^{Note 1 in page 140} When his cousin Cleveland was laboring under the loss of his wife and child, Percy recommended that he take up the study of genealogy and heraldry—as a distraction and a solace. See Alice C. C. Gaussen, Percy: Prelate and Poet (London, 1908), p. 137.

^{Note 2 in page 140} Letter to Dr. Birch, July 27, 1765, Nichols, Illustrations of Literature, vii, 577–578.

^{Note 3 in page 140} To be sure, there was his neighbor and early patron, the Earl of Sussex, with whom he became friends and in whose fine library he pursued his studies. But Sussex was not literary, and Percy's approach must be so. Sussex died Jan. 8, 1758, and was succeeded by his brother, who continued the patronage to Percy. But he was a man of fashion and thus not likely to be concerned with Percy's studies.—See Nichols, loc. cit., p. 250.

^{Note 4 in page 140} In the famous letter written after the quarrel over Pennant (see note 35 below), Johnson says, “So much extension of mind, and so much minute accuracy of enquiry, if you survey your whole circle of acquaintance, you will find so scarce, if you find it at all, that you will value Percy by comparison.” See Boswell's Johnson, ed. Hill, iii, 278.

^{Note 5 in page 140} Grainger praises him for it in one translation: “Your Elegy charms me. It is no less elegant than literal” (May 1758, Nichols, loc. cit., p. 254). Note that the literal is taken for granted. See also pp. 244, 250–251, 256–257, 258, 268.

^{Note 6 in page 140} See Hans Hecht, “Thomas Percy und William Shenstone,” Quellen und Forschungen, ciii (1909), 4, 10, 14–16, 23, 33–34, 35.

^{Note 7 in page 140} August 3, 1759, ibid., p. 21.

^{Note 8 in page 141} Perhaps Shenstone's attitude fostered this uncertainty. About one of the translations Shenstone advises him “to make it as just to the Author and to y^r own Sentiments as you can, and afterwards employe me as a mere Musick-master ...; at most to retrench any little Incroachments upon Simplicity, ease of Style, and Harmony.” (Ibid., p. 17.) See also pp. 30, 31, 45, 51, 66, 79, 88.

Possible warrant for Shenstone's opinion may be read into a different occasion. Percy was reading aloud Grainger's Sugar-Cane. When a burst of laughter greeted the passage on rats, Percy seemed much taken aback. He explained that Grainger had altered the text since he had seen it, but perhaps he was unaware that it was an anticlimax. So one might conclude from the context. See Boswell's Johnson, ed. Hill, ii, 453–454, and note.

^{Note 9 in page 141} It is probable too that the terrible drubbing given by Smollett in the Critical Review (Dec., 1758) to Grainger's translation of Tibullus, on which Percy had helped, made Percy desirous of a shell at his back into which he could retire at need. Of course if his book proved successful, he could acknowledge it later. Also see “Percy und Shenstone,” p. 30.

^{Note 10 in page 141} “... they present us with frequent sallies of bold imagination, and constantly afford matter for philosophical reflection by showing the workings of the human mind in its almost original state of nature.” (Preface to Five Pieces of Runic Poetry, 1763.) A number of passages from the introductory matter in the Reliques might be cited, and the preface to Eau Kiou Choaan (Dodsley, 1761, 4 vols.)

^{Note 11 in page 142} Ch'ên Shou-Yi, “Thomas Percy and His Chinese Studies,” Chinese Social and Politica Science Review, xx (1936), 202–230. To continue the study of Hau Kiou Choaan, in the de tails of its preparation and publication, see also three articles by several authors in th Review of English Studies, ii, 446–455; iii, 214–218; ix, 30–36.

^{Note 12 in page 142} February 1758, Nichols, loc. cit., p. 249.

^{Note 13 in page 142} July 20, 1758, ibid., p. 261.

^{Note 14 in page 142} Grainger's attempt to secure Payne via Hawksworth fell through, but Dodsley became interested, as Grainger informed him Feb. 17, 1759. Percy forthwith headed for London, and his diary records that he read Dodsley the novel on February 26, and again on March 5 with Johnson and some others present. On August 6, he sent Dodsley the first packet for printing.

^{Note 15 in page 142} August 3, 1759, “Percy und Shenstone,” pp. 20–21.

^{Note 16 in page 142} October 3, ibid., p. 24. Percy's answer to this letter is missing from the series, but its content on this matter is made clear by Shenstone's next, pp. 26–27.

^{Note 17 in page 142} “I have no knowledge yet of y^e Nature of your Chinese Publication. Pardon me, however, if I propose One Question to you. Are you never prejudiced by y^e Air of Learning, y^e obscurity, y^e rarity, and, perhaps, the Difficulty, of your work, to imagine something in it more extraordinary, yⁿ the Publick will perhaps discover?”—Shenstone to Percy, Feb. 15, 1760, ibid., p. 31.

^{Note 18 in page 143} “I am entirely of your Opinion with regard to the Oriental Eclogues [Collins'].... I know not whether you will agree with me that the Oriental Peculiarities do not strike so much in Poetry as Prose.... Had I any Talents at Tale-telling I could muster up many pleasing Idioms of the Chinese, which would shine under such a Workman as Johnson.”— Percy to Shenstone, March 12, 1760, ibid., p. 34. Also, “I've inserted a Passage from y^e Jesuites Letters containing an Acc^t of the Chinese Gardens: if you have never seen it in print it will entertain you. Return it back to me with your remarks. I like every thing better in it than the zig-zag bridges ... ”—Percy to Shenstone, April 13, 1760, ibid., p. 36. Since Shenstone's greatest pride lay in his grounds, no doubt Percy thought he was playing a trump card.

^{Note 19 in page 143} Sat., Apr. 1761, June 11, ibid., pp. 51, 55. Percy explained that Dodsley did not wish to part with any copies before publication, but that Shenstone, of course, would be excepted.

^{Note 20 in page 143} July 5, 1761, ibid., p. 58.

^{Note 21 in page 143} This defense came a little earlier: “Considered in a Critical Light you will find it a moderate performance, but as it gives us a history of the human mind in China, I hope it will not be altogether unworthy attention.”—June 20, 1761, ibid., pp. 55–56. Finally this:

“I am obliged to you that you have favoured our Chinese History with your acceptance; after all, it is not a work calculated for you, nor will afford you any pleasure, unless you can be content to give up almost every beauty of composition for the sake of seeing the workings [of] the human mind under all the peculiarities of a Chinese Education. This is the only merit the book lays claim to, and (tho' I know you think otherwise) sufficient in my opinion to warrant its publication & intitle [it] to the Notice of the world. For my part, I think the beauties of style & composition an inferior consideration (at least that the want of them may upon some occasions be excused), when the knowledge of our common nature is thereby promoted & we can gain a deeper insight into the mind of man, our knowledge of which must in some degree remain imperfect 'till we can see the manner of its operation under every possible combination of Ideas.”—Percy to Shenstone, July 19, 1761, ibid., pp. 60–61.

^{Note 22 in page 144} Sept. 1761, Sat., ibid., pp. 62–63. Shenstone appended a note explaining his delay Lady Gough had borrowed the book, kept it a fortnight, and read only the dedication.

^{Note 23 in page 144} Dated in Percy's hand Oct. 1761, ibid., p. 67.

^{Note 24 in page 144} Grainger, writing after he had had the book some time, confessed that neither he nor his wife had finished reading it. Later he commended Percy's careful and illuminating notes, and that was all. (Nichols, op. cit., vii, 278, 280–281.) The Monthly applauded the value of the text, the scholarship of the editor, and vouched for the authenticity of the MS. as described by the editor—which was decent, since Griffiths had refused it. The Critical Review was loudly bored, and the London merely listed it.

^{Note 25 in page 144} Ch'ên Shou-Yi, op. cit., pp. 208–210, 217.

^{Note 26 in page 145} See “Text of the Percy-Warton Letters,” PMLA, xlvi (1931), 1166–1201; and “Corrections,” xxviii (1933), 301–303.

In the expansion of the plan of the Reliques to include material not in the Folio Percy was taking the initiative. Evidently Shenstone had said he would write to Warton, but had failed to do it. When a copy or digest of the letter was shown him, he perceived its strategy at once:

“I am glad you wrote, y^rself, to M^r Warton, for (tho' I would have done it in y^e end) yet, to my shame be it spoken, I never wrote to thank him for the Present he made me of his Critique upon Spenser. The Preface to y^r Letter was very pertinent & must engage him to serve you to the utmost of his Power.”—Shenstone to Percy, July 5, 1761, “Percy und Shenstone,” p. 58.

