The concept of brotherhood is the basis of a myriad of works of the Victorian era. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle highlights a classic image of brotherhood in his portrayal of Sherlock Holmes and his partner Dr. Watson, but ultimately identifies its flaws through the introduction of women who directly influence Holmes and Watson. Similarly, Matthew Arnold delves into the elusiveness of brotherhood and comments on its impossibility by emphasizing the ubiquity of isolation. Friedrich Engels offers a conflation of the two commenting on the impossibility of brotherhood when England is so narrowly divided between the poor and the middle and upper classes. The three authors ultimately convey that brotherhood is desirable but fleeting, although they each highlight disparate reasons for this conclusion. The presence of brotherhood in the Sherlock Holmes stories is notable because it occurs primarily between two completely different men, although Doyle's assertion through Holmes and Watson that brotherhood is vital is not diminished. Holmes, an intelligent man whose "observations have quite astonished" (Scarlet 24) Watson serves as a contrast to Watson himself, who deems contemporary knowledge of great importance. This contrasts with Holmes' opinion that “useless facts” (Scarlet 25), such as those relating to the solar system, are of no use to him. However, since Watson is a “Doctor of Medicine” (Scarlet 17), their mutual interest in observation and science ultimately strengthens the depth of their relationship, allowing Holmes and Watson to be included in a sort of “brotherhood ” of science. Indeed, in A Study in Scarlet, it is under the aegis of science, in the “chemical laboratory” (Scarlet 18), that Watson and Holmes meet for the first time. Furthermore, this inclusion...in the center of the paper...is attached to it, making the repetition of the phrase effective in conveying that the use of the lower class "as mere material" (584) contributes to his inability to identify in the slightest with the bourgeoisie having the capacity to experience the idea of ​​brotherhood in conditions not marked by “filth, ruin, and uninhabitability” (584). While the conclusions of Doyle, Arnold, and Engels all reinforced the idea that Brotherhood has its barriers and inhibitors, each affirms the idea in profoundly different ways. Where Doyle claimed that women interfere with the institution of brotherhood, Arnold praised women. While Arnold insisted that brotherhood is something worth fighting for, his final conclusion that the inevitability of isolation makes it impossible is in line with Engels' view that the consequences of industry make it a unattainable goal for many..