Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Kubla Khan

2011-12-13T22:20:58Z

Ottava: /* References */ fix

'''''Kubla Khan''''' is a poem by Samuel Taylor Coleridge , completed in 1797 and published in ''Christabel, Kubla Khan, and the Pains of Sleep'' in 1816. According to Coleridge's Preface to ''Kubla Khan'', the poem was composed one night after he experienced an opium influenced dream after reading a work describing the Tartar king Kublai Khan . Upon waking, he set about writing lines of poetry that came to him from the dream until he was interrupted by a person from Porlock . The poem could not be completed according to its original 200-300 line plan as the interruption caused him to forget the lines. Although the specific details of Coleridge's Preface are debatable, he most likely composed ''Kubla Khan'' during autumn 1797 but left unpublished and kept for private readings until 1816 when, on the prompting by George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron George Gordon Byron , it was made available to the public.

The poem is different in style and form from other poems composed by Coleridge. While incomplete and subtitled a "fragment", its language is highly stylized with a strong emphasis on sound devices that change between the poem's original two stanza s. The first stanza of the poem describes Khan's pleasure dome built alongside a sacred river fed by a powerful fountain. The second stanza of the poem is the narrator's response to the power and effects of a Habesha people Abyssinian maid's song, which enraptures him but leaves him unable to act on her inspiration unless he could hear her once again. Together, they form a comparison of creative power that does not work with nature and creative power that is harmonious with nature.

Modern critics, with some exceptions, view ''Kubla Khan'' as one of Coleridge's three great poems, with '' The Rime of the Ancient Mariner '' and ''Christabel ''. While Coleridge's contemporaries mostly denounced the poem upon publication or questioned Coleridge's statements about its origin, ''Kubla Khan'' was originally published because many of Coleridge's associates felt that the poem, when read by Coleridge aloud, was wonderful. It was not until years later that critics began to openly admire the poem.

==Background==
In September 1797, Coleridge lived in Stowey in the south west of England and spent much of his time walking through the nearby Quantock Hills with his fellow poet William Wordsworth and Wordsworth's sister Dorothy ;<ref name="Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162">Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162</ref> the route is memorialized as the " Coleridge Way ".<ref>[http://www.somerset-rural-renaissance.co.uk/coleridge-way.html] "The Coleridge Way". Somerset Rural Renaissance, 2007. accessdate=2 July 2010}}</ref> Throughout the autumn, he worked on many poems, including "The Brook" and the tragedy ''Osorio''. Some time between 9 October and 14 October 1797, when Coleridge says he had completed the tragedy, he left Stowey for Lynton. On his return, he became sick and rested at Ash Farm, located at Culbone Church and one of the few places to seek shelter on his route.<ref name="Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162"/> In 1934, a copy of the poem known as the Crewe Manuscript was discovered and it contained a note about the origin of ''Kubla Khan''.<ref name="Ashton p. 112">Ashton 1997 p. 112</ref> Coleridge attributed the poem's origins to one of his stays at Ash Farm, possibly the one that happened in October 1797: "This fragment with a good deal more, not recoverable, composed, in a sort of Reverie brought on by two grains of Opium taken to check a dysentry, at a Farm House between Porlock & Linton, a quarter of a mile from Culbone Church, in the fall of the year, 1797".<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd. p. 162</ref> Coleridge explained in the Preface of the 1816 edition that he read from Samuel Purchas 's ''Pilgrimage'' and included a passage that directly influenced his thoughts:<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 163-164</ref>
<blockquote>In ''Xanada'' did ''Cublai Can'' build a stately Pallace, encompassing sixteene miles of plaine ground with a wall, wherein are fertile Meddows, pleasant Springs, delightful Streames, and all sorts of beasts of chase and game, and in the midst thereof a sumptuous house of pleasure, which may be removed from place to place. Here he doth abide in the months of June, July, and August, on the eight and twentieth day whereof, he departeth thence to another place to do sacrifice in this manner: He hath a Herd or Drove of Horses and Mares, about ten thousand, as white as snow; of the milke whereof none may taste, except he be of the blood of ''Cingis Can''. Yea, the Tartars do these beasts great reverence, nor dare any cross their way, or go before them. According to the directions of his Astrologers or Magicians, he on the eight and twentieth day of August aforesaid, spendeth and poureth forth with his owne hands the milke of these Mares in the aire, and on the earth, to give drink to the spirits and Idols which they worship, that they may preserve the men, women, beasts, birds, corne, and other things growing on the earth.<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd. pp. 163-164</ref></blockquote>
The lines from Purchas, according to the Preface, inspired a dream in which Coleridge was provided a poem about Kubla Khan. Upon waking, he began to compose the 200 to 300 line poem, but he was interrupted by a man from Porlock . When the unidentified individual left, Coleridge was unable to continue ''Kubla Khan'' except for only a few of the lines and images he still retained. The second stanza of the poem, forming a conclusion, was composed at a later date and was possibly disconnected from the original dream.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 40-44</ref>

Unlike Coleridge's normal approach to his poetry, he did not mention the poem in letters to his friends. The first written record of the poem is in Dorothy Wordsworth's Journal, October 1798. It is possible that the poem was recited to his friends during this time and was kept for private use instead of publication. However, the exact date of the poem is uncertain because Coleridge normally dated his poems but did not date ''Kubla Khan''.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 165</ref> Coleridge did write to John Thelwall, 14 October 1797, to describe his feelings related to those expressed in the poem:<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 166-167</ref>
<blockquote>I should much wish, like the Indian Vishna, to float about along an infinite ocean cradled in the flower of the Lotos, & wake once in a million years for a few minutes – just to know I was going to sleep a million years more ... I can ''at times'' feel strong the beauties, you describe, in themselves, & for themselves – but more frequently ''all things'' appear little – all the knowledge, that can be acquired, child's play – the universe itself – what but an immense heap of ''little'' things? ... My mind feels as if it ached to behold & know something ''great'' – something ''one'' & ''indivisible'' – and it is only in the faith of this that rocks or waterfalls, mountains or caverns give me the sense of sublimity or majesty!<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd p. 167</ref></blockquote>
The thoughts expressed in Coleridge's letter date ''Kubla Khan'' to October 1797, but two alternatives have been postulated by Coleridge's biographers: May 1798 and October 1799. These were both times he was in the area, and, by 1799, Coleridge was able to read Robert Southey 's ''Thalaba the Destroyer'', a work which also drew on Purchas's work. It is possible that he merely edited the poem during those time periods, and there is little evidence to suggest that Coleridge lied about the opium-induced experience at Ash Farm.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 167-</ref>

The work was set aside until 1815 when Coleridge compiled manuscripts of his poems for a collection titled ''Sibylline Leaves''.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 387</ref> The poem remained buried in obscurity until a 10 April 1816 meeting between Coleridge and George Gordon Byron , a younger poet, who persuaded Coleridge to publish ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'' as fragments. Leigh Hunt, another poet, witnessed the event and wrote, "He recited his 'Kubla Khan' one morning to Lord Byron, in his Lordship's house in Piccadilly, when I happened to be in another room. I remember the other's coming away from him, highly struck with his poem, and saying how wonderfully he talked. This was the impression of everyone who heard him."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 426</ref> Byron arranged for John Murray to publish the poem with ''Christabel'' and "The Pains of Sleep" along with prefaces to the works. A contract was drawn up on 12 April 1816 for 80 pounds.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 426</ref> Charles Lamb , poet and friend of Coleridge, witnessed Coleridge's work towards publishing the poem and wrote to Wordsworth: "Coleridge is printing Xtabel by Lord Byron's recommendation to Murray, with what he calls a vision of Kubla Khan – which said vision he repeats so enchantingly that it irradiates & brings Heaven & Elysian bowers into my parlour while he sings or says it".<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 429</ref> Coleridge stayed in London to work on the poem and also to try and break his opium addiction.. However, not everyone was happy with the idea of the poem's being published, as Coleridge's wife, who was not with him, wrote to Thomas Poole, "Oh! when will he ever give his friends anything but pain? he has been so unwise as to publish his fragments of 'Christabel' & 'Koula-Khan' ... we were all sadly vexed when we read the advertisement of these things."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 431</ref>

The collection of poems was published 25 May 1816,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 434</ref> and Coleridge included "A Fragment" as a subtitle to the 54 line version of the poem to defend against criticism of the poem's incomplete nature.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 112-113</ref> The original published version of the work was separated into 2 stanzas, with the first ending at line 30.<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 145</ref> Printed with ''Kubla Khan'' was a preface that claimed an opium induced dream provided Coleridge the lines.<ref name="Sisman p. 417">Sisman 2006 p. 417</ref> The poem was printed four times in Coleridge's life, with the final printing in his ''Poetical Works'' of 1834.<ref>Mays 2001 p. 511</ref> In the final work, Coleridge added the expanded subtitle "Or, A Vision in a Dream. A Fragment". In some later anthologies of Coleridge's poetry, the Preface is dropped along with the subtitle denoting its fragmentary and dream nature. Sometimes, the Preface is included in modern editions but lacks both the first and final paragraphs.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 39-40</ref>

==Style==
The poem according to Coleridge's account, is a fragment of what it should have been, amounting to what he was able to jot down from memory: 54 lines.<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 195</ref> Originally, his dream included between 200 and 300 lines, but he was only able to compose the first 30 before he was interrupted. The second stanza is not necessarily part of the original dream and refers to the dream in the past tense.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 43-44</ref> The rhythm of the poem, like its themes and images, is different from other poems Coleridge wrote during the time, and it is organised in a structure similar to 18th-century odes. The poem relies on many sound-based techniques, including cognate variation and chiasmus .<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 509-512</ref> In particular, the poem emphasises the use of the "æ" sound and similar modifications to the standard "a" sound to make the poem sound Asian. Its rhyme scheme found in the first seven lines is repeated in the first seven lines of the second stanza. There is a heavy use of assonance , the reuse of vowel sounds, and a reliance on alliteration, repetition of the first sound of a word, within the poem including the first line: "In Xanadu did Kubla Khan". The stressed sounds, "Xan", "du", "Ku", "Khan", contain assonance in their use of the sounds a-u-u-a, have two rhyming syllables with "Xan" and "Khan", and employ alliteration with the name "Kubla Khan" and the reuse of "d" sounds in "Xanadu" and "did". To pull the line together, the "i" sound of "In" is repeated in "did". Later lines do not contain the same amount of symmetry but do rely on assonance and rhymes throughout. The only word that has no true connection to another word is "dome" except in its use of a "d" sound. Though the lines are interconnected, the rhyme scheme and line lengths are irregular.<ref>Schneider 1967 pp. 88-91</ref>

The first lines of the poem follow iambic tetrameter with the initial stanza relying on heavy stresses. The lines of the second stanza incorporate lighter stresses to increase the speed of the meter to separate them from the hammer-like rhythm of the previous lines.<ref name="Yarlott p. 129">Yarlott 1967 p. 129</ref> There also is strong a break following line 36 in the poem that provides for a second stanza, and there is a transition in narration from a third person narration about Kubla Khan into the poet discussing his role as a poet.<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 509-510, 514</ref> Without the Preface, the two stanzas form two different poems that have some relationship to each other but lack unity.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 42-43</ref> This is not to say they would be two different poems, since the technique of having separate parts that respond to another is used in the genre of the odal hymn , used in the poetry of other Romantic poets including John Keats or Percy Bysshe Shelley .<ref>Bate 1968 p. 78</ref> However, the odal hymn as used by others has a stronger unity among its parts, and Coleridge believed in writing poetry that was unified organically.<ref>Singh 1994 p. 48}}</ref> It is possible that Coleridge was displeased by the lack of unity in the poem and added a note about the structure to the Preface to explain his thoughts.<ref>Roe 2001 p.265}}</ref> In terms of genre, the poem is a dream poem and related to works describing visions common to the Romantic poets. ''Kubla Khan'' is also related to the genre of fragmentary poetry, with internal images reinforcing the idea of fragmentation that is found within the form of the poem.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 42, 45-47</ref> The poem's self-proclaimed fragmentary nature combined with Coleridge's warning about the poem in the preface turns ''Kubla Khan'' into an "anti-poem", a work that lacks structure, order, and leaves the reader confused instead of enlightened.<ref>Fulford 2002 p. 54</ref> However, the poem has little relation to the other fragmentary poems Coleridge wrote.<ref>Bate 1968 p. 76</ref>

==Preface==
The Preface of ''Kubla Khan'' began by explaining that it was printed:<ref name="Sisman p. 417"/> "at the request of a poet of great and deserved celebrity, and as far as the author's own opinions are concerned, rather as a psychological curiosity, than on the ground of any supposed ''poetic'' merits".<ref>Sisman 2006 qtd. p. 417</ref> The preface then provided an origin to both the poem and why it was merely a smaller portion of an intended larger work. After reading from Purchas's book,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 434-435</ref> "The Author continued for about three hours in a profound sleep, at least of the external senses, during which time he had the most vivid confidence, that he could not have composed less than from two or three hundred lines ... On Awaking he appeared to himself to have a distinct recollection of the whole, and taking his pen, ink, and paper, instantly and eagerly wrote down the lines that are here preserved."<ref name="Holmes qtd. p. 435">Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 435</ref> The image of himself that Coleridge provides is of a dreamer who reads works of lore and not as an opium addict. Instead, the effects of the opium, as described, are intended to suggest that he was not used to its effects.<ref name="Perkins p. 39">Perkins 2010 p. 39</ref>

There are some problems with Coleridge's account, especially the claim to have a copy of Purchas with him. It was a rare book, unlikely to be at a "lonely farmhouse", nor would an individual carry it on a journey; the folio was heavy and almost 1000 pages insize.<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 337</ref> It is probable that the words of Purchas were merely remembered by Coleridge and that the depiction of immediately reading the work before falling asleep was to suggest that the subject came to him accidentally.<ref>Bate 1968 pp. 75-76</ref>

The passage continues with a famous account of an interruption:<ref name="Holmes 1998 p. 435">Holmes 1998 p. 435</ref> "At this moment he was unfortunately called out by a person on business from Porlock, and detained by him above an hour, and on his return to his room, found, to his no small surprise and mortification, that though he still retained some vague and dim recollection of the general purpose of the vision, yet, with the exception of some eight or ten scattered lines and images, all the rest had passed away like the images on the surface of a stream into which a stone has been cast, but, alas! without the after restoration of the latter!"<ref name="Holmes qtd. p. 435"/> The actual person from Porlock mentioned could be many people, including Wordsworth, Joseph Cottle, John Thelwall, Coleridge's wife, or merely a literary device. As a symbol within the preface, the person represents the obligations of the real world crashing down upon the creative world or other factors that kept Coleridge from finishing his poetry. The claim to produce poetry after dreaming of it became popular after ''Kubla Khan'' was published.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 436</ref> The person from Porlock later became a word to describe interrupted genius, and the literary critic Walter Jackson Bate recounted that while John Livingston Lowes taught the poem, he told his students "If there is any man in the history of literature who should be hanged, drawn, and quartered, it is the man on business from Porlock."<ref>Perkins 2010 qtd. p. 39</ref> The literary critic D. F. Rauber claimed that the man was "necessary to create the illusion of the cut short rather than the stopped".<ref>Rauber 1969 p. 221</ref> This would have allowed Coleridge to purposefully write the poem as a fragment.<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 44-45</ref>

The Preface to the poem suggests that the poem was not supposed to be printed, that it was a fragmentary work that he was unable to complete, and that the work itself was provided to him through involuntary inspiration. When the Preface is dropped, the poem seems to compare the act of poetry with the might of Kubla Khan instead of the loss of inspiration causing the work to have a more complex depiction of the poetic power. Taken together, the Preface could connect with the first half of the poem to suggest that the poem is from the view of a dreaming narrator,<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 40-41</ref> or it could connect with the second half of the poem to show how a reader is to interpret the lines by connecting himself with the persona in a negative manner.<ref>Wheeler 1981 pp. 28-38</ref> The Preface and the poem are different in their locations, as the Preface discusses Coleridge's England while the poem discusses ancient China, but both discuss the role of the poem and his abilities. The poet of the Preface is a dreamer who must write and the poet of the poem is a vocal individual, but both are poets who lose inspiration. Only the poet of the poem feels that he can recover the vision, and the Preface, like a Coleridge poem that is quoted in it, ''The Picture'', states that visions are unrecoverable.<ref>Perkins 2010 p. 41</ref>

==Poem==
The poem begins with a description of Khan's Xanadu, near the river Alph which passes through caverns before reaching a dark or dead sea. Although the land is one of man-made "pleasure", there is a natural, "sacred" river that runs past it. The lines describing the river have a markedly different rhythm from the rest of the passage:<ref name="Yarlott p. 129"/>
:In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
:A stately pleasure-dome decree :
:Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
:Through caverns measureless to man
:Down to a sunless sea. (lines 1-5)

The land is constructed as a paradisaical garden, but like Eden after Man's fall, Xanadu is isolated by walls. The finite property of the constructed walls of Xanadu are contrasted with the infinite properties of the natural caves through which the river runs.
:So twice five miles of fertile ground
:With walls and towers were girdled round:
:And here were gardens bright with sinuous rills,
:Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree;
:And here were forests ancient as the hills,
:Enfolding sunny spots of greenery. (lines 6-11)

The poem expands on the Gothic hints of the first stanza as the narrator explores the dark chasm in the midst of Xanadu's gardens, and describes the surrounding area as both "savage" and "holy". Yarlott interprets this chasm as symbolic of the poet struggling with decadence that ignores nature.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 141-142</ref> It may also represent the dark side of the soul, the dehumanizing effect of power and dominion.
:But oh! that deep romantic chasm which slanted
:Down the green hill athwart a cedarn cover!
:A savage place! as holy and enchanted
:As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted
:By woman wailing for her demon-lover! (lines 12-16)

From the dark chasm a fountain violently erupts, then forms the meandering river Alph, which runs to the sea described in the first stanza. Fountains are often symbolic of the inception of life, and in this case may represent forceful creativity.<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 142</ref> Since this fountain ends in death, it may also simply represent the life span of a human, from violent birth to a sinking end.
:And from this chasm, with ceaseless turmoil seething,
:As if this earth in fast thick pants were breathing,
:A mighty fountain momently was forced:
:Amid whose swift half-intermitted burst
:Huge fragments vaulted like rebounding hail,
:Or chaffy grain beneath the thresher's flail:
:And 'mid these dancing rocks at once and ever
:It flung up momently the sacred river.
:Five miles meandering with a mazy motion
:Through wood and dale the sacred river ran,
:Then reached the caverns measureless to man,
:And sank in tumult to a lifeless ocean: (lines 17-28)

Kubla Khan hears voices of the dead, and refers to a vague "war" that appears to be unreferenced elsewhere in the poem. Yarlott argues that the war represents the penalty for seeking pleasure, or simply the confrontation of the present by the past:<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 144</ref>
:And 'mid this tumult Kubla heard from far
:Ancestral voices prophesying war! (lines 29-30)

Though the exterior of Xanadu is presented in images of darkness, and in context of the dead sea, we are reminded of the "miracle" and "pleasure" of Kubla Khan's creation. The vision of the sites, including the dome, the cavern, and the fountain, are similar to an apocalyptic vision. Together, the natural and man-made structures form a miracle of nature as they represent the mixing of opposites together, the essence of creativity:<ref>Bloom 1993 pp. 218-219</ref>
:The shadow of the dome of pleasure
:Floated midway on the waves;
:Where was heard the mingled measure
:From the fountain and the caves.
:It was a miracle of rare device,
:A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice! (lines 31-36)

The narrator turns prophetic, referring to a vision of an unidentified "Abyssinian maid" who sings of "Mount Abora". Harold Bloom suggests that this passage reveals the narrator's desire to rival Khan's ability to create with his own.<ref name="Bloom 1993 pp. 219-220">Bloom 1993 pp. 219-220</ref> The woman may also refer to Mnemosyne , the Greek personification of memory and mother of the muses , referring directly to Coleridge's claimed struggle to compose this poem from memory of a dream.
:A damsel with a dulcimer
:In a vision once I saw:
:It was an Abyssinian maid,
:And on her dulcimer she played,
:Singing of Mount Abora.
:Could I revive within me
:Her symphony and song,
:To such a deep delight 'twould win me,
:That with music loud and long,
:I would build that dome in air,
:That sunny dome! those caves of ice! (lines 37-47)

The subsequent passage refers to unnamed witnesses who may also hear this, and thereby share in the narrator's vision of a replicated, ethereal, Xanadu. Harold Bloom suggests that the power of the poetic imagination, stronger than nature or art, fills the narrator and grants him the ability to share this vision with others through his poetry. The narrator would thereby be elevated to an awesome, almost mythical status, as one who has experienced an Edenic paradise available only to those who have similarly mastered these creative powers:<ref>Bloom 1993 p. 220</ref>
:And all who heard should see them there,
:And all should cry, Beware! Beware!
:His flashing eyes, his floating hair!
:Weave a circle round him thrice,
:And close your eyes with holy dread,
:For he on honey-dew hath fed,
:And drunk the milk of Paradise. (lines 48-54)

==Themes==
''Kubla Khan'' is about poetry and the two sections discuss two types of poems.<ref>Watson 1966 pp. 122-124</ref> The power of the imagination is an important component to this theme. The poem celebrates creativity and how the poet is able to experience a connection to the universe through inspiration. As a poet, Coleridge places himself in an uncertain position as either master over his creative powers or a slave to it.<ref>Holmes 1989 p. 166</ref> The dome city represents the imagination and the second stanza represents the relationship between a poet and the rest of society. The poet is separated from the rest of humanity after he is exposed to the power to create and is able to witness visions of truth. This separation causes a combative relationship between the poet and the audience as the poet seeks to control his listener through a mesmerizing technique.<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 106-109</ref> The poem's emphasis on imagination as subject of a poem, on the contrasts within the paradisal setting, and its discussion of the role of poet as either being blessed or cursed by imagination, has influenced many works, including Alfred Tennyson's "Palace of Art" and William Butler Yeats's Byzantium based poems.<ref>Ashton 1997 p. 115</ref> There is also a strong connection between the idea of retreating into the imagination found within Keats's ''Lamia'' and in Tennyson's "Palace of Art".<ref>Rzepka 1986 p. 108</ref> The Preface, when added to the poem, connects the idea of the paradise as the imagination with the land of Porlock, and that the imagination, though infinite, would be interrupted by a "person on business". The Preface then allows for Coleridge to leave the poem as a fragment, which represents the inability for the imagination to provide complete images or truly reflect reality. The poem would not be about the act of creation but a fragmentary view revealing how the act works: how the poet crafts language and how it relates to himself.<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 44-46</ref>

Through use of the imagination, the poem is able to discuss issues surrounding tyranny, war, and contrasts that exist within paradise.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 115-116</ref> Part of the war motif could be a metaphor for the poet in a competitive struggle with the reader in order to push his own vision and ideas upon his audience.<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 108-109</ref> As a component to the idea of imagination in the poem is the creative process by describing a world that is of the imagination and another that is of understanding. The poet, in Coleridge's system, is able to move from the world of understanding, where men normally are, and enter into the world of the imagination through poetry. When the narrator describes the "ancestral voices prophesying war", the idea is part of the world of understanding, or the real world. As a whole, the poem is connected to Coleridge's belief in a secondary Imagination that can lead a poet into a world of imagination, and the poem is both a description of that world and a description of how the poet enters the world.<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 77-80</ref> The imagination, as it appears in many of Coleridge's and Wordsworth's works, including ''Kubla Khan'', is discussed through the metaphor of water, and the use of the river in ''Kubla Khan'' is connected to the use of the stream in Wordsworth's ''The Prelude''. The water imagery is also related to the divine and nature, and the poet is able to harness tap into nature in a way Kubla Khan cannot in order to harness its power.<ref>Barth 2003 pp. 57-70, 82</ref>

Towards the end of 1797, Coleridge was fascinated with the idea of a river and it was used in multiple poems including ''Kubla Khan'' and "The Brook". In his ''Biographia Literaria'' (1817), he explained, "I sought for a subject, that should give equal room and freedom for description, incident, and impassioned reflections on men, nature, and society, yet supply in itself a natural connection to the parts and unity to the whole. Such a subject I conceived myself to have found in a stream, traced from its source in the hills among the yellow-red moss and conical glass-shaped tufts of bent, to the first break or fall, where its drops become audible, and it begins to form a channel".<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd p. 161</ref> It is possible that the imagery of ''Biographia Literaria'' followed the recovery of the ''Kubla Khan'' manuscript during the composition of the book.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 404</ref> Water imagery permeated through many of his poems, and the coast that he witnessed on his journey to Linton appears in ''Osorio''. Additionally, many of the images are connected to a broad use of Ash Farm and the Quantocks in Coleridge's poetry, and the mystical setting of both ''Osorio'' and ''Kubla Khans'' are based on his idealized version of the region.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 163-166</ref> ''Kubla Khan'' was composed in the same year as ''This Lime-Tree Bower My Prison'', and both poems contained images that were used in the 14 October 1797 letter to Thelwall. However, the styles are very different as one is heavily structured and rhymed while the other tries to mimic conversational speak. What they do have in common is that they use scenery based on the same location, including repeated uses of dells, rocks, ferns, and a waterfall found in the Somerset region.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 113-114</ref> The Preface uses water imagery to explain what happens when visions are lost by quoting a passage from his poem ''The Picture''. When considering all of ''The Picture'' and not just the excerpt, Coleridge describes how inspiration is similar to a stream and that if an object is thrown into it the vision is interrupted.<ref>Perkins 2010 p. 42-43</ref>

===Tartars and paradise===
The Tartars ruled by Kubla Khan were seen in the tradition Coleridge worked from as a violent, barbaric people and were used in that way when Coleridge would compare others to Tartars. They were seen as worshipers of the sun, but uncivilized and connected to either the Cain or Ham line of outcasts. However, Coleridge describes Khan in a peaceful light and as a man of genius. He seeks to show his might but does so by building his own version of paradise. The description and the tradition provide a contrast between the daemonic and genius within the poem, and Khan is a ruler who is unable to recreate Eden.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 227-240</ref> There are also comparisons between Khan with Catherine the Great or Napoleon with their building and destroying nations. Though the imagery can be dark, there is little moral concern as the ideas are mixed with creative energies.<ref name="Mays p. 510">Mays 2001 p. 510</ref> In the second stanza, Khan is able to establish some order in the natural world but he cannot stop the forces of nature that constantly try to destroy what he made. Nature, in the poem is not a force of redemption but one of destruction, and the paradise references reinforce what Khan cannot attain.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 244-246</ref>

Although the Tartars are barbarians from China, they are connected to ideas within the Judaeo Christian tradition, including the idea of Original Sin and Eden.<ref>Jasper 1985 p. 45</ref> The account of Cublai Can in Purchas's work, discussed in Coleridge's Preface, connects the idea of paradise with luxury and sensual pleasure. The place was described in negative terms and seen as an inferior representation of paradise, and Coleridge's ethical system did not connect pleasure with joy or the divine.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 130-131</ref> As for specific aspects of the scene, the river and cavern images are used to describe how creativity operates in a post-Edenic reality. The river, Alph, replaces the one from John Milton's Eden that granted immortality and it disappears into a sunless sea that lacks life. The image is further connected to the Biblical, post-Edenic stories in that a mythological story attributes the violent children of Ham becoming the Tartars, and that Tartarus, derived from the location, became a synonym for hell. Coleridge believed that the Tartars were violent, and that their culture was opposite to the civilized Chinese. The Tartars were also in contrast to the concept of Prester John, who may have been Prester Chan and, in Ludolphus's account, chased out of Asia by the Tartars and, in John Herbert's ''Travels'', was Abyssinian.<ref>Beer 1959 pp. 221-236</ref>

The land is similar to the false paradise of Mount Amara in ''Paradise Lost'', especially the Abyssinian maid's song about Mount Abora that is able to mesmerize the poet. In the manuscript copy, the location was named both Amora and Amara, and the location of both is the same.<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 510, 514</ref> There are more connections to ''Paradise Lost'', including how Milton associates the Tartar ruler to the Post-Edenic world in Adam's vision of the Tartar kingdom. In post-Milton accounts, the kingdom is linked with the worship of the sun, and his name is seen to be one that reveals the Khan as a priest. This is reinforced by the connection of the river Alph with the Alpheus, a river that in Greece was connected to the worship of the sun. As followers of the sun, the Tartar are connected to a tradition that describes Cain as founding a city of sun worshipers and that people in Asia would build gardens in remembrance of the lost Eden.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 227-231</ref>

In the tradition Coleridge relies on, the Tartar worship the sun because it reminds them of paradise, and they build gardens because they want to recreate paradise. Kubla Khan is of the line of Cain and fallen, but he wants to overcome that state and rediscover paradise by creating an enclosed garden. The dome, in Thomas Maurice's description, in ''The History of Hindostan'' of the tradition, was related to nature worship as it reflects the shape of the universe. Coleridge, when composing the poem, believed in a connection between nature and the divine but believed that the only dome that should serve as the top of a temple was the sky. He thought that a dome was an attempt to hide from the ideal and escape into a private creation, and Kubla Khan's dome is a flaw that keeps him from truly connecting to nature. Maurice's ''History of Hindostan'' also describes aspects of Kashmir that were copied by Coleridge in preparation for hymns he intended to write. The work, and others based on it, describe a temple with a dome.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 233-236</ref> Purchas's work does not mention a dome but a "house of pleasure". The use of dome instead of house or palace could represent the most artificial of constructs and reinforce the idea that the builder was separated from nature. However, Coleridge did believe that a dome could be positive if it was connected to religion, but the Khan's dome was one of immoral pleasure and a purposeless life dominated by sensuality and pleasure.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 130-132</ref>

===Abyssinian maid===
The narrator introduces a character he once dreamed about, an Abyssinian maid who sings of another land. She is a figure of imaginary power within the poem who can inspire within the narrator his own ability to craft poetry.<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 79-80</ref> When she sings, she is able to inspire and mesmerize the poet by describing a false paradise.<ref name="Mays p. 510"/> The woman herself is similar to the way Coleridge describes Lewti in another poem he wrote around the same time ''Lewti''. The connection between Lewti and the Abyssinian maid makes it possible that the maid was intended as a disguised version of Mary Evans, who appears as a love interest since Coleridge's 1794 poem ''The Sigh''. Evans, in the poems, appears as an object of sexual desire and a source of inspiration.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 310-312</ref> She is also similar to the later subject of many of Coleridge's poems, Asra, based on Sara Hutchinson, whom Coleridge wanted but was not his wife and experienced opium induced dreams of being with her.<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 338</ref>

The figure is related to Heliodurus's work, ''Aethiopian History '' with its description of "a young Lady, sitting upon a Rock, of so rare and perfect a Beauty, as one would have taken her for a Goddess, and though her present misery opprest her with extreamest grief, yet in the greatness of her afflection, they might easily perceive the greatness of her Courage: A Laurel crown'd her Head, an a Quiver in a Scarf hanged at her back".<ref>Beer 1962 qtd. p. 266</ref> Her description in the poem is also related to Isis of Apuleius's ''Metamorphoses'', but Isis was a figure of redemption and the Abyssinian maid cries out for her demon-lover. She is similar to John Keats's Indian woman in ''Endymion'' who is revealed to be the moon goddess, but in ''Kubla Khan'' she is also related to the sun and the sun as an image of divine truth.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 266-269</ref>

In addition to real life counterparts of the Abyssinian maid, Milton's ''Paradise Lost'' describes Abyssinian kings keeping their children guarded at Mount Amara and a false paradise, which is echoed in ''Kubla Khan''.<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 344</ref>

==Sources==
There are many sources attributed to ''Kubla Khan'' for the style, imagery, and topic. Of the sources, Coleridge was influenced by the surrounding of Culbone Combe and its hills, gulleys, and other features including the "mystical" and "sacred" locations in the region. He admitted that he was directly influenced by Purchas's ''Pilgrimage'', but there are additional strong literary connections to other works, including John Milton's ''Paradise Lost'', Samuel Johnson's ''Rasselas'', Chatterton's ''African Eclogues'', William Bartram's ''Travels through North and South Carolina'', Thomas Burnet's ''Sacred Theory of the Earth'', Mary Wollstonecraft's ''A Short Residence in Sweden'', Plato's ''Phaedrus and Ion'',<ref>Holmes 1989 p. 164</ref> Maurice's ''The History of Hindostan'', and Heliodorus's ''Aethiopian History''.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 235, 266</ref> The poem also contains allusions to the Book of Revelation in its description of New Jerusalem and to the paradise of William Shakespeare's ''A Midsummer Night's Dream''.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 114-115</ref> As for specific places, the main character is Kublai Khan the Tartar king from China, the river is Alpheus in Greece and is similar to the Nile, and the Abyssinian woman sings of Mount Amara, and the caves are like those in Kashmir. Also, the name "Alph" could connect to the idea of being an alpha or original place.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 217-219</ref> The sources used for ''Kubla Khan'' are also those used in Coleridge's ''The Rime of the Ancient Mariner''.<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 410-411</ref>

Much of the poem could have been influenced by Coleridge's opium dream or, as his friend and fellow poet Robert Southey joked, "Coleridge had dreamed he had written a poem in a dream".<ref>Doughty 1981 qtd. p. 132</ref> If Coleridge's dream did originate ideas within the poem, then the dreams are related to those experienced by contemporary opium eaters and writers, Thomas de Quincey and Charles Pierre Baudelaire. It is possible that the dream affected Coleridge's later mood and caused him to enter into a depression, influencing the ideas in his writing that followed the dream night. Of these ideas, Coleridge's emphasised the vastness of the universe and his feeling overwhelmed by how little the universe seemed to him.<ref>Doughty 1981 pp. 132-133</ref> Also, Charles Lamb provided Coleridge on 15 April 1797 with a copy of his "A Vision of Repentance", a poem that discussed a dream containing imagery similar to those in ''Kubla Khan''. The poem could have provided Coleridge with the idea of a dream poem that discusses fountains, sacredness, and even a woman singing a sorrowful song.<ref>Fruman 1971 pp. 345-346</ref> The poem's use of original names and disorganised use of action can also be attributed to an opium induced state of mind. In terms of spelling, Coleridge's printed version differs from Purchas's spelling, which refers to the Tartar ruler as "Cublai Can", and from the spelling used by Milton, "Cathaian Can".<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 211, 227</ref> His original manuscript (as reproduced above) spells the name "Cubla Khan" and the place "Xannadu".

The Abyssinian maid is derived from many figures in Coleridge's life, including women who Coleridge admired in some way: Charlotte Brent, Catherine Clarkson, Mary Morgan, and Dorothy Wordsworth. Although Asra/Hutchinson is similar to the way Coleridge talks about the Abyssinian maid, Hutchinson was someone he met after writing ''Kubla Khan''. The person who was the closest match to the figure was Evans, the subject of Coleridge's ''Lewti''. The poem's claim that the narrator would be inspired to act if the song of the maid could be heard was a belief that Coleridge held regarding Evans after she become unattainable to him.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 153, 310</ref>

==Critical response==
Before the poem was published, it was greatly favoured by Byron, who encouraged Coleridge to publish the poem,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 425-426</ref> and it was admired by many people including Walter Scott. However, the immediate response to the 1816 collection was to ignore ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'' or to just attack ''Kubla Khan''.<ref name="Ashton p. 112"/> The work went through multiple editions, but the poem, as with his others published in 1816 and 1817, had poor sales as a result of hostile critics who went so far to attack Coleridge's integrity. Many of the attacks started as a new generation of critical magazines, including ''Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine'', ''Edinburgh Review'', and ''Quarterly Review'', were established at the beginning of the 19th century. The critics were more provocative than those of the previous generation, and much of the bad reception was based on Coleridge's timing of publication and his own political views, much of which contrasted with those of the critics, than actual content. Another reason for negative reviews was a puff piece written by Byron about the ''Christabel'' publication.<ref>Jackson 1970 pp. 8-10</ref> Not all of the negative comments were public, as Charles Lamb, friend of Coleridge, expressed his fears of a negative response as he wrote: "Coleridge repeats so enchantingly that it irradiates and brings heaven and elysian bowers into my parlour while he sings or says it; but there is an observation: 'never tell thy dreams,' and I am almost afraid that ''Kubla Khan'' is an owl that won't bear daylight. I fear lest it should be discovered by the lantern of typography and clear reducing to letters, no better than nonsense or no sense."<ref>Doughty 1981 qtd. p. 433</ref>

The first of the negative reviews was written by William Hazlitt, literary critic and Romantic writer. He reviewed the collection of poems for the 2 June 1816 ''Examiner'', and, in his analysis, he attacked the fragmentary nature of the work and argued, "The fault of Mr Coleridge is, that he comes to no conclusion ... from an excess of capacity, he does little or nothing" and that the poem revealed that "Mr Coleridge can write better ''nonsense'' verse than any man in English."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd p. 434</ref> In conclusion, Hazlitt admitted, "We could repeat these lines to ourselves not the less often for not knowing the meaning of them."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 209</ref> Following in the June 1816 ''Eclectic Review'', Josiah Conder dismissed the poem: "As to 'Kubla Khan', and the 'Pains of Sleep', we can only regret the publication of them, as affording a proof that the Author over-rates the importance of his name. With regard to the former, which is professedly published as a psychological curiosity, it having been composed during sleep, there appears to us nothing in the quality of the lines to render this circumstance extraordinary."<ref name="Jackson p. 212">Jackson 1970 p. 212</ref> He then continued by focusing on the manner in which the poem was composed, 'We could have informed Mr. Coleridge of a reverend friend of ours, who actually wrote down two sermons on a passage in the Apocalypse, from the recollection of the spontaneous exercise of his faculties in sleep. To persons who are in the habit of poetical composition, a similar phenomenon would not be a stranger occurrence, than the spirited dialogues in prose which take place in dreams of persons of duller invention than our poet, and which not unfrequently leave behind a very vivid impression."<ref name="Jackson p. 212"/>

Coleridge's statements on the origin of the poem were considered again by various critics with an emphasis on how the origins affected the merits of the poem. In an anonymous review for the July 1816 ''Literary Panorama'', the reviewer claimed, "'Kubla Khan' is merely a few stanzas which owe their origin to a circumstance by no means uncommon to persons of a poetical imagination ... It should however be recollected, that in sleep the judgment is the first faculty of the mind which ceases to act, therefore, the opinion of the sleeper respecting his performance is not to be trusted, even in his waking moments."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. pp. 215-216</ref> The review does praise the work as it continues, "Still if Mr. Coleridge's two hundred lines were all of equal merit with the following which he has preserved, we are ready to admit that he has reason to be grieved at their loss."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 216</ref> Another July 1816 anonymous review, for the ''Anti-Jacobin'', discussed the origin of the poem but dismissed the poem with lukewarm praise: "These have none of the wildness or deformity, of 'Christabel'; and though they are not marked by any striking beauties, they are not wholly discreditable to the author's talents."<ref>Jackson qtd. p. 221</ref> Another July 1816 anonymous review, in the ''Augustan Review'', claimed that the poem's descriptions "have much of the Oriental richness and harmony" but also said, in response to the preface, "There seems to be no great harm in dreaming while one sleeps; but an author really should not thus dream while he is awake, and writing too."<ref>Jackson qtd. 1995 p. 266</ref>

Reviews following months after publication contained limited positive appraisal of the poem. William Roberts's review, for the August 1816 ''British Review'', was more positive than previous analysis but with no detail about the work: "passing over the two other poems which are bound together with 'Christabel', called 'The Fragment of Kubla Khan', and 'The Pains of Sleep'; in which, however, there are some playful thoughts and fanciful imagery, which we would gladly have extracted if our room would have allowed it."<ref>Jackson 1970 p. 225</ref> The next review came in the January 1817 ''Monthly Review'', with the anonymous reviewer questioning: "Allowing every possible accuracy to the statement of Mr. Coleridge, we would yet ask him whether this extraordinary fragment was not rather the effect of rapid and instant composition after he was awake, than of memory immediately recording that which he dreamt when asleep? By what process of consciousness could he distinguish between such composition and such reminiscence? Impressed as his mind was with his interesting dream, and habituated as he is ... to the momentary production of verse, will he venture to assert that he did not ''compose'', and that he did ''remember'', the lines before us?"<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 246</ref> The review then concluded, "His 'psychological curiosity', as he terms it, depends in no slight degree on the establishment of the previous fact which we have mentioned: but the poem itself is below criticism. We would dismiss it with some portentous words of Sir Kenelm Digby, in his observations on Browne's ''religio Medici'': 'I have much ado to believe what he speaketh confidently; that he is more beholding to Morpheus for learned and rational as well as pleasing dreams, than to Mercury for smart and facetious conceptions'."<ref>Jackson 1970 pp. 246-247</ref>

===Later analysis===
Positive analysis of the poem came from Leigh Hunt, in the 21 October 1821 ''Examiner'' when Hunt wrote a piece on Coleridge as part of his "Sketches of the Living Poets" series. When coming to ''Kubla Khan'', he pointed out: "instead of being content to have written finely under the influence of laudanum, recommends 'Kubla-Khan' to his readers, not as a poem, but as 'a psychological curiosity' ... Every lover of books, scholar or not, who knows what it is to have his quarto open against a loaf at his tea ... ought to be in possession of Mr. Coleridge's poems, if it is only for 'Christabel', 'Kubla Khan', and the 'Ancient Mariner'."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 475</ref> When talking about the poem on its own, Hunt claimed it "is a voice and a vision, an everlasting tune in our mouths, a dream fit for Cambuscan and all his poets, a dance of pictures such as Giotto or Cimabue, revived and re-inspired, would have made for a Storie of Old Tartarie, a piece of the invisible world made visible by a sun at midnight and sliding before our eyes ... Justly is it thought that to be able to present such images as these to the mind, is to realise the world they speak of. We could repeat such verses as the following down a green glade, a whole summer's morning".<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. pp. 475-476</ref> The work went without major notice until John Bowring reviewed Coleridge's ''Poetical Works'' for the January 1830 ''Westminster Review''. When discussing the work along with the origins of the poem, Bowring stated, "The tale is extraordinary, but 'Kubla Khan' is much more valuable on another account, which is, that of its melodious versification. It is perfect music. The effect could scarcely have been more satisfactory to the ear had every syllable been selected merely for the sake of its sound. And yet there is throughout a close correspondence between the metre, the march of the verse, and the imagery which the words describe."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 550</ref> When concluding about the work, he declared, "The elements of this melody are only the common and well-known ones of English versification; our author is always felicitous in their management, but no where has he blended them in so perfect a combination as in this instance."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 551</ref> Another emphasis on the musicality of the poem came in August 1834, with Henry Nelson Coleridge analysis in the ''Quarterly Review'': "In some of the smaller pieces, as the conclusion of the 'Kubla Khan', for example, not only the lines by themselves are musical, but the whole passage sounds all at once as an outburst or crash of harps in the still air of autumn. The verses seem as if ''played'' to the ear upon some unseen instrument. And the poet's manner of reciting verse is similar."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 627</ref>

Victorian critics praised the poem and some examined aspects of the poem's background. John Sheppard, in his analysis of dreams titled ''On Dreams'' (1847), lamented Coleridge's drug use as getting in the way of his poetry but argued: "It is probable, since he writes of having taken an 'anodyne,' that the 'vision in a dream' arose under some excitement of that same narcotic; but this does not destroy, even as to his particular case, the evidence for a wonderfully inventive action of the mind in sleep; for, whatever were the exciting cause, the fact remains the same".<ref>Sheppard 1847 p. 170</ref> T. Hall Caine, in 1883 survey of the original critical response to ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'', praised the poem and declared: "It must surely be allowed that the adverse criticism on 'Christabel' and 'Kubla Khan' which is here quoted is outside all tolerant treatment, whether of raillery or of banter. It is difficult to attribute such false verdict to pure and absolute ignorance. Even when we make all due allowance for the prejudices of critics whose only possible enthusiasm went out to 'the pointed and fine propriety of Poe,' we can hardly believe that the exquisite art which is among the most valued on our possessions could encounter so much garrulous abuse without the criminal intervention of personal malignancy."<ref>Caine 1883 p. 65</ref> In a review of H. D. Traill's analysis of Coleridge in the "English Men of Letters", an anonymous reviewer wrote in 1885 ''Westminster Review'': "Of 'Kubla Khan,' Mr. Traill writes: 'As to the wild dream-poem 'Kubla Khan,' it is hardly more than a psychologial curiosity, and only that perhaps in respect of the completeness of its metrical form.' Lovers of poetry think otherwise, and listen to these wonderful lines as the voice of Poesy itself."<ref>Anonymous 1885. p. 283</ref>

Critics at the end of the 19th century favoured the poem and placed it as one of Coleridge's best works. When discussing ''Christabel'', ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'' and ''Kubla Khan'', an anonymous reviewer in the October 1893 '' The Church Quarterly Review '' claimed, "In these poems Coleridge achieves a mastery of language and rhythm which is nowhere else conspicuously evident in him."<ref>Anonymous, '' The Church Quarterly Review '', 1894 p. 175.</ref> In 1895, Andrew Lang reviewed the ''Letters of Coleridge'' in addition to Coleridge's ''Kubla Khan'', ''Christabel'' and ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'', saying: "all these poems are 'miraculous;' all seem to have been 'given' by the dreaming 'subconscious self' of Coleridge. The earliest pieces hold no promise of these marvels. They come from what is oldest in Coleridge's nature, his uninvited and irrepressible intuition, magical and rare, vivid beyond common sight of common things, sweet beyond sound of things heard."<ref>Land 1895 p. 284</ref> G E Woodberry, in 1897, said that ''Christabel'', ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'', and ''Kubla Khan'' "are the marvelous creations of his genius. In these it will be said there is both a world of nature new created, and a dramatic method and interest. It is enough for the purpose of the analysis if it be granted that nowhere else in Coleridge's work, except in these and less noticeably in a few other instances, do these high characteristics occur."<ref>Woodberry 1897 p. 3849</ref> In speaking of the three poems, he claimed they "have besides that wealth of beauty in detail, of fine diction, of liquid melody, of sentiment, thought, and image, which belong only to poetry of the highest order, and which are too obvious to require any comment. 'Kubla Khan' is a poem of the same kind, in which the mystical effect is given almost wholly by landscape."<ref>Woodberry 1897 p. 3851</ref>

===Modern criticism===
The 1920s contained analysis of the poem that emphasised the poem's power. In ''Road to Xanadu'' (1927), a book length study of ''The Rime of the Ancient Mariner'' and ''Kubla Khan'', John Livingston Lowes claimed that the poems were "two of the most remarkable poems in English".<ref>Lowes 1927 p. 3</ref> When turning to the background of the works, he argued, "Coleridge as Coleridge, be it said at once, is a secondary moment to our purpose; it is the significant process, not the man, which constitutes our theme. But the amazing ''modus operandi'' of his genius, in the fresh light which I hope I have to offer, becomes the very abstract and brief chronicle of the procedure of the creative faculty itself."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 4-5</ref> After breaking down the various aspects of the poem, Lowes stated, "with a picture of unimpaired and thrilling vividness, the fragment ends. And with it ends, for all save Coleridge, the dream. 'The earth hath bubbles as the water has, and this is of them.' For 'Kubla Khan' is as near enchantment, I suppose, as we are like to come in this dull world. And over it is cast the glamour, enhanced beyond all reckoning in the dream, of the remote in time and space – that visionary presence of a vague and gorgeous and mysterious Past which brooded, as Coleridge read, above the inscrutable Nile, and domed pavilions in Cashmere, and the vanished stateliness of Xanadu."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 409-410</ref> He continued by describing the power of the poem: "For none of the things which we have seen – dome, river, chasm, fountain, caves of ice, or floating hair – nor any combination of them holds the secret key to that sense of an incommunicable witchery which pervades the poem. That is something more impalpable by far, into which entered who can tell what tracelesss, shadowy recollections ... The poem is steeped in the wonder of all Coleridge's enchanted voyagings."<ref>Lowes 1927 p. 410</ref> Lowes then concluded about the two works: "Not even in the magical four and fifty lines of 'Kubla Khan' is sheer visualizing energy so intensely exercised as in 'The Ancient Mariner.' But every crystal-clear picture there, is an integral part of a preconceived and consciously elaborated whole ... In 'Kubla Khan' the linked and interweaving images irresponsibly and gloriously stream, like the pulsing, fluctuating banners of the North. And their pageant is as aimless as it is magnificent ... There is, then ... on glory of 'Kubla Khan' and another glory of 'The Ancient Mariner,' as one star differeth from another start in glory."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 412-413</ref> George Watson, in 1966, claimed that Lowes's analysis of the poems "will stand as a permanent monument to historical criticism."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 11</ref> Also in 1966, Kenneth Burke, declared, "Count me among those who would view this poem both as a marvel, and as 'in principle' ''finished''"<ref>Burke 1986 p. 33</ref>

T. S. Eliot attacked the reputation of ''Kubla Khan'' and sparked a dispute within literary criticism with his analysis of the poem in his essay "Origin and Uses of Poetry" from ''The Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism'' (1933): "The way in which poetry is written is not, so far as our knowledge of these obscure matters as yet extends, any clue to its value ... The faith in mystical inspiration is responsible for the exaggerated repute of ''Kubla Khan''. The imagery of that fragment, certainly, whatever its origins in Coleridge's reading, sank to the depths of Coleridge's feeling, was saturated, transformed there ... and brought up into daylight again."<ref name="Eliot p. 90">Eliot 1975 p. 90</ref> He goes on to explain, "But it is not ''used'': the poem has not been written. A single verse is not poetry unless it is a one-verse poem; and even the finest line draws its life from its context. Organization is necessary as well as 'inspiration'. The re-creation of word and image which happens fitfully in the poetry of such a poet as Coleridge happens almost incessantly with Shakespeare."<ref name="Eliot p. 90"/> Geoffrey Yarlott, in 1967, responds to Eliot to claim, "Certainly, the enigmatic personages who appear in the poem ... and the vaguely incantatory proper names ... appear to adumbrate rather than crystalize the poet's intention. Yet, though generally speaking intentions in poetry are nothing save as 'realized', we are unable to ignore the poem, despite Mr Eliot's strictures on its 'exaggerated repute'."<ref name="Yarlott p. 127">Yarlott 1967 p. 127</ref> He continued, "We may question without end ''what'' it means, but few of us question if the poem is worth the trouble, or whether the meaning is worth the having. While the feeling persists that there is something there which is profoundly important, the challenge to elucidate it proves irresistible."<ref name="Yarlott p. 127"/> However, Lilian Furst, in 1969, countered Yarlott to argue that, "T. S. Eliot's objection to the exaggerated repute of the surrealist ''Kubla Khan'' is not unjustified. Moreover, the customary criticism of Coleridge as a cerebral poet would seem to be borne out by those poems such as ''This Lime-tree Bower my Prison'' or ''The Pains of Sleep'', which tend more towards a direct statement than an imaginative presentation of personal dilemma."<ref>Furst 1979 p. 189</ref>

During the 1940s and 1950s, critics focused on the technique of the poem and how it relates to the meaning. In 1941, G. W. Knight claimed that ''Kubla Khan'' "needs no defence. It has a barbaric and oriental magnificence that asserts itself with a happy power and authenticity too often absent from visionary poems set within the Christian tradition."<ref>Knight 1975 p. 213</ref> Humphrey House, in 1953, praised the poem and said of beginning of the poem: "The whole passage is full of life because the verse has both the needed energy and the needed control. The combination of energy and control in the rhythm and sound is so great" and that Coleridge's words "convey so fully the sense of inexhaustible energy, now falling now rising, but persisting through its own pulse".<ref>House 1953 pp. 117-118</ref> Also in 1953, Elisabeth Schneider dedicated her book to analysing the various aspects of the poem, including the various sound techniques. When discussing the quality of the poem, she wrote, "I sometimes think we overwork Coleridge's idea of 'the balance or reconciliation of opposite or discordant qualities.' I have to come back to it here, however, for the particular flavor of ''Kubla Khan'', with its air of mystery, is describable in part through that convenient phrase. Yet, the 'reconciliation' does not quite occur either. It is in fact avoided. What we have instead is the very spirit of 'oscillation' itself."<ref name="Schneider p. 91">Schneider 1953 p. 91</ref> Continuing, she claimed, "The poem is the soul of ambivalence, oscillation's very self; and that is probably its deepest meaning. In creating this effect, form and matter are intricately woven. The irregular and inexact rhymes and varied lengths of the lines play some part. More important is the musical effect in which a smooth, rather swift forward movement is emphasized by the relation of grammatical structure to line and rhyme, yet is impeded and thrown back upon itself even from the beginning".<ref name="Schneider p. 91"/> She then concluded: "Here in these interwoven oscillations dwells the magic, the 'dream,' and the air of mysterious meaning of ''Kubla Khan''. I question whether this effect was all deliberately thought out by Coleridge, though it might have been. It is possibly half-inherent in his subject ... . What remains is the spirit of 'oscillation,' perfectly poeticized, and possibly ironically commemorative of the author."<ref>Schneider 1967 pp. 92-93</ref> Following in 1959, John Beer described the complex nature of the poem: "''Kubla Khan'' the poem is not a meaningless reverie, but a poem so packed with meaning as to render detailed elucidation extremely difficult."<ref>Beer 1962 p. 212</ref> In responding to House, Beer claimed, "That there is an image of energy in the fountain may be accepted: but I cannot agree that it is creative energy of the highest type."<ref>Beer 1962 p. 242</ref>

Critics of the 1960s focused on the reputation of the poem and how it compared to Coleridge's other poems. In 1966, Virginia Radley considered Wordsworth and his sister as an important influence to Coleridge writing a great poem: "Almost daily social intercourse with this remarkable brother and sister seemed to provide the catalyst to greatness, for it is during this period that Coleridge conceived his greatest poems, 'Christabel,' 'The Rime of the Ancient Mariner,' and 'Kubla Khan,' poems so distinctive and so different from his others that many generations of readers know Coleridge solely through them."<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 18-19</ref> She latter added that "Of all the poems Coleridge wrote, three are beyond compare. These three, 'The Ancient Mariner,' 'Christabel,' and 'Kubla Khan,' produced an aura which defies definition, but which might be properly be called one of 'natural magic.'"<ref>Radley 1966 p. 57</ref> What sets apart the poem from the others is its "verbal enactment of the creative process" which makes it "unique even among the three poems of high imagination."<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 77-78</ref> To Radley, "the poem is skilfully wrought, as are all the poems of high imagination. The opposites within it are diverse and effectively so. In tone, the poem juxtaposes quiet with noise ... Action presents its contrasts also ... These seemingly antithetical images combine to demonstrate the proximity of the known and the unknown worlds, the two worlds of Understanding and Imagination."<ref>Radley 1966 p. 80</ref> In concluding about the poem, she argued, "In truth, there are other 'Fears in Solitude' than that written by Coleridge and there are other 'Frosts at Midnight'; but there are no other 'Ancient Mariners' or 'Kubla Khans,' nor are there likely to be. In evaluating Coleridge's poetry, it can readily be seen and accepted that for the poems of high imagination his reputation is eternally made."<ref>Radley 1966 p. 146</ref>

In the same year as Radley, George Watson argued that "The case of 'Kubla Khan' is perhaps the strangest of all – a poem that stands high even in English poetry as a work of ordered perfection is offered by the poet himself, nearly twenty years after its composition, as a fragment. Anyone can accept that a writer's head should be full of projects he will never fulfil, and most writers are cautious enough not to set them down; Coleridge, rashly, did set them down, so that his very fertility has survived as evidence of infertility."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 9</ref> He later argued that the poem "is probably the most original poem about poetry in English, and the first hint outside his notebooks and letters that a major critic lies hidden in the twenty-five-year-old Coleridge."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 122</ref> In conclusion about the poem, Watson stated, "The triumph of 'Kubla Khan,' perhaps, lies in its evasions: it hints so delicately at critical truths while demonstrating them so boldly. The contrasts between the two halves of the poem ... So bold, indeed, that Coleridge for once was able to dispense with any language out of the past. It was his own poem, a manifesto. To read it now, with the hindsight of another age, is to feel premonitions of the critical achievement to come ... But the poem is in advance, not just of these, but in all probability of any critical statement that survives. It may be that it stands close to the moment of discovery itself."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 130</ref> After responding to Eliot's claims about ''Kubla Khan'', Yarlott, in 1967, argued that "few of us question if the poem is worth the trouble" before explaining that "The ambiguities inherent in the poem pose a special problem of critical approach. If we restrict ourselves to what is 'given', appealing to the poem as a 'whole', we shall fail probably to resolves its various cruxes. Hence, there is a temptation to look for 'external' influences ... The trouble with all these approaches is that they tend finally to lead ''away'' from the poem itself."<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 127-128</ref> When describing specifics, he argued, "The rhythmical development of the stanza, too, though technically brilliant, evokes admiration rather than delight. The unusually heavy stresses and abrupt masculine rhymes impose a slow and sonorous weightiness upon the movement of the iambic octosyllabics which is quite in contrast, say, to the light fast metre of the final stanza where speed of movement matches buoyancy of tone."<ref name="Yarlott p. 129"/> Following in 1968, Walter Jackson Bate called the poem "haunting" and said that it was "so unlike anything else in English".<ref>Bate 1968 p. 75</ref>

Criticism during the 1970s and 1980s emphasized the importance of the Preface while praising the work. Norman Fruman, in 1971, argued: "To discuss 'Kubla Khan' as one might any other great poem would be an exercise in futility. For a century and a half its status has been unique, a masterpiece ''sui generis'', embodying interpretive problems wholly its own...It would not be excessive to say that no small part of the extraordinary fame of 'Kubla Khan' inheres in its alleged marvellous conception. Its Preface is world famous and has been used in many studies of the creative process as a signal instance in which a poem has come to us directly from the unconscious."<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 334</ref>

In 1981, Kathleen Wheeler contrasts the Crewe Manuscript note with the Preface: "Contrasting this relatively factual, literal, and dry account of the circumstances surrounding the birth of the poem with the actual published preface, one illustrates what the latter is not: it is not a literal, dry, factual account of this sort, but a highly literary piece of composition, providing the verse with a certain mystique."<ref>Wheeler 1981 p. 28</ref> In 1985, David Jasper praised the poem as "one of his greatest meditations on the nature of poetry and poetic creation" and argued "it is through irony, also, as it unsettles and undercuts, that the fragment becomes a Romantic literary form of such importance, nowhere more so than in 'Kubla Khan'."<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 14, 19</ref> When talking about the Preface, Jasper claimed that it "profoundly influenced the way in which the poem has been understood".<ref>Jasper 1985 p. 43</ref> Responding in part to Wheeler in 1986, Charles Rzepka analysed the relationship between the poet and the audience of the poem while describing ''Kubla Khan'' as one of "Coleridge's three great poems of the supernatural".<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 109-110</ref> He continued by discussing the preface: "despite its obvious undependability as a guide to the actual process of the poem's composition, the preface can still, in Wheeler's words, lead us 'to ponder why Coleridge chose to write a preface ... ' What the preface describes, of course, is not the actual process by which the poem came into being, but an analogue of poetic creation as ''logos'', a divine 'decree' or fiat which transforms the Word into the world."<ref>Rzepka 1986 p. 112</ref>

During the 1990s, critics continued to praise the poem with many critics placing emphasis on what the Preface adds to the poem. David Perkins, in 1990, argued that "Coleridge's introductory note to ''Kubla Khan'' weaves together two myths with potent imaginative appeal. The myth of the lost poem tells how an inspired work was mysteriously given to the poet and dispelled irrecoverably."<ref name="Perkins p. 39"/> Also in 1990, Thomas McFarland stated, "Judging by the number and variety of critical effort to interpret their meaning, there may be no more palpably symbolic poems in all of English literature than ''Kubla Khan'' and ''The Ancient Mariner''."<ref>McFarland 1990 p. 42</ref> In 1996, Rosemary Ashton claimed that the poem was "one of the most famous poems in the language" and claimed the Preface as "the most famous, but probably not the most accurate, preface in literary history."<ref>Ashton 1997 p. 111</ref> Richard Holmes, in 1998, declared the importance of the poem's Preface while describing the reception of the 1816 volume of poems: "However, no contemporary critic saw the larger possible significance of Coleridge's Preface to 'Kubla Khan', though it eventually became one of the most celebrated, and disputed, accounts of poetic composition ever written. Like the letter from the fictional 'friend' in the ''Biographia'', it brilliantly suggests how a compressed fragment came to represent a much larger (and even more mysterious) act of creation."<ref name="Holmes 1998 p. 435"/>

In 2002, J. C. C. Mays pointed out that "Coleridge's claim to be a great poet lies in the continued pursuit of the consequences of 'The Ancient Mariner,' 'Christabel' and 'Kubla Khan' on several levels."<ref>Mays 2002 p. 91</ref> Adam Sisman, in 2006, questioned the nature of the poem itself: "No one even knows whether it is complete; Coleridge describes it as a 'fragment,' but there is a case for doubting this. Maybe it is not a poem at all. Hazlitt called it 'a musical composition' ... Though literary detectives have uncovered some of its sources, its remains difficult to say what the poem is about."<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 193</ref> In describing the merits of the poem and its fragmentary state, he claimed, "The poem stands for itself: beautiful, sensuous and enigmatic."<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 196</ref> During the same year, Jack Stillinger claimed that "Coleridge wrote only a few poems of the first rank – perhaps no more than a dozen, all told – and he seems to have taken a very casual attitude toward them ... he kept ''Kubla Khan'' in manuscript for nearly twenty years before offering it to the public 'rather as a psychological curiosity, than on the grounds of any supposed ''poetic'' merits'".<ref>Stillinger 2010 p. 157</ref> Harold Bloom, in 2010, argued that Coleridge wrote two kinds of poems and that "The daemonic group, necessarily more famous, is the triad of ''The Ancient Mariner'', ''Christabel'', and 'Kubla Khan.'"<ref>Bloom 2010 p. 3</ref> He goes on to explain the "daemonic": "Opium was the avenging daemon or ''alastor'' of Coleridge's life, his dark or fallen angel, his experiential acquaintance with Milton's Satan. Opium was for him what wandering and moral tale-telling became for the Mariner – the personal shape of repetition compulsion. The lust for paradise in 'Kubla Khan,' Geraldine's lust for Christabel – these are manifestations of Coleridge's revisionary daemonization of Milton, these are Coleridge's countersublime. Poetic genius, the genial spirit itself, Coleridge must see as daemonic when it is his own rather than when it is Milton's."<ref>Bloom 2010 p. 14</ref>

==Notes==
{{reflist|3}}

==References==
<div style="-moz-column-count:3; column-count:3;">
* Anonymous. "Samuel Taylor Coleridge". ''The Church Quarterly Review''. Vol 37 (October 1893 - January 1894). London: Spottiswoode, 1894
* Anonymous. ''Westminster Review''. Vol 67 (January, April). Philadelphia: Leonard Scott, 1885.
* Ashton, Rosemary. ''The Life of Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997.
* Barth, J. Robert. ''Romanticism and Transcendence''. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2003.
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''Coleridge''. New York: Macmillan, 1968.
* Beer, John. ''Coleridge the Visionary''. New York: Collier, 1962
* Bloom, Harold. "Introduction" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Bloom, Harold. ''The Visionary Company''. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993.
* Burke, Kenneth. "'Kubla Khan': Proto-Surrealist Poem" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1986.
* Caine, T. Hall. ''Cobwebs of Criticism''. London: Elliot Stock, 1883.
* Doughty, Oswald. ''Perturbed Spirit''. London: Associated University Presses, 1981.
* Eliot, T. S. ''Selected Prose of T. S. Eliot''. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 1975.
* Fruman, Norman. ''Coleridge, the Damaged Archangel''. New York: George Braziller, 1971.
* Fulford, Tim. "Slavery and Superstition in the Poems" in ''The Cambridge Companion to Coleridge''. Ed. Lucy Newlyn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
* Furst, Lilian. ''Romanticism in Perspective''. New York: St Martin's Press, 1969.
* Holmes, Richard. ''Coleridge: Early Visions, 1772-1804''. New York: Pantheon, 1989.
* Holmes, Richard. ''Coleridge: Darker Reflections, 1804-1834''. New York: Pantheon, 1998.
* House, Humphry. ''Coleridge''. London: R. Hart-Davis, 1953.
* Jackson, J R de J. ''Coleridge: The Critical Heritage''. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1970.
* Jackson, J R de J. ''Coleridge: The Critical Heritage 1834-1900''. New York: Routledge, 1995.
* Knight, G. W. "Coleridge's Divine Comedy" in ''English Romantic Poets''. Ed. M. H. Abrams. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975.
* Lang, Andrew. "The Letters of Coleridge". ''Littell's Living Age''. Vol. 206 (July, August, September). Boston: Littell and Co., 1895.
* Lowes, John. ''The Road to Xanadu''. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1927.
* Mays, J. C. C. (editor). ''The Collected Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge: Poetical Works'' I Vol I.I. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.
* Mays, J. C. C. "The Later Poetry" in ''The Cambridge Companion to Coleridge''. Ed. Lucy Newlyn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
* McFarland, Thomas. "Involute and Symbol" in ''Coleridge, Keats, and the Imagination''. Ed. J. Robert Barth and John Mahoney. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1990.
* Perkins, David. "The Imaginative Vision of ''Kubla Khan'': On Coleridge's Introductory Note" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Radley, Virginia. ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. New York: Twayne, 1966.
* Rauber, D. F. "The Fragment as Romantic Form", ''Modern Language Quarterly''. Vol 30 (1969).
*Nicholas, Roe. ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge and the sciences of life''. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
* Rzepka, Charles. ''The Self As Mind''. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.
* Schneider, Elisabeth. "''Kubla Khan''" in ''Coleridge''. Ed. Kathleen Coburn. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967.
* Sheppard, John. ''On Dreams''. London: Jackson and Walford, 1847.
* Singh, Sukhdev. ''Coleridge and the New Criticism''. Anmol Publications, 1994.
* Sisman, Adam. ''The Friendship''. New York: Viking, 2006.
* Stillinger, Jack. "Pictorialism and Matter-of Factness in Coleridge's Poems of Somerset" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Watson, George. ''Coleridge the Poet''. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1966.
* Wheeler, Kathleen. ''The Creative Mind in Coleridge's Poetry''. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.
* Woodberry, G. E. "Samuel Taylor Coleridge" in ''Library of the World's Best Literature''. Vol VII. New York: R. S. Peale and J. A. Hill, 1897.
* Yarlott, Geoffrey. ''Coleridge and the Abyssinian Maid''. London: Methuen & Co, 1967.
</div>

Kubla Khan

2011-12-13T22:17:32Z

Ottava: fix

'''''Kubla Khan''''' is a poem by Samuel Taylor Coleridge , completed in 1797 and published in ''Christabel, Kubla Khan, and the Pains of Sleep'' in 1816. According to Coleridge's Preface to ''Kubla Khan'', the poem was composed one night after he experienced an opium influenced dream after reading a work describing the Tartar king Kublai Khan . Upon waking, he set about writing lines of poetry that came to him from the dream until he was interrupted by a person from Porlock . The poem could not be completed according to its original 200-300 line plan as the interruption caused him to forget the lines. Although the specific details of Coleridge's Preface are debatable, he most likely composed ''Kubla Khan'' during autumn 1797 but left unpublished and kept for private readings until 1816 when, on the prompting by George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron George Gordon Byron , it was made available to the public.

The poem is different in style and form from other poems composed by Coleridge. While incomplete and subtitled a "fragment", its language is highly stylized with a strong emphasis on sound devices that change between the poem's original two stanza s. The first stanza of the poem describes Khan's pleasure dome built alongside a sacred river fed by a powerful fountain. The second stanza of the poem is the narrator's response to the power and effects of a Habesha people Abyssinian maid's song, which enraptures him but leaves him unable to act on her inspiration unless he could hear her once again. Together, they form a comparison of creative power that does not work with nature and creative power that is harmonious with nature.

Modern critics, with some exceptions, view ''Kubla Khan'' as one of Coleridge's three great poems, with '' The Rime of the Ancient Mariner '' and ''Christabel ''. While Coleridge's contemporaries mostly denounced the poem upon publication or questioned Coleridge's statements about its origin, ''Kubla Khan'' was originally published because many of Coleridge's associates felt that the poem, when read by Coleridge aloud, was wonderful. It was not until years later that critics began to openly admire the poem.

==Background==
In September 1797, Coleridge lived in Stowey in the south west of England and spent much of his time walking through the nearby Quantock Hills with his fellow poet William Wordsworth and Wordsworth's sister Dorothy ;<ref name="Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162">Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162</ref> the route is memorialized as the " Coleridge Way ".<ref>[http://www.somerset-rural-renaissance.co.uk/coleridge-way.html] "The Coleridge Way". Somerset Rural Renaissance, 2007. accessdate=2 July 2010}}</ref> Throughout the autumn, he worked on many poems, including "The Brook" and the tragedy ''Osorio''. Some time between 9 October and 14 October 1797, when Coleridge says he had completed the tragedy, he left Stowey for Lynton. On his return, he became sick and rested at Ash Farm, located at Culbone Church and one of the few places to seek shelter on his route.<ref name="Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162"/> In 1934, a copy of the poem known as the Crewe Manuscript was discovered and it contained a note about the origin of ''Kubla Khan''.<ref name="Ashton p. 112">Ashton 1997 p. 112</ref> Coleridge attributed the poem's origins to one of his stays at Ash Farm, possibly the one that happened in October 1797: "This fragment with a good deal more, not recoverable, composed, in a sort of Reverie brought on by two grains of Opium taken to check a dysentry, at a Farm House between Porlock & Linton, a quarter of a mile from Culbone Church, in the fall of the year, 1797".<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd. p. 162</ref> Coleridge explained in the Preface of the 1816 edition that he read from Samuel Purchas 's ''Pilgrimage'' and included a passage that directly influenced his thoughts:<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 163-164</ref>
<blockquote>In ''Xanada'' did ''Cublai Can'' build a stately Pallace, encompassing sixteene miles of plaine ground with a wall, wherein are fertile Meddows, pleasant Springs, delightful Streames, and all sorts of beasts of chase and game, and in the midst thereof a sumptuous house of pleasure, which may be removed from place to place. Here he doth abide in the months of June, July, and August, on the eight and twentieth day whereof, he departeth thence to another place to do sacrifice in this manner: He hath a Herd or Drove of Horses and Mares, about ten thousand, as white as snow; of the milke whereof none may taste, except he be of the blood of ''Cingis Can''. Yea, the Tartars do these beasts great reverence, nor dare any cross their way, or go before them. According to the directions of his Astrologers or Magicians, he on the eight and twentieth day of August aforesaid, spendeth and poureth forth with his owne hands the milke of these Mares in the aire, and on the earth, to give drink to the spirits and Idols which they worship, that they may preserve the men, women, beasts, birds, corne, and other things growing on the earth.<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd. pp. 163-164</ref></blockquote>
The lines from Purchas, according to the Preface, inspired a dream in which Coleridge was provided a poem about Kubla Khan. Upon waking, he began to compose the 200 to 300 line poem, but he was interrupted by a man from Porlock . When the unidentified individual left, Coleridge was unable to continue ''Kubla Khan'' except for only a few of the lines and images he still retained. The second stanza of the poem, forming a conclusion, was composed at a later date and was possibly disconnected from the original dream.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 40-44</ref>

Unlike Coleridge's normal approach to his poetry, he did not mention the poem in letters to his friends. The first written record of the poem is in Dorothy Wordsworth's Journal, October 1798. It is possible that the poem was recited to his friends during this time and was kept for private use instead of publication. However, the exact date of the poem is uncertain because Coleridge normally dated his poems but did not date ''Kubla Khan''.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 165</ref> Coleridge did write to John Thelwall, 14 October 1797, to describe his feelings related to those expressed in the poem:<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 166-167</ref>
<blockquote>I should much wish, like the Indian Vishna, to float about along an infinite ocean cradled in the flower of the Lotos, & wake once in a million years for a few minutes – just to know I was going to sleep a million years more ... I can ''at times'' feel strong the beauties, you describe, in themselves, & for themselves – but more frequently ''all things'' appear little – all the knowledge, that can be acquired, child's play – the universe itself – what but an immense heap of ''little'' things? ... My mind feels as if it ached to behold & know something ''great'' – something ''one'' & ''indivisible'' – and it is only in the faith of this that rocks or waterfalls, mountains or caverns give me the sense of sublimity or majesty!<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd p. 167</ref></blockquote>
The thoughts expressed in Coleridge's letter date ''Kubla Khan'' to October 1797, but two alternatives have been postulated by Coleridge's biographers: May 1798 and October 1799. These were both times he was in the area, and, by 1799, Coleridge was able to read Robert Southey 's ''Thalaba the Destroyer'', a work which also drew on Purchas's work. It is possible that he merely edited the poem during those time periods, and there is little evidence to suggest that Coleridge lied about the opium-induced experience at Ash Farm.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 167-</ref>

The work was set aside until 1815 when Coleridge compiled manuscripts of his poems for a collection titled ''Sibylline Leaves''.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 387</ref> The poem remained buried in obscurity until a 10 April 1816 meeting between Coleridge and George Gordon Byron , a younger poet, who persuaded Coleridge to publish ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'' as fragments. Leigh Hunt, another poet, witnessed the event and wrote, "He recited his 'Kubla Khan' one morning to Lord Byron, in his Lordship's house in Piccadilly, when I happened to be in another room. I remember the other's coming away from him, highly struck with his poem, and saying how wonderfully he talked. This was the impression of everyone who heard him."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 426</ref> Byron arranged for John Murray to publish the poem with ''Christabel'' and "The Pains of Sleep" along with prefaces to the works. A contract was drawn up on 12 April 1816 for 80 pounds.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 426</ref> Charles Lamb , poet and friend of Coleridge, witnessed Coleridge's work towards publishing the poem and wrote to Wordsworth: "Coleridge is printing Xtabel by Lord Byron's recommendation to Murray, with what he calls a vision of Kubla Khan – which said vision he repeats so enchantingly that it irradiates & brings Heaven & Elysian bowers into my parlour while he sings or says it".<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 429</ref> Coleridge stayed in London to work on the poem and also to try and break his opium addiction.. However, not everyone was happy with the idea of the poem's being published, as Coleridge's wife, who was not with him, wrote to Thomas Poole, "Oh! when will he ever give his friends anything but pain? he has been so unwise as to publish his fragments of 'Christabel' & 'Koula-Khan' ... we were all sadly vexed when we read the advertisement of these things."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 431</ref>

The collection of poems was published 25 May 1816,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 434</ref> and Coleridge included "A Fragment" as a subtitle to the 54 line version of the poem to defend against criticism of the poem's incomplete nature.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 112-113</ref> The original published version of the work was separated into 2 stanzas, with the first ending at line 30.<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 145</ref> Printed with ''Kubla Khan'' was a preface that claimed an opium induced dream provided Coleridge the lines.<ref name="Sisman p. 417">Sisman 2006 p. 417</ref> The poem was printed four times in Coleridge's life, with the final printing in his ''Poetical Works'' of 1834.<ref>Mays 2001 p. 511</ref> In the final work, Coleridge added the expanded subtitle "Or, A Vision in a Dream. A Fragment". In some later anthologies of Coleridge's poetry, the Preface is dropped along with the subtitle denoting its fragmentary and dream nature. Sometimes, the Preface is included in modern editions but lacks both the first and final paragraphs.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 39-40</ref>

==Style==
The poem according to Coleridge's account, is a fragment of what it should have been, amounting to what he was able to jot down from memory: 54 lines.<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 195</ref> Originally, his dream included between 200 and 300 lines, but he was only able to compose the first 30 before he was interrupted. The second stanza is not necessarily part of the original dream and refers to the dream in the past tense.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 43-44</ref> The rhythm of the poem, like its themes and images, is different from other poems Coleridge wrote during the time, and it is organised in a structure similar to 18th-century odes. The poem relies on many sound-based techniques, including cognate variation and chiasmus .<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 509-512</ref> In particular, the poem emphasises the use of the "æ" sound and similar modifications to the standard "a" sound to make the poem sound Asian. Its rhyme scheme found in the first seven lines is repeated in the first seven lines of the second stanza. There is a heavy use of assonance , the reuse of vowel sounds, and a reliance on alliteration, repetition of the first sound of a word, within the poem including the first line: "In Xanadu did Kubla Khan". The stressed sounds, "Xan", "du", "Ku", "Khan", contain assonance in their use of the sounds a-u-u-a, have two rhyming syllables with "Xan" and "Khan", and employ alliteration with the name "Kubla Khan" and the reuse of "d" sounds in "Xanadu" and "did". To pull the line together, the "i" sound of "In" is repeated in "did". Later lines do not contain the same amount of symmetry but do rely on assonance and rhymes throughout. The only word that has no true connection to another word is "dome" except in its use of a "d" sound. Though the lines are interconnected, the rhyme scheme and line lengths are irregular.<ref>Schneider 1967 pp. 88-91</ref>

The first lines of the poem follow iambic tetrameter with the initial stanza relying on heavy stresses. The lines of the second stanza incorporate lighter stresses to increase the speed of the meter to separate them from the hammer-like rhythm of the previous lines.<ref name="Yarlott p. 129">Yarlott 1967 p. 129</ref> There also is strong a break following line 36 in the poem that provides for a second stanza, and there is a transition in narration from a third person narration about Kubla Khan into the poet discussing his role as a poet.<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 509-510, 514</ref> Without the Preface, the two stanzas form two different poems that have some relationship to each other but lack unity.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 42-43</ref> This is not to say they would be two different poems, since the technique of having separate parts that respond to another is used in the genre of the odal hymn , used in the poetry of other Romantic poets including John Keats or Percy Bysshe Shelley .<ref>Bate 1968 p. 78</ref> However, the odal hymn as used by others has a stronger unity among its parts, and Coleridge believed in writing poetry that was unified organically.<ref>Singh 1994 p. 48}}</ref> It is possible that Coleridge was displeased by the lack of unity in the poem and added a note about the structure to the Preface to explain his thoughts.<ref>Roe 2001 p.265}}</ref> In terms of genre, the poem is a dream poem and related to works describing visions common to the Romantic poets. ''Kubla Khan'' is also related to the genre of fragmentary poetry, with internal images reinforcing the idea of fragmentation that is found within the form of the poem.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 42, 45-47</ref> The poem's self-proclaimed fragmentary nature combined with Coleridge's warning about the poem in the preface turns ''Kubla Khan'' into an "anti-poem", a work that lacks structure, order, and leaves the reader confused instead of enlightened.<ref>Fulford 2002 p. 54</ref> However, the poem has little relation to the other fragmentary poems Coleridge wrote.<ref>Bate 1968 p. 76</ref>

==Preface==
The Preface of ''Kubla Khan'' began by explaining that it was printed:<ref name="Sisman p. 417"/> "at the request of a poet of great and deserved celebrity, and as far as the author's own opinions are concerned, rather as a psychological curiosity, than on the ground of any supposed ''poetic'' merits".<ref>Sisman 2006 qtd. p. 417</ref> The preface then provided an origin to both the poem and why it was merely a smaller portion of an intended larger work. After reading from Purchas's book,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 434-435</ref> "The Author continued for about three hours in a profound sleep, at least of the external senses, during which time he had the most vivid confidence, that he could not have composed less than from two or three hundred lines ... On Awaking he appeared to himself to have a distinct recollection of the whole, and taking his pen, ink, and paper, instantly and eagerly wrote down the lines that are here preserved."<ref name="Holmes qtd. p. 435">Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 435</ref> The image of himself that Coleridge provides is of a dreamer who reads works of lore and not as an opium addict. Instead, the effects of the opium, as described, are intended to suggest that he was not used to its effects.<ref name="Perkins p. 39">Perkins 2010 p. 39</ref>

There are some problems with Coleridge's account, especially the claim to have a copy of Purchas with him. It was a rare book, unlikely to be at a "lonely farmhouse", nor would an individual carry it on a journey; the folio was heavy and almost 1000 pages insize.<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 337</ref> It is probable that the words of Purchas were merely remembered by Coleridge and that the depiction of immediately reading the work before falling asleep was to suggest that the subject came to him accidentally.<ref>Bate 1968 pp. 75-76</ref>

The passage continues with a famous account of an interruption:<ref name="Holmes 1998 p. 435">Holmes 1998 p. 435</ref> "At this moment he was unfortunately called out by a person on business from Porlock, and detained by him above an hour, and on his return to his room, found, to his no small surprise and mortification, that though he still retained some vague and dim recollection of the general purpose of the vision, yet, with the exception of some eight or ten scattered lines and images, all the rest had passed away like the images on the surface of a stream into which a stone has been cast, but, alas! without the after restoration of the latter!"<ref name="Holmes qtd. p. 435"/> The actual person from Porlock mentioned could be many people, including Wordsworth, Joseph Cottle, John Thelwall, Coleridge's wife, or merely a literary device. As a symbol within the preface, the person represents the obligations of the real world crashing down upon the creative world or other factors that kept Coleridge from finishing his poetry. The claim to produce poetry after dreaming of it became popular after ''Kubla Khan'' was published.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 436</ref> The person from Porlock later became a word to describe interrupted genius, and the literary critic Walter Jackson Bate recounted that while John Livingston Lowes taught the poem, he told his students "If there is any man in the history of literature who should be hanged, drawn, and quartered, it is the man on business from Porlock."<ref>Perkins 2010 qtd. p. 39</ref> The literary critic D. F. Rauber claimed that the man was "necessary to create the illusion of the cut short rather than the stopped".<ref>Rauber 1969 p. 221</ref> This would have allowed Coleridge to purposefully write the poem as a fragment.<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 44-45</ref>

The Preface to the poem suggests that the poem was not supposed to be printed, that it was a fragmentary work that he was unable to complete, and that the work itself was provided to him through involuntary inspiration. When the Preface is dropped, the poem seems to compare the act of poetry with the might of Kubla Khan instead of the loss of inspiration causing the work to have a more complex depiction of the poetic power. Taken together, the Preface could connect with the first half of the poem to suggest that the poem is from the view of a dreaming narrator,<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 40-41</ref> or it could connect with the second half of the poem to show how a reader is to interpret the lines by connecting himself with the persona in a negative manner.<ref>Wheeler 1981 pp. 28-38</ref> The Preface and the poem are different in their locations, as the Preface discusses Coleridge's England while the poem discusses ancient China, but both discuss the role of the poem and his abilities. The poet of the Preface is a dreamer who must write and the poet of the poem is a vocal individual, but both are poets who lose inspiration. Only the poet of the poem feels that he can recover the vision, and the Preface, like a Coleridge poem that is quoted in it, ''The Picture'', states that visions are unrecoverable.<ref>Perkins 2010 p. 41</ref>

==Poem==
The poem begins with a description of Khan's Xanadu, near the river Alph which passes through caverns before reaching a dark or dead sea. Although the land is one of man-made "pleasure", there is a natural, "sacred" river that runs past it. The lines describing the river have a markedly different rhythm from the rest of the passage:<ref name="Yarlott p. 129"/>
:In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
:A stately pleasure-dome decree :
:Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
:Through caverns measureless to man
:Down to a sunless sea. (lines 1-5)

The land is constructed as a paradisaical garden, but like Eden after Man's fall, Xanadu is isolated by walls. The finite property of the constructed walls of Xanadu are contrasted with the infinite properties of the natural caves through which the river runs.
:So twice five miles of fertile ground
:With walls and towers were girdled round:
:And here were gardens bright with sinuous rills,
:Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree;
:And here were forests ancient as the hills,
:Enfolding sunny spots of greenery. (lines 6-11)

The poem expands on the Gothic hints of the first stanza as the narrator explores the dark chasm in the midst of Xanadu's gardens, and describes the surrounding area as both "savage" and "holy". Yarlott interprets this chasm as symbolic of the poet struggling with decadence that ignores nature.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 141-142</ref> It may also represent the dark side of the soul, the dehumanizing effect of power and dominion.
:But oh! that deep romantic chasm which slanted
:Down the green hill athwart a cedarn cover!
:A savage place! as holy and enchanted
:As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted
:By woman wailing for her demon-lover! (lines 12-16)

From the dark chasm a fountain violently erupts, then forms the meandering river Alph, which runs to the sea described in the first stanza. Fountains are often symbolic of the inception of life, and in this case may represent forceful creativity.<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 142</ref> Since this fountain ends in death, it may also simply represent the life span of a human, from violent birth to a sinking end.
:And from this chasm, with ceaseless turmoil seething,
:As if this earth in fast thick pants were breathing,
:A mighty fountain momently was forced:
:Amid whose swift half-intermitted burst
:Huge fragments vaulted like rebounding hail,
:Or chaffy grain beneath the thresher's flail:
:And 'mid these dancing rocks at once and ever
:It flung up momently the sacred river.
:Five miles meandering with a mazy motion
:Through wood and dale the sacred river ran,
:Then reached the caverns measureless to man,
:And sank in tumult to a lifeless ocean: (lines 17-28)

Kubla Khan hears voices of the dead, and refers to a vague "war" that appears to be unreferenced elsewhere in the poem. Yarlott argues that the war represents the penalty for seeking pleasure, or simply the confrontation of the present by the past:<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 144</ref>
:And 'mid this tumult Kubla heard from far
:Ancestral voices prophesying war! (lines 29-30)

Though the exterior of Xanadu is presented in images of darkness, and in context of the dead sea, we are reminded of the "miracle" and "pleasure" of Kubla Khan's creation. The vision of the sites, including the dome, the cavern, and the fountain, are similar to an apocalyptic vision. Together, the natural and man-made structures form a miracle of nature as they represent the mixing of opposites together, the essence of creativity:<ref>Bloom 1993 pp. 218-219</ref>
:The shadow of the dome of pleasure
:Floated midway on the waves;
:Where was heard the mingled measure
:From the fountain and the caves.
:It was a miracle of rare device,
:A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice! (lines 31-36)

The narrator turns prophetic, referring to a vision of an unidentified "Abyssinian maid" who sings of "Mount Abora". Harold Bloom suggests that this passage reveals the narrator's desire to rival Khan's ability to create with his own.<ref name="Bloom 1993 pp. 219-220">Bloom 1993 pp. 219-220</ref> The woman may also refer to Mnemosyne , the Greek personification of memory and mother of the muses , referring directly to Coleridge's claimed struggle to compose this poem from memory of a dream.
:A damsel with a dulcimer
:In a vision once I saw:
:It was an Abyssinian maid,
:And on her dulcimer she played,
:Singing of Mount Abora.
:Could I revive within me
:Her symphony and song,
:To such a deep delight 'twould win me,
:That with music loud and long,
:I would build that dome in air,
:That sunny dome! those caves of ice! (lines 37-47)

The subsequent passage refers to unnamed witnesses who may also hear this, and thereby share in the narrator's vision of a replicated, ethereal, Xanadu. Harold Bloom suggests that the power of the poetic imagination, stronger than nature or art, fills the narrator and grants him the ability to share this vision with others through his poetry. The narrator would thereby be elevated to an awesome, almost mythical status, as one who has experienced an Edenic paradise available only to those who have similarly mastered these creative powers:<ref>Bloom 1993 p. 220</ref>
:And all who heard should see them there,
:And all should cry, Beware! Beware!
:His flashing eyes, his floating hair!
:Weave a circle round him thrice,
:And close your eyes with holy dread,
:For he on honey-dew hath fed,
:And drunk the milk of Paradise. (lines 48-54)

==Themes==
''Kubla Khan'' is about poetry and the two sections discuss two types of poems.<ref>Watson 1966 pp. 122-124</ref> The power of the imagination is an important component to this theme. The poem celebrates creativity and how the poet is able to experience a connection to the universe through inspiration. As a poet, Coleridge places himself in an uncertain position as either master over his creative powers or a slave to it.<ref>Holmes 1989 p. 166</ref> The dome city represents the imagination and the second stanza represents the relationship between a poet and the rest of society. The poet is separated from the rest of humanity after he is exposed to the power to create and is able to witness visions of truth. This separation causes a combative relationship between the poet and the audience as the poet seeks to control his listener through a mesmerizing technique.<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 106-109</ref> The poem's emphasis on imagination as subject of a poem, on the contrasts within the paradisal setting, and its discussion of the role of poet as either being blessed or cursed by imagination, has influenced many works, including Alfred Tennyson's "Palace of Art" and William Butler Yeats's Byzantium based poems.<ref>Ashton 1997 p. 115</ref> There is also a strong connection between the idea of retreating into the imagination found within Keats's ''Lamia'' and in Tennyson's "Palace of Art".<ref>Rzepka 1986 p. 108</ref> The Preface, when added to the poem, connects the idea of the paradise as the imagination with the land of Porlock, and that the imagination, though infinite, would be interrupted by a "person on business". The Preface then allows for Coleridge to leave the poem as a fragment, which represents the inability for the imagination to provide complete images or truly reflect reality. The poem would not be about the act of creation but a fragmentary view revealing how the act works: how the poet crafts language and how it relates to himself.<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 44-46</ref>

Through use of the imagination, the poem is able to discuss issues surrounding tyranny, war, and contrasts that exist within paradise.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 115-116</ref> Part of the war motif could be a metaphor for the poet in a competitive struggle with the reader in order to push his own vision and ideas upon his audience.<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 108-109</ref> As a component to the idea of imagination in the poem is the creative process by describing a world that is of the imagination and another that is of understanding. The poet, in Coleridge's system, is able to move from the world of understanding, where men normally are, and enter into the world of the imagination through poetry. When the narrator describes the "ancestral voices prophesying war", the idea is part of the world of understanding, or the real world. As a whole, the poem is connected to Coleridge's belief in a secondary Imagination that can lead a poet into a world of imagination, and the poem is both a description of that world and a description of how the poet enters the world.<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 77-80</ref> The imagination, as it appears in many of Coleridge's and Wordsworth's works, including ''Kubla Khan'', is discussed through the metaphor of water, and the use of the river in ''Kubla Khan'' is connected to the use of the stream in Wordsworth's ''The Prelude''. The water imagery is also related to the divine and nature, and the poet is able to harness tap into nature in a way Kubla Khan cannot in order to harness its power.<ref>Barth 2003 pp. 57-70, 82</ref>

Towards the end of 1797, Coleridge was fascinated with the idea of a river and it was used in multiple poems including ''Kubla Khan'' and "The Brook". In his ''Biographia Literaria'' (1817), he explained, "I sought for a subject, that should give equal room and freedom for description, incident, and impassioned reflections on men, nature, and society, yet supply in itself a natural connection to the parts and unity to the whole. Such a subject I conceived myself to have found in a stream, traced from its source in the hills among the yellow-red moss and conical glass-shaped tufts of bent, to the first break or fall, where its drops become audible, and it begins to form a channel".<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd p. 161</ref> It is possible that the imagery of ''Biographia Literaria'' followed the recovery of the ''Kubla Khan'' manuscript during the composition of the book.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 404</ref> Water imagery permeated through many of his poems, and the coast that he witnessed on his journey to Linton appears in ''Osorio''. Additionally, many of the images are connected to a broad use of Ash Farm and the Quantocks in Coleridge's poetry, and the mystical setting of both ''Osorio'' and ''Kubla Khans'' are based on his idealized version of the region.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 163-166</ref> ''Kubla Khan'' was composed in the same year as ''This Lime-Tree Bower My Prison'', and both poems contained images that were used in the 14 October 1797 letter to Thelwall. However, the styles are very different as one is heavily structured and rhymed while the other tries to mimic conversational speak. What they do have in common is that they use scenery based on the same location, including repeated uses of dells, rocks, ferns, and a waterfall found in the Somerset region.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 113-114</ref> The Preface uses water imagery to explain what happens when visions are lost by quoting a passage from his poem ''The Picture''. When considering all of ''The Picture'' and not just the excerpt, Coleridge describes how inspiration is similar to a stream and that if an object is thrown into it the vision is interrupted.<ref>Perkins 2010 p. 42-43</ref>

===Tartars and paradise===
The Tartars ruled by Kubla Khan were seen in the tradition Coleridge worked from as a violent, barbaric people and were used in that way when Coleridge would compare others to Tartars. They were seen as worshipers of the sun, but uncivilized and connected to either the Cain or Ham line of outcasts. However, Coleridge describes Khan in a peaceful light and as a man of genius. He seeks to show his might but does so by building his own version of paradise. The description and the tradition provide a contrast between the daemonic and genius within the poem, and Khan is a ruler who is unable to recreate Eden.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 227-240</ref> There are also comparisons between Khan with Catherine the Great or Napoleon with their building and destroying nations. Though the imagery can be dark, there is little moral concern as the ideas are mixed with creative energies.<ref name="Mays p. 510">Mays 2001 p. 510</ref> In the second stanza, Khan is able to establish some order in the natural world but he cannot stop the forces of nature that constantly try to destroy what he made. Nature, in the poem is not a force of redemption but one of destruction, and the paradise references reinforce what Khan cannot attain.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 244-246</ref>

Although the Tartars are barbarians from China, they are connected to ideas within the Judaeo Christian tradition, including the idea of Original Sin and Eden.<ref>Jasper 1985 p. 45</ref> The account of Cublai Can in Purchas's work, discussed in Coleridge's Preface, connects the idea of paradise with luxury and sensual pleasure. The place was described in negative terms and seen as an inferior representation of paradise, and Coleridge's ethical system did not connect pleasure with joy or the divine.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 130-131</ref> As for specific aspects of the scene, the river and cavern images are used to describe how creativity operates in a post-Edenic reality. The river, Alph, replaces the one from John Milton's Eden that granted immortality and it disappears into a sunless sea that lacks life. The image is further connected to the Biblical, post-Edenic stories in that a mythological story attributes the violent children of Ham becoming the Tartars, and that Tartarus, derived from the location, became a synonym for hell. Coleridge believed that the Tartars were violent, and that their culture was opposite to the civilized Chinese. The Tartars were also in contrast to the concept of Prester John, who may have been Prester Chan and, in Ludolphus's account, chased out of Asia by the Tartars and, in John Herbert's ''Travels'', was Abyssinian.<ref>Beer 1959 pp. 221-236</ref>

The land is similar to the false paradise of Mount Amara in ''Paradise Lost'', especially the Abyssinian maid's song about Mount Abora that is able to mesmerize the poet. In the manuscript copy, the location was named both Amora and Amara, and the location of both is the same.<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 510, 514</ref> There are more connections to ''Paradise Lost'', including how Milton associates the Tartar ruler to the Post-Edenic world in Adam's vision of the Tartar kingdom. In post-Milton accounts, the kingdom is linked with the worship of the sun, and his name is seen to be one that reveals the Khan as a priest. This is reinforced by the connection of the river Alph with the Alpheus, a river that in Greece was connected to the worship of the sun. As followers of the sun, the Tartar are connected to a tradition that describes Cain as founding a city of sun worshipers and that people in Asia would build gardens in remembrance of the lost Eden.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 227-231</ref>

In the tradition Coleridge relies on, the Tartar worship the sun because it reminds them of paradise, and they build gardens because they want to recreate paradise. Kubla Khan is of the line of Cain and fallen, but he wants to overcome that state and rediscover paradise by creating an enclosed garden. The dome, in Thomas Maurice's description, in ''The History of Hindostan'' of the tradition, was related to nature worship as it reflects the shape of the universe. Coleridge, when composing the poem, believed in a connection between nature and the divine but believed that the only dome that should serve as the top of a temple was the sky. He thought that a dome was an attempt to hide from the ideal and escape into a private creation, and Kubla Khan's dome is a flaw that keeps him from truly connecting to nature. Maurice's ''History of Hindostan'' also describes aspects of Kashmir that were copied by Coleridge in preparation for hymns he intended to write. The work, and others based on it, describe a temple with a dome.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 233-236</ref> Purchas's work does not mention a dome but a "house of pleasure". The use of dome instead of house or palace could represent the most artificial of constructs and reinforce the idea that the builder was separated from nature. However, Coleridge did believe that a dome could be positive if it was connected to religion, but the Khan's dome was one of immoral pleasure and a purposeless life dominated by sensuality and pleasure.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 130-132</ref>

===Abyssinian maid===
The narrator introduces a character he once dreamed about, an Abyssinian maid who sings of another land. She is a figure of imaginary power within the poem who can inspire within the narrator his own ability to craft poetry.<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 79-80</ref> When she sings, she is able to inspire and mesmerize the poet by describing a false paradise.<ref name="Mays p. 510"/> The woman herself is similar to the way Coleridge describes Lewti in another poem he wrote around the same time ''Lewti''. The connection between Lewti and the Abyssinian maid makes it possible that the maid was intended as a disguised version of Mary Evans, who appears as a love interest since Coleridge's 1794 poem ''The Sigh''. Evans, in the poems, appears as an object of sexual desire and a source of inspiration.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 310-312</ref> She is also similar to the later subject of many of Coleridge's poems, Asra, based on Sara Hutchinson, whom Coleridge wanted but was not his wife and experienced opium induced dreams of being with her.<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 338</ref>

The figure is related to Heliodurus's work, ''Aethiopian History '' with its description of "a young Lady, sitting upon a Rock, of so rare and perfect a Beauty, as one would have taken her for a Goddess, and though her present misery opprest her with extreamest grief, yet in the greatness of her afflection, they might easily perceive the greatness of her Courage: A Laurel crown'd her Head, an a Quiver in a Scarf hanged at her back".<ref>Beer 1962 qtd. p. 266</ref> Her description in the poem is also related to Isis of Apuleius's ''Metamorphoses'', but Isis was a figure of redemption and the Abyssinian maid cries out for her demon-lover. She is similar to John Keats's Indian woman in ''Endymion'' who is revealed to be the moon goddess, but in ''Kubla Khan'' she is also related to the sun and the sun as an image of divine truth.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 266-269</ref>

In addition to real life counterparts of the Abyssinian maid, Milton's ''Paradise Lost'' describes Abyssinian kings keeping their children guarded at Mount Amara and a false paradise, which is echoed in ''Kubla Khan''.<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 344</ref>

==Sources==
There are many sources attributed to ''Kubla Khan'' for the style, imagery, and topic. Of the sources, Coleridge was influenced by the surrounding of Culbone Combe and its hills, gulleys, and other features including the "mystical" and "sacred" locations in the region. He admitted that he was directly influenced by Purchas's ''Pilgrimage'', but there are additional strong literary connections to other works, including John Milton's ''Paradise Lost'', Samuel Johnson's ''Rasselas'', Chatterton's ''African Eclogues'', William Bartram's ''Travels through North and South Carolina'', Thomas Burnet's ''Sacred Theory of the Earth'', Mary Wollstonecraft's ''A Short Residence in Sweden'', Plato's ''Phaedrus and Ion'',<ref>Holmes 1989 p. 164</ref> Maurice's ''The History of Hindostan'', and Heliodorus's ''Aethiopian History''.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 235, 266</ref> The poem also contains allusions to the Book of Revelation in its description of New Jerusalem and to the paradise of William Shakespeare's ''A Midsummer Night's Dream''.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 114-115</ref> As for specific places, the main character is Kublai Khan the Tartar king from China, the river is Alpheus in Greece and is similar to the Nile, and the Abyssinian woman sings of Mount Amara, and the caves are like those in Kashmir. Also, the name "Alph" could connect to the idea of being an alpha or original place.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 217-219</ref> The sources used for ''Kubla Khan'' are also those used in Coleridge's ''The Rime of the Ancient Mariner''.<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 410-411</ref>

Much of the poem could have been influenced by Coleridge's opium dream or, as his friend and fellow poet Robert Southey joked, "Coleridge had dreamed he had written a poem in a dream".<ref>Doughty 1981 qtd. p. 132</ref> If Coleridge's dream did originate ideas within the poem, then the dreams are related to those experienced by contemporary opium eaters and writers, Thomas de Quincey and Charles Pierre Baudelaire. It is possible that the dream affected Coleridge's later mood and caused him to enter into a depression, influencing the ideas in his writing that followed the dream night. Of these ideas, Coleridge's emphasised the vastness of the universe and his feeling overwhelmed by how little the universe seemed to him.<ref>Doughty 1981 pp. 132-133</ref> Also, Charles Lamb provided Coleridge on 15 April 1797 with a copy of his "A Vision of Repentance", a poem that discussed a dream containing imagery similar to those in ''Kubla Khan''. The poem could have provided Coleridge with the idea of a dream poem that discusses fountains, sacredness, and even a woman singing a sorrowful song.<ref>Fruman 1971 pp. 345-346</ref> The poem's use of original names and disorganised use of action can also be attributed to an opium induced state of mind. In terms of spelling, Coleridge's printed version differs from Purchas's spelling, which refers to the Tartar ruler as "Cublai Can", and from the spelling used by Milton, "Cathaian Can".<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 211, 227</ref> His original manuscript (as reproduced above) spells the name "Cubla Khan" and the place "Xannadu".

The Abyssinian maid is derived from many figures in Coleridge's life, including women who Coleridge admired in some way: Charlotte Brent, Catherine Clarkson, Mary Morgan, and Dorothy Wordsworth. Although Asra/Hutchinson is similar to the way Coleridge talks about the Abyssinian maid, Hutchinson was someone he met after writing ''Kubla Khan''. The person who was the closest match to the figure was Evans, the subject of Coleridge's ''Lewti''. The poem's claim that the narrator would be inspired to act if the song of the maid could be heard was a belief that Coleridge held regarding Evans after she become unattainable to him.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 153, 310</ref>

==Critical response==
Before the poem was published, it was greatly favoured by Byron, who encouraged Coleridge to publish the poem,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 425-426</ref> and it was admired by many people including Walter Scott. However, the immediate response to the 1816 collection was to ignore ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'' or to just attack ''Kubla Khan''.<ref name="Ashton p. 112"/> The work went through multiple editions, but the poem, as with his others published in 1816 and 1817, had poor sales as a result of hostile critics who went so far to attack Coleridge's integrity. Many of the attacks started as a new generation of critical magazines, including ''Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine'', ''Edinburgh Review'', and ''Quarterly Review'', were established at the beginning of the 19th century. The critics were more provocative than those of the previous generation, and much of the bad reception was based on Coleridge's timing of publication and his own political views, much of which contrasted with those of the critics, than actual content. Another reason for negative reviews was a puff piece written by Byron about the ''Christabel'' publication.<ref>Jackson 1970 pp. 8-10</ref> Not all of the negative comments were public, as Charles Lamb, friend of Coleridge, expressed his fears of a negative response as he wrote: "Coleridge repeats so enchantingly that it irradiates and brings heaven and elysian bowers into my parlour while he sings or says it; but there is an observation: 'never tell thy dreams,' and I am almost afraid that ''Kubla Khan'' is an owl that won't bear daylight. I fear lest it should be discovered by the lantern of typography and clear reducing to letters, no better than nonsense or no sense."<ref>Doughty 1981 qtd. p. 433</ref>

The first of the negative reviews was written by William Hazlitt, literary critic and Romantic writer. He reviewed the collection of poems for the 2 June 1816 ''Examiner'', and, in his analysis, he attacked the fragmentary nature of the work and argued, "The fault of Mr Coleridge is, that he comes to no conclusion ... from an excess of capacity, he does little or nothing" and that the poem revealed that "Mr Coleridge can write better ''nonsense'' verse than any man in English."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd p. 434</ref> In conclusion, Hazlitt admitted, "We could repeat these lines to ourselves not the less often for not knowing the meaning of them."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 209</ref> Following in the June 1816 ''Eclectic Review'', Josiah Conder dismissed the poem: "As to 'Kubla Khan', and the 'Pains of Sleep', we can only regret the publication of them, as affording a proof that the Author over-rates the importance of his name. With regard to the former, which is professedly published as a psychological curiosity, it having been composed during sleep, there appears to us nothing in the quality of the lines to render this circumstance extraordinary."<ref name="Jackson p. 212">Jackson 1970 p. 212</ref> He then continued by focusing on the manner in which the poem was composed, 'We could have informed Mr. Coleridge of a reverend friend of ours, who actually wrote down two sermons on a passage in the Apocalypse, from the recollection of the spontaneous exercise of his faculties in sleep. To persons who are in the habit of poetical composition, a similar phenomenon would not be a stranger occurrence, than the spirited dialogues in prose which take place in dreams of persons of duller invention than our poet, and which not unfrequently leave behind a very vivid impression."<ref name="Jackson p. 212"/>

Coleridge's statements on the origin of the poem were considered again by various critics with an emphasis on how the origins affected the merits of the poem. In an anonymous review for the July 1816 ''Literary Panorama'', the reviewer claimed, "'Kubla Khan' is merely a few stanzas which owe their origin to a circumstance by no means uncommon to persons of a poetical imagination ... It should however be recollected, that in sleep the judgment is the first faculty of the mind which ceases to act, therefore, the opinion of the sleeper respecting his performance is not to be trusted, even in his waking moments."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. pp. 215-216</ref> The review does praise the work as it continues, "Still if Mr. Coleridge's two hundred lines were all of equal merit with the following which he has preserved, we are ready to admit that he has reason to be grieved at their loss."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 216</ref> Another July 1816 anonymous review, for the ''Anti-Jacobin'', discussed the origin of the poem but dismissed the poem with lukewarm praise: "These have none of the wildness or deformity, of 'Christabel'; and though they are not marked by any striking beauties, they are not wholly discreditable to the author's talents."<ref>Jackson qtd. p. 221</ref> Another July 1816 anonymous review, in the ''Augustan Review'', claimed that the poem's descriptions "have much of the Oriental richness and harmony" but also said, in response to the preface, "There seems to be no great harm in dreaming while one sleeps; but an author really should not thus dream while he is awake, and writing too."<ref>Jackson qtd. 1995 p. 266</ref>

Reviews following months after publication contained limited positive appraisal of the poem. William Roberts's review, for the August 1816 ''British Review'', was more positive than previous analysis but with no detail about the work: "passing over the two other poems which are bound together with 'Christabel', called 'The Fragment of Kubla Khan', and 'The Pains of Sleep'; in which, however, there are some playful thoughts and fanciful imagery, which we would gladly have extracted if our room would have allowed it."<ref>Jackson 1970 p. 225</ref> The next review came in the January 1817 ''Monthly Review'', with the anonymous reviewer questioning: "Allowing every possible accuracy to the statement of Mr. Coleridge, we would yet ask him whether this extraordinary fragment was not rather the effect of rapid and instant composition after he was awake, than of memory immediately recording that which he dreamt when asleep? By what process of consciousness could he distinguish between such composition and such reminiscence? Impressed as his mind was with his interesting dream, and habituated as he is ... to the momentary production of verse, will he venture to assert that he did not ''compose'', and that he did ''remember'', the lines before us?"<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 246</ref> The review then concluded, "His 'psychological curiosity', as he terms it, depends in no slight degree on the establishment of the previous fact which we have mentioned: but the poem itself is below criticism. We would dismiss it with some portentous words of Sir Kenelm Digby, in his observations on Browne's ''religio Medici'': 'I have much ado to believe what he speaketh confidently; that he is more beholding to Morpheus for learned and rational as well as pleasing dreams, than to Mercury for smart and facetious conceptions'."<ref>Jackson 1970 pp. 246-247</ref>

===Later analysis===
Positive analysis of the poem came from Leigh Hunt, in the 21 October 1821 ''Examiner'' when Hunt wrote a piece on Coleridge as part of his "Sketches of the Living Poets" series. When coming to ''Kubla Khan'', he pointed out: "instead of being content to have written finely under the influence of laudanum, recommends 'Kubla-Khan' to his readers, not as a poem, but as 'a psychological curiosity' ... Every lover of books, scholar or not, who knows what it is to have his quarto open against a loaf at his tea ... ought to be in possession of Mr. Coleridge's poems, if it is only for 'Christabel', 'Kubla Khan', and the 'Ancient Mariner'."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 475</ref> When talking about the poem on its own, Hunt claimed it "is a voice and a vision, an everlasting tune in our mouths, a dream fit for Cambuscan and all his poets, a dance of pictures such as Giotto or Cimabue, revived and re-inspired, would have made for a Storie of Old Tartarie, a piece of the invisible world made visible by a sun at midnight and sliding before our eyes ... Justly is it thought that to be able to present such images as these to the mind, is to realise the world they speak of. We could repeat such verses as the following down a green glade, a whole summer's morning".<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. pp. 475-476</ref> The work went without major notice until John Bowring reviewed Coleridge's ''Poetical Works'' for the January 1830 ''Westminster Review''. When discussing the work along with the origins of the poem, Bowring stated, "The tale is extraordinary, but 'Kubla Khan' is much more valuable on another account, which is, that of its melodious versification. It is perfect music. The effect could scarcely have been more satisfactory to the ear had every syllable been selected merely for the sake of its sound. And yet there is throughout a close correspondence between the metre, the march of the verse, and the imagery which the words describe."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 550</ref> When concluding about the work, he declared, "The elements of this melody are only the common and well-known ones of English versification; our author is always felicitous in their management, but no where has he blended them in so perfect a combination as in this instance."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 551</ref> Another emphasis on the musicality of the poem came in August 1834, with Henry Nelson Coleridge analysis in the ''Quarterly Review'': "In some of the smaller pieces, as the conclusion of the 'Kubla Khan', for example, not only the lines by themselves are musical, but the whole passage sounds all at once as an outburst or crash of harps in the still air of autumn. The verses seem as if ''played'' to the ear upon some unseen instrument. And the poet's manner of reciting verse is similar."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 627</ref>

Victorian critics praised the poem and some examined aspects of the poem's background. John Sheppard, in his analysis of dreams titled ''On Dreams'' (1847), lamented Coleridge's drug use as getting in the way of his poetry but argued: "It is probable, since he writes of having taken an 'anodyne,' that the 'vision in a dream' arose under some excitement of that same narcotic; but this does not destroy, even as to his particular case, the evidence for a wonderfully inventive action of the mind in sleep; for, whatever were the exciting cause, the fact remains the same".<ref>Sheppard 1847 p. 170</ref> T. Hall Caine, in 1883 survey of the original critical response to ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'', praised the poem and declared: "It must surely be allowed that the adverse criticism on 'Christabel' and 'Kubla Khan' which is here quoted is outside all tolerant treatment, whether of raillery or of banter. It is difficult to attribute such false verdict to pure and absolute ignorance. Even when we make all due allowance for the prejudices of critics whose only possible enthusiasm went out to 'the pointed and fine propriety of Poe,' we can hardly believe that the exquisite art which is among the most valued on our possessions could encounter so much garrulous abuse without the criminal intervention of personal malignancy."<ref>Caine 1883 p. 65</ref> In a review of H. D. Traill's analysis of Coleridge in the "English Men of Letters", an anonymous reviewer wrote in 1885 ''Westminster Review'': "Of 'Kubla Khan,' Mr. Traill writes: 'As to the wild dream-poem 'Kubla Khan,' it is hardly more than a psychologial curiosity, and only that perhaps in respect of the completeness of its metrical form.' Lovers of poetry think otherwise, and listen to these wonderful lines as the voice of Poesy itself."<ref>Anonymous 1885. p. 283</ref>

Critics at the end of the 19th century favoured the poem and placed it as one of Coleridge's best works. When discussing ''Christabel'', ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'' and ''Kubla Khan'', an anonymous reviewer in the October 1893 '' The Church Quarterly Review '' claimed, "In these poems Coleridge achieves a mastery of language and rhythm which is nowhere else conspicuously evident in him."<ref>Anonymous, '' The Church Quarterly Review '', 1894 p. 175.</ref> In 1895, Andrew Lang reviewed the ''Letters of Coleridge'' in addition to Coleridge's ''Kubla Khan'', ''Christabel'' and ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'', saying: "all these poems are 'miraculous;' all seem to have been 'given' by the dreaming 'subconscious self' of Coleridge. The earliest pieces hold no promise of these marvels. They come from what is oldest in Coleridge's nature, his uninvited and irrepressible intuition, magical and rare, vivid beyond common sight of common things, sweet beyond sound of things heard."<ref>Land 1895 p. 284</ref> G E Woodberry, in 1897, said that ''Christabel'', ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'', and ''Kubla Khan'' "are the marvelous creations of his genius. In these it will be said there is both a world of nature new created, and a dramatic method and interest. It is enough for the purpose of the analysis if it be granted that nowhere else in Coleridge's work, except in these and less noticeably in a few other instances, do these high characteristics occur."<ref>Woodberry 1897 p. 3849</ref> In speaking of the three poems, he claimed they "have besides that wealth of beauty in detail, of fine diction, of liquid melody, of sentiment, thought, and image, which belong only to poetry of the highest order, and which are too obvious to require any comment. 'Kubla Khan' is a poem of the same kind, in which the mystical effect is given almost wholly by landscape."<ref>Woodberry 1897 p. 3851</ref>

===Modern criticism===
The 1920s contained analysis of the poem that emphasised the poem's power. In ''Road to Xanadu'' (1927), a book length study of ''The Rime of the Ancient Mariner'' and ''Kubla Khan'', John Livingston Lowes claimed that the poems were "two of the most remarkable poems in English".<ref>Lowes 1927 p. 3</ref> When turning to the background of the works, he argued, "Coleridge as Coleridge, be it said at once, is a secondary moment to our purpose; it is the significant process, not the man, which constitutes our theme. But the amazing ''modus operandi'' of his genius, in the fresh light which I hope I have to offer, becomes the very abstract and brief chronicle of the procedure of the creative faculty itself."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 4-5</ref> After breaking down the various aspects of the poem, Lowes stated, "with a picture of unimpaired and thrilling vividness, the fragment ends. And with it ends, for all save Coleridge, the dream. 'The earth hath bubbles as the water has, and this is of them.' For 'Kubla Khan' is as near enchantment, I suppose, as we are like to come in this dull world. And over it is cast the glamour, enhanced beyond all reckoning in the dream, of the remote in time and space – that visionary presence of a vague and gorgeous and mysterious Past which brooded, as Coleridge read, above the inscrutable Nile, and domed pavilions in Cashmere, and the vanished stateliness of Xanadu."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 409-410</ref> He continued by describing the power of the poem: "For none of the things which we have seen – dome, river, chasm, fountain, caves of ice, or floating hair – nor any combination of them holds the secret key to that sense of an incommunicable witchery which pervades the poem. That is something more impalpable by far, into which entered who can tell what tracelesss, shadowy recollections ... The poem is steeped in the wonder of all Coleridge's enchanted voyagings."<ref>Lowes 1927 p. 410</ref> Lowes then concluded about the two works: "Not even in the magical four and fifty lines of 'Kubla Khan' is sheer visualizing energy so intensely exercised as in 'The Ancient Mariner.' But every crystal-clear picture there, is an integral part of a preconceived and consciously elaborated whole ... In 'Kubla Khan' the linked and interweaving images irresponsibly and gloriously stream, like the pulsing, fluctuating banners of the North. And their pageant is as aimless as it is magnificent ... There is, then ... on glory of 'Kubla Khan' and another glory of 'The Ancient Mariner,' as one star differeth from another start in glory."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 412-413</ref> George Watson, in 1966, claimed that Lowes's analysis of the poems "will stand as a permanent monument to historical criticism."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 11</ref> Also in 1966, Kenneth Burke, declared, "Count me among those who would view this poem both as a marvel, and as 'in principle' ''finished''"<ref>Burke 1986 p. 33</ref>

T. S. Eliot attacked the reputation of ''Kubla Khan'' and sparked a dispute within literary criticism with his analysis of the poem in his essay "Origin and Uses of Poetry" from ''The Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism'' (1933): "The way in which poetry is written is not, so far as our knowledge of these obscure matters as yet extends, any clue to its value ... The faith in mystical inspiration is responsible for the exaggerated repute of ''Kubla Khan''. The imagery of that fragment, certainly, whatever its origins in Coleridge's reading, sank to the depths of Coleridge's feeling, was saturated, transformed there ... and brought up into daylight again."<ref name="Eliot p. 90">Eliot 1975 p. 90</ref> He goes on to explain, "But it is not ''used'': the poem has not been written. A single verse is not poetry unless it is a one-verse poem; and even the finest line draws its life from its context. Organization is necessary as well as 'inspiration'. The re-creation of word and image which happens fitfully in the poetry of such a poet as Coleridge happens almost incessantly with Shakespeare."<ref name="Eliot p. 90"/> Geoffrey Yarlott, in 1967, responds to Eliot to claim, "Certainly, the enigmatic personages who appear in the poem ... and the vaguely incantatory proper names ... appear to adumbrate rather than crystalize the poet's intention. Yet, though generally speaking intentions in poetry are nothing save as 'realized', we are unable to ignore the poem, despite Mr Eliot's strictures on its 'exaggerated repute'."<ref name="Yarlott p. 127">Yarlott 1967 p. 127</ref> He continued, "We may question without end ''what'' it means, but few of us question if the poem is worth the trouble, or whether the meaning is worth the having. While the feeling persists that there is something there which is profoundly important, the challenge to elucidate it proves irresistible."<ref name="Yarlott p. 127"/> However, Lilian Furst, in 1969, countered Yarlott to argue that, "T. S. Eliot's objection to the exaggerated repute of the surrealist ''Kubla Khan'' is not unjustified. Moreover, the customary criticism of Coleridge as a cerebral poet would seem to be borne out by those poems such as ''This Lime-tree Bower my Prison'' or ''The Pains of Sleep'', which tend more towards a direct statement than an imaginative presentation of personal dilemma."<ref>Furst 1979 p. 189</ref>

During the 1940s and 1950s, critics focused on the technique of the poem and how it relates to the meaning. In 1941, G. W. Knight claimed that ''Kubla Khan'' "needs no defence. It has a barbaric and oriental magnificence that asserts itself with a happy power and authenticity too often absent from visionary poems set within the Christian tradition."<ref>Knight 1975 p. 213</ref> Humphrey House, in 1953, praised the poem and said of beginning of the poem: "The whole passage is full of life because the verse has both the needed energy and the needed control. The combination of energy and control in the rhythm and sound is so great" and that Coleridge's words "convey so fully the sense of inexhaustible energy, now falling now rising, but persisting through its own pulse".<ref>House 1953 pp. 117-118</ref> Also in 1953, Elisabeth Schneider dedicated her book to analysing the various aspects of the poem, including the various sound techniques. When discussing the quality of the poem, she wrote, "I sometimes think we overwork Coleridge's idea of 'the balance or reconciliation of opposite or discordant qualities.' I have to come back to it here, however, for the particular flavor of ''Kubla Khan'', with its air of mystery, is describable in part through that convenient phrase. Yet, the 'reconciliation' does not quite occur either. It is in fact avoided. What we have instead is the very spirit of 'oscillation' itself."<ref name="Schneider p. 91">Schneider 1953 p. 91</ref> Continuing, she claimed, "The poem is the soul of ambivalence, oscillation's very self; and that is probably its deepest meaning. In creating this effect, form and matter are intricately woven. The irregular and inexact rhymes and varied lengths of the lines play some part. More important is the musical effect in which a smooth, rather swift forward movement is emphasized by the relation of grammatical structure to line and rhyme, yet is impeded and thrown back upon itself even from the beginning".<ref name="Schneider p. 91"/> She then concluded: "Here in these interwoven oscillations dwells the magic, the 'dream,' and the air of mysterious meaning of ''Kubla Khan''. I question whether this effect was all deliberately thought out by Coleridge, though it might have been. It is possibly half-inherent in his subject ... . What remains is the spirit of 'oscillation,' perfectly poeticized, and possibly ironically commemorative of the author."<ref>Schneider 1967 pp. 92-93</ref> Following in 1959, John Beer described the complex nature of the poem: "''Kubla Khan'' the poem is not a meaningless reverie, but a poem so packed with meaning as to render detailed elucidation extremely difficult."<ref>Beer 1962 p. 212</ref> In responding to House, Beer claimed, "That there is an image of energy in the fountain may be accepted: but I cannot agree that it is creative energy of the highest type."<ref>Beer 1962 p. 242</ref>

Critics of the 1960s focused on the reputation of the poem and how it compared to Coleridge's other poems. In 1966, Virginia Radley considered Wordsworth and his sister as an important influence to Coleridge writing a great poem: "Almost daily social intercourse with this remarkable brother and sister seemed to provide the catalyst to greatness, for it is during this period that Coleridge conceived his greatest poems, 'Christabel,' 'The Rime of the Ancient Mariner,' and 'Kubla Khan,' poems so distinctive and so different from his others that many generations of readers know Coleridge solely through them."<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 18-19</ref> She latter added that "Of all the poems Coleridge wrote, three are beyond compare. These three, 'The Ancient Mariner,' 'Christabel,' and 'Kubla Khan,' produced an aura which defies definition, but which might be properly be called one of 'natural magic.'"<ref>Radley 1966 p. 57</ref> What sets apart the poem from the others is its "verbal enactment of the creative process" which makes it "unique even among the three poems of high imagination."<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 77-78</ref> To Radley, "the poem is skilfully wrought, as are all the poems of high imagination. The opposites within it are diverse and effectively so. In tone, the poem juxtaposes quiet with noise ... Action presents its contrasts also ... These seemingly antithetical images combine to demonstrate the proximity of the known and the unknown worlds, the two worlds of Understanding and Imagination."<ref>Radley 1966 p. 80</ref> In concluding about the poem, she argued, "In truth, there are other 'Fears in Solitude' than that written by Coleridge and there are other 'Frosts at Midnight'; but there are no other 'Ancient Mariners' or 'Kubla Khans,' nor are there likely to be. In evaluating Coleridge's poetry, it can readily be seen and accepted that for the poems of high imagination his reputation is eternally made."<ref>Radley 1966 p. 146</ref>

In the same year as Radley, George Watson argued that "The case of 'Kubla Khan' is perhaps the strangest of all – a poem that stands high even in English poetry as a work of ordered perfection is offered by the poet himself, nearly twenty years after its composition, as a fragment. Anyone can accept that a writer's head should be full of projects he will never fulfil, and most writers are cautious enough not to set them down; Coleridge, rashly, did set them down, so that his very fertility has survived as evidence of infertility."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 9</ref> He later argued that the poem "is probably the most original poem about poetry in English, and the first hint outside his notebooks and letters that a major critic lies hidden in the twenty-five-year-old Coleridge."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 122</ref> In conclusion about the poem, Watson stated, "The triumph of 'Kubla Khan,' perhaps, lies in its evasions: it hints so delicately at critical truths while demonstrating them so boldly. The contrasts between the two halves of the poem ... So bold, indeed, that Coleridge for once was able to dispense with any language out of the past. It was his own poem, a manifesto. To read it now, with the hindsight of another age, is to feel premonitions of the critical achievement to come ... But the poem is in advance, not just of these, but in all probability of any critical statement that survives. It may be that it stands close to the moment of discovery itself."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 130</ref> After responding to Eliot's claims about ''Kubla Khan'', Yarlott, in 1967, argued that "few of us question if the poem is worth the trouble" before explaining that "The ambiguities inherent in the poem pose a special problem of critical approach. If we restrict ourselves to what is 'given', appealing to the poem as a 'whole', we shall fail probably to resolves its various cruxes. Hence, there is a temptation to look for 'external' influences ... The trouble with all these approaches is that they tend finally to lead ''away'' from the poem itself."<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 127-128</ref> When describing specifics, he argued, "The rhythmical development of the stanza, too, though technically brilliant, evokes admiration rather than delight. The unusually heavy stresses and abrupt masculine rhymes impose a slow and sonorous weightiness upon the movement of the iambic octosyllabics which is quite in contrast, say, to the light fast metre of the final stanza where speed of movement matches buoyancy of tone."<ref name="Yarlott p. 129"/> Following in 1968, Walter Jackson Bate called the poem "haunting" and said that it was "so unlike anything else in English".<ref>Bate 1968 p. 75</ref>

Criticism during the 1970s and 1980s emphasized the importance of the Preface while praising the work. Norman Fruman, in 1971, argued: "To discuss 'Kubla Khan' as one might any other great poem would be an exercise in futility. For a century and a half its status has been unique, a masterpiece ''sui generis'', embodying interpretive problems wholly its own...It would not be excessive to say that no small part of the extraordinary fame of 'Kubla Khan' inheres in its alleged marvellous conception. Its Preface is world famous and has been used in many studies of the creative process as a signal instance in which a poem has come to us directly from the unconscious."<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 334</ref>

In 1981, Kathleen Wheeler contrasts the Crewe Manuscript note with the Preface: "Contrasting this relatively factual, literal, and dry account of the circumstances surrounding the birth of the poem with the actual published preface, one illustrates what the latter is not: it is not a literal, dry, factual account of this sort, but a highly literary piece of composition, providing the verse with a certain mystique."<ref>Wheeler 1981 p. 28</ref> In 1985, David Jasper praised the poem as "one of his greatest meditations on the nature of poetry and poetic creation" and argued "it is through irony, also, as it unsettles and undercuts, that the fragment becomes a Romantic literary form of such importance, nowhere more so than in 'Kubla Khan'."<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 14, 19</ref> When talking about the Preface, Jasper claimed that it "profoundly influenced the way in which the poem has been understood".<ref>Jasper 1985 p. 43</ref> Responding in part to Wheeler in 1986, Charles Rzepka analysed the relationship between the poet and the audience of the poem while describing ''Kubla Khan'' as one of "Coleridge's three great poems of the supernatural".<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 109-110</ref> He continued by discussing the preface: "despite its obvious undependability as a guide to the actual process of the poem's composition, the preface can still, in Wheeler's words, lead us 'to ponder why Coleridge chose to write a preface ... ' What the preface describes, of course, is not the actual process by which the poem came into being, but an analogue of poetic creation as ''logos'', a divine 'decree' or fiat which transforms the Word into the world."<ref>Rzepka 1986 p. 112</ref>

During the 1990s, critics continued to praise the poem with many critics placing emphasis on what the Preface adds to the poem. David Perkins, in 1990, argued that "Coleridge's introductory note to ''Kubla Khan'' weaves together two myths with potent imaginative appeal. The myth of the lost poem tells how an inspired work was mysteriously given to the poet and dispelled irrecoverably."<ref name="Perkins p. 39"/> Also in 1990, Thomas McFarland stated, "Judging by the number and variety of critical effort to interpret their meaning, there may be no more palpably symbolic poems in all of English literature than ''Kubla Khan'' and ''The Ancient Mariner''."<ref>McFarland 1990 p. 42</ref> In 1996, Rosemary Ashton claimed that the poem was "one of the most famous poems in the language" and claimed the Preface as "the most famous, but probably not the most accurate, preface in literary history."<ref>Ashton 1997 p. 111</ref> Richard Holmes, in 1998, declared the importance of the poem's Preface while describing the reception of the 1816 volume of poems: "However, no contemporary critic saw the larger possible significance of Coleridge's Preface to 'Kubla Khan', though it eventually became one of the most celebrated, and disputed, accounts of poetic composition ever written. Like the letter from the fictional 'friend' in the ''Biographia'', it brilliantly suggests how a compressed fragment came to represent a much larger (and even more mysterious) act of creation."<ref name="Holmes 1998 p. 435"/>

In 2002, J. C. C. Mays pointed out that "Coleridge's claim to be a great poet lies in the continued pursuit of the consequences of 'The Ancient Mariner,' 'Christabel' and 'Kubla Khan' on several levels."<ref>Mays 2002 p. 91</ref> Adam Sisman, in 2006, questioned the nature of the poem itself: "No one even knows whether it is complete; Coleridge describes it as a 'fragment,' but there is a case for doubting this. Maybe it is not a poem at all. Hazlitt called it 'a musical composition' ... Though literary detectives have uncovered some of its sources, its remains difficult to say what the poem is about."<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 193</ref> In describing the merits of the poem and its fragmentary state, he claimed, "The poem stands for itself: beautiful, sensuous and enigmatic."<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 196</ref> During the same year, Jack Stillinger claimed that "Coleridge wrote only a few poems of the first rank – perhaps no more than a dozen, all told – and he seems to have taken a very casual attitude toward them ... he kept ''Kubla Khan'' in manuscript for nearly twenty years before offering it to the public 'rather as a psychological curiosity, than on the grounds of any supposed ''poetic'' merits'".<ref>Stillinger 2010 p. 157</ref> Harold Bloom, in 2010, argued that Coleridge wrote two kinds of poems and that "The daemonic group, necessarily more famous, is the triad of ''The Ancient Mariner'', ''Christabel'', and 'Kubla Khan.'"<ref>Bloom 2010 p. 3</ref> He goes on to explain the "daemonic": "Opium was the avenging daemon or ''alastor'' of Coleridge's life, his dark or fallen angel, his experiential acquaintance with Milton's Satan. Opium was for him what wandering and moral tale-telling became for the Mariner – the personal shape of repetition compulsion. The lust for paradise in 'Kubla Khan,' Geraldine's lust for Christabel – these are manifestations of Coleridge's revisionary daemonization of Milton, these are Coleridge's countersublime. Poetic genius, the genial spirit itself, Coleridge must see as daemonic when it is his own rather than when it is Milton's."<ref>Bloom 2010 p. 14</ref>

==Notes==
{{reflist|3}}

==References==
{{refbegin}}
<div style="-moz-column-count:3; column-count:3;">
* Anonymous. "Samuel Taylor Coleridge". ''The Church Quarterly Review''. Vol 37 (October 1893 - January 1894). London: Spottiswoode, 1894
* Anonymous. ''Westminster Review''. Vol 67 (January, April). Philadelphia: Leonard Scott, 1885.
* Ashton, Rosemary. ''The Life of Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997.
* Barth, J. Robert. ''Romanticism and Transcendence''. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2003.
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''Coleridge''. New York: Macmillan, 1968.
* Beer, John. ''Coleridge the Visionary''. New York: Collier, 1962
* Bloom, Harold. "Introduction" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Bloom, Harold. ''The Visionary Company''. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993.
* Burke, Kenneth. "'Kubla Khan': Proto-Surrealist Poem" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1986.
* Caine, T. Hall. ''Cobwebs of Criticism''. London: Elliot Stock, 1883.
* Doughty, Oswald. ''Perturbed Spirit''. London: Associated University Presses, 1981.
* Eliot, T. S. ''Selected Prose of T. S. Eliot''. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 1975.
* Fruman, Norman. ''Coleridge, the Damaged Archangel''. New York: George Braziller, 1971.
* Fulford, Tim. "Slavery and Superstition in the Poems" in ''The Cambridge Companion to Coleridge''. Ed. Lucy Newlyn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
* Furst, Lilian. ''Romanticism in Perspective''. New York: St Martin's Press, 1969.
* Holmes, Richard. ''Coleridge: Early Visions, 1772-1804''. New York: Pantheon, 1989.
* Holmes, Richard. ''Coleridge: Darker Reflections, 1804-1834''. New York: Pantheon, 1998.
* House, Humphry. ''Coleridge''. London: R. Hart-Davis, 1953.
* Jackson, J R de J. ''Coleridge: The Critical Heritage''. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1970.
* Jackson, J R de J. ''Coleridge: The Critical Heritage 1834-1900''. New York: Routledge, 1995.
* Knight, G. W. "Coleridge's Divine Comedy" in ''English Romantic Poets''. Ed. M. H. Abrams. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975.
* Lang, Andrew. "The Letters of Coleridge". ''Littell's Living Age''. Vol. 206 (July, August, September). Boston: Littell and Co., 1895.
* Lowes, John. ''The Road to Xanadu''. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1927.
* Mays, J. C. C. (editor). ''The Collected Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge: Poetical Works'' I Vol I.I. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.
* Mays, J. C. C. "The Later Poetry" in ''The Cambridge Companion to Coleridge''. Ed. Lucy Newlyn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
* McFarland, Thomas. "Involute and Symbol" in ''Coleridge, Keats, and the Imagination''. Ed. J. Robert Barth and John Mahoney. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1990.
* Perkins, David. "The Imaginative Vision of ''Kubla Khan'': On Coleridge's Introductory Note" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Radley, Virginia. ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. New York: Twayne, 1966.
* Rauber, D. F. "The Fragment as Romantic Form", ''Modern Language Quarterly''. Vol 30 (1969).
*{{citation
|title=Samuel Taylor Coleridge and the sciences of life
|last=Roe
|first=Nicholas
|publisher=Oxford University Press
|year=2001
|isbn=9780198187233
|url=http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=YV3Wa7--lDUC
| accessdate = 2010-07-02
}}
* Rzepka, Charles. ''The Self As Mind''. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.
* Schneider, Elisabeth. "''Kubla Khan''" in ''Coleridge''. Ed. Kathleen Coburn. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967.
* Sheppard, John. ''On Dreams''. London: Jackson and Walford, 1847.
*{{citation
|title=Coleridge and the New Criticism
|last=Singh
|first=Sukhdev
|publisher=Anmol Publications
|year=1994
|isbn=9788170418955
| url = http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aP0B3n6hN64C
| accessdate = 2010-07-02
}}
* Sisman, Adam. ''The Friendship''. New York: Viking, 2006.
* Stillinger, Jack. "Pictorialism and Matter-of Factness in Coleridge's Poems of Somerset" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Watson, George. ''Coleridge the Poet''. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1966.
* Wheeler, Kathleen. ''The Creative Mind in Coleridge's Poetry''. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.
* Woodberry, G. E. "Samuel Taylor Coleridge" in ''Library of the World's Best Literature''. Vol VII. New York: R. S. Peale and J. A. Hill, 1897.
* Yarlott, Geoffrey. ''Coleridge and the Abyssinian Maid''. London: Methuen & Co, 1967.
</div>
{{refend}}

Kubla Khan

2011-12-13T22:16:14Z

Ottava: copying over good version of Kubla Khan from Wikipedia - I wrote the article, and it has since been filled with original research, plagiarism, and all sorts of nonsense

''''Kubla Khan''''' is a poem by Samuel Taylor Coleridge , completed in 1797 and published in ''Christabel, Kubla Khan, and the Pains of Sleep'' in 1816. According to Coleridge's Preface to ''Kubla Khan'', the poem was composed one night after he experienced an opium influenced dream after reading a work describing the Tartar king Kublai Khan . Upon waking, he set about writing lines of poetry that came to him from the dream until he was interrupted by a person from Porlock . The poem could not be completed according to its original 200-300 line plan as the interruption caused him to forget the lines. Although the specific details of Coleridge's Preface are debatable, he most likely composed ''Kubla Khan'' during autumn 1797 but left unpublished and kept for private readings until 1816 when, on the prompting by George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron George Gordon Byron , it was made available to the public.

The poem is different in style and form from other poems composed by Coleridge. While incomplete and subtitled a "fragment", its language is highly stylized with a strong emphasis on sound devices that change between the poem's original two stanza s. The first stanza of the poem describes Khan's pleasure dome built alongside a sacred river fed by a powerful fountain. The second stanza of the poem is the narrator's response to the power and effects of a Habesha people Abyssinian maid's song, which enraptures him but leaves him unable to act on her inspiration unless he could hear her once again. Together, they form a comparison of creative power that does not work with nature and creative power that is harmonious with nature.

Modern critics, with some exceptions, view ''Kubla Khan'' as one of Coleridge's three great poems, with '' The Rime of the Ancient Mariner '' and ''Christabel ''. While Coleridge's contemporaries mostly denounced the poem upon publication or questioned Coleridge's statements about its origin, ''Kubla Khan'' was originally published because many of Coleridge's associates felt that the poem, when read by Coleridge aloud, was wonderful. It was not until years later that critics began to openly admire the poem.

==Background==
In September 1797, Coleridge lived in Stowey in the south west of England and spent much of his time walking through the nearby Quantock Hills with his fellow poet William Wordsworth and Wordsworth's sister Dorothy ;<ref name="Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162">Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162</ref> the route is memorialized as the " Coleridge Way ".<ref>[http://www.somerset-rural-renaissance.co.uk/coleridge-way.html] "The Coleridge Way". Somerset Rural Renaissance, 2007. accessdate=2 July 2010}}</ref> Throughout the autumn, he worked on many poems, including "The Brook" and the tragedy ''Osorio''. Some time between 9 October and 14 October 1797, when Coleridge says he had completed the tragedy, he left Stowey for Lynton. On his return, he became sick and rested at Ash Farm, located at Culbone Church and one of the few places to seek shelter on his route.<ref name="Holmes 1989 pp. 161-162"/> In 1934, a copy of the poem known as the Crewe Manuscript was discovered and it contained a note about the origin of ''Kubla Khan''.<ref name="Ashton p. 112">Ashton 1997 p. 112</ref> Coleridge attributed the poem's origins to one of his stays at Ash Farm, possibly the one that happened in October 1797: "This fragment with a good deal more, not recoverable, composed, in a sort of Reverie brought on by two grains of Opium taken to check a dysentry, at a Farm House between Porlock & Linton, a quarter of a mile from Culbone Church, in the fall of the year, 1797".<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd. p. 162</ref> Coleridge explained in the Preface of the 1816 edition that he read from Samuel Purchas 's ''Pilgrimage'' and included a passage that directly influenced his thoughts:<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 163-164</ref>
<blockquote>In ''Xanada'' did ''Cublai Can'' build a stately Pallace, encompassing sixteene miles of plaine ground with a wall, wherein are fertile Meddows, pleasant Springs, delightful Streames, and all sorts of beasts of chase and game, and in the midst thereof a sumptuous house of pleasure, which may be removed from place to place. Here he doth abide in the months of June, July, and August, on the eight and twentieth day whereof, he departeth thence to another place to do sacrifice in this manner: He hath a Herd or Drove of Horses and Mares, about ten thousand, as white as snow; of the milke whereof none may taste, except he be of the blood of ''Cingis Can''. Yea, the Tartars do these beasts great reverence, nor dare any cross their way, or go before them. According to the directions of his Astrologers or Magicians, he on the eight and twentieth day of August aforesaid, spendeth and poureth forth with his owne hands the milke of these Mares in the aire, and on the earth, to give drink to the spirits and Idols which they worship, that they may preserve the men, women, beasts, birds, corne, and other things growing on the earth.<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd. pp. 163-164</ref></blockquote>
The lines from Purchas, according to the Preface, inspired a dream in which Coleridge was provided a poem about Kubla Khan. Upon waking, he began to compose the 200 to 300 line poem, but he was interrupted by a man from Porlock . When the unidentified individual left, Coleridge was unable to continue ''Kubla Khan'' except for only a few of the lines and images he still retained. The second stanza of the poem, forming a conclusion, was composed at a later date and was possibly disconnected from the original dream.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 40-44</ref>

Unlike Coleridge's normal approach to his poetry, he did not mention the poem in letters to his friends. The first written record of the poem is in Dorothy Wordsworth's Journal, October 1798. It is possible that the poem was recited to his friends during this time and was kept for private use instead of publication. However, the exact date of the poem is uncertain because Coleridge normally dated his poems but did not date ''Kubla Khan''.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 165</ref> Coleridge did write to John Thelwall, 14 October 1797, to describe his feelings related to those expressed in the poem:<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 166-167</ref>
<blockquote>I should much wish, like the Indian Vishna, to float about along an infinite ocean cradled in the flower of the Lotos, & wake once in a million years for a few minutes – just to know I was going to sleep a million years more ... I can ''at times'' feel strong the beauties, you describe, in themselves, & for themselves – but more frequently ''all things'' appear little – all the knowledge, that can be acquired, child's play – the universe itself – what but an immense heap of ''little'' things? ... My mind feels as if it ached to behold & know something ''great'' – something ''one'' & ''indivisible'' – and it is only in the faith of this that rocks or waterfalls, mountains or caverns give me the sense of sublimity or majesty!<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd p. 167</ref></blockquote>
The thoughts expressed in Coleridge's letter date ''Kubla Khan'' to October 1797, but two alternatives have been postulated by Coleridge's biographers: May 1798 and October 1799. These were both times he was in the area, and, by 1799, Coleridge was able to read Robert Southey 's ''Thalaba the Destroyer'', a work which also drew on Purchas's work. It is possible that he merely edited the poem during those time periods, and there is little evidence to suggest that Coleridge lied about the opium-induced experience at Ash Farm.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 167-</ref>

The work was set aside until 1815 when Coleridge compiled manuscripts of his poems for a collection titled ''Sibylline Leaves''.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 387</ref> The poem remained buried in obscurity until a 10 April 1816 meeting between Coleridge and George Gordon Byron , a younger poet, who persuaded Coleridge to publish ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'' as fragments. Leigh Hunt, another poet, witnessed the event and wrote, "He recited his 'Kubla Khan' one morning to Lord Byron, in his Lordship's house in Piccadilly, when I happened to be in another room. I remember the other's coming away from him, highly struck with his poem, and saying how wonderfully he talked. This was the impression of everyone who heard him."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 426</ref> Byron arranged for John Murray to publish the poem with ''Christabel'' and "The Pains of Sleep" along with prefaces to the works. A contract was drawn up on 12 April 1816 for 80 pounds.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 426</ref> Charles Lamb , poet and friend of Coleridge, witnessed Coleridge's work towards publishing the poem and wrote to Wordsworth: "Coleridge is printing Xtabel by Lord Byron's recommendation to Murray, with what he calls a vision of Kubla Khan – which said vision he repeats so enchantingly that it irradiates & brings Heaven & Elysian bowers into my parlour while he sings or says it".<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 429</ref> Coleridge stayed in London to work on the poem and also to try and break his opium addiction.. However, not everyone was happy with the idea of the poem's being published, as Coleridge's wife, who was not with him, wrote to Thomas Poole, "Oh! when will he ever give his friends anything but pain? he has been so unwise as to publish his fragments of 'Christabel' & 'Koula-Khan' ... we were all sadly vexed when we read the advertisement of these things."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 431</ref>

The collection of poems was published 25 May 1816,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 434</ref> and Coleridge included "A Fragment" as a subtitle to the 54 line version of the poem to defend against criticism of the poem's incomplete nature.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 112-113</ref> The original published version of the work was separated into 2 stanzas, with the first ending at line 30.<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 145</ref> Printed with ''Kubla Khan'' was a preface that claimed an opium induced dream provided Coleridge the lines.<ref name="Sisman p. 417">Sisman 2006 p. 417</ref> The poem was printed four times in Coleridge's life, with the final printing in his ''Poetical Works'' of 1834.<ref>Mays 2001 p. 511</ref> In the final work, Coleridge added the expanded subtitle "Or, A Vision in a Dream. A Fragment". In some later anthologies of Coleridge's poetry, the Preface is dropped along with the subtitle denoting its fragmentary and dream nature. Sometimes, the Preface is included in modern editions but lacks both the first and final paragraphs.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 39-40</ref>

==Style==
The poem according to Coleridge's account, is a fragment of what it should have been, amounting to what he was able to jot down from memory: 54 lines.<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 195</ref> Originally, his dream included between 200 and 300 lines, but he was only able to compose the first 30 before he was interrupted. The second stanza is not necessarily part of the original dream and refers to the dream in the past tense.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 43-44</ref> The rhythm of the poem, like its themes and images, is different from other poems Coleridge wrote during the time, and it is organised in a structure similar to 18th-century odes. The poem relies on many sound-based techniques, including cognate variation and chiasmus .<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 509-512</ref> In particular, the poem emphasises the use of the "æ" sound and similar modifications to the standard "a" sound to make the poem sound Asian. Its rhyme scheme found in the first seven lines is repeated in the first seven lines of the second stanza. There is a heavy use of assonance , the reuse of vowel sounds, and a reliance on alliteration, repetition of the first sound of a word, within the poem including the first line: "In Xanadu did Kubla Khan". The stressed sounds, "Xan", "du", "Ku", "Khan", contain assonance in their use of the sounds a-u-u-a, have two rhyming syllables with "Xan" and "Khan", and employ alliteration with the name "Kubla Khan" and the reuse of "d" sounds in "Xanadu" and "did". To pull the line together, the "i" sound of "In" is repeated in "did". Later lines do not contain the same amount of symmetry but do rely on assonance and rhymes throughout. The only word that has no true connection to another word is "dome" except in its use of a "d" sound. Though the lines are interconnected, the rhyme scheme and line lengths are irregular.<ref>Schneider 1967 pp. 88-91</ref>

The first lines of the poem follow iambic tetrameter with the initial stanza relying on heavy stresses. The lines of the second stanza incorporate lighter stresses to increase the speed of the meter to separate them from the hammer-like rhythm of the previous lines.<ref name="Yarlott p. 129">Yarlott 1967 p. 129</ref> There also is strong a break following line 36 in the poem that provides for a second stanza, and there is a transition in narration from a third person narration about Kubla Khan into the poet discussing his role as a poet.<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 509-510, 514</ref> Without the Preface, the two stanzas form two different poems that have some relationship to each other but lack unity.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 42-43</ref> This is not to say they would be two different poems, since the technique of having separate parts that respond to another is used in the genre of the odal hymn , used in the poetry of other Romantic poets including John Keats or Percy Bysshe Shelley .<ref>Bate 1968 p. 78</ref> However, the odal hymn as used by others has a stronger unity among its parts, and Coleridge believed in writing poetry that was unified organically.<ref>Singh 1994 p. 48}}</ref> It is possible that Coleridge was displeased by the lack of unity in the poem and added a note about the structure to the Preface to explain his thoughts.<ref>Roe 2001 p.265}}</ref> In terms of genre, the poem is a dream poem and related to works describing visions common to the Romantic poets. ''Kubla Khan'' is also related to the genre of fragmentary poetry, with internal images reinforcing the idea of fragmentation that is found within the form of the poem.<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 42, 45-47</ref> The poem's self-proclaimed fragmentary nature combined with Coleridge's warning about the poem in the preface turns ''Kubla Khan'' into an "anti-poem", a work that lacks structure, order, and leaves the reader confused instead of enlightened.<ref>Fulford 2002 p. 54</ref> However, the poem has little relation to the other fragmentary poems Coleridge wrote.<ref>Bate 1968 p. 76</ref>

==Preface==
The Preface of ''Kubla Khan'' began by explaining that it was printed:<ref name="Sisman p. 417"/> "at the request of a poet of great and deserved celebrity, and as far as the author's own opinions are concerned, rather as a psychological curiosity, than on the ground of any supposed ''poetic'' merits".<ref>Sisman 2006 qtd. p. 417</ref> The preface then provided an origin to both the poem and why it was merely a smaller portion of an intended larger work. After reading from Purchas's book,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 434-435</ref> "The Author continued for about three hours in a profound sleep, at least of the external senses, during which time he had the most vivid confidence, that he could not have composed less than from two or three hundred lines ... On Awaking he appeared to himself to have a distinct recollection of the whole, and taking his pen, ink, and paper, instantly and eagerly wrote down the lines that are here preserved."<ref name="Holmes qtd. p. 435">Holmes 1998 qtd. p. 435</ref> The image of himself that Coleridge provides is of a dreamer who reads works of lore and not as an opium addict. Instead, the effects of the opium, as described, are intended to suggest that he was not used to its effects.<ref name="Perkins p. 39">Perkins 2010 p. 39</ref>

There are some problems with Coleridge's account, especially the claim to have a copy of Purchas with him. It was a rare book, unlikely to be at a "lonely farmhouse", nor would an individual carry it on a journey; the folio was heavy and almost 1000 pages insize.<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 337</ref> It is probable that the words of Purchas were merely remembered by Coleridge and that the depiction of immediately reading the work before falling asleep was to suggest that the subject came to him accidentally.<ref>Bate 1968 pp. 75-76</ref>

The passage continues with a famous account of an interruption:<ref name="Holmes 1998 p. 435">Holmes 1998 p. 435</ref> "At this moment he was unfortunately called out by a person on business from Porlock, and detained by him above an hour, and on his return to his room, found, to his no small surprise and mortification, that though he still retained some vague and dim recollection of the general purpose of the vision, yet, with the exception of some eight or ten scattered lines and images, all the rest had passed away like the images on the surface of a stream into which a stone has been cast, but, alas! without the after restoration of the latter!"<ref name="Holmes qtd. p. 435"/> The actual person from Porlock mentioned could be many people, including Wordsworth, Joseph Cottle, John Thelwall, Coleridge's wife, or merely a literary device. As a symbol within the preface, the person represents the obligations of the real world crashing down upon the creative world or other factors that kept Coleridge from finishing his poetry. The claim to produce poetry after dreaming of it became popular after ''Kubla Khan'' was published.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 436</ref> The person from Porlock later became a word to describe interrupted genius, and the literary critic Walter Jackson Bate recounted that while John Livingston Lowes taught the poem, he told his students "If there is any man in the history of literature who should be hanged, drawn, and quartered, it is the man on business from Porlock."<ref>Perkins 2010 qtd. p. 39</ref> The literary critic D. F. Rauber claimed that the man was "necessary to create the illusion of the cut short rather than the stopped".<ref>Rauber 1969 p. 221</ref> This would have allowed Coleridge to purposefully write the poem as a fragment.<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 44-45</ref>

The Preface to the poem suggests that the poem was not supposed to be printed, that it was a fragmentary work that he was unable to complete, and that the work itself was provided to him through involuntary inspiration. When the Preface is dropped, the poem seems to compare the act of poetry with the might of Kubla Khan instead of the loss of inspiration causing the work to have a more complex depiction of the poetic power. Taken together, the Preface could connect with the first half of the poem to suggest that the poem is from the view of a dreaming narrator,<ref>Perkins 2010 pp. 40-41</ref> or it could connect with the second half of the poem to show how a reader is to interpret the lines by connecting himself with the persona in a negative manner.<ref>Wheeler 1981 pp. 28-38</ref> The Preface and the poem are different in their locations, as the Preface discusses Coleridge's England while the poem discusses ancient China, but both discuss the role of the poem and his abilities. The poet of the Preface is a dreamer who must write and the poet of the poem is a vocal individual, but both are poets who lose inspiration. Only the poet of the poem feels that he can recover the vision, and the Preface, like a Coleridge poem that is quoted in it, ''The Picture'', states that visions are unrecoverable.<ref>Perkins 2010 p. 41</ref>

==Poem==
The poem begins with a description of Khan's Xanadu, near the river Alph which passes through caverns before reaching a dark or dead sea. Although the land is one of man-made "pleasure", there is a natural, "sacred" river that runs past it. The lines describing the river have a markedly different rhythm from the rest of the passage:<ref name="Yarlott p. 129"/>
:In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
:A stately pleasure-dome decree :
:Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
:Through caverns measureless to man
:Down to a sunless sea. (lines 1-5)

The land is constructed as a paradisaical garden, but like Eden after Man's fall, Xanadu is isolated by walls. The finite property of the constructed walls of Xanadu are contrasted with the infinite properties of the natural caves through which the river runs.
:So twice five miles of fertile ground
:With walls and towers were girdled round:
:And here were gardens bright with sinuous rills,
:Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree;
:And here were forests ancient as the hills,
:Enfolding sunny spots of greenery. (lines 6-11)

The poem expands on the Gothic hints of the first stanza as the narrator explores the dark chasm in the midst of Xanadu's gardens, and describes the surrounding area as both "savage" and "holy". Yarlott interprets this chasm as symbolic of the poet struggling with decadence that ignores nature.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 141-142</ref> It may also represent the dark side of the soul, the dehumanizing effect of power and dominion.
:But oh! that deep romantic chasm which slanted
:Down the green hill athwart a cedarn cover!
:A savage place! as holy and enchanted
:As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted
:By woman wailing for her demon-lover! (lines 12-16)

From the dark chasm a fountain violently erupts, then forms the meandering river Alph, which runs to the sea described in the first stanza. Fountains are often symbolic of the inception of life, and in this case may represent forceful creativity.<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 142</ref> Since this fountain ends in death, it may also simply represent the life span of a human, from violent birth to a sinking end.
:And from this chasm, with ceaseless turmoil seething,
:As if this earth in fast thick pants were breathing,
:A mighty fountain momently was forced:
:Amid whose swift half-intermitted burst
:Huge fragments vaulted like rebounding hail,
:Or chaffy grain beneath the thresher's flail:
:And 'mid these dancing rocks at once and ever
:It flung up momently the sacred river.
:Five miles meandering with a mazy motion
:Through wood and dale the sacred river ran,
:Then reached the caverns measureless to man,
:And sank in tumult to a lifeless ocean: (lines 17-28)

Kubla Khan hears voices of the dead, and refers to a vague "war" that appears to be unreferenced elsewhere in the poem. Yarlott argues that the war represents the penalty for seeking pleasure, or simply the confrontation of the present by the past:<ref>Yarlott 1967 p. 144</ref>
:And 'mid this tumult Kubla heard from far
:Ancestral voices prophesying war! (lines 29-30)

Though the exterior of Xanadu is presented in images of darkness, and in context of the dead sea, we are reminded of the "miracle" and "pleasure" of Kubla Khan's creation. The vision of the sites, including the dome, the cavern, and the fountain, are similar to an apocalyptic vision. Together, the natural and man-made structures form a miracle of nature as they represent the mixing of opposites together, the essence of creativity:<ref>Bloom 1993 pp. 218-219</ref>
:The shadow of the dome of pleasure
:Floated midway on the waves;
:Where was heard the mingled measure
:From the fountain and the caves.
:It was a miracle of rare device,
:A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice! (lines 31-36)

The narrator turns prophetic, referring to a vision of an unidentified "Abyssinian maid" who sings of "Mount Abora". Harold Bloom suggests that this passage reveals the narrator's desire to rival Khan's ability to create with his own.<ref name="Bloom 1993 pp. 219-220">Bloom 1993 pp. 219-220</ref> The woman may also refer to Mnemosyne , the Greek personification of memory and mother of the muses , referring directly to Coleridge's claimed struggle to compose this poem from memory of a dream.
:A damsel with a dulcimer
:In a vision once I saw:
:It was an Abyssinian maid,
:And on her dulcimer she played,
:Singing of Mount Abora.
:Could I revive within me
:Her symphony and song,
:To such a deep delight 'twould win me,
:That with music loud and long,
:I would build that dome in air,
:That sunny dome! those caves of ice! (lines 37-47)

The subsequent passage refers to unnamed witnesses who may also hear this, and thereby share in the narrator's vision of a replicated, ethereal, Xanadu. Harold Bloom suggests that the power of the poetic imagination, stronger than nature or art, fills the narrator and grants him the ability to share this vision with others through his poetry. The narrator would thereby be elevated to an awesome, almost mythical status, as one who has experienced an Edenic paradise available only to those who have similarly mastered these creative powers:<ref>Bloom 1993 p. 220</ref>
:And all who heard should see them there,
:And all should cry, Beware! Beware!
:His flashing eyes, his floating hair!
:Weave a circle round him thrice,
:And close your eyes with holy dread,
:For he on honey-dew hath fed,
:And drunk the milk of Paradise. (lines 48-54)

==Themes==
''Kubla Khan'' is about poetry and the two sections discuss two types of poems.<ref>Watson 1966 pp. 122-124</ref> The power of the imagination is an important component to this theme. The poem celebrates creativity and how the poet is able to experience a connection to the universe through inspiration. As a poet, Coleridge places himself in an uncertain position as either master over his creative powers or a slave to it.<ref>Holmes 1989 p. 166</ref> The dome city represents the imagination and the second stanza represents the relationship between a poet and the rest of society. The poet is separated from the rest of humanity after he is exposed to the power to create and is able to witness visions of truth. This separation causes a combative relationship between the poet and the audience as the poet seeks to control his listener through a mesmerizing technique.<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 106-109</ref> The poem's emphasis on imagination as subject of a poem, on the contrasts within the paradisal setting, and its discussion of the role of poet as either being blessed or cursed by imagination, has influenced many works, including Alfred Tennyson's "Palace of Art" and William Butler Yeats's Byzantium based poems.<ref>Ashton 1997 p. 115</ref> There is also a strong connection between the idea of retreating into the imagination found within Keats's ''Lamia'' and in Tennyson's "Palace of Art".<ref>Rzepka 1986 p. 108</ref> The Preface, when added to the poem, connects the idea of the paradise as the imagination with the land of Porlock, and that the imagination, though infinite, would be interrupted by a "person on business". The Preface then allows for Coleridge to leave the poem as a fragment, which represents the inability for the imagination to provide complete images or truly reflect reality. The poem would not be about the act of creation but a fragmentary view revealing how the act works: how the poet crafts language and how it relates to himself.<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 44-46</ref>

Through use of the imagination, the poem is able to discuss issues surrounding tyranny, war, and contrasts that exist within paradise.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 115-116</ref> Part of the war motif could be a metaphor for the poet in a competitive struggle with the reader in order to push his own vision and ideas upon his audience.<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 108-109</ref> As a component to the idea of imagination in the poem is the creative process by describing a world that is of the imagination and another that is of understanding. The poet, in Coleridge's system, is able to move from the world of understanding, where men normally are, and enter into the world of the imagination through poetry. When the narrator describes the "ancestral voices prophesying war", the idea is part of the world of understanding, or the real world. As a whole, the poem is connected to Coleridge's belief in a secondary Imagination that can lead a poet into a world of imagination, and the poem is both a description of that world and a description of how the poet enters the world.<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 77-80</ref> The imagination, as it appears in many of Coleridge's and Wordsworth's works, including ''Kubla Khan'', is discussed through the metaphor of water, and the use of the river in ''Kubla Khan'' is connected to the use of the stream in Wordsworth's ''The Prelude''. The water imagery is also related to the divine and nature, and the poet is able to harness tap into nature in a way Kubla Khan cannot in order to harness its power.<ref>Barth 2003 pp. 57-70, 82</ref>

Towards the end of 1797, Coleridge was fascinated with the idea of a river and it was used in multiple poems including ''Kubla Khan'' and "The Brook". In his ''Biographia Literaria'' (1817), he explained, "I sought for a subject, that should give equal room and freedom for description, incident, and impassioned reflections on men, nature, and society, yet supply in itself a natural connection to the parts and unity to the whole. Such a subject I conceived myself to have found in a stream, traced from its source in the hills among the yellow-red moss and conical glass-shaped tufts of bent, to the first break or fall, where its drops become audible, and it begins to form a channel".<ref>Holmes 1989 qtd p. 161</ref> It is possible that the imagery of ''Biographia Literaria'' followed the recovery of the ''Kubla Khan'' manuscript during the composition of the book.<ref>Holmes 1998 p. 404</ref> Water imagery permeated through many of his poems, and the coast that he witnessed on his journey to Linton appears in ''Osorio''. Additionally, many of the images are connected to a broad use of Ash Farm and the Quantocks in Coleridge's poetry, and the mystical setting of both ''Osorio'' and ''Kubla Khans'' are based on his idealized version of the region.<ref>Holmes 1989 pp. 163-166</ref> ''Kubla Khan'' was composed in the same year as ''This Lime-Tree Bower My Prison'', and both poems contained images that were used in the 14 October 1797 letter to Thelwall. However, the styles are very different as one is heavily structured and rhymed while the other tries to mimic conversational speak. What they do have in common is that they use scenery based on the same location, including repeated uses of dells, rocks, ferns, and a waterfall found in the Somerset region.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 113-114</ref> The Preface uses water imagery to explain what happens when visions are lost by quoting a passage from his poem ''The Picture''. When considering all of ''The Picture'' and not just the excerpt, Coleridge describes how inspiration is similar to a stream and that if an object is thrown into it the vision is interrupted.<ref>Perkins 2010 p. 42-43</ref>

===Tartars and paradise===
The Tartars ruled by Kubla Khan were seen in the tradition Coleridge worked from as a violent, barbaric people and were used in that way when Coleridge would compare others to Tartars. They were seen as worshipers of the sun, but uncivilized and connected to either the Cain or Ham line of outcasts. However, Coleridge describes Khan in a peaceful light and as a man of genius. He seeks to show his might but does so by building his own version of paradise. The description and the tradition provide a contrast between the daemonic and genius within the poem, and Khan is a ruler who is unable to recreate Eden.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 227-240</ref> There are also comparisons between Khan with Catherine the Great or Napoleon with their building and destroying nations. Though the imagery can be dark, there is little moral concern as the ideas are mixed with creative energies.<ref name="Mays p. 510">Mays 2001 p. 510</ref> In the second stanza, Khan is able to establish some order in the natural world but he cannot stop the forces of nature that constantly try to destroy what he made. Nature, in the poem is not a force of redemption but one of destruction, and the paradise references reinforce what Khan cannot attain.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 244-246</ref>

Although the Tartars are barbarians from China, they are connected to ideas within the Judaeo Christian tradition, including the idea of Original Sin and Eden.<ref>Jasper 1985 p. 45</ref> The account of Cublai Can in Purchas's work, discussed in Coleridge's Preface, connects the idea of paradise with luxury and sensual pleasure. The place was described in negative terms and seen as an inferior representation of paradise, and Coleridge's ethical system did not connect pleasure with joy or the divine.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 130-131</ref> As for specific aspects of the scene, the river and cavern images are used to describe how creativity operates in a post-Edenic reality. The river, Alph, replaces the one from John Milton's Eden that granted immortality and it disappears into a sunless sea that lacks life. The image is further connected to the Biblical, post-Edenic stories in that a mythological story attributes the violent children of Ham becoming the Tartars, and that Tartarus, derived from the location, became a synonym for hell. Coleridge believed that the Tartars were violent, and that their culture was opposite to the civilized Chinese. The Tartars were also in contrast to the concept of Prester John, who may have been Prester Chan and, in Ludolphus's account, chased out of Asia by the Tartars and, in John Herbert's ''Travels'', was Abyssinian.<ref>Beer 1959 pp. 221-236</ref>

The land is similar to the false paradise of Mount Amara in ''Paradise Lost'', especially the Abyssinian maid's song about Mount Abora that is able to mesmerize the poet. In the manuscript copy, the location was named both Amora and Amara, and the location of both is the same.<ref>Mays 2001 pp. 510, 514</ref> There are more connections to ''Paradise Lost'', including how Milton associates the Tartar ruler to the Post-Edenic world in Adam's vision of the Tartar kingdom. In post-Milton accounts, the kingdom is linked with the worship of the sun, and his name is seen to be one that reveals the Khan as a priest. This is reinforced by the connection of the river Alph with the Alpheus, a river that in Greece was connected to the worship of the sun. As followers of the sun, the Tartar are connected to a tradition that describes Cain as founding a city of sun worshipers and that people in Asia would build gardens in remembrance of the lost Eden.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 227-231</ref>

In the tradition Coleridge relies on, the Tartar worship the sun because it reminds them of paradise, and they build gardens because they want to recreate paradise. Kubla Khan is of the line of Cain and fallen, but he wants to overcome that state and rediscover paradise by creating an enclosed garden. The dome, in Thomas Maurice's description, in ''The History of Hindostan'' of the tradition, was related to nature worship as it reflects the shape of the universe. Coleridge, when composing the poem, believed in a connection between nature and the divine but believed that the only dome that should serve as the top of a temple was the sky. He thought that a dome was an attempt to hide from the ideal and escape into a private creation, and Kubla Khan's dome is a flaw that keeps him from truly connecting to nature. Maurice's ''History of Hindostan'' also describes aspects of Kashmir that were copied by Coleridge in preparation for hymns he intended to write. The work, and others based on it, describe a temple with a dome.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 233-236</ref> Purchas's work does not mention a dome but a "house of pleasure". The use of dome instead of house or palace could represent the most artificial of constructs and reinforce the idea that the builder was separated from nature. However, Coleridge did believe that a dome could be positive if it was connected to religion, but the Khan's dome was one of immoral pleasure and a purposeless life dominated by sensuality and pleasure.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 130-132</ref>

===Abyssinian maid===
The narrator introduces a character he once dreamed about, an Abyssinian maid who sings of another land. She is a figure of imaginary power within the poem who can inspire within the narrator his own ability to craft poetry.<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 79-80</ref> When she sings, she is able to inspire and mesmerize the poet by describing a false paradise.<ref name="Mays p. 510"/> The woman herself is similar to the way Coleridge describes Lewti in another poem he wrote around the same time ''Lewti''. The connection between Lewti and the Abyssinian maid makes it possible that the maid was intended as a disguised version of Mary Evans, who appears as a love interest since Coleridge's 1794 poem ''The Sigh''. Evans, in the poems, appears as an object of sexual desire and a source of inspiration.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 310-312</ref> She is also similar to the later subject of many of Coleridge's poems, Asra, based on Sara Hutchinson, whom Coleridge wanted but was not his wife and experienced opium induced dreams of being with her.<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 338</ref>

The figure is related to Heliodurus's work, ''Aethiopian History '' with its description of "a young Lady, sitting upon a Rock, of so rare and perfect a Beauty, as one would have taken her for a Goddess, and though her present misery opprest her with extreamest grief, yet in the greatness of her afflection, they might easily perceive the greatness of her Courage: A Laurel crown'd her Head, an a Quiver in a Scarf hanged at her back".<ref>Beer 1962 qtd. p. 266</ref> Her description in the poem is also related to Isis of Apuleius's ''Metamorphoses'', but Isis was a figure of redemption and the Abyssinian maid cries out for her demon-lover. She is similar to John Keats's Indian woman in ''Endymion'' who is revealed to be the moon goddess, but in ''Kubla Khan'' she is also related to the sun and the sun as an image of divine truth.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 266-269</ref>

In addition to real life counterparts of the Abyssinian maid, Milton's ''Paradise Lost'' describes Abyssinian kings keeping their children guarded at Mount Amara and a false paradise, which is echoed in ''Kubla Khan''.<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 344</ref>

==Sources==
There are many sources attributed to ''Kubla Khan'' for the style, imagery, and topic. Of the sources, Coleridge was influenced by the surrounding of Culbone Combe and its hills, gulleys, and other features including the "mystical" and "sacred" locations in the region. He admitted that he was directly influenced by Purchas's ''Pilgrimage'', but there are additional strong literary connections to other works, including John Milton's ''Paradise Lost'', Samuel Johnson's ''Rasselas'', Chatterton's ''African Eclogues'', William Bartram's ''Travels through North and South Carolina'', Thomas Burnet's ''Sacred Theory of the Earth'', Mary Wollstonecraft's ''A Short Residence in Sweden'', Plato's ''Phaedrus and Ion'',<ref>Holmes 1989 p. 164</ref> Maurice's ''The History of Hindostan'', and Heliodorus's ''Aethiopian History''.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 235, 266</ref> The poem also contains allusions to the Book of Revelation in its description of New Jerusalem and to the paradise of William Shakespeare's ''A Midsummer Night's Dream''.<ref>Ashton 1997 pp. 114-115</ref> As for specific places, the main character is Kublai Khan the Tartar king from China, the river is Alpheus in Greece and is similar to the Nile, and the Abyssinian woman sings of Mount Amara, and the caves are like those in Kashmir. Also, the name "Alph" could connect to the idea of being an alpha or original place.<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 217-219</ref> The sources used for ''Kubla Khan'' are also those used in Coleridge's ''The Rime of the Ancient Mariner''.<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 410-411</ref>

Much of the poem could have been influenced by Coleridge's opium dream or, as his friend and fellow poet Robert Southey joked, "Coleridge had dreamed he had written a poem in a dream".<ref>Doughty 1981 qtd. p. 132</ref> If Coleridge's dream did originate ideas within the poem, then the dreams are related to those experienced by contemporary opium eaters and writers, Thomas de Quincey and Charles Pierre Baudelaire. It is possible that the dream affected Coleridge's later mood and caused him to enter into a depression, influencing the ideas in his writing that followed the dream night. Of these ideas, Coleridge's emphasised the vastness of the universe and his feeling overwhelmed by how little the universe seemed to him.<ref>Doughty 1981 pp. 132-133</ref> Also, Charles Lamb provided Coleridge on 15 April 1797 with a copy of his "A Vision of Repentance", a poem that discussed a dream containing imagery similar to those in ''Kubla Khan''. The poem could have provided Coleridge with the idea of a dream poem that discusses fountains, sacredness, and even a woman singing a sorrowful song.<ref>Fruman 1971 pp. 345-346</ref> The poem's use of original names and disorganised use of action can also be attributed to an opium induced state of mind. In terms of spelling, Coleridge's printed version differs from Purchas's spelling, which refers to the Tartar ruler as "Cublai Can", and from the spelling used by Milton, "Cathaian Can".<ref>Beer 1962 pp. 211, 227</ref> His original manuscript (as reproduced above) spells the name "Cubla Khan" and the place "Xannadu".

The Abyssinian maid is derived from many figures in Coleridge's life, including women who Coleridge admired in some way: Charlotte Brent, Catherine Clarkson, Mary Morgan, and Dorothy Wordsworth. Although Asra/Hutchinson is similar to the way Coleridge talks about the Abyssinian maid, Hutchinson was someone he met after writing ''Kubla Khan''. The person who was the closest match to the figure was Evans, the subject of Coleridge's ''Lewti''. The poem's claim that the narrator would be inspired to act if the song of the maid could be heard was a belief that Coleridge held regarding Evans after she become unattainable to him.<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 153, 310</ref>

==Critical response==
Before the poem was published, it was greatly favoured by Byron, who encouraged Coleridge to publish the poem,<ref>Holmes 1998 pp. 425-426</ref> and it was admired by many people including Walter Scott. However, the immediate response to the 1816 collection was to ignore ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'' or to just attack ''Kubla Khan''.<ref name="Ashton p. 112"/> The work went through multiple editions, but the poem, as with his others published in 1816 and 1817, had poor sales as a result of hostile critics who went so far to attack Coleridge's integrity. Many of the attacks started as a new generation of critical magazines, including ''Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine'', ''Edinburgh Review'', and ''Quarterly Review'', were established at the beginning of the 19th century. The critics were more provocative than those of the previous generation, and much of the bad reception was based on Coleridge's timing of publication and his own political views, much of which contrasted with those of the critics, than actual content. Another reason for negative reviews was a puff piece written by Byron about the ''Christabel'' publication.<ref>Jackson 1970 pp. 8-10</ref> Not all of the negative comments were public, as Charles Lamb, friend of Coleridge, expressed his fears of a negative response as he wrote: "Coleridge repeats so enchantingly that it irradiates and brings heaven and elysian bowers into my parlour while he sings or says it; but there is an observation: 'never tell thy dreams,' and I am almost afraid that ''Kubla Khan'' is an owl that won't bear daylight. I fear lest it should be discovered by the lantern of typography and clear reducing to letters, no better than nonsense or no sense."<ref>Doughty 1981 qtd. p. 433</ref>

The first of the negative reviews was written by William Hazlitt, literary critic and Romantic writer. He reviewed the collection of poems for the 2 June 1816 ''Examiner'', and, in his analysis, he attacked the fragmentary nature of the work and argued, "The fault of Mr Coleridge is, that he comes to no conclusion ... from an excess of capacity, he does little or nothing" and that the poem revealed that "Mr Coleridge can write better ''nonsense'' verse than any man in English."<ref>Holmes 1998 qtd p. 434</ref> In conclusion, Hazlitt admitted, "We could repeat these lines to ourselves not the less often for not knowing the meaning of them."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 209</ref> Following in the June 1816 ''Eclectic Review'', Josiah Conder dismissed the poem: "As to 'Kubla Khan', and the 'Pains of Sleep', we can only regret the publication of them, as affording a proof that the Author over-rates the importance of his name. With regard to the former, which is professedly published as a psychological curiosity, it having been composed during sleep, there appears to us nothing in the quality of the lines to render this circumstance extraordinary."<ref name="Jackson p. 212">Jackson 1970 p. 212</ref> He then continued by focusing on the manner in which the poem was composed, 'We could have informed Mr. Coleridge of a reverend friend of ours, who actually wrote down two sermons on a passage in the Apocalypse, from the recollection of the spontaneous exercise of his faculties in sleep. To persons who are in the habit of poetical composition, a similar phenomenon would not be a stranger occurrence, than the spirited dialogues in prose which take place in dreams of persons of duller invention than our poet, and which not unfrequently leave behind a very vivid impression."<ref name="Jackson p. 212"/>

Coleridge's statements on the origin of the poem were considered again by various critics with an emphasis on how the origins affected the merits of the poem. In an anonymous review for the July 1816 ''Literary Panorama'', the reviewer claimed, "'Kubla Khan' is merely a few stanzas which owe their origin to a circumstance by no means uncommon to persons of a poetical imagination ... It should however be recollected, that in sleep the judgment is the first faculty of the mind which ceases to act, therefore, the opinion of the sleeper respecting his performance is not to be trusted, even in his waking moments."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. pp. 215-216</ref> The review does praise the work as it continues, "Still if Mr. Coleridge's two hundred lines were all of equal merit with the following which he has preserved, we are ready to admit that he has reason to be grieved at their loss."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 216</ref> Another July 1816 anonymous review, for the ''Anti-Jacobin'', discussed the origin of the poem but dismissed the poem with lukewarm praise: "These have none of the wildness or deformity, of 'Christabel'; and though they are not marked by any striking beauties, they are not wholly discreditable to the author's talents."<ref>Jackson qtd. p. 221</ref> Another July 1816 anonymous review, in the ''Augustan Review'', claimed that the poem's descriptions "have much of the Oriental richness and harmony" but also said, in response to the preface, "There seems to be no great harm in dreaming while one sleeps; but an author really should not thus dream while he is awake, and writing too."<ref>Jackson qtd. 1995 p. 266</ref>

Reviews following months after publication contained limited positive appraisal of the poem. William Roberts's review, for the August 1816 ''British Review'', was more positive than previous analysis but with no detail about the work: "passing over the two other poems which are bound together with 'Christabel', called 'The Fragment of Kubla Khan', and 'The Pains of Sleep'; in which, however, there are some playful thoughts and fanciful imagery, which we would gladly have extracted if our room would have allowed it."<ref>Jackson 1970 p. 225</ref> The next review came in the January 1817 ''Monthly Review'', with the anonymous reviewer questioning: "Allowing every possible accuracy to the statement of Mr. Coleridge, we would yet ask him whether this extraordinary fragment was not rather the effect of rapid and instant composition after he was awake, than of memory immediately recording that which he dreamt when asleep? By what process of consciousness could he distinguish between such composition and such reminiscence? Impressed as his mind was with his interesting dream, and habituated as he is ... to the momentary production of verse, will he venture to assert that he did not ''compose'', and that he did ''remember'', the lines before us?"<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 246</ref> The review then concluded, "His 'psychological curiosity', as he terms it, depends in no slight degree on the establishment of the previous fact which we have mentioned: but the poem itself is below criticism. We would dismiss it with some portentous words of Sir Kenelm Digby, in his observations on Browne's ''religio Medici'': 'I have much ado to believe what he speaketh confidently; that he is more beholding to Morpheus for learned and rational as well as pleasing dreams, than to Mercury for smart and facetious conceptions'."<ref>Jackson 1970 pp. 246-247</ref>

===Later analysis===
Positive analysis of the poem came from Leigh Hunt, in the 21 October 1821 ''Examiner'' when Hunt wrote a piece on Coleridge as part of his "Sketches of the Living Poets" series. When coming to ''Kubla Khan'', he pointed out: "instead of being content to have written finely under the influence of laudanum, recommends 'Kubla-Khan' to his readers, not as a poem, but as 'a psychological curiosity' ... Every lover of books, scholar or not, who knows what it is to have his quarto open against a loaf at his tea ... ought to be in possession of Mr. Coleridge's poems, if it is only for 'Christabel', 'Kubla Khan', and the 'Ancient Mariner'."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 475</ref> When talking about the poem on its own, Hunt claimed it "is a voice and a vision, an everlasting tune in our mouths, a dream fit for Cambuscan and all his poets, a dance of pictures such as Giotto or Cimabue, revived and re-inspired, would have made for a Storie of Old Tartarie, a piece of the invisible world made visible by a sun at midnight and sliding before our eyes ... Justly is it thought that to be able to present such images as these to the mind, is to realise the world they speak of. We could repeat such verses as the following down a green glade, a whole summer's morning".<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. pp. 475-476</ref> The work went without major notice until John Bowring reviewed Coleridge's ''Poetical Works'' for the January 1830 ''Westminster Review''. When discussing the work along with the origins of the poem, Bowring stated, "The tale is extraordinary, but 'Kubla Khan' is much more valuable on another account, which is, that of its melodious versification. It is perfect music. The effect could scarcely have been more satisfactory to the ear had every syllable been selected merely for the sake of its sound. And yet there is throughout a close correspondence between the metre, the march of the verse, and the imagery which the words describe."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 550</ref> When concluding about the work, he declared, "The elements of this melody are only the common and well-known ones of English versification; our author is always felicitous in their management, but no where has he blended them in so perfect a combination as in this instance."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 551</ref> Another emphasis on the musicality of the poem came in August 1834, with Henry Nelson Coleridge analysis in the ''Quarterly Review'': "In some of the smaller pieces, as the conclusion of the 'Kubla Khan', for example, not only the lines by themselves are musical, but the whole passage sounds all at once as an outburst or crash of harps in the still air of autumn. The verses seem as if ''played'' to the ear upon some unseen instrument. And the poet's manner of reciting verse is similar."<ref>Jackson 1970 qtd. p. 627</ref>

Victorian critics praised the poem and some examined aspects of the poem's background. John Sheppard, in his analysis of dreams titled ''On Dreams'' (1847), lamented Coleridge's drug use as getting in the way of his poetry but argued: "It is probable, since he writes of having taken an 'anodyne,' that the 'vision in a dream' arose under some excitement of that same narcotic; but this does not destroy, even as to his particular case, the evidence for a wonderfully inventive action of the mind in sleep; for, whatever were the exciting cause, the fact remains the same".<ref>Sheppard 1847 p. 170</ref> T. Hall Caine, in 1883 survey of the original critical response to ''Christabel'' and ''Kubla Khan'', praised the poem and declared: "It must surely be allowed that the adverse criticism on 'Christabel' and 'Kubla Khan' which is here quoted is outside all tolerant treatment, whether of raillery or of banter. It is difficult to attribute such false verdict to pure and absolute ignorance. Even when we make all due allowance for the prejudices of critics whose only possible enthusiasm went out to 'the pointed and fine propriety of Poe,' we can hardly believe that the exquisite art which is among the most valued on our possessions could encounter so much garrulous abuse without the criminal intervention of personal malignancy."<ref>Caine 1883 p. 65</ref> In a review of H. D. Traill's analysis of Coleridge in the "English Men of Letters", an anonymous reviewer wrote in 1885 ''Westminster Review'': "Of 'Kubla Khan,' Mr. Traill writes: 'As to the wild dream-poem 'Kubla Khan,' it is hardly more than a psychologial curiosity, and only that perhaps in respect of the completeness of its metrical form.' Lovers of poetry think otherwise, and listen to these wonderful lines as the voice of Poesy itself."<ref>Anonymous 1885. p. 283</ref>

Critics at the end of the 19th century favoured the poem and placed it as one of Coleridge's best works. When discussing ''Christabel'', ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'' and ''Kubla Khan'', an anonymous reviewer in the October 1893 '' The Church Quarterly Review '' claimed, "In these poems Coleridge achieves a mastery of language and rhythm which is nowhere else conspicuously evident in him."<ref>Anonymous, '' The Church Quarterly Review '', 1894 p. 175.</ref> In 1895, Andrew Lang reviewed the ''Letters of Coleridge'' in addition to Coleridge's ''Kubla Khan'', ''Christabel'' and ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'', saying: "all these poems are 'miraculous;' all seem to have been 'given' by the dreaming 'subconscious self' of Coleridge. The earliest pieces hold no promise of these marvels. They come from what is oldest in Coleridge's nature, his uninvited and irrepressible intuition, magical and rare, vivid beyond common sight of common things, sweet beyond sound of things heard."<ref>Land 1895 p. 284</ref> G E Woodberry, in 1897, said that ''Christabel'', ''Rime of the Ancient Mariner'', and ''Kubla Khan'' "are the marvelous creations of his genius. In these it will be said there is both a world of nature new created, and a dramatic method and interest. It is enough for the purpose of the analysis if it be granted that nowhere else in Coleridge's work, except in these and less noticeably in a few other instances, do these high characteristics occur."<ref>Woodberry 1897 p. 3849</ref> In speaking of the three poems, he claimed they "have besides that wealth of beauty in detail, of fine diction, of liquid melody, of sentiment, thought, and image, which belong only to poetry of the highest order, and which are too obvious to require any comment. 'Kubla Khan' is a poem of the same kind, in which the mystical effect is given almost wholly by landscape."<ref>Woodberry 1897 p. 3851</ref>

===Modern criticism===
The 1920s contained analysis of the poem that emphasised the poem's power. In ''Road to Xanadu'' (1927), a book length study of ''The Rime of the Ancient Mariner'' and ''Kubla Khan'', John Livingston Lowes claimed that the poems were "two of the most remarkable poems in English".<ref>Lowes 1927 p. 3</ref> When turning to the background of the works, he argued, "Coleridge as Coleridge, be it said at once, is a secondary moment to our purpose; it is the significant process, not the man, which constitutes our theme. But the amazing ''modus operandi'' of his genius, in the fresh light which I hope I have to offer, becomes the very abstract and brief chronicle of the procedure of the creative faculty itself."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 4-5</ref> After breaking down the various aspects of the poem, Lowes stated, "with a picture of unimpaired and thrilling vividness, the fragment ends. And with it ends, for all save Coleridge, the dream. 'The earth hath bubbles as the water has, and this is of them.' For 'Kubla Khan' is as near enchantment, I suppose, as we are like to come in this dull world. And over it is cast the glamour, enhanced beyond all reckoning in the dream, of the remote in time and space – that visionary presence of a vague and gorgeous and mysterious Past which brooded, as Coleridge read, above the inscrutable Nile, and domed pavilions in Cashmere, and the vanished stateliness of Xanadu."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 409-410</ref> He continued by describing the power of the poem: "For none of the things which we have seen – dome, river, chasm, fountain, caves of ice, or floating hair – nor any combination of them holds the secret key to that sense of an incommunicable witchery which pervades the poem. That is something more impalpable by far, into which entered who can tell what tracelesss, shadowy recollections ... The poem is steeped in the wonder of all Coleridge's enchanted voyagings."<ref>Lowes 1927 p. 410</ref> Lowes then concluded about the two works: "Not even in the magical four and fifty lines of 'Kubla Khan' is sheer visualizing energy so intensely exercised as in 'The Ancient Mariner.' But every crystal-clear picture there, is an integral part of a preconceived and consciously elaborated whole ... In 'Kubla Khan' the linked and interweaving images irresponsibly and gloriously stream, like the pulsing, fluctuating banners of the North. And their pageant is as aimless as it is magnificent ... There is, then ... on glory of 'Kubla Khan' and another glory of 'The Ancient Mariner,' as one star differeth from another start in glory."<ref>Lowes 1927 pp. 412-413</ref> George Watson, in 1966, claimed that Lowes's analysis of the poems "will stand as a permanent monument to historical criticism."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 11</ref> Also in 1966, Kenneth Burke, declared, "Count me among those who would view this poem both as a marvel, and as 'in principle' ''finished''"<ref>Burke 1986 p. 33</ref>

T. S. Eliot attacked the reputation of ''Kubla Khan'' and sparked a dispute within literary criticism with his analysis of the poem in his essay "Origin and Uses of Poetry" from ''The Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism'' (1933): "The way in which poetry is written is not, so far as our knowledge of these obscure matters as yet extends, any clue to its value ... The faith in mystical inspiration is responsible for the exaggerated repute of ''Kubla Khan''. The imagery of that fragment, certainly, whatever its origins in Coleridge's reading, sank to the depths of Coleridge's feeling, was saturated, transformed there ... and brought up into daylight again."<ref name="Eliot p. 90">Eliot 1975 p. 90</ref> He goes on to explain, "But it is not ''used'': the poem has not been written. A single verse is not poetry unless it is a one-verse poem; and even the finest line draws its life from its context. Organization is necessary as well as 'inspiration'. The re-creation of word and image which happens fitfully in the poetry of such a poet as Coleridge happens almost incessantly with Shakespeare."<ref name="Eliot p. 90"/> Geoffrey Yarlott, in 1967, responds to Eliot to claim, "Certainly, the enigmatic personages who appear in the poem ... and the vaguely incantatory proper names ... appear to adumbrate rather than crystalize the poet's intention. Yet, though generally speaking intentions in poetry are nothing save as 'realized', we are unable to ignore the poem, despite Mr Eliot's strictures on its 'exaggerated repute'."<ref name="Yarlott p. 127">Yarlott 1967 p. 127</ref> He continued, "We may question without end ''what'' it means, but few of us question if the poem is worth the trouble, or whether the meaning is worth the having. While the feeling persists that there is something there which is profoundly important, the challenge to elucidate it proves irresistible."<ref name="Yarlott p. 127"/> However, Lilian Furst, in 1969, countered Yarlott to argue that, "T. S. Eliot's objection to the exaggerated repute of the surrealist ''Kubla Khan'' is not unjustified. Moreover, the customary criticism of Coleridge as a cerebral poet would seem to be borne out by those poems such as ''This Lime-tree Bower my Prison'' or ''The Pains of Sleep'', which tend more towards a direct statement than an imaginative presentation of personal dilemma."<ref>Furst 1979 p. 189</ref>

During the 1940s and 1950s, critics focused on the technique of the poem and how it relates to the meaning. In 1941, G. W. Knight claimed that ''Kubla Khan'' "needs no defence. It has a barbaric and oriental magnificence that asserts itself with a happy power and authenticity too often absent from visionary poems set within the Christian tradition."<ref>Knight 1975 p. 213</ref> Humphrey House, in 1953, praised the poem and said of beginning of the poem: "The whole passage is full of life because the verse has both the needed energy and the needed control. The combination of energy and control in the rhythm and sound is so great" and that Coleridge's words "convey so fully the sense of inexhaustible energy, now falling now rising, but persisting through its own pulse".<ref>House 1953 pp. 117-118</ref> Also in 1953, Elisabeth Schneider dedicated her book to analysing the various aspects of the poem, including the various sound techniques. When discussing the quality of the poem, she wrote, "I sometimes think we overwork Coleridge's idea of 'the balance or reconciliation of opposite or discordant qualities.' I have to come back to it here, however, for the particular flavor of ''Kubla Khan'', with its air of mystery, is describable in part through that convenient phrase. Yet, the 'reconciliation' does not quite occur either. It is in fact avoided. What we have instead is the very spirit of 'oscillation' itself."<ref name="Schneider p. 91">Schneider 1953 p. 91</ref> Continuing, she claimed, "The poem is the soul of ambivalence, oscillation's very self; and that is probably its deepest meaning. In creating this effect, form and matter are intricately woven. The irregular and inexact rhymes and varied lengths of the lines play some part. More important is the musical effect in which a smooth, rather swift forward movement is emphasized by the relation of grammatical structure to line and rhyme, yet is impeded and thrown back upon itself even from the beginning".<ref name="Schneider p. 91"/> She then concluded: "Here in these interwoven oscillations dwells the magic, the 'dream,' and the air of mysterious meaning of ''Kubla Khan''. I question whether this effect was all deliberately thought out by Coleridge, though it might have been. It is possibly half-inherent in his subject ... . What remains is the spirit of 'oscillation,' perfectly poeticized, and possibly ironically commemorative of the author."<ref>Schneider 1967 pp. 92-93</ref> Following in 1959, John Beer described the complex nature of the poem: "''Kubla Khan'' the poem is not a meaningless reverie, but a poem so packed with meaning as to render detailed elucidation extremely difficult."<ref>Beer 1962 p. 212</ref> In responding to House, Beer claimed, "That there is an image of energy in the fountain may be accepted: but I cannot agree that it is creative energy of the highest type."<ref>Beer 1962 p. 242</ref>

Critics of the 1960s focused on the reputation of the poem and how it compared to Coleridge's other poems. In 1966, Virginia Radley considered Wordsworth and his sister as an important influence to Coleridge writing a great poem: "Almost daily social intercourse with this remarkable brother and sister seemed to provide the catalyst to greatness, for it is during this period that Coleridge conceived his greatest poems, 'Christabel,' 'The Rime of the Ancient Mariner,' and 'Kubla Khan,' poems so distinctive and so different from his others that many generations of readers know Coleridge solely through them."<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 18-19</ref> She latter added that "Of all the poems Coleridge wrote, three are beyond compare. These three, 'The Ancient Mariner,' 'Christabel,' and 'Kubla Khan,' produced an aura which defies definition, but which might be properly be called one of 'natural magic.'"<ref>Radley 1966 p. 57</ref> What sets apart the poem from the others is its "verbal enactment of the creative process" which makes it "unique even among the three poems of high imagination."<ref>Radley 1966 pp. 77-78</ref> To Radley, "the poem is skilfully wrought, as are all the poems of high imagination. The opposites within it are diverse and effectively so. In tone, the poem juxtaposes quiet with noise ... Action presents its contrasts also ... These seemingly antithetical images combine to demonstrate the proximity of the known and the unknown worlds, the two worlds of Understanding and Imagination."<ref>Radley 1966 p. 80</ref> In concluding about the poem, she argued, "In truth, there are other 'Fears in Solitude' than that written by Coleridge and there are other 'Frosts at Midnight'; but there are no other 'Ancient Mariners' or 'Kubla Khans,' nor are there likely to be. In evaluating Coleridge's poetry, it can readily be seen and accepted that for the poems of high imagination his reputation is eternally made."<ref>Radley 1966 p. 146</ref>

In the same year as Radley, George Watson argued that "The case of 'Kubla Khan' is perhaps the strangest of all – a poem that stands high even in English poetry as a work of ordered perfection is offered by the poet himself, nearly twenty years after its composition, as a fragment. Anyone can accept that a writer's head should be full of projects he will never fulfil, and most writers are cautious enough not to set them down; Coleridge, rashly, did set them down, so that his very fertility has survived as evidence of infertility."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 9</ref> He later argued that the poem "is probably the most original poem about poetry in English, and the first hint outside his notebooks and letters that a major critic lies hidden in the twenty-five-year-old Coleridge."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 122</ref> In conclusion about the poem, Watson stated, "The triumph of 'Kubla Khan,' perhaps, lies in its evasions: it hints so delicately at critical truths while demonstrating them so boldly. The contrasts between the two halves of the poem ... So bold, indeed, that Coleridge for once was able to dispense with any language out of the past. It was his own poem, a manifesto. To read it now, with the hindsight of another age, is to feel premonitions of the critical achievement to come ... But the poem is in advance, not just of these, but in all probability of any critical statement that survives. It may be that it stands close to the moment of discovery itself."<ref>Watson 1966 p. 130</ref> After responding to Eliot's claims about ''Kubla Khan'', Yarlott, in 1967, argued that "few of us question if the poem is worth the trouble" before explaining that "The ambiguities inherent in the poem pose a special problem of critical approach. If we restrict ourselves to what is 'given', appealing to the poem as a 'whole', we shall fail probably to resolves its various cruxes. Hence, there is a temptation to look for 'external' influences ... The trouble with all these approaches is that they tend finally to lead ''away'' from the poem itself."<ref>Yarlott 1967 pp. 127-128</ref> When describing specifics, he argued, "The rhythmical development of the stanza, too, though technically brilliant, evokes admiration rather than delight. The unusually heavy stresses and abrupt masculine rhymes impose a slow and sonorous weightiness upon the movement of the iambic octosyllabics which is quite in contrast, say, to the light fast metre of the final stanza where speed of movement matches buoyancy of tone."<ref name="Yarlott p. 129"/> Following in 1968, Walter Jackson Bate called the poem "haunting" and said that it was "so unlike anything else in English".<ref>Bate 1968 p. 75</ref>

Criticism during the 1970s and 1980s emphasized the importance of the Preface while praising the work. Norman Fruman, in 1971, argued: "To discuss 'Kubla Khan' as one might any other great poem would be an exercise in futility. For a century and a half its status has been unique, a masterpiece ''sui generis'', embodying interpretive problems wholly its own...It would not be excessive to say that no small part of the extraordinary fame of 'Kubla Khan' inheres in its alleged marvellous conception. Its Preface is world famous and has been used in many studies of the creative process as a signal instance in which a poem has come to us directly from the unconscious."<ref>Fruman 1971 p. 334</ref>

In 1981, Kathleen Wheeler contrasts the Crewe Manuscript note with the Preface: "Contrasting this relatively factual, literal, and dry account of the circumstances surrounding the birth of the poem with the actual published preface, one illustrates what the latter is not: it is not a literal, dry, factual account of this sort, but a highly literary piece of composition, providing the verse with a certain mystique."<ref>Wheeler 1981 p. 28</ref> In 1985, David Jasper praised the poem as "one of his greatest meditations on the nature of poetry and poetic creation" and argued "it is through irony, also, as it unsettles and undercuts, that the fragment becomes a Romantic literary form of such importance, nowhere more so than in 'Kubla Khan'."<ref>Jasper 1985 pp. 14, 19</ref> When talking about the Preface, Jasper claimed that it "profoundly influenced the way in which the poem has been understood".<ref>Jasper 1985 p. 43</ref> Responding in part to Wheeler in 1986, Charles Rzepka analysed the relationship between the poet and the audience of the poem while describing ''Kubla Khan'' as one of "Coleridge's three great poems of the supernatural".<ref>Rzepka 1986 pp. 109-110</ref> He continued by discussing the preface: "despite its obvious undependability as a guide to the actual process of the poem's composition, the preface can still, in Wheeler's words, lead us 'to ponder why Coleridge chose to write a preface ... ' What the preface describes, of course, is not the actual process by which the poem came into being, but an analogue of poetic creation as ''logos'', a divine 'decree' or fiat which transforms the Word into the world."<ref>Rzepka 1986 p. 112</ref>

During the 1990s, critics continued to praise the poem with many critics placing emphasis on what the Preface adds to the poem. David Perkins, in 1990, argued that "Coleridge's introductory note to ''Kubla Khan'' weaves together two myths with potent imaginative appeal. The myth of the lost poem tells how an inspired work was mysteriously given to the poet and dispelled irrecoverably."<ref name="Perkins p. 39"/> Also in 1990, Thomas McFarland stated, "Judging by the number and variety of critical effort to interpret their meaning, there may be no more palpably symbolic poems in all of English literature than ''Kubla Khan'' and ''The Ancient Mariner''."<ref>McFarland 1990 p. 42</ref> In 1996, Rosemary Ashton claimed that the poem was "one of the most famous poems in the language" and claimed the Preface as "the most famous, but probably not the most accurate, preface in literary history."<ref>Ashton 1997 p. 111</ref> Richard Holmes, in 1998, declared the importance of the poem's Preface while describing the reception of the 1816 volume of poems: "However, no contemporary critic saw the larger possible significance of Coleridge's Preface to 'Kubla Khan', though it eventually became one of the most celebrated, and disputed, accounts of poetic composition ever written. Like the letter from the fictional 'friend' in the ''Biographia'', it brilliantly suggests how a compressed fragment came to represent a much larger (and even more mysterious) act of creation."<ref name="Holmes 1998 p. 435"/>

In 2002, J. C. C. Mays pointed out that "Coleridge's claim to be a great poet lies in the continued pursuit of the consequences of 'The Ancient Mariner,' 'Christabel' and 'Kubla Khan' on several levels."<ref>Mays 2002 p. 91</ref> Adam Sisman, in 2006, questioned the nature of the poem itself: "No one even knows whether it is complete; Coleridge describes it as a 'fragment,' but there is a case for doubting this. Maybe it is not a poem at all. Hazlitt called it 'a musical composition' ... Though literary detectives have uncovered some of its sources, its remains difficult to say what the poem is about."<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 193</ref> In describing the merits of the poem and its fragmentary state, he claimed, "The poem stands for itself: beautiful, sensuous and enigmatic."<ref>Sisman 2006 p. 196</ref> During the same year, Jack Stillinger claimed that "Coleridge wrote only a few poems of the first rank – perhaps no more than a dozen, all told – and he seems to have taken a very casual attitude toward them ... he kept ''Kubla Khan'' in manuscript for nearly twenty years before offering it to the public 'rather as a psychological curiosity, than on the grounds of any supposed ''poetic'' merits'".<ref>Stillinger 2010 p. 157</ref> Harold Bloom, in 2010, argued that Coleridge wrote two kinds of poems and that "The daemonic group, necessarily more famous, is the triad of ''The Ancient Mariner'', ''Christabel'', and 'Kubla Khan.'"<ref>Bloom 2010 p. 3</ref> He goes on to explain the "daemonic": "Opium was the avenging daemon or ''alastor'' of Coleridge's life, his dark or fallen angel, his experiential acquaintance with Milton's Satan. Opium was for him what wandering and moral tale-telling became for the Mariner – the personal shape of repetition compulsion. The lust for paradise in 'Kubla Khan,' Geraldine's lust for Christabel – these are manifestations of Coleridge's revisionary daemonization of Milton, these are Coleridge's countersublime. Poetic genius, the genial spirit itself, Coleridge must see as daemonic when it is his own rather than when it is Milton's."<ref>Bloom 2010 p. 14</ref>

==Notes==
{{reflist|3}}

==References==
{{refbegin}}
<div style="-moz-column-count:3; column-count:3;">
* Anonymous. "Samuel Taylor Coleridge". ''The Church Quarterly Review''. Vol 37 (October 1893 - January 1894). London: Spottiswoode, 1894
* Anonymous. ''Westminster Review''. Vol 67 (January, April). Philadelphia: Leonard Scott, 1885.
* Ashton, Rosemary. ''The Life of Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997.
* Barth, J. Robert. ''Romanticism and Transcendence''. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2003.
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''Coleridge''. New York: Macmillan, 1968.
* Beer, John. ''Coleridge the Visionary''. New York: Collier, 1962
* Bloom, Harold. "Introduction" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Bloom, Harold. ''The Visionary Company''. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993.
* Burke, Kenneth. "'Kubla Khan': Proto-Surrealist Poem" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1986.
* Caine, T. Hall. ''Cobwebs of Criticism''. London: Elliot Stock, 1883.
* Doughty, Oswald. ''Perturbed Spirit''. London: Associated University Presses, 1981.
* Eliot, T. S. ''Selected Prose of T. S. Eliot''. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 1975.
* Fruman, Norman. ''Coleridge, the Damaged Archangel''. New York: George Braziller, 1971.
* Fulford, Tim. "Slavery and Superstition in the Poems" in ''The Cambridge Companion to Coleridge''. Ed. Lucy Newlyn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
* Furst, Lilian. ''Romanticism in Perspective''. New York: St Martin's Press, 1969.
* Holmes, Richard. ''Coleridge: Early Visions, 1772-1804''. New York: Pantheon, 1989.
* Holmes, Richard. ''Coleridge: Darker Reflections, 1804-1834''. New York: Pantheon, 1998.
* House, Humphry. ''Coleridge''. London: R. Hart-Davis, 1953.
* Jackson, J R de J. ''Coleridge: The Critical Heritage''. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1970.
* Jackson, J R de J. ''Coleridge: The Critical Heritage 1834-1900''. New York: Routledge, 1995.
* Knight, G. W. "Coleridge's Divine Comedy" in ''English Romantic Poets''. Ed. M. H. Abrams. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975.
* Lang, Andrew. "The Letters of Coleridge". ''Littell's Living Age''. Vol. 206 (July, August, September). Boston: Littell and Co., 1895.
* Lowes, John. ''The Road to Xanadu''. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1927.
* Mays, J. C. C. (editor). ''The Collected Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge: Poetical Works'' I Vol I.I. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.
* Mays, J. C. C. "The Later Poetry" in ''The Cambridge Companion to Coleridge''. Ed. Lucy Newlyn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
* McFarland, Thomas. "Involute and Symbol" in ''Coleridge, Keats, and the Imagination''. Ed. J. Robert Barth and John Mahoney. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1990.
* Perkins, David. "The Imaginative Vision of ''Kubla Khan'': On Coleridge's Introductory Note" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Radley, Virginia. ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. New York: Twayne, 1966.
* Rauber, D. F. "The Fragment as Romantic Form", ''Modern Language Quarterly''. Vol 30 (1969).
*{{citation
|title=Samuel Taylor Coleridge and the sciences of life
|last=Roe
|first=Nicholas
|publisher=Oxford University Press
|year=2001
|isbn=9780198187233
|url=http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=YV3Wa7--lDUC
| accessdate = 2010-07-02
}}
* Rzepka, Charles. ''The Self As Mind''. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.
* Schneider, Elisabeth. "''Kubla Khan''" in ''Coleridge''. Ed. Kathleen Coburn. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967.
* Sheppard, John. ''On Dreams''. London: Jackson and Walford, 1847.
*{{citation
|title=Coleridge and the New Criticism
|last=Singh
|first=Sukhdev
|publisher=Anmol Publications
|year=1994
|isbn=9788170418955
| url = http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aP0B3n6hN64C
| accessdate = 2010-07-02
}}
* Sisman, Adam. ''The Friendship''. New York: Viking, 2006.
* Stillinger, Jack. "Pictorialism and Matter-of Factness in Coleridge's Poems of Somerset" in ''Samuel Taylor Coleridge''. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase, 2010.
* Watson, George. ''Coleridge the Poet''. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1966.
* Wheeler, Kathleen. ''The Creative Mind in Coleridge's Poetry''. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.
* Woodberry, G. E. "Samuel Taylor Coleridge" in ''Library of the World's Best Literature''. Vol VII. New York: R. S. Peale and J. A. Hill, 1897.
* Yarlott, Geoffrey. ''Coleridge and the Abyssinian Maid''. London: Methuen & Co, 1967.
</div>
{{refend}}

To Autumn

2011-10-06T01:34:00Z

Ottava: /* Critical reception */

"'''To Autumn'''" is a poem written by Romantic poet [[John Keats]] (31 October 1795 – 23 February 1821). The work was composed on 19 September 1819 and published in a volume of Keats's poetry that included "Lamia" and "The Eve of Saint Agnes" in 1820. "To Autumn" is the final work in a group of poems known as Keats's "1819 Odes." Although Keats had little time throughout 1819 to devote to poetry because of personal problems, he managed to compose "To Autumn" after he was inspired following a walk near Winchester one autumn evening. The work marks the end of his poetic career as he needed to earn money and could no longer devote himself to the lifestyle of a poet. A little over a year following the publication of "To Autumn," Keats died in Rome.

The poem has three stanzas, each of eleven lines, that describe the tastes, sights, and sounds of autumn. Much of the third stanza, however, is dedicated to diction , symbolism, and literary devices with negative connotations, as it describes the end of the day and the end of autumn. "To Autumn" includes an emphasis on images of motion, growth, and maturation. The work can be interpreted as a discussion of death, an expression of colonialist sentiment, or as a political response to the Peterloo Massacre. "To Autumn" has been regarded by critics as one of the most perfect short poems in the English literature, and it is one of the most anthologized English lyric poems.

==Background==
During the spring of 1819, Keats wrote many of his major odes: "Ode on a Grecian Urn", "Ode on Indolence", "Ode on Melancholy", "Ode to a Nightingale", and "Ode to Psyche". After the month of May, he began to pursue other forms of poetry, including the verse tragedy ''Otho the Great'' in collaboration with friend and roommate Charles Brown, the second half of ''Lamia'', and a return to his unfinished epic ''Hyperion ''.<ref name="Bate pp. 526–562">Bate 1963 pp. 526–562</ref> His efforts from spring until autumn were dedicated completely to a career in poetry; he switched between writing long and short poems, and his goal for each day was to compose more than fifty lines of verse. He devoted his free time to studying works such as Robert Burton 's ''Anatomy of Melancholy'' to further his own ideas.<ref>Gittings 1968 pp. 269–270</ref>

Although Keats managed to write many poems in 1819, he was suffering from a multitude of financial troubles throughout the year. These troubles were compounded with his concerns over his brother, George, who, after emigrating to America, was badly in need of money. Keats was distracted by his and his brother's fiscal problems, but on 19 September 1819 he set aside time to write "To Autumn". The poem marks the final moment of his poetry career. He could no longer afford to devote his time to the composition of poems and began working on more lucrative projects.<ref name="Bate pp. 526–562"/> In addition to his monetary problems, Keats's declining health and personal responsibilities provided more obstacles to his poetic efforts.<ref name="Motion p. 461">Motion 1999 p. 461</ref>

On 19 September 1819, Keats walked near Winchester along the River Itchen. In a letter to his friend John Hamilton Reynolds written on 21 September, Keats described the impression the scene had made upon him and its influence on the composition of "To Autumn":<ref>Bate 1963 p. 580</ref> "How beautiful the season is now – How fine the air. A temperate sharpness about it [...] I never lik'd stubble fields so much as now [...] Somehow a stubble plain looks warm – in the same way that some pictures look warm – this struck me so much in my sunday's walk that I composed upon it."<ref>Keats 2008 p. 184</ref> Not everything on Keats's mind at the time was bright; the poet knew in September that he would have to finally abandon ''Hyperion''. Thus, in the letter that he wrote to Reynolds, Keats also included a note saying that he abandoned his long poem.<ref>Bate 1963 p. 585</ref> Keats did not send "To Autumn" to Reynolds, but did include the poem within a letter to Richard Woodhouse, Keats's publisher and friend, and dated it on the same day.<ref>Evert 1965 pp. 296–297</ref>

The poem was revised and included in Keats's 1820 collection of poetry titled ''Lamia, Isabella, the Eve of St. Agnes, and Other Poems''. Although the publishers Taylor and Hessey feared the kind of bad reviews that had plagued Keats's 1818 edition of ''Endymion '', they were willing to publish the collection after the removal of any potentially controversial poems to ensure that there would be no politically motivated reviews that could give the volume a bad reputation.<ref>McGann 1979 pp. 988–989</ref>

==Structure==
Like many of Keats's 1819 odes, the structure of the poem is that of an odal hymn .<ref>Bate 1963 p. 499</ref> While the earlier 1819 odes perfected techniques and allowed for variations that appear within "To Autumn", Keats dispenses with some aspects of the previous poems (such as the narrator ) and ensures that the poem deals only with concrete concepts. There is no dramatic movement in "To Autumn" as there is in the earlier poems, and the poem attempts to discuss the poetic process without a progression of the temporal scene, an idea that Keats termed as "stationing".<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 581–582</ref> Some of the language of the poem resembles phrases found in earlier poems Keats had written and there are similarities between the lines of "To Autumn" and lines in poems such as ''Endymion '', '' Sleep and Poetry '', and ''Calidore''.<ref>Ridley 1933 pp. 283–285</ref>

Keats relies heavily on monosyllabic words and consonantal sounds – especially bilabial consonants – along with an emphasis on long vowels to control the flow of the poem. His syntax lacks hiatus and there is only a single instance medial inversion of an accent within the poem. However, he does incorporate the Augustan inversion (a reversal of an accent at the beginning of a line) approximately 4.2% of the time. Within his measure, Keats incorporates spondees in approximately 13.9% of his verses. The rhyme follows a pattern of starting with a Shakespearean ABAB pattern which is followed by CDEDCCE rhyme scheme however in his second and third stanza it changes to CDECDDE. The verse differentiates itself from his previous odes through use of 11 line stanza s, instead of 10, with a couplet placed before the concluding line of each stanza.<ref>Bate 1962 pp. 182–184</ref>

Between the manuscript version and the published version of "To Autumn" Keats tightened the language of the poem. One of Keats's changes emphasized by critics is the change in line 17 of "Drows'd with red poppies" to "Drows'd with the fume of poppies", which emphasizes the sense of smell instead of sight. The later edition relies more on passive, past participles, as apparent in the change of "While a gold cloud" in line 25 to "While barred clouds".<ref>Bate 1962 p. 183</ref> Other changes involve the strengthening of phrases, especially within the transformation of the phrase in line 13 "whoever seeks for thee may find" into "whoever seeks abroad may find". Many of the lines within the second stanza were completely rewritten, especially those which did not fit into a rhyme scheme. Some of the minor changes involved adding punctuation missing from the original manuscript copy and altering capitalization changes between the versions.<ref>Ridley 1933 pp. 285–287</ref>

==Poem==
The first stanza of the poem describes natural processes, unlike the following which deal more with sensual observations, as it presents a harvest in its final stages. <ref name="Bloom p.432"> Bloom 1971 p. 432</ref> The Stanza provides a union of maturation and growth, two oppositional forces within the work, and this union instills an idea within nature that the season will not end:<ref name="Bate p. 582">Bate 1963 p. 582</ref>
:Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness
:Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun
:Conspiring with him how to load and bless
:With fruit the vines that round the thatch-eaves run;
:To bend with apples the moss'd cottage-trees,
:And fill all fruit with ripeness to the core;
:To swell the gourd, and plump the hazel shells
:With a sweet kernel; to set budding more,
:And still more, later flowers for the bees,
:Until they think warm days will never cease,
:For Summer has o'er-brimm'd their clammy cells. (lines 1-11)

The second stanza reverses the images of the first stanza and describes the process of harvesting. Autumn, a harvester, is not actually harvesting but exists in a stasis. Only near the end of the stanza is there movement:<ref name="Bate p. 582"/>
:Who hath not seen thee oft amid thy store?
:Sometimes whoever seeks abroad may find
:Thee sitting careless on a granary floor,
:Thy hair soft-lifted by the winnowing wind;
:Or on a half-reap'd furrow sound asleep,
:Drows'd with the fume of poppies, while thy hook
:Spares the next swath and all its twined flowers:
:And sometimes like a gleaner thou dost keep
:Steady thy laden head across a brook;
:Or by a cider-press, with patient look,
:Thou watchest the last oozings hours by hours. (lines 12-22)

Within the final moments of the poem, there is an introduction of the harvest and Autumn is manifested in the role of a harvester. The end approaches within the final moments of the song and death is slowly approaching alongside of the end of the year. However, Autumn is replaced by an image of life in general, and the songs of autumn becomes a song about life in general:<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 582–583</ref>
:Where are the songs of Spring? Ay, where are they?
:Think not of them, thou hast thy music too,-
:While barred clouds bloom the soft-dying day,
:And touch the stubble-plains with rosy hue;
:Then in a wailful choir the small gnats mourn
:Among the river sallows, borne aloft
:Or sinking as the light wind lives or dies;
:And full-grown lambs loud bleat from hilly bourn;
:Hedge-crickets sing; and now with treble soft
:The red-breast whistles from a garden-croft;
:And gathering swallows twitter in the skies. (lines 23-33)

==Themes==
"To Autumn" is thematically connected to many of Keats's 1819 odes. For example, his "Ode to Melancholy" introduces the acceptance of the process of life, and the concept is taken up again within "To Autumn".<ref>Bate 1962 p. 522</ref> There is a union between the ideal and the real which leads to fulfillment. Of all of Keats's poems, "To Autumn" most closely describes an actual paradise while focusing on the archetypal images that are connected with autumn. Within the poem, the season of autumn represents the growth, the maturation, and finally an approaching death.<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 581–583</ref> The poem also defends art's role in helping society in a manner similar to Keats's "Ode on Indolence" and "Ode to Psyche". "To Autumn" describes a system in which nature and culture are two separate parts of the universe, and nature is turned into culture by an artist. Civilization is furthered by man's ability to use nature for agricultural cultivation. The artist, like the farmer, has to process nature into a consumable object, which in turn allows people sustenance. The end of the poem is joined in song as nature gives way to civilization, which represents the self-sacrificing of both nature and the artist for society.<ref>Vendler 1988 pp. 124–125</ref>

The three stanzas of "To Autumn" are able to suggest both a movement from summer to early winter and also day turning into dusk. This progression is joined with a shift from the sensation of touch to sight and then to sound, creating a three part symmetry which is missing in Keats's other odes.<ref>Sperry 1973 p. 337</ref> Although there is process and the suggestion of motion within the poem, there is a lack of action. Within the second stanza, autumn is described through metaphor as an exhausted labourer in lines 14–15. Near the end of the stanza, the steadiness of the gleaner in lines 19–20 emphasizes a motionlessness within the poem. The individuals are burdened or merely watch the events surrounding them. The poem as a whole creates within the imagination an image of death and a finality that is welcomed. There are no contrary ideas that are common within the other odes of 1819. Instead, "To Autumn" puts forth the idea that progression is no longer necessary as maturation has taken over, and growth and death are in harmony.<ref>Bloom 1968 pp. 95–97</ref> Along with this harmony, the placing of the couplet before the end of each stanza creates a suspension of closing within the poem. This suspension within the poem reinforces the theme of continuation.<ref>Wagner 1996 pp. 110–111</ref>

In a 1979 essay, Jerome McGann argued that while the poem was indirectly influenced by historical events, Keats had deliberately ignored the political landscape of 1819.<ref>McGann 1979 pp. 988–1032</ref> Countering this view, Andrew Bennett, Nicholas Roe and others focused more on the political aspects of the poem, Roe arguing for a direct connection to the Peterloo Massacre of 1819.<ref>Strachan 2003 p. 175</ref> Later, Paul Fry further argued against McGann's stance when he pointed out, "It scarcely seems pertinent to say that 'To Autumn' is therefore an evasion of social violence when it is so clearly an encounter with death itself [...] it is not a politically encoded escape from history reflecting the coerced betrayal [...] of its author's radicalism. McGann thinks to rescue Keats from the imputation of political naïveté by saying that he was a radical browbeaten into quietism".<ref>Fry 1995 pp. 123–124</ref> In regards to other political aspects, post-colonial critic Alan Bewell interpreted the themes of Keats's ode in the context of British imperialism. He claimed "To Autumn" promoted the moderate climate of Britain over tropical climates.<ref>Bewell 2008 pp. 635–638</ref>

