University of Virginia Library

The Preliminaries to Dr. Johnson's Dictionary: Authorial Revisions and the Establishment of the Texts
by
Gwin J. Kolb and Robert DeMaria, Jr. [*]

As is true for the editors of many other works, determining authorial revisions and establishing the texts were two of the principal duties we faced as editors of the preliminaries to Dr. Johnson's Dictionary of the English Language—chiefly the Preface, the History of the English Language, and the Grammar of the English Tongue. Fortunately, early in our research we learned that our tasks had been notably aided by the findings of previous investigators, specifically, W. R. Keast (in his "The Preface to A Dictionary of the English Language: Johnson's Revision and the Establishment of the Text"), Arthur Sherbo (in his "1773: The Year of Revision"), and Daisuke Nagashima (in his Johnson the Philologist).[1]

I
Preface: Alterations in Second and Fourth Editions

Keast initially collated the first four London folio editions of the Preface, all published during Johnson's lifetime (1755; 1755 again, set from the first edition and revised by Johnson; 1765, set from the second edition and unrevised; and 1773, set from the first edition and revised by Johnson). In his essay, he records, with his individual assessments, virtually all the variants, substantive and accidental, in the second and fourth editions. At the end, making clear his concurrence, which we share, with the Greg-Bowers theory of copy-text, he sums up: "Future editors must . . . adopt the text of the first edition as their copy-text and introduce into it the two sets of Johnsonian revisions from the second and fourth editions, together with such changes in

the accidentals from these texts as seem necessary for correctness or consistency" (p. 146).

Examining anew editions one through four as well as the "proprietors'" fifth (1784), sixth (1785), and seventh (1785), the latter for possible rectification of errors, we have arrived at the same general conclusion, although our estimate of variants has differed from Keast's in two instances. Specifically, we have accepted sixty-three of Keast's suggested readings, including his emendation of fall for full in paragraph 45; but we have rejected his choice of betwixt rather than between in paragraph 15 (we have found betwixt neither elsewhere in the Preface nor in the Plan of a Dictionary, the History, the Grammar, and Johnson's letters) and his emendation of semi for fair in paragraph 38 (we have adopted far, proposed by the reviewer of the Dictionary in the Monthly Review, 12 [1755], 300, n. 14). Moreover, we have (1) made decisions on three variants about which Keast was undecided (pp. 130, 131); (2) selected the replacement in paragraph 26 of a semi-colon for a comma (after "language") which appears in the second, third, and fourth editions and which Keast overlooked; and (3) recorded twelve accidental variants which appear only in the third edition, unrevised, to repeat, by Johnson.

II
Grammar: Alterations in Third Edition

Sherbo's essay, much less inclusive than Keast's, concentrates on Johnson's revisions for his fourth edition (1773) of Shakespeare's plays (of which George Steevens was a collaborator) and for the fourth folio edition (also 1773) of his Dictionary. But Sherbo mentions (p. 19) that in the third edition of the Dictionary Johnson, surely reacting to John Wilkes's witty remark on the mistake, modified his original comment, in the Grammar, about the letter H to read: "It seldom, perhaps never, except in compounded words, begins any but the first syllable" (our italics). His principal subject being Johnson's revisions in 1773, Sherbo says nothing else about authorial changes in the 1765 version of the Grammar.

However, our collation of the entire text reveals that Johnson did not revise the Grammar in the second edition but that he altered it in the third edition more often than anyone has ever pointed out. For example, of the thirty-three substantive variants originating in this edition, twenty-three can be confidently labeled "authorial." Fifteen of the twenty-three are additions which divide the Grammar into parts and sections—namely, "PART I. Of ORTHOGRAPHY." (with three roman section numbers), "PART II." (with six roman section numbers), "PART III.", and "PART IV." (with two roman section numbers) (sigs. L1r, L1v, L2v, M1r, M1v, N1r, N2r, and N2v). Four more are also additions—three the identifications of authors of quoted passages on sig. O1r ("Pope.", Elijah "Fenton.", and David "Lewis."), the fourth an entire sentence following that on sig. L2r ending in "as frosty winter"

