Two of Watson’s wives are specifically mentioned in The Canon: Mary Watson, née Morstan, Holmes’s client in The Sign of the Four (which occurs in September 1888), and the unnamed lady to whom Holmes refers (in “The Blanched Soldier”, which occurs in January 1903) when he writes: “The good Watson had at that time deserted me for a wife, the only selfish action which I can recall in our association.”
But in the case of Mary Morstan, there are some troubling chronological questions. If Watson didn’t meet Mary until autumn 1888, then how does one explain some curious references that imply a Watsonian marriage before this date?
For example, at the beginning of “A Scandal in Bohemia”, Watson mentions his recent marriage, and then states:
One night – it was on the twentieth of March, 1888 – I was returning from a journey to a patient (for I had now returned to civil practice), when my way led me through Baker Street.
So he’s married in the spring of 1888, but meets his wife in the fall of 1888…?
And then there’s “The Five Orange Pips”, which Watson specifically says occurs in ‘87. Soon after he writes:
My wife was on a visit to her mother’s, and for a few days I was a dweller once more in my old quarters at Baker Street.
But Mary Morstan was an orphan – She had no mother to visit! – and this case occurred in autumn 1887 – a full year before Watson would even meet Mary for the first time.
Clearly, there is a third wife.
Dealing with the chronological questions and inconsistencies that regularly occur in The Canon is no easy thing, but some of us thrive on it. And yet, at times much of the heavy lifting for these questions has already been done, if one is willing to let go and accept what others have determined. In 1962, William S. Baring-Gould published his masterpiece biography Sherlock Holmes of Baker Street, in which he compiled scholarship and known facts to provide the first birth-to-death narrative of Our Hero’s life. (He didn’t get everything right, and I don’t agree with all of it, but it’s an amazing jumping-off place.) It was Baring-Gould who provided the initial concrete details of Watson’s first wife – Constance Watson née Adams, from San Francisco – how they met and wed, her subsequent health problems, and then how she passed away in late 1887, just before the New Year, after just a little more than a year of marriage.
Some don’t care about chronology, or questions concerning Watson’s wives. Some do, but have varying opinions. As time has passed, and more evidence has come forth, the idea of Constance as Watson’s first wife has taken on more and more certainty. (For example, she is included by name in Les Klinger’s composite chronology, published in his Sherlock Holmes Reference Library, and used by many as a safe go-to.) Her existence, as first related by Baring-Gould, helps to clear up several chronological questions, and also to provide an added aspect to Watson’s life, and the additional tragedy he faced by losing a wife before the later death of his second wife, Mary Watson, in 1893.
With the discovery of this narrative, Sherlock Holmes and The Eye of Heka, more information is now available regarding the unfortunate passing of Constance Watson, as well as the events just weeks after her death. As a Sherlockian, any new tale from Watson’s pen is a good thing, and having more information concerning various chronological aspects and the first Mrs. Watson is even better.
David Marcum