==Critical reception==
Critical and scholarly praise has been unanimous in declaring "To Autumn" one of the most perfect poems in the English language. A.C. Swinburne placed it with "Ode on a Grecian Urn" as "the nearest to absolute perfection" of Keats's odes; Aileen Ward declared it "Keats's most perfect and untroubled poem"; and Douglas Bush has stated the poem is "flawless in structure, texture, tone, and rhythm";<ref>Bennett 1991 qtd. p. 159</ref> Walter Evert, in 1965, stated "To Autumn" is "the only perfect poem that Keats ever wrote – and if this should seem to take from him some measure of credit for his extraordinary enrichment of the English poetic tradition, I would quickly add that I am thinking of absolute perfection in whole poems, in which every part is wholly relevant to and consistent in effect with every other part."<ref>Evert 1965 p. 298</ref>

Early reviews of "To Autumn" focused on it as part of Keats's collection of poems ''Lamia, Isabella, the Eve of St. Agnes, and Other Poems''. An anonymous critic in the July 1820 ''Monthly Review'' claimed, "this writer is very rich both in imagination and fancy; and even a superabundance of the latter faculty is displayed in his lines 'On Autumn,' which bring the reality of nature more before our eyes than almost any description that we remember [...] If we did not fear that, you as is Mr K., his peculiarities are fixed beyond all the power of criticism to remove, we would exhort him to become somewhat less strikingly original,—to be less fond of the folly of too new or too old phrases,—and to believe that poetry does not consist in either the one or the other."<ref>Matthews 1971 qtd. p. 162</ref> Josiah Conder in the September 1820 ''Eclectic Review'' argued, "One naturally turns first to the shorter pieces, in order to taste the flavour of the poetry. The following ode to Autumn is no unfavourable specimen."<ref>Matthews 1971 qtd. p. 233</ref> The ''Edinburgh Magazine'' ran a review in 1820 which simply said, "The ode to 'Fancy,' and the ode to 'Autumn,' also have great merit.<ref>Matthews 1971 qtd. p. 215</ref>

Mid-19th century critics viewed the poem favorably. A review in the October 1859 ''National Review'' explained that there are "four exquisite odes,—'To a Nightingale,' 'To a Grecian Urn,' 'To Melancholy,' and 'To Autumn,'—all so pregnant with deep thought, so picturesque in their limning, and so suggestive."<ref>Matthews 1971 qtd. p. 356</ref> In 1865, Matthew Arnold used the poem as evidence that Keats was a better poet than Percy Bysshe Shelley .<ref>Arnold 1865 p. 109</ref> John Dennis, in an 1883 work about great poets, wrote that "the 'Ode to Autumn', ripe with the glory of the season it describes—must ever have a place among the most precious gems of lyrical poetry."<ref>Dennis 1883 p. 372</ref> The 1888 Britannica declared, "Of these [odes] perhaps the two nearest to absolute perfection, to the triumphant achievement and accomplishment of the very utmost beauty possible to human words, may be that of to Autumn and that on a Grecian Urn".<ref>Baynes 1888 p. 23</ref>

At the turn of the 20th century, a 1904 analysis of great poetry by Stephen Gwynn claimed, "above and before all [of Keats's poems are] the three odes, ''To a Nightingale'', ''On a Grecian Urn'', and ''To Autumn''. Among these odes criticism can hardly choose; in each of them the whole magic of poetry seems to be contained."<ref>Gwynn 1904 p. 378</ref> Sidney Colvin, in his 1920 biography, pointed out that "["To Autumn"] opens up no such far-reaching avenues to the mind and soul of the reader as the odes ''To a Grecian Urn'', ''To a Nightingale'', or ''On Melancholy'', but in execution is more complete and faultless than any of them."<ref>Colvin 1920 p. 422</ref> Following this in a 1934 analysis of Romantic poetry, Margaret Sherwood stated that the poem was "a perfect expression of the phase of primitive feeling and dim thought in regard to earth processes when these are passing into a thought of personality."<ref>Sherwood 1934 p. 263</ref>

Harold Bloom, in 1961, described "To Autumn" as "the most perfect shorter poem in the English language."<ref>Bloom 1993 p. 432</ref> Following this, Walter Jackson Bate, in 1963, claimed that "[...] each generation has found it one of the most nearly perfect poems in English."<ref>Bate 1963 p. 581</ref> Later in 1973, Stuart Sperry wrote, "'To Autumn' succeeds through its acceptance of an order innate in our experience – the natural rhythm of the seasons. It is a poem that, without ever stating it, inevitably suggests the truth of 'ripeness is all' by developing, with a richness of profundity of implication, the simple perception that ripeness is fall."<ref>Sperry 1973 p. 336</ref> In 1981, William Walsh argued that "Among the major Odes [...] no one has questioned the place and supremacy of 'To Autumn', in which we see wholly realized, powerfully embodied in art, the complete maturity so earnestly laboured at in Keats's life, so persuasively argued about in his letters."<ref>Walsh 1981 p. 118</ref> Literary critic and academic Helen Vendler , in 1988, declared that "in the ode 'To Autumn,' Keats finds his most comprehensive and adequate symbol for the social value of art."<ref>Vendler 1988 p. 124</ref>

In 1997, Andrew Motion summarized the critical view on "To Autumn": "it has often been called Keats's 'most ... untroubled poem' [...] To register the full force of its achievement, its tensions have to be felt as potent and demanding."<ref name="Motion p. 461"/> Following in 1998, M. H. Abrams explained, "'To Autumn' was the last work of artistic consequence that Keats completed [...] he achieved this celebratory poem, with its calm acquiescence to time, transience and mortality, at a time when he was possessed by a premonition [...] that he had himself less than two years to live".<ref>Abrams pp. 51–52</ref> James Chandler, also in 1998, pointed out that "If ''To Autumn'' is his greatest piece of writing, as has so often been said, it is because in it he arguably set himself the most ambitious challenge of his brief career and managed to meet it."<ref>Chandler 1998 p. 430</ref> Timothy Corrigan, in 2000, claimed that "'To Autumn' may be, as other critics have pointed out, his greatest achievement in its ability [...] to redeem the English vernacular as the casual expression of everyday experience, becoming in this his most exterior poem even in all its bucolic charm."<ref>Corrigan 2000 p. 156</ref> In 2008, Stanley Plumly wrote, "history, posterity, immortality are seeing 'Ode to a Nightingale,' 'Ode on a Grecian Urn,' and 'To Autumn' as three of the most anthologized lyric poems of tragic vision in English."<ref>Plumly 2008 p. 343</ref>

==Notes==
{{reflist|3}}

==References==
* Abrams, M. H. "Keats's Poems: The Material Dimensions" in ''The Persistence of Poetry''. Ed. Robert Ryan and Ronald Sharp. Amherst: University of Mass. Press, 1998. ISBN 1558491759
* Arnold, Matthew. ''Essays in Criticism''. London: Macmillan, 1865. OCLC 3012869.
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''John Keats''. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1963. OCLC 291522
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''The Stylistic Development of Keats''. New York: Humanities Press, 1962. OCLC 276912.
* Baynes, Thomas (Ed.). ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' Vol XIV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1888. OCLC 1387837
* Bennett, Andrew. ''Keats, Narrative and Audience''. Cambridge, New York, and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1994. ISBN 0521445655.
* Bewell, Alan. "'To Autumn' and the Curing of Space" in ''Keats's Poetry and Prose'' ed Jeffrey Cox, 634–642. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008. ISBN 9780393924916
* Bloom, Harold. ''The Visionary Company''. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993. ISBN 0801406226
* Bloom, Harold. "The Ode ''To Autumn''" in ''Keats's Odes'' ed. Jack Stillinger, 44-47. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968. OCLC 176883021
* Chandler, James. ''England in 1819''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. ISBN 0226101088
* Colvin, Sidney. ''John Keats''. London: Macmillan, 1920. OCLC 257603790
* Corrigan, Timothy. "Keats, Hazlitt and Public Character" in ''Challenge of Keats''. Ed. Allan Christensen, Lilla Jones, Giuseppe Galigani, and Anthony Johnson. Atlanta: Rodopi, 2000. ISBN 9042005092
* Dennis, John. ''Heroes of Literature, English Poets''. New York: E. & J. B. Young, 1883. OCLC 4798560
* Evert, Walter. ''Aesthetics and Myth in the Poetry of Keats''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965. OCLC 291999
* Fry, Paul. ''A Defense of Poetry''. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995. ISBN 0804724520
* Gittings, Robert. ''John Keats''. London: Heinemann, 1968. OCLC 295596
* Gwynn, Stephen. ''The Masters of English Literature''. London: Macmillan, 1904. OCLC 3175019
* Keats, John. ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=J-su12fRTngC The Life and Letters of John Keats]'' ed. Richard Houghton (reprint). Read Books, 2008.
* Matthews, G. M. (ed.). ''John Keats: The Critical Heritage''. London: Routledge, 1971. ISBN 0710071477
* McGann. "Keats and the Historical Method in Literary Criticism" ''MLN'' 94 (1979): 988–1032.
* Motion, Andrew. ''Keats''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. ISBN 0226542408
* Plumly, Stanley. ''Posthumous Keats''. New York: W. W. Norton, 2008. ISBN 9780393065732
* Ridley, Maurice. ''Keats' Craftsmanship''. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933. OCLC 1842818
* Sherwood, Margaret. ''Undercurrents of Influence in English Romantic Poetry''. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1934. OCLC 2032945
* Sperry, Stuart. ''Keats the Poet''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973. ISBN 069106220X
* Strachan, John. ''A Routledge Literary Sourcebook on the Poems of John Keats''. London: Routledge, 2003. ISBN 0415234778
* Vendler, Helen. ''The Music of What Happens''. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1988. ISBN 0674591526
* Wagner, Jennifer. ''A Moment's Monument''. Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996. ISBN 0838636306
* Walsh, William. ''Introduction to Keats''. London: Methuen, 1981. ISBN 0416304907

To Autumn

2011-10-06T01:33:20Z

Ottava: /* Themes */

"'''To Autumn'''" is a poem written by Romantic poet [[John Keats]] (31 October 1795 – 23 February 1821). The work was composed on 19 September 1819 and published in a volume of Keats's poetry that included "Lamia" and "The Eve of Saint Agnes" in 1820. "To Autumn" is the final work in a group of poems known as Keats's "1819 Odes." Although Keats had little time throughout 1819 to devote to poetry because of personal problems, he managed to compose "To Autumn" after he was inspired following a walk near Winchester one autumn evening. The work marks the end of his poetic career as he needed to earn money and could no longer devote himself to the lifestyle of a poet. A little over a year following the publication of "To Autumn," Keats died in Rome.

The poem has three stanzas, each of eleven lines, that describe the tastes, sights, and sounds of autumn. Much of the third stanza, however, is dedicated to diction , symbolism, and literary devices with negative connotations, as it describes the end of the day and the end of autumn. "To Autumn" includes an emphasis on images of motion, growth, and maturation. The work can be interpreted as a discussion of death, an expression of colonialist sentiment, or as a political response to the Peterloo Massacre. "To Autumn" has been regarded by critics as one of the most perfect short poems in the English literature, and it is one of the most anthologized English lyric poems.

==Background==
During the spring of 1819, Keats wrote many of his major odes: "Ode on a Grecian Urn", "Ode on Indolence", "Ode on Melancholy", "Ode to a Nightingale", and "Ode to Psyche". After the month of May, he began to pursue other forms of poetry, including the verse tragedy ''Otho the Great'' in collaboration with friend and roommate Charles Brown, the second half of ''Lamia'', and a return to his unfinished epic ''Hyperion ''.<ref name="Bate pp. 526–562">Bate 1963 pp. 526–562</ref> His efforts from spring until autumn were dedicated completely to a career in poetry; he switched between writing long and short poems, and his goal for each day was to compose more than fifty lines of verse. He devoted his free time to studying works such as Robert Burton 's ''Anatomy of Melancholy'' to further his own ideas.<ref>Gittings 1968 pp. 269–270</ref>

Although Keats managed to write many poems in 1819, he was suffering from a multitude of financial troubles throughout the year. These troubles were compounded with his concerns over his brother, George, who, after emigrating to America, was badly in need of money. Keats was distracted by his and his brother's fiscal problems, but on 19 September 1819 he set aside time to write "To Autumn". The poem marks the final moment of his poetry career. He could no longer afford to devote his time to the composition of poems and began working on more lucrative projects.<ref name="Bate pp. 526–562"/> In addition to his monetary problems, Keats's declining health and personal responsibilities provided more obstacles to his poetic efforts.<ref name="Motion p. 461">Motion 1999 p. 461</ref>

On 19 September 1819, Keats walked near Winchester along the River Itchen. In a letter to his friend John Hamilton Reynolds written on 21 September, Keats described the impression the scene had made upon him and its influence on the composition of "To Autumn":<ref>Bate 1963 p. 580</ref> "How beautiful the season is now – How fine the air. A temperate sharpness about it [...] I never lik'd stubble fields so much as now [...] Somehow a stubble plain looks warm – in the same way that some pictures look warm – this struck me so much in my sunday's walk that I composed upon it."<ref>Keats 2008 p. 184</ref> Not everything on Keats's mind at the time was bright; the poet knew in September that he would have to finally abandon ''Hyperion''. Thus, in the letter that he wrote to Reynolds, Keats also included a note saying that he abandoned his long poem.<ref>Bate 1963 p. 585</ref> Keats did not send "To Autumn" to Reynolds, but did include the poem within a letter to Richard Woodhouse, Keats's publisher and friend, and dated it on the same day.<ref>Evert 1965 pp. 296–297</ref>

The poem was revised and included in Keats's 1820 collection of poetry titled ''Lamia, Isabella, the Eve of St. Agnes, and Other Poems''. Although the publishers Taylor and Hessey feared the kind of bad reviews that had plagued Keats's 1818 edition of ''Endymion '', they were willing to publish the collection after the removal of any potentially controversial poems to ensure that there would be no politically motivated reviews that could give the volume a bad reputation.<ref>McGann 1979 pp. 988–989</ref>

==Structure==
Like many of Keats's 1819 odes, the structure of the poem is that of an odal hymn .<ref>Bate 1963 p. 499</ref> While the earlier 1819 odes perfected techniques and allowed for variations that appear within "To Autumn", Keats dispenses with some aspects of the previous poems (such as the narrator ) and ensures that the poem deals only with concrete concepts. There is no dramatic movement in "To Autumn" as there is in the earlier poems, and the poem attempts to discuss the poetic process without a progression of the temporal scene, an idea that Keats termed as "stationing".<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 581–582</ref> Some of the language of the poem resembles phrases found in earlier poems Keats had written and there are similarities between the lines of "To Autumn" and lines in poems such as ''Endymion '', '' Sleep and Poetry '', and ''Calidore''.<ref>Ridley 1933 pp. 283–285</ref>

Keats relies heavily on monosyllabic words and consonantal sounds – especially bilabial consonants – along with an emphasis on long vowels to control the flow of the poem. His syntax lacks hiatus and there is only a single instance medial inversion of an accent within the poem. However, he does incorporate the Augustan inversion (a reversal of an accent at the beginning of a line) approximately 4.2% of the time. Within his measure, Keats incorporates spondees in approximately 13.9% of his verses. The rhyme follows a pattern of starting with a Shakespearean ABAB pattern which is followed by CDEDCCE rhyme scheme however in his second and third stanza it changes to CDECDDE. The verse differentiates itself from his previous odes through use of 11 line stanza s, instead of 10, with a couplet placed before the concluding line of each stanza.<ref>Bate 1962 pp. 182–184</ref>

Between the manuscript version and the published version of "To Autumn" Keats tightened the language of the poem. One of Keats's changes emphasized by critics is the change in line 17 of "Drows'd with red poppies" to "Drows'd with the fume of poppies", which emphasizes the sense of smell instead of sight. The later edition relies more on passive, past participles, as apparent in the change of "While a gold cloud" in line 25 to "While barred clouds".<ref>Bate 1962 p. 183</ref> Other changes involve the strengthening of phrases, especially within the transformation of the phrase in line 13 "whoever seeks for thee may find" into "whoever seeks abroad may find". Many of the lines within the second stanza were completely rewritten, especially those which did not fit into a rhyme scheme. Some of the minor changes involved adding punctuation missing from the original manuscript copy and altering capitalization changes between the versions.<ref>Ridley 1933 pp. 285–287</ref>

==Poem==
The first stanza of the poem describes natural processes, unlike the following which deal more with sensual observations, as it presents a harvest in its final stages. <ref name="Bloom p.432"> Bloom 1971 p. 432</ref> The Stanza provides a union of maturation and growth, two oppositional forces within the work, and this union instills an idea within nature that the season will not end:<ref name="Bate p. 582">Bate 1963 p. 582</ref>
:Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness
:Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun
:Conspiring with him how to load and bless
:With fruit the vines that round the thatch-eaves run;
:To bend with apples the moss'd cottage-trees,
:And fill all fruit with ripeness to the core;
:To swell the gourd, and plump the hazel shells
:With a sweet kernel; to set budding more,
:And still more, later flowers for the bees,
:Until they think warm days will never cease,
:For Summer has o'er-brimm'd their clammy cells. (lines 1-11)

The second stanza reverses the images of the first stanza and describes the process of harvesting. Autumn, a harvester, is not actually harvesting but exists in a stasis. Only near the end of the stanza is there movement:<ref name="Bate p. 582"/>
:Who hath not seen thee oft amid thy store?
:Sometimes whoever seeks abroad may find
:Thee sitting careless on a granary floor,
:Thy hair soft-lifted by the winnowing wind;
:Or on a half-reap'd furrow sound asleep,
:Drows'd with the fume of poppies, while thy hook
:Spares the next swath and all its twined flowers:
:And sometimes like a gleaner thou dost keep
:Steady thy laden head across a brook;
:Or by a cider-press, with patient look,
:Thou watchest the last oozings hours by hours. (lines 12-22)

Within the final moments of the poem, there is an introduction of the harvest and Autumn is manifested in the role of a harvester. The end approaches within the final moments of the song and death is slowly approaching alongside of the end of the year. However, Autumn is replaced by an image of life in general, and the songs of autumn becomes a song about life in general:<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 582–583</ref>
:Where are the songs of Spring? Ay, where are they?
:Think not of them, thou hast thy music too,-
:While barred clouds bloom the soft-dying day,
:And touch the stubble-plains with rosy hue;
:Then in a wailful choir the small gnats mourn
:Among the river sallows, borne aloft
:Or sinking as the light wind lives or dies;
:And full-grown lambs loud bleat from hilly bourn;
:Hedge-crickets sing; and now with treble soft
:The red-breast whistles from a garden-croft;
:And gathering swallows twitter in the skies. (lines 23-33)

==Themes==
"To Autumn" is thematically connected to many of Keats's 1819 odes. For example, his "Ode to Melancholy" introduces the acceptance of the process of life, and the concept is taken up again within "To Autumn".<ref>Bate 1962 p. 522</ref> There is a union between the ideal and the real which leads to fulfillment. Of all of Keats's poems, "To Autumn" most closely describes an actual paradise while focusing on the archetypal images that are connected with autumn. Within the poem, the season of autumn represents the growth, the maturation, and finally an approaching death.<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 581–583</ref> The poem also defends art's role in helping society in a manner similar to Keats's "Ode on Indolence" and "Ode to Psyche". "To Autumn" describes a system in which nature and culture are two separate parts of the universe, and nature is turned into culture by an artist. Civilization is furthered by man's ability to use nature for agricultural cultivation. The artist, like the farmer, has to process nature into a consumable object, which in turn allows people sustenance. The end of the poem is joined in song as nature gives way to civilization, which represents the self-sacrificing of both nature and the artist for society.<ref>Vendler 1988 pp. 124–125</ref>

The three stanzas of "To Autumn" are able to suggest both a movement from summer to early winter and also day turning into dusk. This progression is joined with a shift from the sensation of touch to sight and then to sound, creating a three part symmetry which is missing in Keats's other odes.<ref>Sperry 1973 p. 337</ref> Although there is process and the suggestion of motion within the poem, there is a lack of action. Within the second stanza, autumn is described through metaphor as an exhausted labourer in lines 14–15. Near the end of the stanza, the steadiness of the gleaner in lines 19–20 emphasizes a motionlessness within the poem. The individuals are burdened or merely watch the events surrounding them. The poem as a whole creates within the imagination an image of death and a finality that is welcomed. There are no contrary ideas that are common within the other odes of 1819. Instead, "To Autumn" puts forth the idea that progression is no longer necessary as maturation has taken over, and growth and death are in harmony.<ref>Bloom 1968 pp. 95–97</ref> Along with this harmony, the placing of the couplet before the end of each stanza creates a suspension of closing within the poem. This suspension within the poem reinforces the theme of continuation.<ref>Wagner 1996 pp. 110–111</ref>

In a 1979 essay, Jerome McGann argued that while the poem was indirectly influenced by historical events, Keats had deliberately ignored the political landscape of 1819.<ref>McGann 1979 pp. 988–1032</ref> Countering this view, Andrew Bennett, Nicholas Roe and others focused more on the political aspects of the poem, Roe arguing for a direct connection to the Peterloo Massacre of 1819.<ref>Strachan 2003 p. 175</ref> Later, Paul Fry further argued against McGann's stance when he pointed out, "It scarcely seems pertinent to say that 'To Autumn' is therefore an evasion of social violence when it is so clearly an encounter with death itself [...] it is not a politically encoded escape from history reflecting the coerced betrayal [...] of its author's radicalism. McGann thinks to rescue Keats from the imputation of political naïveté by saying that he was a radical browbeaten into quietism".<ref>Fry 1995 pp. 123–124</ref> In regards to other political aspects, post-colonial critic Alan Bewell interpreted the themes of Keats's ode in the context of British imperialism. He claimed "To Autumn" promoted the moderate climate of Britain over tropical climates.<ref>Bewell 2008 pp. 635–638</ref>

==Critical reception==
Critical and scholarly praise has been unanimous in declaring "To Autumn" one of the most perfect poems in the English language. A.C. Swinburne placed it with "Ode on a Grecian Urn" as "the nearest to absolute perfection" of Keats's odes; Aileen Ward declared it "Keats's most perfect and untroubled poem"; and Douglas Bush has stated the poem is "flawless in structure, texture, tone, and rhythm";<ref>Bennett 1991 qtd. p. 159</ref> Walter Evert, in 1965, stated "To Autumn" is "the only perfect poem that Keats ever wrote – and if this should seem to take from him some measure of credit for his extraordinary enrichment of the English poetic tradition, I would quickly add that I am thinking of absolute perfection in whole poems, in which every part is wholly relevant to and consistent in effect with every other part."<ref>Evert 1965 p. 298</ref>

Early reviews of "To Autumn" focused on it as part of Keats's collection of poems ''Lamia, Isabella, the Eve of St. Agnes, and Other Poems''. An anonymous critic in the July 1820 ''Monthly Review'' claimed, "this writer is very rich both in imagination and fancy; and even a superabundance of the latter faculty is displayed in his lines 'On Autumn,' which bring the reality of nature more before our eyes than almost any description that we remember [...] If we did not fear that, you as is Mr K., his peculiarities are fixed beyond all the power of criticism to remove, we would exhort him to become somewhat less strikingly original,—to be less fond of the folly of too new or too old phrases,—and to believe that poetry does not consist in either the one or the other."<ref>Matthews 1971 qtd. p. 162</ref> Josiah Conder in the September 1820 ''Eclectic Review'' argued, "One naturally turns first to the shorter pieces, in order to taste the flavour of the poetry. The following ode to Autumn is no unfavourable specimen."<ref>Matthews 1971 qtd. p. 233</ref> The ''Edinburgh Magazine'' ran a review in 1820 which simply said, "The ode to 'Fancy,' and the ode to 'Autumn,' also have great merit.<ref>Matthews 1971 qtd. p. 215</ref>

Mid-19th century critics viewed the poem favorably. A review in the October 1859 ''National Review'' explained that there are "four exquisite odes,—'To a Nightingale,' 'To a Grecian Urn,' 'To Melancholy,' and 'To Autumn,'—all so pregnant with deep thought, so picturesque in their limning, and so suggestive."<ref>Matthews 1971 qtd. p. 356</ref> In 1865, Matthew Arnold used the poem as evidence that Keats was a better poet than Percy Bysshe Shelley .<ref>Arnold 1865 p. 109</ref> John Dennis, in an 1883 work about great poets, wrote that "the 'Ode to Autumn', ripe with the glory of the season it describes—must ever have a place among the most precious gems of lyrical poetry."<ref>Dennis 1883 p. 372</ref> The 1888 Britannica declared, "Of these [odes] perhaps the two nearest to absolute perfection, to the triumphant achievement and accomplishment of the very utmost beauty possible to human words, may be that of to Autumn and that on a Grecian Urn".<ref>Baynes 1888 p. 23</ref>

At the turn of the 20th century, a 1904 analysis of great poetry by Stephen Gwynn claimed, "above and before all [of Keats's poems are] the three odes, ''To a Nightingale'', ''On a Grecian Urn'', and ''To Autumn''. Among these odes criticism can hardly choose; in each of them the whole magic of poetry seems to be contained."<ref>Gwynn 1904 p. 378</ref> Sidney Colvin, in his 1920 biography, pointed out that "["To Autumn"] opens up no such far-reaching avenues to the mind and soul of the reader as the odes ''To a Grecian Urn'', ''To a Nightingale'', or ''On Melancholy'', but in execution is more complete and faultless than any of them."<ref>Colvin 1920 p. 422</ref> Following this in a 1934 analysis of Romantic poetry, Margaret Sherwood stated that the poem was "a perfect expression of the phase of primitive feeling and dim thought in regard to earth processes when these are passing into a thought of personality."<ref>Sherwood 1934 p. 263</ref>

Harold Bloom, in 1961, described "To Autumn" as "the most perfect shorter poem in the English language."<ref>Bloom 1993 p. 432</ref> Following this, Walter Jackson Bate, in 1963, claimed that "[...] each generation has found it one of the most nearly perfect poems in English."<ref>Bate 1963 p. 581</ref> Later in 1973, Stuart Sperry wrote, "'To Autumn' succeeds through its acceptance of an order innate in our experience – the natural rhythm of the seasons. It is a poem that, without ever stating it, inevitably suggests the truth of 'ripeness is all' by developing, with a richness of profundity of implication, the simple perception that ripeness is fall."<ref>Sperry 1973 p. 336</ref> In 1981, William Walsh argued that "Among the major Odes [...] no one has questioned the place and supremacy of 'To Autumn', in which we see wholly realized, powerfully embodied in art, the complete maturity so earnestly laboured at in Keats's life, so persuasively argued about in his letters."<ref>Walsh 1981 p. 118</ref> Literary critic and academic Helen Vendler , in 1988, declared that "in the ode 'To Autumn,' Keats finds his most comprehensive and adequate symbol for the social value of art."<ref>Vendler 1988 p. 124</ref>

In 1997, Andrew Motion summarized the critical view on "To Autumn": "it has often been called Keats's 'most ... untroubled poem' [...] To register the full force of its achievement, its tensions have to be felt as potent and demanding."<ref name="Motion p. 461"/> Following in 1998, M. H. Abrams explained, "'To Autumn' was the last work of artistic consequence that Keats completed [...] he achieved this celebratory poem, with its calm acquiescence to time, transience and mortality, at a time when he was possessed by a premonition [...] that he had himself less than two years to live".<ref>Abrams pp. 51–52</ref> James Chandler, also in 1998, pointed out that "If ''To Autumn'' is his greatest piece of writing, as has so often been said, it is because in it he arguably set himself the most ambitious challenge of his brief career and managed to meet it."<ref>Chandler 1998 p. 430</ref> Timothy Corrigan, in 2000, claimed that {{"'}}To Autumn' may be, as other critics have pointed out, his greatest achievement in its ability [...] to redeem the English vernacular as the casual expression of everyday experience, becoming in this his most exterior poem even in all its bucolic charm."<ref>Corrigan 2000 p. 156</ref> In 2008, Stanley Plumly wrote, "history, posterity, immortality are seeing 'Ode to a Nightingale,' 'Ode on a Grecian Urn,' and 'To Autumn' as three of the most anthologized lyric poems of tragic vision in English."<ref>Plumly 2008 p. 343</ref>

==Notes==
{{reflist|3}}

==References==
* Abrams, M. H. "Keats's Poems: The Material Dimensions" in ''The Persistence of Poetry''. Ed. Robert Ryan and Ronald Sharp. Amherst: University of Mass. Press, 1998. ISBN 1558491759
* Arnold, Matthew. ''Essays in Criticism''. London: Macmillan, 1865. OCLC 3012869.
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''John Keats''. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1963. OCLC 291522
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''The Stylistic Development of Keats''. New York: Humanities Press, 1962. OCLC 276912.
* Baynes, Thomas (Ed.). ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' Vol XIV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1888. OCLC 1387837
* Bennett, Andrew. ''Keats, Narrative and Audience''. Cambridge, New York, and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1994. ISBN 0521445655.
* Bewell, Alan. "'To Autumn' and the Curing of Space" in ''Keats's Poetry and Prose'' ed Jeffrey Cox, 634–642. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008. ISBN 9780393924916
* Bloom, Harold. ''The Visionary Company''. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993. ISBN 0801406226
* Bloom, Harold. "The Ode ''To Autumn''" in ''Keats's Odes'' ed. Jack Stillinger, 44-47. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968. OCLC 176883021
* Chandler, James. ''England in 1819''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. ISBN 0226101088
* Colvin, Sidney. ''John Keats''. London: Macmillan, 1920. OCLC 257603790
* Corrigan, Timothy. "Keats, Hazlitt and Public Character" in ''Challenge of Keats''. Ed. Allan Christensen, Lilla Jones, Giuseppe Galigani, and Anthony Johnson. Atlanta: Rodopi, 2000. ISBN 9042005092
* Dennis, John. ''Heroes of Literature, English Poets''. New York: E. & J. B. Young, 1883. OCLC 4798560
* Evert, Walter. ''Aesthetics and Myth in the Poetry of Keats''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965. OCLC 291999
* Fry, Paul. ''A Defense of Poetry''. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995. ISBN 0804724520
* Gittings, Robert. ''John Keats''. London: Heinemann, 1968. OCLC 295596
* Gwynn, Stephen. ''The Masters of English Literature''. London: Macmillan, 1904. OCLC 3175019
* Keats, John. ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=J-su12fRTngC The Life and Letters of John Keats]'' ed. Richard Houghton (reprint). Read Books, 2008.
* Matthews, G. M. (ed.). ''John Keats: The Critical Heritage''. London: Routledge, 1971. ISBN 0710071477
* McGann. "Keats and the Historical Method in Literary Criticism" ''MLN'' 94 (1979): 988–1032.
* Motion, Andrew. ''Keats''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. ISBN 0226542408
* Plumly, Stanley. ''Posthumous Keats''. New York: W. W. Norton, 2008. ISBN 9780393065732
* Ridley, Maurice. ''Keats' Craftsmanship''. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933. OCLC 1842818
* Sherwood, Margaret. ''Undercurrents of Influence in English Romantic Poetry''. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1934. OCLC 2032945
* Sperry, Stuart. ''Keats the Poet''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973. ISBN 069106220X
* Strachan, John. ''A Routledge Literary Sourcebook on the Poems of John Keats''. London: Routledge, 2003. ISBN 0415234778
* Vendler, Helen. ''The Music of What Happens''. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1988. ISBN 0674591526
* Wagner, Jennifer. ''A Moment's Monument''. Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996. ISBN 0838636306
* Walsh, William. ''Introduction to Keats''. London: Methuen, 1981. ISBN 0416304907

To Autumn

2011-10-06T01:31:53Z

Ottava: /* Poem */

"'''To Autumn'''" is a poem written by Romantic poet John Keats (31 October 1795 – 23 February 1821). The work was composed on 19 September 1819 and published in a volume of Keats's poetry that included ''Lamia'' and ''The Eve of Saint Agnes'' in 1820. "To Autumn" is the final work in a group of poems known as Keats's "1819 odes." Although he had little time throughout 1819 to devote to poetry because of personal problems, he managed to compose "To Autumn" after he was inspired to write the poem following a walk near Winchester one autumnal evening. The work marks the end of his poetic career as he needed to earn money and could no longer devote himself to the lifestyle of a poet. A little over a year following the publication of "To Autumn," Keats died in Rome.

The poem has three stanza s, each of eleven lines, that describe the tastes, sights, and sounds of autumn. Much of the third stanza, however, is dedicated to diction , symbol ism, and literary devices with negative connotation s, as it describes the end of the day and the end of autumn. "To Autumn" includes an emphasis on images of motion, growth, and maturation. The work can be interpreted as a discussion of death, an expression of colonialist sentiment, or as a political response to the Peterloo Massacre. "To Autumn" has been regarded by critics as one of the most perfect short poems in the English literature, and it is one of the most anthologized English lyric poems.

