1807, and
before those known to have been written in 1808; while _The Force of
Prayer_ naturally follows it.

The poem--first published in quarto in 1815--was scarcely altered in the
editions of 1820, 1827, and 1832. In 1837, however, it was revised
throughout, and in that year the text was virtually settled; the
subsequent changes being few and insignificant, while those introduced
in 1837 were numerous and important. A glance at the foot-notes will
show that many passages were entirely rewritten in that year, and that a
good many lines of the earlier text were altogether omitted. All the
poems were subjected to minute revision in 1836-37; but few, if any,
were more thoroughly recast, and improved, in that year than _The White
Doe of Rylstone_. As a sample of the best kind of changes--where a new
thought was added to the earlier text with admirable felicity--compare
the lines in canto vii., as it stood in 1815, when the Lady Emily first
saw the White Doe at the old Hall of Rylstone, after her terrible losses
and desolation--

Lone Sufferer! will not she believe
The promise in that speaking face,
And take this gift of Heaven with grace?

with the additional thought conveyed in the version of 1837--

Lone Sufferer! will not she believe
The promise in that speaking face;
And welcome, as a gift of grace,
The saddest thought the Creature brings?

In the "Reminiscences" of Wordsworth--written by the Hon. Mr. Justice
Coleridge for the late Bishop of Lincoln's _Memoirs_ of his uncle--the
following occurs. (See vol. ii. p. 311.) "His conversation was on
critical subjects, arising out of his attempts to alter his poems. He
said he considered _The White Doe_ as, in conception, the highest work
he had ever produced. The mere physical action was all unsuccessful: but
the true action of the poem was spiritual--the subduing of the will, and
all inferior fancies, to the perfect purifying and spiritualizing of the
intellectual nature; while the Doe, by connection with Emily, is raised
as it were from its mere animal nature into something mysterious and
saint-like. He said he should devote much labour to perfecting the
execution of it in the mere business parts, in which, from anxiety 'to
get on' with the more important parts, he was sensible that
imperfections had crept in which gave the style a feebleness of
character."

From this conversation--which took place in 1836--it will be see