("Yet I am of opinion that both w and y are always vowels, because they cannot after a vowel be used with the sound which is supposed to make them consonants"). The four remaining authorial revisions consist of clarifications or corrections in as many statements: (1) "None of the small consonants have a double form, except s, s" is altered to "None of the consonants have a double form, except the small s, s" (sig. L1r); (2) as pointed out above, the assertion that the letter H "seldom, perhaps never, begins any but the first syllable . . ." becomes "seldom, perhaps never, except in compounded words, begins . . ." (sig. L2r); (3) "But it may be observed of y as of w, that it follows a vowel without any hiatus, as rosy youth" is changed to "It may . . . youth, but yet that it cannot be sounded after a vowel" (sig. L2v); and (4) in the sentence "The verse of twelve lines, called an Alexandrine, is now only used to diversify heroick lines," "twelve lines" is corrected to "twelve syllables" (sig. O1r). We have adopted all the revisions in this group except two, the identification of the author David "Lewis," which was expanded to "Lewis to Pope" in the fourth edition (see below) and (3) above, which was superseded by Johnson's revision in the fourth edition (see below).

The rest of the substantive alterations can be divided into the four which we think Johnson probably made and the six which he possibly made. The first of the former group changes "gradation" to "gradations" in the sentence reading, in part, "In treating on the letters, I shall not . . . enquire into the original of their form . . . ; nor into the properties and gradation of sounds . . ." (sig. L1r). "Gradations," denoting plurality and diversity, clearly describes human sounds more accurately than does the singular "gradation," as the accompanying term "properties" evinces. And Johnson seems the plausible cause of the shift, although a careful compositor or proof corrector cannot be entirely ruled out. Likewise, the "as" inserted after "consonant" in the phrase "is a consonant, as ye, young" (sigs. L2r-L2v) and that inserted after "ain" in the phrase "except words in ain, as cértain" (sig. N2v) are likely authorial additions, although, again, another person might have been responsible for them. The same comment applies to the correct replacement of "hung" by "stunk" in the original sequence of "drunk, sunk, shrunk, hung, come" (sig. M2v). We have adopted all these variants.

The last group of changes could have been made, we conclude, either by Johnson or by another person. The first is the deletion of the superfluous "it" in the sentence on sig. L1v originally beginning "F, . . ., it is numbered. . . ." We have adopted this correction. The next three consist of alterations from the plural to the singular form of verbs—" Wr imply" to "implies," "Sw imply" to "implies," and "C1 denote" to "denotes" (sig. N1v). An examination of the context immediately reveals the reason for the change: to achieve conformity between the number of the verbs and that of neighboring comparable verbs. However, since, as we note below, the fourth edition of the Grammar contains the plural form of all the verbs just described, we have chosen the same form for our text. The fifth variant, occurring too in the fourth edition, corrects the letters "ly" to "ty" in the sentence "Words ending in ly have their accent on the antepenult, as pusillanímity, actívity" (sig. N2v). We have

adopted this correction. Added to the beginning of line 4 ("Shall that holy fire") of Michael Drayton's "An Ode Written in the Peake" (sig. N2v), the word "Or" is the final member of this group. Johnson or someone else, we surmise, noticing that the line, unlike the others in the poem, lacks six syllables, and not consulting an independent text, proceeded to regularize the line by prefixing the "Or" (cf. the two appearances of "Or" in the last stanza). But we have retained the five-syllable line (also in the fourth edition) because it occurs in all early editions of Drayton's poem, including that (1748) from which Johnson drew illustrative passages in the Dictionary.[2]

Besides the thirty-three substantive differences, the third folio edition of the Grammar contains thirty-seven accidental variations from both its predecessors and its successor, two only from its predecessors, and one only from its successor. Twenty-three of these are changes in punctuation, eight in spelling, four in accent marks, three in italics, one in the location of a sentence, and one in the position of a word. We have accepted two of the alterations in punctuation: (1) On sig. L1v, the single sentence reading in part: "C, . . . , never ends a word; therefore we write stick, block, . . ., in such words C is now mute" becomes two sentences by the replacement of a period for the comma immediately preceding the phrase "in such words"; Johnson seems to us the probable source of the change. (2) On sig. L2v, the period following the sentence beginning "Had he written" and concluding "appeared thus" (succeeded by four lines of poetry) is changed to a colon (i. e., "thus:"); since the same change occurs in the fourth edition, Johnson might have been the cause of it. The remaining twenty-one variants in punctuation are either manifestly improper or less suitable to their contexts than their alternatives in the first, second, and fourth editions.

We have adopted two of the changes in spelling. (1) On sig. M1r, below the line of poetry ending "noble savage ran" (Dryden's Conquest of Granada, Part I, l. 1.209), "Dryd." is expanded to "Dryden," which, possibly Johnson's revision, harmonizes with "Milton" located directly above (and below a passage from Paradise Lost, I, ll. 1-3). (2) On sig. O1r, in the line of poetry beginning "Fairest piece" (Edmund Waller's "To Zelinda," l. 1), "welform'd" becomes "well-form'd," the same spelling as that in the wordlist of Johnson's Dictionary, where Waller's line is cited under well (adverb, sense 13). The other six variants are either errors or less preferable than their alternatives.

On sig. N2v, in the sentence beginning "1. Of dissyllables," an accent mark is correctly placed above "fáirer," thereby correcting a mistake in the first, second, and fourth editions. Similarly, in the sentence beginning "4. All dissyllables" accent marks are correctly placed above "cránny," "lábour," and "fávour," thus remedying an omission in the first, second, and fourth editions. Johnson might have been responsible for all these changes, which we have adopted.

On the other hand, we have accepted none of the remaining groups of

accidental variants in the third edition. The first three changes diverge from the pattern of italicizing evident in the first, second, and fourth editions. Forming the fourth difference, a short sentence is transferred—inadvertently, we assume—from its proper location, as evidenced by the context, to the end of the next paragraph. And the final difference—the location of the name of an author—is superseded by the location of the same word in the fourth edition.

III
Grammar: Alterations in Fourth Edition

The fourth edition of the Grammar, set, like the Preface, from the first edition, contains seventy-seven substantive, and one hundred and forty-two accidental, variants from the first, second, and third editions. Of the former group, Sherbo cites (pp. 19, 20, 29-33) thirty-four, which are starred below. Nagashima counts (p. 146) a total of twenty-seven, excluding the addition of the names of the ten poets whose lines are quoted in the section on Prosody (sigs. N2r-O1r), and he reproduces (pp. 147-148) two variants—a revision of a phrase (see below) and one addition to the text (see below). Neither he nor Sherbo mentions the accidental differences in the fourth edition.

The substantive variants can be divided into fifty additions and twenty-seven revisions (including omissions). The additions range from whole paragraphs and sentences through parts of sentences to single words. Since Johnson's hand is clearly discernible in most of them and consonant with the small remainder, we have admitted all of these additions into our text. Arranged sequentially from the beginning to the end of the Grammar, they are:

• (1) "Saxon" and below "Saxon" two columns of the capital and small letters of the "Saxon" alphabet (sig. a1r); a similar list, it should be pointed out, appears at the end of the Grammar in editions one through eight (1756-86) of the abridged Dictionary
• (2) "and consequently able to pronounce the letters, of which I teach the pronunciation;" in the sentence beginning "I consider" (ibid.)
• (3) "as in věx, pěrplexity" in the sentence beginning "It is always short" (sig. a1v)
• (4) "in his Remains" in the sentence beginning "Camden" (ibid.)
• (5) "This faintness of sound is found when e separates a mute from a liquid, as in rotten; or follows a mute and liquid, as in cattle.", forming a new paragraph after the sentence ending in "lucre" (ibid.)
• (6) "Many is pronounced as if it were written manny.", forming a new paragraph after the sentence ending in "frog" (ibid.)
• (7) "having no determinate sound," after the letter "C," which also begins the sentence (ibid.)
• (8) "to which may be added Egypt and" after "gingle" and before "gypsy" in the sentence beginning "G before" (sig. a2r)
• (9) "It sometimes begins middle or final syllables in words compounded, as blockhead; or derived from the Latin, as comprehended," forming a new paragraph after the sentence beginning "It seldom" (ibid.); see also the revision above
• (10) "because sc is sounded like s, as in scene" after "sceptick" in the sentence beginning "K has" (ibid.)
• (11) "in modern pronunciation" following "sound" in the sentence beginning "It is used" (ibid.)

---

126




• (12) "stripe" added between "stramen" and "sventura" in the sentence beginning "Σβέννυμι" (ibid.)
• (13) "words ending in ty," added after "from" and before "as" in the sentence beginning "Ti before" (ibid.)
• (14) "and in" after "compounds;" and before "that" in the sentence beginning "The sound" (ibid.)
• *(15) "The chief argument by which w and y appear to be always vowels is, that the sounds which they are supposed to have as consonants, cannot be uttered after a vowel, like that of all other consonants; thus we say, tu, ut; do, odd; but in wed, dew, the two sounds of w have no resemblance of each other," forming a new paragraph after the sentence ending in "rosy youth" (ibid.)
• *(16) "The English language has properly no dialects; the stile of writers has no professed diversity in the use of words, or of their flexions, and terminations, nor differs but by different degrees of skill or care. The oral diction is uniform in no spacious country, but has less variation in England than in most other nations of equal extent. The language of the northern counties retains many words now out of use, but which are commonly of the genuine Teutonick race, and is uttered with a pronunciation which now seems harsh and rough, but was probably used by our ancestors. The northern speech is therefore not barbarous but obsolete. The speech in the western provinces seems to differ from the general diction rather by a depraved pronunciation, than by any real difference which letters would express," forming a new paragraph after the sentence ending in "have followed them" (sig. a2v)
• *(17) "An or a can only be joined with a singular, the correspondent plural is the noun without an article, as I want a pen, I want pens: or with the pronominal adjective some, as I want some pens," forming a new paragraph after "Shakespeare" (sig. b1r)
• *(18) "Dr. Lowth, on the other part, supposes the possessive pronouns mine and thine to be genitive cases," added after the sentence ending in "Latin genitive" (ibid.)
• (19) "for the most part" after "have" and before "no genitives" in the sentence beginning "Plurals ending" (ibid.)
• *(20) "They would commonly produce a troublesome ambiguity, as the Lord's house may be the house of Lords, or the house of a Lord. Besides that the mark of elision is improper, for in the Lords' house nothing is cut off. Some English substantives, like those of many other languages, change their termination as they express different sexes, as prince, princess; actor, actress; lion, lioness; hero, heroines. To these mentioned by Dr. Lowth may be added arbitress, poetess, chauntress, duchess, tigress, governess, tutress, peeress, authoress, traytress, and perhaps others. Of these variable terminations we have only a sufficient number to make us feel our want, for when we say of a woman that she is a philosopher, an astronomer, a builder, a weaver, a dancer, we perceive an impropriety in the termination which we cannot avoid; but we can say that she is an architect, a botanist, a student, because these terminations have not annexed to them the notion of sex. In words which the necessities of life are often requiring, the sex is distinguished not by different terminations but by different names, as a bull, a cow; a horse, a mare; equus, equa; a cock, a hen; and sometimes by pronouns prefixed, as a he-goat, a she-goat," appearing after the sentence ending in "against them" (ibid.); this addition (partly) quoted by Nagashima
• (21) "some" added to the sentence ending in "the same" (sig. b1v)
• *(22) "as, thy house is larger than mine, but my garden is more spacious than thine" added to the sentence ending in "substantive preceding" (ibid.)
• *(23) "they, when they is the plural of it," after "likewise of" and before "and are" in the sentence beginning "Their and" (ibid.)
• *(24) "At least it was common to say, the man which, though I remember no example of, the thing who" after the sentence ending in "anciently confounded" (sig. b1v)
• (25) "or hath" after "he has" and before "had" in the line beginning "Sing." and under the "Compound Preterite" form of the verb to have (sig. b2r)