^{Note 27 in page 145} The extracts from the Percy-Williams-Evans Correspondence (Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 32, 330) here summarized, all of the spring of 1761, were furnished me by Mr. A. Watkins-Jones, now of Cardiff, Wales, to whom I wish to make cordial acknowledgment. The complete text of Wilhams' letter of July 26, whose summary follows, and the quotation accompanied by note 31 came from the same source.

^{Note 28 in page 146} The following passages from this letter of Williams will reveal his style:

“My very inquisitive friend Mr. Percy has long solicited me on y^e same head [to procure original pieces of Welsh poetry], & as we had no prospect of success till now, we determin'd to turn our thoughts to another Subject even Welsh Proverbs; he gives y^u in his letter the reasons of my inability to satisfy him on this Subject also; Oh Dear Sir you have set me all on fire to enter immediately on y^e same Scent with y^rSelf, y^e game is noble, y^e pursuit honourable; but alas! my health, my time of life, my Situation and Connexions here are such; —de lingua Britannicâ desperandum est. Sed fungar vice Cotis. But let not this impossibility I am under, of doing y^u more Substantial Service deprive me of y^e pleasure of a Correspondence, w^ch I so greatly esteem, & earnestly request. But Stay, I think I ought to claim some degree of merit with y^u, by Bringing you acquainted with my friend Percy. In [sic] my opinion He has considerable abilities, he is inquisitive & indefatigable, with a good Share of taste, Judgement & poetic Genius, alias, A wen Prydyddiaeth in y^r own Style; & holds correspondence with Some of y^e most ingenious men of y^e age; if not better engag'd I dare recommend him as a very fit person to dress out y^r Welsh odes agreeable to y^e taste of y^e English reader.... Y^r answer to y^e particulars in his letter I Sh^d be glad to peruse, So w^d y^r Schoolfellow W: W^ms., if y^u, as he did, will be pleas'd to inclose it unseal'd, I'll forward it with my own answer to his last to me, with all Speed.”

Williams' age, however, was not so advanced but that he married in 1767, and lived to perform the duties of his parish for thirty more years. He died—in Wales—June 30, 1791. (Weston-under-Lizard Parish Register, 1654–1812. Staffordshire Parish Registers Society, ed. by Percy W. L. Adams [1934], pp. v, 56, 57; Gentleman's Magazine 61² [July 1791]: 683).

^{Note 29 in page 146} A number of Percy's letters to Evans are published in an appendix to Evan Evans. Some Specimens of the Poetry of the Ancient Welsh Bards, Llanidloes, Montgomery, [1862]. This one is the first, pp. 160–162.

^{Note 30 in page 147} The quotation continues:

“—specimens of East Indian Poetry, Peruvian Poetry, Lapland Poetry, Greenland Poetry; and inclosed I send you a specimen of Saxon Poetry.... The Latin version falls from the pen of my very learned friend Mr Lye, who has made many important emendations in the original. The English was a slight attempt of my own....” (Ibid., p. 165.)

The published letter is undated, but I am able to supply the date from a transcript of some passages from the Percy-Evans Correspondence in the British Museum supplied me some years ago through Professor Ronald S. Crane.

In a later letter, however (July 23, 1764) Percy refers to himself as responsible for the three publications he has here attributed to friends. (Quoted in Hecht, “Percy und Shenstone,” p. xxiii.)

^{Note 31 in page 147} Thereupon Williams sought out Shenstone.

“There was a Little good-natured Welch-man called upon me t'other Day; I think he said his Name was Rice, & as far as I could make out, he is Chaplain to the Earl of Bradford. He told me y^t by his means you had settled a correspondence in Wales, & left with me a Little Welch Ode w^th a literal translation of it in Latin.”—Shenstone to Percy, Sept. 1761, ibid., p. 63. (The ode had accompanied Evans' fairly prompt reply of August 8th.)

An annotation in Percy's hand completes Rice's name and places him in “Weston, near Shiffnal and Newport, Shropshire.” Shiffnal, it will be remembered, is the town where Percy had procured his Folio. Percy was identifying him relatively to his own early stamping-ground.

^{Note 32 in page 148} On July 19, two days before what appears to be Percy's first letter to Evans, Percy had written Shenstone, applauding the request for MacGowan's aid in the ballad collection and adding, “It is in the remote and obscure parts of the kingdom, that I expect to find curiosities of the kind I want.... for this reason I have settled a correspondence in the very heart of Wales ....” (Ibid., p. 60.)

