the same with regard to the Duddon Sonnets.

They were

first published in 1820: but No. XIV., beginning—

"O Mountain Stream; the shepherd and his cot,"

was certainly composed in or before the year 1807, because it appears in the edition of that year. On the other hand, the series of "Poems composed during a tour in Scotland, and on the English Border, in the autumn of 1831"and first published in the year 1835, in the volume entitled Yarrow revisited, and other Poems-contains two, which Wordsworth himself tells us were composed earlier; and there is no reason why these poems should not be restored to their chronological place. The series of itinerary sonnets, published along with them in the edition of 1834, is the record of a supplemental Scottish tour, in the year 1833; and Wordsworth says of them that they were "composed, or suggested, during a tour in the summer of 1833." We cannot now know which of them were written during the tour, and which at Rydal Mount after his return; but it is obvious that they should be printed in the order in which they were left by him, in 1834. [It may here be noted that almost all the "Evening Voluntaries" belong to these years-1832 to 1835-when the author was from sixty-two to sixtyfive years of age.]

Wordsworth's habit of revision may perhaps explain the mistakes into which he occasionally fell as to the dates of his poems, and the difficulty of reconciling what he says as to the year of composition with the date assigned by his sister in her journal. When he says "written in 1801, or 1802," he may be referring to the last revision which he gave to his work. Certain it is, that he sometimes gave a date for the composition, which was subsequent to the first publication of the poem in question.

In the case of poems to which no date is attached, we must

try to find some clue by which to fix an approximate one. Obviously, it will not do to place all the undated poems in a class by themselves. Such an arrangement would be thoroughly artificial; and, while we are in many instances left to conjecture, we can always say that such and such a poem was composed not later than a particular year. When the precise date is quite undiscoverable, I have thought it best to place the poem in or immediately before the year in which it was first published.

It is further to be noted that some of the poems were several years in process of composition, having evidently been laid aside, and taken up again repeatedly; e.g., the Ode on Immortality was written at intervals from 1803 to 1806, and The Prelude, as already stated, from 1799 to 1805. In such cases, the poems are always placed in the year in which they were finished. Disputable questions as to the date of any particular poem will be dealt with in the editorial note appended to it.

Mr Arnold's rearrangement of the Poems, in his volume. of Selections, recently published,' is extremely interesting and valuable; but, as to the method of grouping adopted, I am not sure that it is better than Wordsworth's own. As a descriptive title, "Poems of Sentiment and Reflection" may be as good as "Poems akin to the Antique," and "Poems of the Fancy" quite as appropriate as "Poems of Ballad Form.' "12

A second distinctive feature of this edition is the publi

1 Poems of Wordsworth selected and arranged by Matthew Arnold. London: Macmillan & Co.

As the chronological arrangement is not only important in itself, but also in its bearing on other features of this edition, a complete list of the poems, thus arranged, is given at the close of the Preface to this volume. It is perhaps too much to hope, however-even after every effort has been made that perfect accuracy as to the date of each poem, in a list of between eight and nine hundred, has been finally secured.

cation of all the various Readings, or variations of text, sanctioned by Wordsworth during his lifetime. Few English poets have changed their text more frequently, or with more fastidiousness than Wordsworth. He did not always alter it for the better. Every alteration however, whether for the better or for the worse, is here printed in full. We have thus a record of the fluctuations of his own mind as to the form in which he wished his poems to appear; and it will be found that this record casts considerable light on the development of his genius.1

A knowledge of these changes of text can only be obtained in one or other of two ways. Either the reader must have access to all the thirty-two editions of the works, the publication of which Wordsworth personally supervised; or, he must have all the changes in the successive editions, exhibited in the form of footnotes, and appended to the particular text that is selected and printed in the body of the work. Now, it is extremely difficult-in some cases quite impossible-to obtain the early editions. The great public libraries of the country do not possess them all. It is therefore necessary to fall back upon the latter plan, which seems the only one by which a knowledge of the changes of the text can be made accessible, either to the general reader, or to the special student of English Poetry.

The text which-after much consideration-I have resolved to place throughout in the body of the work is Wordsworth's own final textus receptus, i.e., the text of

1 It need hardly be explained that, in the case of a modern poet, these various readings are not like the conjectural guesses of critics and commentators as to what the original text was (as in the case of the Greek Poets, or of Dante, or even of Shakespere). They are the actual alterations introduced deliberately, as improvements, by the hand of the poet himself.

2 Even the collection in the British Museum is incomplete.

1849-50, and of the posthumous edition of 1857;1 and since opinion will doubtless differ as to the wisdom of this selection, it may be desirable to state at some length the reasons which have led me to adopt it.

There are only three possible courses open to an editor, who wishes to give-along with the text selected-all the various readings chronologically arranged as footnotes. Either, 1st, the earliest text may be taken, or 2d, the latest may be followed, or 3d, the text may be selected from different editions, so as to present each poem in its best state (according to the judgment of the editor), in whatever edition it is found. A composite text, made up from two or more editions, would be inadmissible.

Now, every one who has studied the subject knows (or believes) that Wordsworth's best text is to be found, for one poem in the earliest edition, for another in the latest, and for a third in some intermediate edition. I cannot agree either with the statement that he always altered for the worse, or that he always altered for the better. His critical judgment was not nearly so unerring in this respect as Coleridge's was, or as Tennyson's has been. It may be difficult, therefore, to assign an altogether satisfactory reason for adopting either the earliest or the latest text; and at first sight, the remaining alternative plan may seem the wisest of the three. There are indeed difficulties in the way of the adoption of any one of the methods suggested; and as I adopt the latest text-not because it is always intrinsically the best, but on other grounds to be immediately stated-it may clear the way, if reference be made in the first instance to the others, and to the reasons for abandoning them.

1 The publication of this edition was superintended by Mr Carter, who acted as Wordsworth's secretary for thirty-seven years, and was appointed one of his literary executors.

As to a selection of the text from various editions, this would doubtless be the best plan, were it a practicable one; and perhaps it may be attainable some day. But Wordsworth is as yet too near us for such a treatment of his works to be successful. The fundamental objection to it is that scarcely two minds-even amongst the most competent of contemporary judges—will agree as to what the best text is. An edition arranged on this principle could not possibly be acceptable to more than a few persons. Of course no arrangement of any kind will escape adverse criticism. It would be most unfortunate if it did. But this particular edition would fail in its main purpose, if questions of individual taste were made primary, and not secondary; and an arrangement, which gave scope for the arbitrary selection of particular texts, according to the wisdom or want of wisdom of the editor, would certainly meet with the most adverse criticism in many quarters. Besides, such a method of arrangement would not harmonise with the special idea of this edition, that, viz., of giving a genetic view of the poet's mind, and of the development of his genius. If an editor wished to indicate his own opinion of the best text for each poem-under the idea that his judgment might be of some use to other people-it would be wiser to do so by means of some mark or marginal note, than by printing his selected text in the main body of the work. He could thus at once preserve the chronological order of the readings, indicate his own preference, and leave it to others to select what they preferred. Besides, the compiler of such an edition would often find himself in doubt as to what the best text really was, the merit of the different readings being sometimes almost equal, or very nearly balanced; and, were he to endeavour to get out of the difficulty by obtaining the judgments of literary men, or even of contemporary poets, he would find that their opinions would in most cases