---

127




• *(26) "This, by custom at least, appears more easy than the other form of expressing the same sense by a negative adverb after the verb, I like her, but love her not" after the sentence beginning "It is frequently" (sig. b2v)
• *(27) "of former times" after "purer writers" and before "after if" in the sentence beginning "It is used" (ibid.)
• (28) "till or until" after "before" and before "whether" in the same sentence identified above (ibid.)
• *(29) "Wrote however may be used in poetry; at least if we allow any authority to poets, who, in the exultation of genius, think themselves perhaps intitled to trample on grammarians," after the sentence ending in "The book is wrote" (ibid.)
• (30) "and" after "worshipful," and before "to worship" in the sentence beginning "Thus worship" (sig. c1v)
• *(31) "made by beating different bodies into one mass" after "for food," in the sentence beginning "There are in English" (ibid.)
• (32) "θυγαΤήρ" after "πορθμόζ" and before "μεαλοζ" in the sentence beginning "It is certain" (sigs. c1v-c2r)
• (33) "We should therefore say dispútable, indispútable, rather than dísputable, indísputable; and advertísement rather than advértisement" after the sentence beginning "16." and ending in "commúnicableness" (sig. c2v)
• *(34) "The variations necessary to pleasure belong to the art of poetry, not the rules of grammar" after the sentence beginning "In all" and ending in "observed" (sig. d1r)
• *(35) "Walton's Angler." below the line of poetry "Are but toys" (ibid.)
• *(36) "Old Ballad." below the line of poetry "Lovers felt annoy" (ibid.)
• *(37) "Waller." below the line of poetry ending in "your haughty birth" (ibid.)
• *(38) "The measures of twelve and fourteen syllables, were often mingled by our old poets, sometimes in alternate lines, and sometimes in alternate couplets" after the line of poetry ending in "distract" (ibid.)
• *(39) "Lewis to Pope." below the line of poetry ending in "see" (ibid.)
• *(40) "Beneath this tomb an infant lies
  To earth whose body lent,
  Hereafter shall more glorious rise,
  But not more innocent.
  When the Archangel's trump shall blow,
  And souls to bodies join,
  What crowds shall wish their lives below
  Had been as short as thine.
  Wesley." below "Lewis to Pope" (ibid.)
  
• *(41) "Dr. Pope." below the line of poetry ending in "awáy" (ibid.)
• *(42) "Dr. Pope." below the line of poetry ending in "proúd" (ibid.)
• *(43) "When présent, we lóve, and when ábsent agrée" below "Dr. Pope." in the addition listed above (ibid.)
• *(44) "Dryden." below the line of poetry ending in "mé" (ibid.)
• *(45) "'Tis the divinity that stirs within us," below the sentence ending in "measure" (ibid.)
• *(46) "Addison." below the line of poetry ending in "man" (ibid.)
• *(47) "Prior." below the line of poetry ending in "abounded" (ibid.)
• *(48) "Glover." below the line of poetry ending in "alone" (ibid.)
• *(49) "Gay." below the line of poetry ending in "reclin'd" (ibid.)
• *(50) "Ballad." below the line of poetry ending in "right" (ibid.).

Like the additions, the twenty-seven revisions (including omissions) strike us, with one exception, as obviously authorial or else consistent with Johnson's mode of composition. Therefore we have admitted all of them save one into our text. Listed in the same order as the additions, they are:

• (1) "disquisition" substituted for "view" in the sentence beginning "I consider the English" (sig. a1r)
• (2) "metre" omitted from the sentence ending originally in "participle, metre, lucre" (sig. a1v)
• (3) "consonant" omitted from the phrase reading originally "w consonant, as" in the sentence beginning "It coalesces with" (ibid.)
• (4) "geld" substituted for "gold" in the phrase reading originally "gear, gold, geese" in the sentence beginning "G before e is soft" (sig. a2r)
• *(5) "perhaps never" omitted from the sentence beginning originally "[H] seldom, perhaps never, begins" (ibid.); see Johnson's revisions above
• (6) "snipe" substituted for "strife" between "smell" and "space" in the sentence beginning "Σβένννμζ, scatter" (ibid.)
• (7) "and" substituted for "the" in the phrase reading originally "The learned, the sagacious Wallis," which also begins the sentence (sig. b1r); this change noted by Nagashima
• *(8) "Do and did are thus used only for the present and simple preterite" substituted for the original sentence "Do is thus used only in the simple tenses" (sig. b2v)
• (9) "wend, the participle is gone" substituted for the original phrase "wend, and the participle gone" in the sentence beginning "Yet from flee" (sig. c1r)
• (10) "indecent" substituted for "indecency" in the phrase reading originally "indecency, inelegant, improper" in the sentence beginning "In borrowing adjectives" (ibid.)
• (11) "will not suffer h to be twice repeated" substituted for "prevails, lest h should be twice repeated" in the sentence beginning "These should rather" (sig. c1v)
• (12) "batter" substituted for "butter" in the phrase reading originally "to batter, butter" in the sentence beginning "There are in English" (ibid.); see the related addition above
• (13) "imply" substituted for "implies" in the sentence reading originally "Sn usually implies" (ibid.)
• (14) "denote" substituted for "denotes" in the phrase reading originally "sn denotes nasus" in the sentence beginning "But as if from" (ibid.)
• (15) "imply" substituted for "implies" in the sentence beginning originally "Bl implies" (ibid.)
• (16) "imply" substituted for "implies" in the sentence beginning originally "St in like manner implies" (ibid.)
• (17) "denote" substituted for "denotes" in the phrase reading originally "st denotes" in the sentence beginning "In all these" (ibid.)
• (18) "imply" substituted for "implies" in the sentence beginning originally "Thr implies" (ibid.)
• (19) "imply" substituted for "implies" in the sentence beginning originally "Sp implies" (ibid.)
• (20) "denote" substituted for "denotes" in the sentence beginning originally "Sl denotes" (ibid.)
• (21) "indicate" substituted for "indicates" in the sentence beginning originally "And so likewise . . . indicates" (ibid.)
• *(22) "path, pfad," omitted from the phrase reading originally "as path, pfad, ax" in the sentence beginning "It is certain" (sigs. c1v-c2r)
• (23) "heal" omitted from the phrase reading originally "whole, heal, from" in the same sentence identified above (ibid.)
• (24) "πα[Τζο]" omitted from the phrase reading originally "from πα[Τ]οζ, αξίνη" in the same sentence identified above (ibid.)
• (25) "εἰλέω" omitted from the same sentence identified above and ending originally in "ὅλοζ, εἰλέω" (ibid.)
• (26) "neglected" substituted for "omitted" in the sentence beginning "Wallis therefore has" (sig. c2v)
• (27) The single revision we have not adopted is the erroneous "in" rather than

  ---

  129

  
  
  
  "into" (occurring in the first, second, and third editions) in the phrase "sc in sh" in the sentence beginning "The contractions may" (sig. c2r).

Of the one hundred and forty-two accidental variants in the fourth edition of the Grammar, one hundred and twenty-nine concern punctuation, four spelling, three italics, two accent marks, two word order, one capitalization, and one a symbol for the letter r. We have adopted one hundred and twenty-two changes in punctuation, although we recognize that some of them may have been made by a compositor or a proof corrector rather than Johnson. Four of the remainder are patent mistakes (the first, second, and third editions all contain the correct marks); two more are less suitable to their contexts than are their counterparts; and the last one, like the rejected variants in spelling noted below, diverges from that in the edition of Michael Drayton's poems Johnson used in compiling the Dictionary. We have accepted one variant (a correction) in spelling; the rest, like the rejected punctuation mark noted above, depart from the text of Drayton's poems Johnson used in preparing the Dictionary. Finally, we have adopted all three variants in italics (one probably authorial, the other two corrections), one accent mark (a correction, the second being an error), the two in word order (one almost certainly authorial, the other possibly so), the one in capitalization (probably authorial), and the character for the letter r (almost certainly authorial).

IV
Grammar: Alterations in Other Editions, and Emendations

Selecting as modifications of our first edition copy-text those substantive and accidental variants in the third and fourth editions of the Grammar assuredly or probably or possibly authorial has been the most difficult part of our textual responsibilities, and we are keenly aware that our choices sometimes rest on very slender evidence. On the other hand, detecting the certain or relative rightness of assorted competing variants in the first, second (unrevised), fifth (1784, unrevised), sixth (1785), and seventh (1785) editions presented fewer problems. Eight of the seventeen substantive selections from the first edition (all also in the fourth edition and five in the third) were replaced by incorrect readings in the second edition; another four names of works and authors and two names of works (all six also in the fourth edition) were reduced to authors' names; and three verbs were reduced from the plural (all also in the fourth edition) to the singular number. Of the fifty-four accidentals chosen from the first edition (thirty-two punctuation, eighteen spelling, one accent, one italics, one capitalization, and one the position of a sentence), we have judged twenty-six to be correct readings, twenty-eight preferable (usually owing to their certain or putative adherence to Johnson's copy-texts for quoted passages) to their alternatives.

Although unrevised, the second edition of the Grammar has supplied our text with (1) nine substantive readings—eight corrections of mistakes in the

first edition and an expansion of the initial "B." to "Ben" (sig. M1v), which also appears in the third and fourth editions; and (2) twenty accidentals, which correct a variety of slips. Likewise, the fifth edition has added four more correct readings—two substantive, two accidental—to our text. And our collation of the sixth edition has increased the number of correct readings by three—two substantive and one accidental. We found nothing more in the seventh edition.

Of the preliminaries to the unabridged (folio) Dictionary, only the Grammar appears in at least the first seven editions of the "proprietors'" abridged (octavo) version. Our collation showed that the first octavo edition (1756) of the Grammar was set from the first folio edition, the second octavo (1760) from the first, the third (1766) from the third folio edition, the fourth (1770) from the third octavo, the fifth (1773) from the fourth octavo, the sixth (1778) from the fourth folio edition, and the seventh (1783) from the sixth octavo. Our collation also revealed no signs of authorial revisions in any of the octavo editions of the Grammar.

Lastly, in the formation of our text, we have emended the text of the Grammar by altering three words. On sig. c2r, in the phrase "apex, a piece; peak, pike; zophorus, freese," "a piece" has been changed to "apice," which appears in John Wallis's Grammatica linguae Anglicanae (fourth edition 1674), from which Johnson drew the phrase and numerous other parts of his Grammar.[3] Also on sig. c2r, in the phrase "so in scapha [rightly "scapha" in the fifth edition], skiff, skip," "skip" has been changed to "ship," the proper translation, along with skiff, of the Latin scapha; ship also occurs, it should be noted, in Wallis's Grammar. Again on sig. c2r, in the phrase "and spell, a messenger, from epistola," "messenger" has been altered to "message," the correct translation of Wallis's "nuncium."

Neither in the Grammar nor in the History have we emended the passages—a great many in the History—which Johnson quotes from other writers. But wherever mistakes obstruct a reader's comprehension of the text we have supplied correct readings in our textual notes.

V
History: Alterations in Fourth Edition

Our collation of the "proprietors'" first seven editions of the unabridged Dictionary revealed that Johnson (slightly) revised only the fourth edition of his History of the English Language. Four substantive changes in this edition are certainly authorial: (1) the phrase "mixed in considerable numbers with the Saxons without" is altered to "mixed with another in considerable numbers without" (sig. D1r); (2) "and has been twice published" is expanded to "and having been twice published before, has been lately reprinted at Oxford,

under the inspection of Mr. Lye, the editor of Junius" (ibid.); (3) in the next sentence, "both descended" becomes "both have descended" (ibid.); and (4) in the sentence beginning "Dryden, who mistakes . . . and, in confidence" is changed to "Dryden, who, mistaking . . ., in confidence" (sig. F1v). In his article, Sherbo records (pp. 28-29) the second of these alterations; in his study, Nagashima records (pp. 35-36) the first, second, and fourth, as well as two variants in punctuation which we have not adopted in our text.[4]

Besides accepting these four variants from the fourth edition, we have retained fourteen substantive readings in the first edition which were corrupted in the second (ten), third (three), and fourth (one) editions: (1) "On þis. . . . eorl of Albamar þe þe king" (sig. E1v) instead of "Albamar þe king" (2nd ed.); (2) "changes of its own forms and terminations" (sig. E2r) instead of "changes of its own form and terminations" (2nd ed.); (3) "kynz Alfred to ys wylle" (sig. E2v) instead of "in ys wylle" (3rd ed.) in the line of poetry beginning "To þe kẏnz;" (4) "And that that men gon upward" (sig. F1r) instead of "than that men" (4th ed.); (5) "thei ben 31500 myles" (sig. F1v) instead of "thei ben 315000 myles" (2nd ed.); (6) "I that . . . am compelled to fele" (sig. F2r) instead of "and compelled" (3rd ed.); (7) "Alas Alas how . . .: and yet refusythe" (ibid.) instead of "add yet refusythe" (2nd ed.); (8) "But I . . . was amasyd or astonyed" (sig. F2v) instead of "amasyd and astonyed" (2nd ed.); (9) "This . . . knight had ben" (sig. G1v) instead of "knight hath ben" (2nd ed.); (10) "Of the works . . . it was necessary" (sig. G2v) instead of "is was necessary" (3rd ed.); (11) "Hee was . . . for the suretie or encrease" (sig. I1r) instead of "suretie and encrease" (2nd ed.); (12) "For whom . . . som by writing and secret messengers" (sig. I2r) instead of "writing or secret messengers" (2nd ed.); (13) "Vnto whiche . . . king aunswered" (sig. I2v) instead of "sting aunswered" (2nd ed.); (14) "Long was . . . Lucke" (ibid.) instead of "Luke" (2nd ed.). Lastly, we have adopted one substantive correction in the second ("being diffused among those classes" [sig. G2v] instead of "being disused among"), third, and fourth editions; and one appearing only in the third edition, the insertion of "not" between "does" and "allow" in the clause "which the paucity of books does not allow" (sig. F2r).