^{Note 33 in page 148} Evans, op. cit., pp. 164–165.

^{Note 34 in page 148} Unpublished; among the extracts referred to in note 30.

^{Note 35 in page 148} October 1762, “Percy und Shenstone,” p. 86.

It is interesting to glance from this to a famous incident, which shows Percy attempting to manage someone else, and being himself managed by the same compliment-in-letter healing device he was trying on Williams. It followed the Percy-Johnson quarrel over Pennant's travel book (Boswell's Johnson, ed. Hill, iii, 271–278). I quote from Boswell:

“We had a calm after the storm, staid the evening and supped and were pleasant and gay. But Dr. Percy told me he was very uneasy at what had passed; for there was a gentleman there who was acquainted with the Northumberland family, to whom he hoped to have appeared more respectable, by shewing how intimate he was with Dr. Johnson, and who might now, on the contrary, go away with an opinion to his disadvantage. He begged I would mention this to Dr. Johnson, which I afterwards did. His observation upon it was, ‘This comes of stratagem ....‘ (p. 275)”

Then to heal Percy's hurt feelings and accomplish his end, Boswell proposed a stratagem, which was followed. Boswell wrote Johnson on the subject of the quarrel, giving Johnson excuse to reply to Boswell in a letter full of praise of Percy. Boswell read the two letters in Northumberland's hearing, and the end was gained. Then Boswell told Percy all about it, and Percy, far from being offended that it was a cooked-up affair, was highly pleased. But Johnson, learning that Percy had been given a copy of his letter, was irritated and asked Boswell to get it back from Percy, which he did. But Boswell kept and printed the letters, together with the whole account; it must have been with mixed feelings that Percy later read it. The incident took place in the spring of 1778.

^{Note 36 in page 148} Nov. 14, 1762, “Percy und Shenstone,” p. 88.

^{Note 37 in page 148} September 24, 1761, Nichols, op. cit., vii, 221.

^{Note 38 in page 148} “Percy und Shenstone,” p. 90. See also p. 77.

^{Note 39 in page 150} “Next week you will receive MSS. D. Buckingham ... King & the Tanner (Warton to Percy, Nov. 12).” On November 5th, he had written Percy that he would dispatch two volumes to Dodsley, who would “transmití” them to Percy. These explain the “five or six packets.” (“Percy-Warton Letters,” p. 1181.)

^{Note 40 in page 150} Watkin-Jones, “Bishop Percy and the Scottish Ballads,” Essays and Studies by Members of the English Association, xviii (1933), 110–121.

“Curiously enough, Percy's first object in corresponding with Dalrymple was to invoke his aid for the edition of Buckingham's works which was then in hand; and his first letter (10 Nov. 1762) is full of talk of textual difficulties, collation of editions, &c. But Dalrymple, in reply (18 Nov.), pleads his inability to elucidate conundrums in seventeenth century plays, and passes on at once to a subject obviously nearer to his heart: ‘Give me leave, Sir, to ask what progress you have made in your collection of Old Songs.‘ (p. 112)”

This quotation Mr. Watkin-Jones has extended and supplemented in correspondence.

I would disagree, however, that the edition of Buckingham was Percy's first object in importance at that moment. I do not mean that he would not have welcomed any information he received, but that in spite of his indirect method his first object was the ballad collection, as it almost certainly had been in the correspondence with Evans, where he began with Evans' own work.

^{Note 41 in page 150} “Percy und Shenstone,” pp. 4–5, 6–7, 9–10, 12, 15, 21, 24.

^{Note 42 in page 151} “I proposed the scheme for him myself, wishing to see an elegant edition and good collection of this kind.” (Shenstone to Graves, March 1, 1761.)

“I have occasioned a friend of mine to publish a fair collection of the best old English and Scotch ballads.” (Shenstone to MacGowan, Sept. 1761.)

Both extracts are quoted in Irving L. Churchill's “William Shenstone's Share in the Preparation of Percy's Reliques,” PMLA, li (1936), 960.

Mr. Churchill interprets these passages (p. 962) as meaning that Shenstone proposed (though he was not the first to propose) the venture, and that the plan actually followed was his. I suspect that Shenstone had merely forgotten all about the content of Percy's letters three and a half years earlier, as well as his own earlier opposition to the publishing of the Folio (see letter of Jan. 4, 1758, “Percy und Shenstone,” pp. 6–7).

