an autobiography." They said that the adventures did not bear "the impress of truth." They suggested that the anti-Papistry was "added and interpolated to suit the occasion of the recent Papal aggression." They laughed at its mystery-making. They said that it gave "a false dream in the place of reality." Ford regretted that Borrow had "told so little about himself." Two friends praised it and foretold long life for it. Whitwell Elwin in 1857 said that "the truth and vividness of the descriptions both of scenes and persons, coupled with the purity, force and simplicity of the language, should confer immortality upon many of its pages." "The Saturday Review" found that he had humour and romance, and that his writing left "a general impression of the scenery and persons introduced so strongly vivid and life-like," that it reminded them of Defoe rather than of any contemporary author; they called the books a "strange cross between a novel and an autobiography." In 1857 also, Emile Montegut wrote a study of "The Gypsy Gentleman," which he published in his "Ecrivains Modernes de l'Angleterre." He said that Borrow had revived a neglected literary form, not artificially, but as being the natural frame for the scenes of his wandering life: he even went so far as to say that the form and manner of the picaresque or rogue novel, like "Gil Blas," is the inevitable one for pictures of the low and vagabond life. This form, said he, Borrow adopted not deliberately but intuitively, because he had a certain attitude to express: he rediscovered it, as Cervantes and Mendoza invented it, because it was the most appropriate clothing for his conceptions. Borrow had, without any such ambition, become the Quevedo and the Mendoza of modern England. The autobiography resembles the rogue novel in that it is well peppered with various isolated narratives strung upon the thread of the hero's experience. It differs chiefly in that the study of the hero is serious and without roguery. The conscious attempt to make it as good as a rogue novel on its own ground caused some of the chief faults of the book, the excess of recognitions and re-appearances, the postillion's story, and the visits of the Man in Black. When Borrow came to answer his critics in the Appendix to "The Romany Rye," he assumed that they thought him vulgar for dealing in Gypsies and the like. He retorted: