The variation in the first stanza of Fairfax's _Godfrey of Bulloigne_ has
been long known to bibliographers, and was pointed out in _The Critical
Review_ more than thirty years ago. I cannot fix on the particular number,
but it contained a long notice of the version of Tasso by Fairfax, and the
very stanzas extracted by T. N. The translator could not please himself
with the outset of his undertaking, and hence the recorded substitution;
but it is not known that he carried his fastidiousness so far as to furnish
a _third_ version of the first stanza, as well as of the "Argument" of the
introductory canto, differing from both the others. In the instance pointed
out by T. N. the substitution was effected by pasting the _approved_ stanza
over the _disapproved_ stanza; but the _third_ version was given by
reprinting the whole leaf, which contains other variations of typography,
besides such as it was thought necessary to make in the first stanza.
I formerly had copies of the book, dated 1600, including all three
variations; but the late Mr. Wordsworth having one day looked particularly
at that with the reprinted leaf, and expressing a {360} strong wish to
possess it, I gave it to him, and I presume that it remained in his library
at his death. What I speak of happened full twenty years ago.
_The Critical Review_ of the date I refer to (I am pretty confident that it
was of the early part of 1817) contained a good deal of information
regarding Fairfax and his productions; but it did not mention one fact of
importance to show the early estimation and popularity of his translation
of the _Gerusalemme Liberata_, viz., that although it was published in
1600, it is repeatedly quoted in _England's Parnassus_, printed in the same
year, and containing extracts, as most people are aware, from all the
distinguished poets of that day, and somewhat earlier. This circumstance
ascertains also that Fairfax's Tasso came out before _England's Parnassus_,
although both bear the date of 1600 on the title-pages.