^{Note 43 in page 151} Johnson's famous paradies of ballad imitations took off Percy's own work. (Boswell's Johnson, ed. Hill, ii, 136, note 4; 212 and note 4.)

^{Note 44 in page 151} Ibid., i, 57.

There is also the anecdote contributed by Langten concerning the historical value of reading romances— “seeing with what kind of performances the age and country in which they were written was delighted (ibid., iv, 17).” But see also iii, 2, and the Preface to Shakespeare (1765), Sign. B8.

I have long wondered if Johnson would not have been more interested in the Reliques if it had included less ballad and more romance material, even though Johnson's admission of a fondness for romances is made much as a scholar today might confess to a weakness for detective stories.

^{Note 45 in page 151} Percy had written Shenstone, Jan. 9, 1758:

“Indeed he [Johnson] made me very tempting offers, for he promised to assist me in selecting the most valuable pieces & in revising the Text of those he selected. Nay further, if I would leave a blank Page between every two that I transcribed, he would furnish it out with the proper Notes, etc. etc., a work for which he is peculiarly fitted by his great acquaintance with all our English Romances etc. of which kind of reading he is uncommonly fond.”

To this passage at some later moment of bitterness Percy subjoined the following rubric: “These Promises he never executed, not except a few slight hints, delivered vivâ voce, did he furnish any Contributions, etc.” (“Percy und Shenstone,” p. 9.)

Yet Percy made plenty of capital from the use of Johnson's name, and of course the Dedication of the Reliques shows Johnson's acknowledged hand.

^{Note 46 in page 151} Something of that contagion is, I think, reflected by Grainger:

“For want of that employment [reading proof] I have travelled through Japan with Kempfer, and made the tour of the Chinese Wall with Athanasius Kircher. What a liar that good father is! But neither Hisson nor Pekin yield me half the amusement that Arthur's Court used to do at your fireside.” (Grainger to Percy, Jan. 22, 1764, Nichols, op. cit., p. 285.)

^{Note 47 in page 152} P. 121.

^{Note 48 in page 152} Ibid.

^{Note 49 in page 153} “Percy und Shenstone,” pp. 44, 49, 65, 75–76.

^{Note 50 in page 153} Mr. Churchill reached the same conclusion regarding alterations:

“Unfortunately none of Percy's letters in which he expressed his point of view on this matter of alterations have been preserved, but the mere length of time that this problem was under discussion suggests that he was not easily persuaded to accept Shenstone's advice.” (“Shenstone's Share in Percy's Reliques,” PMLA, li, 967.)

Mr. Churchill also points out that Percy's commonplace book contains a number of transcribed ballads, with additions carefully distinguished (p. 965, note 29).

Mr. Churchill makes one statement, however, whose accuracy I question. Discussing the development of the plans to supply necessary information to the readers of the Reliques, he says, “The Idea of a glossary of obsolete words had not yet [Nov. 1760] occurred to them (p. 968).” Not occurred to Percy when he had Dr. Lye's promise to help him in it (as he had stated in his letter of Jan. 9, 1758, immediately after the passage quoted above in note 45)? It was Shenstone that had forgotten it. Percy I have no doubt was merely keeping it up his sleeve as long as possible. Shenstone was difficult to manage about scholarly trappings.

And I have no doubt that the employment of said scholarly trappings led later scholars to feel that the text they accompanied should be equally precise, and doubled their resentment.

Shenstone, who was also very doubtful of the exclusiveness of Percy's taste when confronted with the charm of age, fought a long and discouraged fight to restrain Percy's collection from obesity. (“Percy und Shenstone,” pp. 31, 45, 51, 54, 65–66, 79, 88.)

^{Note 51 in page 154} Percy's half-guilty awareness that after Shenstone's death he was indulging in a wealth of introductions and notes that Shenstone would never have approved of, is revealed in the Preface:

“The desire of being accurate has seduced him [Percy, the editor] into too minute and trifling an exactness; and in persuit [sic] of information he may have been drawn into many a petty and frivolous research.”

And a little later he states what he would not have had to qualify if he had followed his own bent:

“Where any thing was altered that deserved particular notice, the passage is distinguished by two inverted ‘commas.‘ And the Editor has endeavoured to be as faithful, as the imperfect state of his materials would admit: for these old popular rhimes have, as might be expected, been handed down to us with less care, than any other writings in the world.” (1st ed., 1765, p. xii)

Probably in every field of art, early attempts at restoration have been ill-judged and ill-executed mistakes.