According to our collation, the number of accidental variants in the first four editions of the History totals two hundred and twenty-nine. Of this number, one hundred and fifty-eight concern spelling, sixty-four concern punctuation, six capitalization, and one italics. We have retained one hundred and fifty first-edition spellings, all of words in quoted passages, which we have checked against their originals whenever possible. We have also accepted five second-edition corrections of misspellings in quoted passages, two fourth-edition spellings (one possibly authorial, the other a correction of a mistake in a quoted passage), and one third-edition spelling, which, since it also appears in the fourth edition, is possibly authorial. Again, we have retained fifty-one first-edition versions of punctuation in quoted passages

and five in Johnson's own prose; and have admitted six second-edition versions in quoted passages plus two corrections in Johnson's prose. Likewise, we have retained six first-edition versions of capitalization in quoted passages and have adopted one second-edition use of italics in a quoted passage.

VI
Preface to Abridged Edition and Advertisement to Fourth Edition

In addition to the Preface, the Grammar, and the History, two other short pieces fall under the heading of "preliminaries" to Johnson's Dictionary— the "Preface" to the abridged (octavo) version and the "Advertisement" to the fourth folio edition. As indicated above, seven editions of the former appeared in Johnson's lifetime. Our collation of all of them disclosed only one small substantive variant and seven equally small accidental differences: nothing to suggest any kind of authorial revision or the need for any emendation. Therefore we have retained first-edition readings throughout the text.

As also noted above, the fifth, sixth, and seventh editions of the "proprietors'" unabridged Dictionary were published in 1784 and 1785. Our collation of the three printings of the "Advertisement" turned up no substantive, and only six accidental, variants and no evidence of textual corruption. Consequently, we have retained everywhere the original readings in the fourth edition.

VII
Summary

In conclusion, we append brief assorted comments which largely restate or extend remarks running the risk of being overlooked amid the mass of details forming the body of this article. Johnson revised the second and fourth editions of the Preface to his unabridged Dictionary, the third and fourth editions of his Grammar, and the fourth edition of his History. We can offer an explanation for only the alterations in the fourth edition—namely, Johnson's agreement with the bookseller proprietors (apparently arrived at in 1771) to revise the fourth, which was published early in 1773 (Reddick, pp. 89-90, 170). Neither the changes made in the preliminaries to that edition nor those made earlier in the second and third editions exhibit constant examination and care. It is obvious, for example, that Johnson spent little time indeed scrutinizing the passages in the History which he borrowed from other authors. Keast's generalizations about the revisions in the Preface apply equally well to the companion pieces: without exception Johnson's revisions "were rather casual performances, not at all like his thorough-going work on the Rambler. He evidently read rapidly through the text[s], mending or improving where something happened to catch his eye" (p. 145).

Yet these actions, occasional though they were, possess considerable interest

and value. They show a brilliant writer in the process of re-composition, and they increase one's knowledge of the making of the preliminaries—the first a truly noble pronouncement, the other two meriting scholarly attention—to the greatest one-man dictionary of English ever published. By including in our first-edition copy-texts certain, probable, and possible authorial revisions, along with other substantive and accidental variants deemed necessary for correctness and consistency, we have provided for our reader a fuller, more accurate rendering of the preliminaries than has hitherto been available.

Notes