==Background==
During the spring of 1819, Keats wrote many of his major odes: "Ode on a Grecian Urn", "Ode on Indolence", "Ode on Melancholy", "Ode to a Nightingale", and "Ode to Psyche". After the month of May, he began to pursue other forms of poetry, including the verse tragedy ''Otho the Great'' in collaboration with friend and roommate Charles Brown, the second half of ''Lamia'', and a return to his unfinished epic ''Hyperion ''.<ref name="Bate pp. 526–562">Bate 1963 pp. 526–562</ref> His efforts from spring until autumn were dedicated completely to a career in poetry; he switched between writing long and short poems, and his goal for each day was to compose more than fifty lines of verse. He devoted his free time to studying works such as Robert Burton 's ''Anatomy of Melancholy'' to further his own ideas.<ref>Gittings 1968 pp. 269–270</ref>

Although Keats managed to write many poems in 1819, he was suffering from a multitude of financial troubles throughout the year. These troubles were compounded with his concerns over his brother, George, who, after emigrating to America, was badly in need of money. Keats was distracted by his and his brother's fiscal problems, but on 19 September 1819 he set aside time to write "To Autumn". The poem marks the final moment of his poetry career. He could no longer afford to devote his time to the composition of poems and began working on more lucrative projects.<ref name="Bate pp. 526–562"/> In addition to his monetary problems, Keats's declining health and personal responsibilities provided more obstacles to his poetic efforts.<ref name="Motion p. 461">Motion 1999 p. 461</ref>

On 19 September 1819, Keats walked near Winchester along the River Itchen. In a letter to his friend John Hamilton Reynolds written on 21 September, Keats described the impression the scene had made upon him and its influence on the composition of "To Autumn":<ref>Bate 1963 p. 580</ref> "How beautiful the season is now – How fine the air. A temperate sharpness about it [...] I never lik'd stubble fields so much as now [...] Somehow a stubble plain looks warm – in the same way that some pictures look warm – this struck me so much in my sunday's walk that I composed upon it."<ref>Keats 2008 p. 184</ref> Not everything on Keats's mind at the time was bright; the poet knew in September that he would have to finally abandon ''Hyperion''. Thus, in the letter that he wrote to Reynolds, Keats also included a note saying that he abandoned his long poem.<ref>Bate 1963 p. 585</ref> Keats did not send "To Autumn" to Reynolds, but did include the poem within a letter to Richard Woodhouse, Keats's publisher and friend, and dated it on the same day.<ref>Evert 1965 pp. 296–297</ref>

The poem was revised and included in Keats's 1820 collection of poetry titled ''Lamia, Isabella, the Eve of St. Agnes, and Other Poems''. Although the publishers Taylor and Hessey feared the kind of bad reviews that had plagued Keats's 1818 edition of ''Endymion '', they were willing to publish the collection after the removal of any potentially controversial poems to ensure that there would be no politically motivated reviews that could give the volume a bad reputation.<ref>McGann 1979 pp. 988–989</ref>

==Structure==
Like many of Keats's 1819 odes, the structure of the poem is that of an odal hymn .<ref>Bate 1963 p. 499</ref> While the earlier 1819 odes perfected techniques and allowed for variations that appear within "To Autumn", Keats dispenses with some aspects of the previous poems (such as the narrator ) and ensures that the poem deals only with concrete concepts. There is no dramatic movement in "To Autumn" as there is in the earlier poems, and the poem attempts to discuss the poetic process without a progression of the temporal scene, an idea that Keats termed as "stationing".<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 581–582</ref> Some of the language of the poem resembles phrases found in earlier poems Keats had written and there are similarities between the lines of "To Autumn" and lines in poems such as ''Endymion '', '' Sleep and Poetry '', and ''Calidore''.<ref>Ridley 1933 pp. 283–285</ref>

Keats relies heavily on monosyllabic words and consonantal sounds – especially bilabial consonants – along with an emphasis on long vowels to control the flow of the poem. His syntax lacks hiatus and there is only a single instance medial inversion of an accent within the poem. However, he does incorporate the Augustan inversion (a reversal of an accent at the beginning of a line) approximately 4.2% of the time. Within his measure, Keats incorporates spondees in approximately 13.9% of his verses. The rhyme follows a pattern of starting with a Shakespearean ABAB pattern which is followed by CDEDCCE rhyme scheme however in his second and third stanza it changes to CDECDDE. The verse differentiates itself from his previous odes through use of 11 line stanza s, instead of 10, with a couplet placed before the concluding line of each stanza.<ref>Bate 1962 pp. 182–184</ref>

Between the manuscript version and the published version of "To Autumn" Keats tightened the language of the poem. One of Keats's changes emphasized by critics is the change in line 17 of "Drows'd with red poppies" to "Drows'd with the fume of poppies", which emphasizes the sense of smell instead of sight. The later edition relies more on passive, past participles, as apparent in the change of "While a gold cloud" in line 25 to "While barred clouds".<ref>Bate 1962 p. 183</ref> Other changes involve the strengthening of phrases, especially within the transformation of the phrase in line 13 "whoever seeks for thee may find" into "whoever seeks abroad may find". Many of the lines within the second stanza were completely rewritten, especially those which did not fit into a rhyme scheme. Some of the minor changes involved adding punctuation missing from the original manuscript copy and altering capitalization changes between the versions.<ref>Ridley 1933 pp. 285–287</ref>

==Poem==
The first stanza of the poem describes natural processes, unlike the following which deal more with sensual observations, as it presents a harvest in its final stages. <ref name="Bloom p.432"> Bloom 1971 p. 432</ref> The Stanza provides a union of maturation and growth, two oppositional forces within the work, and this union instills an idea within nature that the season will not end:<ref name="Bate p. 582">Bate 1963 p. 582</ref>
:Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness
:Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun
:Conspiring with him how to load and bless
:With fruit the vines that round the thatch-eaves run;
:To bend with apples the moss'd cottage-trees,
:And fill all fruit with ripeness to the core;
:To swell the gourd, and plump the hazel shells
:With a sweet kernel; to set budding more,
:And still more, later flowers for the bees,
:Until they think warm days will never cease,
:For Summer has o'er-brimm'd their clammy cells. (lines 1-11)

The second stanza reverses the images of the first stanza and describes the process of harvesting. Autumn, a harvester, is not actually harvesting but exists in a stasis. Only near the end of the stanza is there movement:<ref name="Bate p. 582"/>
:Who hath not seen thee oft amid thy store?
:Sometimes whoever seeks abroad may find
:Thee sitting careless on a granary floor,
:Thy hair soft-lifted by the winnowing wind;
:Or on a half-reap'd furrow sound asleep,
:Drows'd with the fume of poppies, while thy hook
:Spares the next swath and all its twined flowers:
:And sometimes like a gleaner thou dost keep
:Steady thy laden head across a brook;
:Or by a cider-press, with patient look,
:Thou watchest the last oozings hours by hours. (lines 12-22)

Within the final moments of the poem, there is an introduction of the harvest and Autumn is manifested in the role of a harvester. The end approaches within the final moments of the song and death is slowly approaching alongside of the end of the year. However, Autumn is replaced by an image of life in general, and the songs of autumn becomes a song about life in general:<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 582–583</ref>
:Where are the songs of Spring? Ay, where are they?
:Think not of them, thou hast thy music too,-
:While barred clouds bloom the soft-dying day,
:And touch the stubble-plains with rosy hue;
:Then in a wailful choir the small gnats mourn
:Among the river sallows, borne aloft
:Or sinking as the light wind lives or dies;
:And full-grown lambs loud bleat from hilly bourn;
:Hedge-crickets sing; and now with treble soft
:The red-breast whistles from a garden-croft;
:And gathering swallows twitter in the skies. (lines 23-33)

==Themes==
"To Autumn" is thematically connected to many of Keats's 1819 odes. For example, his "Ode to Melancholy" introduces the acceptance of the process of life, and the concept is taken up again within "To Autumn".<ref>Bate 1962 p. 522</ref> There is a union between the ideal and the real which leads to fulfillment. Of all of Keats's poems, "To Autumn" most closely describes an actual paradise while focusing on the archetypal images that are connected with autumn. Within the poem, the season of autumn represents the growth, the maturation, and finally an approaching death.<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 581–583</ref> The poem also defends art's role in helping society in a manner similar to Keats's "Ode on Indolence" and "Ode to Psyche". "To Autumn" describes a system in which nature and culture are two separate parts of the universe, and nature is turned into culture by an artist. Civilization is furthered by man's ability to use nature for agricultural cultivation. The artist, like the farmer, has to process nature into a consumable object, which in turn allows people sustenance. The end of the poem is joined in song as nature gives way to civilization, which represents the self-sacrificing of both nature and the artist for society.<ref>Vendler 1988 pp. 124–125</ref>

The three stanzas of "To Autumn" are able to suggest both a movement from summer to early winter and also day turning into dusk. This progression is joined with a shift from the sensation of touch to sight and then to sound, creating a three part symmetry which is missing in Keats's other odes.<ref>Sperry 1973 p. 337</ref> Although there is process and the suggestion of motion within the poem, there is a lack of action. Within the second stanza, autumn is described through metaphor as an exhausted labourer in lines 14–15. Near the end of the stanza, the steadiness of the gleaner in lines 19–20 emphasizes a motionlessness within the poem. The individuals are burdened or merely watch the events surrounding them. The poem as a whole creates within the imagination an image of death and a finality that is welcomed. There are no contrary ideas that are common within the other odes of 1819. Instead, "To Autumn" puts forth the idea that progression is no longer necessary as maturation has taken over, and growth and death are in harmony.<ref>Bloom 1968 pp. 95–97</ref> Along with this harmony, the placing of the couplet before the end of each stanza creates a suspension of closing within the poem. This suspension within the poem reinforces the theme of continuation.<ref>Wagner 1996 pp. 110–111</ref>

In a 1979 essay, Jerome McGann argued that while the poem was indirectly influenced by historical events, Keats had deliberately ignored the political landscape of 1819.<ref>McGann 1979 pp. 988–1032</ref> Countering this view, Andrew Bennett, Nicholas Roe and others focused more on the political aspects of the poem, Roe arguing for a direct connection to the Peterloo Massacre of 1819.<ref>Strachan 2003 p. 175</ref> Later, Paul Fry further argued against McGann's stance when he pointed out, "It scarcely seems pertinent to say that 'To Autumn' is therefore an evasion of social violence when it is so clearly an encounter with death itself [...] it is not a politically encoded escape from history reflecting the coerced betrayal [...] of its author's radicalism. McGann thinks to rescue Keats from the imputation of political naïveté by saying that he was a radical browbeaten into quietism".<ref>Fry 1995 pp. 123–124</ref> In regards to other political aspects, post-colonial critic Alan Bewell interpreted the themes of Keats's ode in the context of British imperialism. He claimed "To Autumn" promoted the moderate climate of Britain over tropical climates.<ref>Bewell 2008 pp. 635–638</ref>

==Notes==
{{reflist|3}}

==References==
* Abrams, M. H. "Keats's Poems: The Material Dimensions" in ''The Persistence of Poetry''. Ed. Robert Ryan and Ronald Sharp. Amherst: University of Mass. Press, 1998. ISBN 1558491759
* Arnold, Matthew. ''Essays in Criticism''. London: Macmillan, 1865. OCLC 3012869.
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''John Keats''. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1963. OCLC 291522
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''The Stylistic Development of Keats''. New York: Humanities Press, 1962. OCLC 276912.
* Baynes, Thomas (Ed.). ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' Vol XIV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1888. OCLC 1387837
* Bennett, Andrew. ''Keats, Narrative and Audience''. Cambridge, New York, and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1994. ISBN 0521445655.
* Bewell, Alan. "'To Autumn' and the Curing of Space" in ''Keats's Poetry and Prose'' ed Jeffrey Cox, 634–642. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008. ISBN 9780393924916
* Bloom, Harold. ''The Visionary Company''. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993. ISBN 0801406226
* Bloom, Harold. "The Ode ''To Autumn''" in ''Keats's Odes'' ed. Jack Stillinger, 44-47. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968. OCLC 176883021
* Chandler, James. ''England in 1819''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. ISBN 0226101088
* Colvin, Sidney. ''John Keats''. London: Macmillan, 1920. OCLC 257603790
* Corrigan, Timothy. "Keats, Hazlitt and Public Character" in ''Challenge of Keats''. Ed. Allan Christensen, Lilla Jones, Giuseppe Galigani, and Anthony Johnson. Atlanta: Rodopi, 2000. ISBN 9042005092
* Dennis, John. ''Heroes of Literature, English Poets''. New York: E. & J. B. Young, 1883. OCLC 4798560
* Evert, Walter. ''Aesthetics and Myth in the Poetry of Keats''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965. OCLC 291999
* Fry, Paul. ''A Defense of Poetry''. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995. ISBN 0804724520
* Gittings, Robert. ''John Keats''. London: Heinemann, 1968. OCLC 295596
* Gwynn, Stephen. ''The Masters of English Literature''. London: Macmillan, 1904. OCLC 3175019
* Keats, John. ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=J-su12fRTngC The Life and Letters of John Keats]'' ed. Richard Houghton (reprint). Read Books, 2008.
* Matthews, G. M. (ed.). ''John Keats: The Critical Heritage''. London: Routledge, 1971. ISBN 0710071477
* McGann. "Keats and the Historical Method in Literary Criticism" ''MLN'' 94 (1979): 988–1032.
* Motion, Andrew. ''Keats''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. ISBN 0226542408
* Plumly, Stanley. ''Posthumous Keats''. New York: W. W. Norton, 2008. ISBN 9780393065732
* Ridley, Maurice. ''Keats' Craftsmanship''. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933. OCLC 1842818
* Sherwood, Margaret. ''Undercurrents of Influence in English Romantic Poetry''. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1934. OCLC 2032945
* Sperry, Stuart. ''Keats the Poet''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973. ISBN 069106220X
* Strachan, John. ''A Routledge Literary Sourcebook on the Poems of John Keats''. London: Routledge, 2003. ISBN 0415234778
* Vendler, Helen. ''The Music of What Happens''. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1988. ISBN 0674591526
* Wagner, Jennifer. ''A Moment's Monument''. Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996. ISBN 0838636306
* Walsh, William. ''Introduction to Keats''. London: Methuen, 1981. ISBN 0416304907

To Autumn

2011-10-06T01:30:59Z

Ottava: /* Structure */

"'''To Autumn'''" is a poem written by Romantic poet John Keats (31 October 1795 – 23 February 1821). The work was composed on 19 September 1819 and published in a volume of Keats's poetry that included ''Lamia'' and ''The Eve of Saint Agnes'' in 1820. "To Autumn" is the final work in a group of poems known as Keats's "1819 odes." Although he had little time throughout 1819 to devote to poetry because of personal problems, he managed to compose "To Autumn" after he was inspired to write the poem following a walk near Winchester one autumnal evening. The work marks the end of his poetic career as he needed to earn money and could no longer devote himself to the lifestyle of a poet. A little over a year following the publication of "To Autumn," Keats died in Rome.

The poem has three stanza s, each of eleven lines, that describe the tastes, sights, and sounds of autumn. Much of the third stanza, however, is dedicated to diction , symbol ism, and literary devices with negative connotation s, as it describes the end of the day and the end of autumn. "To Autumn" includes an emphasis on images of motion, growth, and maturation. The work can be interpreted as a discussion of death, an expression of colonialist sentiment, or as a political response to the Peterloo Massacre. "To Autumn" has been regarded by critics as one of the most perfect short poems in the English literature, and it is one of the most anthologized English lyric poems.

==Background==
During the spring of 1819, Keats wrote many of his major odes: "Ode on a Grecian Urn", "Ode on Indolence", "Ode on Melancholy", "Ode to a Nightingale", and "Ode to Psyche". After the month of May, he began to pursue other forms of poetry, including the verse tragedy ''Otho the Great'' in collaboration with friend and roommate Charles Brown, the second half of ''Lamia'', and a return to his unfinished epic ''Hyperion ''.<ref name="Bate pp. 526–562">Bate 1963 pp. 526–562</ref> His efforts from spring until autumn were dedicated completely to a career in poetry; he switched between writing long and short poems, and his goal for each day was to compose more than fifty lines of verse. He devoted his free time to studying works such as Robert Burton 's ''Anatomy of Melancholy'' to further his own ideas.<ref>Gittings 1968 pp. 269–270</ref>

Although Keats managed to write many poems in 1819, he was suffering from a multitude of financial troubles throughout the year. These troubles were compounded with his concerns over his brother, George, who, after emigrating to America, was badly in need of money. Keats was distracted by his and his brother's fiscal problems, but on 19 September 1819 he set aside time to write "To Autumn". The poem marks the final moment of his poetry career. He could no longer afford to devote his time to the composition of poems and began working on more lucrative projects.<ref name="Bate pp. 526–562"/> In addition to his monetary problems, Keats's declining health and personal responsibilities provided more obstacles to his poetic efforts.<ref name="Motion p. 461">Motion 1999 p. 461</ref>

On 19 September 1819, Keats walked near Winchester along the River Itchen. In a letter to his friend John Hamilton Reynolds written on 21 September, Keats described the impression the scene had made upon him and its influence on the composition of "To Autumn":<ref>Bate 1963 p. 580</ref> "How beautiful the season is now – How fine the air. A temperate sharpness about it [...] I never lik'd stubble fields so much as now [...] Somehow a stubble plain looks warm – in the same way that some pictures look warm – this struck me so much in my sunday's walk that I composed upon it."<ref>Keats 2008 p. 184</ref> Not everything on Keats's mind at the time was bright; the poet knew in September that he would have to finally abandon ''Hyperion''. Thus, in the letter that he wrote to Reynolds, Keats also included a note saying that he abandoned his long poem.<ref>Bate 1963 p. 585</ref> Keats did not send "To Autumn" to Reynolds, but did include the poem within a letter to Richard Woodhouse, Keats's publisher and friend, and dated it on the same day.<ref>Evert 1965 pp. 296–297</ref>

The poem was revised and included in Keats's 1820 collection of poetry titled ''Lamia, Isabella, the Eve of St. Agnes, and Other Poems''. Although the publishers Taylor and Hessey feared the kind of bad reviews that had plagued Keats's 1818 edition of ''Endymion '', they were willing to publish the collection after the removal of any potentially controversial poems to ensure that there would be no politically motivated reviews that could give the volume a bad reputation.<ref>McGann 1979 pp. 988–989</ref>

==Structure==
Like many of Keats's 1819 odes, the structure of the poem is that of an odal hymn .<ref>Bate 1963 p. 499</ref> While the earlier 1819 odes perfected techniques and allowed for variations that appear within "To Autumn", Keats dispenses with some aspects of the previous poems (such as the narrator ) and ensures that the poem deals only with concrete concepts. There is no dramatic movement in "To Autumn" as there is in the earlier poems, and the poem attempts to discuss the poetic process without a progression of the temporal scene, an idea that Keats termed as "stationing".<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 581–582</ref> Some of the language of the poem resembles phrases found in earlier poems Keats had written and there are similarities between the lines of "To Autumn" and lines in poems such as ''Endymion '', '' Sleep and Poetry '', and ''Calidore''.<ref>Ridley 1933 pp. 283–285</ref>

Keats relies heavily on monosyllabic words and consonantal sounds – especially bilabial consonants – along with an emphasis on long vowels to control the flow of the poem. His syntax lacks hiatus and there is only a single instance medial inversion of an accent within the poem. However, he does incorporate the Augustan inversion (a reversal of an accent at the beginning of a line) approximately 4.2% of the time. Within his measure, Keats incorporates spondees in approximately 13.9% of his verses. The rhyme follows a pattern of starting with a Shakespearean ABAB pattern which is followed by CDEDCCE rhyme scheme however in his second and third stanza it changes to CDECDDE. The verse differentiates itself from his previous odes through use of 11 line stanza s, instead of 10, with a couplet placed before the concluding line of each stanza.<ref>Bate 1962 pp. 182–184</ref>

Between the manuscript version and the published version of "To Autumn" Keats tightened the language of the poem. One of Keats's changes emphasized by critics is the change in line 17 of "Drows'd with red poppies" to "Drows'd with the fume of poppies", which emphasizes the sense of smell instead of sight. The later edition relies more on passive, past participles, as apparent in the change of "While a gold cloud" in line 25 to "While barred clouds".<ref>Bate 1962 p. 183</ref> Other changes involve the strengthening of phrases, especially within the transformation of the phrase in line 13 "whoever seeks for thee may find" into "whoever seeks abroad may find". Many of the lines within the second stanza were completely rewritten, especially those which did not fit into a rhyme scheme. Some of the minor changes involved adding punctuation missing from the original manuscript copy and altering capitalization changes between the versions.<ref>Ridley 1933 pp. 285–287</ref>

==Poem==
The first stanza of the poem describes natural processes, unlike the following which deal more with sensual observations, as it presents a harvest in its final stages. <ref name="Bloom p.432"> Bloom 1971 p. 432</ref> The Stanza provides a union of maturation and growth, two oppositional forces within the work, and this union instills an idea within nature that the season will not end:<ref name="Bate p. 582">Bate 1963 p. 582</ref>
:Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness
:Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun
:Conspiring with him how to load and bless
:With fruit the vines that round the thatch-eaves run;
:To bend with apples the moss'd cottage-trees,
:And fill all fruit with ripeness to the core;
:To swell the gourd, and plump the hazel shells
:With a sweet kernel; to set budding more,
:And still more, later flowers for the bees,
:Until they think warm days will never cease,
:For Summer has o'er-brimm'd their clammy cells. (lines 1-11)

The second stanza reverses the images of the first stanza and describes the process of harvesting. Autumn, a harvester, is not actually harvesting but exists in a stasis. Only near the end of the stanza is there movement:<ref name="Bate p. 582"/>
:Who hath not seen thee oft amid thy store?
:Sometimes whoever seeks abroad may find
:Thee sitting careless on a granary floor,
:Thy hair soft-lifted by the winnowing wind;
:Or on a half-reap'd furrow sound asleep,
:Drows'd with the fume of poppies, while thy hook
:Spares the next swath and all its twined flowers:
:And sometimes like a gleaner thou dost keep
:Steady thy laden head across a brook;
:Or by a cider-press, with patient look,
:Thou watchest the last oozings hours by hours. (lines 12-22)

Within the final moments of the poem, there is an introduction of the harvest and Autumn is manifested in the role of a harvester. The end approaches within the final moments of the song and death is slowly approaching alongside of the end of the year. However, Autumn is replaced by an image of life in general, and the songs of autumn becomes a song about life in general:<ref>Bate 1963 pp. 582–583</ref>
:Where are the songs of Spring? Ay, where are they?
:Think not of them, thou hast thy music too,-
:While barred clouds bloom the soft-dying day,
:And touch the stubble-plains with rosy hue;
:Then in a wailful choir the small gnats mourn
:Among the river sallows, borne aloft
:Or sinking as the light wind lives or dies;
:And full-grown lambs loud bleat from hilly bourn;
:Hedge-crickets sing; and now with treble soft
:The red-breast whistles from a garden-croft;
:And gathering swallows twitter in the skies. (lines 23-33)

==Notes==
{{reflist|3}}

==References==
* Abrams, M. H. "Keats's Poems: The Material Dimensions" in ''The Persistence of Poetry''. Ed. Robert Ryan and Ronald Sharp. Amherst: University of Mass. Press, 1998. ISBN 1558491759
* Arnold, Matthew. ''Essays in Criticism''. London: Macmillan, 1865. OCLC 3012869.
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''John Keats''. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1963. OCLC 291522
* Bate, Walter Jackson. ''The Stylistic Development of Keats''. New York: Humanities Press, 1962. OCLC 276912.
* Baynes, Thomas (Ed.). ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' Vol XIV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1888. OCLC 1387837
* Bennett, Andrew. ''Keats, Narrative and Audience''. Cambridge, New York, and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1994. ISBN 0521445655.
* Bewell, Alan. "'To Autumn' and the Curing of Space" in ''Keats's Poetry and Prose'' ed Jeffrey Cox, 634–642. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008. ISBN 9780393924916
* Bloom, Harold. ''The Visionary Company''. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993. ISBN 0801406226
* Bloom, Harold. "The Ode ''To Autumn''" in ''Keats's Odes'' ed. Jack Stillinger, 44-47. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968. OCLC 176883021
* Chandler, James. ''England in 1819''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. ISBN 0226101088
* Colvin, Sidney. ''John Keats''. London: Macmillan, 1920. OCLC 257603790
* Corrigan, Timothy. "Keats, Hazlitt and Public Character" in ''Challenge of Keats''. Ed. Allan Christensen, Lilla Jones, Giuseppe Galigani, and Anthony Johnson. Atlanta: Rodopi, 2000. ISBN 9042005092
* Dennis, John. ''Heroes of Literature, English Poets''. New York: E. & J. B. Young, 1883. OCLC 4798560
* Evert, Walter. ''Aesthetics and Myth in the Poetry of Keats''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965. OCLC 291999
* Fry, Paul. ''A Defense of Poetry''. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995. ISBN 0804724520
* Gittings, Robert. ''John Keats''. London: Heinemann, 1968. OCLC 295596
* Gwynn, Stephen. ''The Masters of English Literature''. London: Macmillan, 1904. OCLC 3175019
* Keats, John. ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=J-su12fRTngC The Life and Letters of John Keats]'' ed. Richard Houghton (reprint). Read Books, 2008.
* Matthews, G. M. (ed.). ''John Keats: The Critical Heritage''. London: Routledge, 1971. ISBN 0710071477
* McGann. "Keats and the Historical Method in Literary Criticism" ''MLN'' 94 (1979): 988–1032.
* Motion, Andrew. ''Keats''. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. ISBN 0226542408
* Plumly, Stanley. ''Posthumous Keats''. New York: W. W. Norton, 2008. ISBN 9780393065732
* Ridley, Maurice. ''Keats' Craftsmanship''. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933. OCLC 1842818
* Sherwood, Margaret. ''Undercurrents of Influence in English Romantic Poetry''. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1934. OCLC 2032945
* Sperry, Stuart. ''Keats the Poet''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973. ISBN 069106220X
* Strachan, John. ''A Routledge Literary Sourcebook on the Poems of John Keats''. London: Routledge, 2003. ISBN 0415234778
* Vendler, Helen. ''The Music of What Happens''. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1988. ISBN 0674591526
* Wagner, Jennifer. ''A Moment's Monument''. Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996. ISBN 0838636306
* Walsh, William. ''Introduction to Keats''. London: Methuen, 1981. ISBN 0416304907

To Autumn

2011-10-06T01:30:09Z

Ottava: /* Background */

To Autumn

2011-10-06T01:28:16Z

Ottava: add

To Autumn

2011-10-06T01:25:39Z

Ottava: Article I wrote before on Wikipedia - reusing old content that was correct before someone added many incorrect statements, added plagiarism, etc to the Wiki version

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-18T04:41:35Z

Ottava: /* Religious views of Charles Darwin */

It looks like this page may have to be protected, since evolutionists are getting on here and posting nonsense such as YEC being "non-scientific". [[User:Scorpionman|Scorpionman]] 22:39, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

::The only nonsense involves the religious thinking there is "proof" of YEC. Really? An article on the big bang contains one scientific paragraph and a longer one about creationist views? How does one explain cosmic background radiation? Or Hubble's Law? Or Deuterium Observation? Or the fact that if you use the big imaging telescopes to look beyond 14 billion light years in any direction all you see is, well, big bang? Inasmuch proof as science allows (remember, science can't "prove" anything, it can only disprove the false in order to make a better hypothesis) the Big Bang is accepted fact. In what peer-reviewed journal did Matthew, Mark, Luke or John publish? [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:46 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Feel free to expand the article if you wish. I might even join you. But you can do that without removing the creationist material. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 10:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::::What I'm saying is, that material is fine--provided one acknowledges that the opinion of creationists, ESPECIALLY YEC's--is viewed in the scientific community as belonging to the lunatic fringe. One can be socially and politically conservative without making oneself look like idiot by espousing such nonsense as YEC. Science shouldn't be politicized--far too many things already are!! Scientific method should have nothing to with ideology; it should have everything to do with coming up with better hypotheses about the universe based on empirical observations. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:56 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::There, finally finished typing it in Word. This works so much better, although feel free to add to its information. Quite frankly, its absurd to believe in YEC--and I'm a committed social, political and economic conservative!! Please don't associate lunatics with conservatives, because it hurts our credibility. In the 1800s, the Comte de Buffon took composite lumps of molten rock of varying sizes and estimated (based on how long it took his samples to cool to room temperature) that a molten ball the size of Earth would've taken at least 35,000 years just to cool. YEC is idiotic, and those who believe it are blinded by their own ignorance of basic physics. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:42 PM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:I'm confused, Scorpionman. Are you saying that YEC is scientific?
:Personally, I don't see why a discussion of Biblical literalism has any place in an article about the Big Bang. If you want to dispute the current prevailing theory behind the origin of the cosmos, then you should do it scientific evidence or at the very least an attempt at refuting evidence presented for the theory and not with the contents of one religious text. As it is, the article abruptly changes the subject and goes totally off-topic. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 13:53, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Please update the article to include peer-reviewed scientific criticisms of Big Bang-like theories. Right now the article looks ridiculous: a half of a dozen scientific references followed by a bunch of references dominated by the Apologetic Press. Clearly somebody misunderstands the modern scientific process.

== Dominant theory ==

Would it ruffle too many feathers to mention that it is the dominant theory amongst scientists today. I suggest that such a statement is an uncontroversial fact. Thoughts? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 05:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
:No, I agree, it is the dominant theory among scientists. [[User:Hengineer|Hengineer]] 05:23, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

== Sweeping generalisation ==

The following sentence should be removed:

:In contrast to young earth creationists, Old Earth Creationists and Theistic evolutionists agree that the Big Bang occured.

Just because you are an OEC or you believe evolution to be correct does not mean that you MUST believe in the Big Bang Theory. Does anyone remember Fred Hoyle?

Are there any objections to the removal of the sentence? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:18, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

I think this article looks good right now. Good edits guys. Hopefully expressing positive emotions is not violative of probation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:16, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

==Article split==

The intro confuses [[Big Bang]] with [[Expanding universe]]. I'd like to split the article up, with one short article treating each of these two distinct ideas. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:23, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:In fairness, no, an expanding universe is part of the "big bang" (which refers to far more than the universes creation. It's confusing, so I would leave it to someone with a background in physics. [[User:Nematocyte|Nematocyte]] 08:39, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::Have the bounds of [[outer space]] expanded? Or is it just that the galaxies have been getting farther apart within boundless space? What exactly does the theory state? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:59, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Apparently, the answer is "both", at least according to http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#MX --[[User:M|M]] 10:49, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, let's try to get this straight. Is [[outer space]] infinite or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:From what I understand most astrophysics believe that since the area that the universe is expanding into is void of matter and energy that yes currently, [[outer space]] is infinite.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:17, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:Unknown. The spatial extent of the Universe could be finite or infinite. If you're picturing a lump of matter dispersing in a larger void, you're thinking of the wrong thing, though. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 04:18, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:Again, I'm pretty much an amateur when it comes to astrophysics...but I think that the confusion comes from the fact that we're currently uncertain as to the actual curvature of space. I think I remember hearing that space seems to be curved enough that it's actually finite (though boundless, like the three-dimensional equivalent of the surface of a sphere), but I can't provide citation of that at the moment.--[[User:M|M]] 07:11, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't think a split is neccesary, however, on a related note, an article describing the Big Freeze, Big Rip, and Big Crunch theories for the end of the universe might be called for, as those also center on the way in which the universe is expanding (specifically, from measurements of type 1 supernovae in extremely distant galaxies, we have evidence that the universe's expansion is in fact, speeding up, giving support to the Big Freeze (everything expands until entropy is at a maximum), or possibly Big Rip (if Dark Energy is the cause of expansion, then if the universe keeps expanding, dark energy could start to rip apart galaxies, then solar systems, then stars and planets, and finally atoms). So yeah, an article on the possible ways the universe will 'end' (or if it is infinite) would probably help provide more information about the nature of the expanding universe, without having to create an article solely about the expansion of the universe. [[User:Warhawk|Warhawk]] 14:07, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== YEC Citations ==

Conservative, your citations don't appear to agree with each other...compare:
<blockquote>
A prediction had been made prior to the discovery, that if the Big Bang were true, there should be some sort of constant radiation in space, although the prediction was for a temperature several times higher. (http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/30)
</blockquote>

with

<blockquote>
All matter radiates heat, regardless of its temperature. Astronomers can detect an extremely uniform radiation, called cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, coming from all directions. It appears to come from perfectly radiating matter whose temperature is 2.73 K—nearly absolute zero. Many incorrectly believe that the big bang theory predicted this radiation.
</blockquote>

Is it standard procedure to use citations which don't agree with each other on the particulars?

:::Is it standard procedure to give me two citations without giving me the specific cite to the second citation? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:25, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:::I found the second citation and it appears to use the following to support its contention: “The big bang made no quantitative prediction that the ‘background’ radiation would have a temperature of 3 degrees Kelvin (in fact its initial prediction [by George Gamow in 1946] was 30 degrees Kelvin); whereas Eddington in 1926 had already calculated that the ‘temperature of space’ produced by the radiation of starlight would be found to be 3 degrees Kelvin.” Tom Van Flandern, “Did the Universe Have a Beginning?” Meta Research Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 3, 15 September 1994, p. 33. [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html][http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes55.html#wp1077943] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:08, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
::::It's a good thing Tom Van Flandern didn't publish in peer-reviewed journals. I'll believe your numbers, but current data indicates that BOTH were wrong. Redoing a computation of the ambient temperature of the Universe (given modern observations) will ''not'' yield Eddington's prediction; reworking Gamow's calculation ''will'' reproduce the CMB temperature very accurately. Additionally, the CMB data is more than just temperature data; the anisotropies in the CMB are also indicative of the premordial expansion. Just because you can dig up a citation doesn't mean it's correct.

== Common Misconceptions ==

As previously written, this was untrue. The Big Bang does not claim that all matter was tightly packed together before the Big Bang started. That is an assumption that the Big Bang does not address. It is unfortunate that in a section titled common misconceptions that a misconception was added. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:08, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

==Misconception about Evolution==
I think evolution discredits itself. But I think it is unfortunate when us anti-evolutionist mistrepresent the theory. It is discreditable on many points, but this sentence mistrepresents it:

:''Many scientists who believe in the Big Bang Theory are Evolutionists, though not all are. One can believe that God both created the Universe AND laid out the plan for all life in the Big Bang, as opposed to the idea that life evolved randomly after the Big Bang. ''

Evolution does not say life evolved randomly. It says the intitial organism came about through essentially "random" events. (although not strictly random).

Evolution is wrong for other reasons. And if we are going to make evolutionists see its falsity, we have to correctly represent the theory. Or atleast not MISREPRESENT the theory. [[User:InTheEvent|InTheEvent]] 00:00, 20 June 2007 (EDT)

I agree and I'm glad that the article at least makes that distinction, although as an a Creationist who believes the Big Bang is one of the strongest theistic arguments out there, I'm not incredibly happy about Evolution being mentioned in there; one has nothing to do with the other. However, I won't press the issue because I think what's there is a reasonable compromise. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:23, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
==Big Bang proves Universe had a beginning==
Why are so many creationists against the big bang, it proves that the universe had a beginning point. It also seems to violate physics because matter can't be created from nothing. It indicates a creative force behind the universe.

:Well, for one thing the "billions of years" makes it just laughable, but more importantly it goes against the Bible which says God created the Earth in 6 days around 6000 years ago. --[[User:Rolloffle|Rolloffle]] 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::Where, exactly, is the age of the Earth specified as being 6000 years in the Bible. Please reference the relevant chapters and verses. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 11:38, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

::"'Billions of years' makes it just laughable." The good old argument from ridiculity. It's like the argument from incredulity, but more fun.--[[User:All Fish Welcome|All Fish Welcome]] 12:10, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Most atheists?==
Does anyone have ANY reference that backs up the claim about "most atheists"? Or is it just made up off the top of people's heads?
: The scientific community (which I define as the doctorate-level degree holding scientists) in the U.S. overwhelmingly accept the Big Bang and old universe. I think most atheists just believe what scientists say is right despite the fact they don't know anything about it. I don't have a source for the U.S. public relating atheism to big bang belief, but I have a source for correlation between scientists' atheism and big bang belief, which we could extrapolate from. [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html From Nature magazine]. --[[User:Theonlyconservative|Theonlyconservative]] 12:38, 9 November 2007 (EST)

== Article Depth ==

In all honesty, this article does not tell anyone very much about the big bang theory, evidence for it, or the reasons why it was formulated in the first place. The article basically introduces the topic with a mish mash of unrelated facts in no particular order, then the next section is "dissent letter" followed by "starlight problem". These are hardly the most relevant topics about the Big Bang theory. May I suggest that as this article is (hopefully) reworked, those doing the writing keep in mind that the Big Bang Theory is a very general class of theories that all have one thing in common - the assertion that long ago the universe "began" from a mathematical singularity and has been increasing in size ever since. Also, be wary about the throwing around the word "singularity" - contrary to popular belief and science fiction, a singularity is not a physical thing - it is an asymptotic point in a mathematical function where the function breaks down and can no longer make any predictions. Other singularities include the center of black holes, and objects traveling at the speed of light. The mathematical models for these systems break down at these values and become meaningless. Likewise, the Big Bang Theory has nothing to say about the origin of the singularity or what came "before" it. It is outside the realm of the theory, and in the opinion of some scientist (I'm not comfortable saying most or few here, as I'm basing this statement only on my personal discussions) outside the realm of science as a whole.

== Georges-Henri Lemaître ==

Could somebody add something in about how Roman Catholic priest [[Georges-Henri Lemaître]], the original proposer of the Big Bang theory, felt that the theory fitted beautifully with his faith as it supports a "creation event"? [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 12:51, 8 January 2008 (EST)

== Change "Starlight problem" to "Horizon problem"? ==

There's a section in this article that refers to the "starlight problem" but I believe scientists actually refer to this issue as the "horizon problem." See [http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/HorizonProblem.html here] and [http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/cosmo.html#c5 here] for example. One reason is that the problem has to do with more than starlight--there are questions about density, temperature, etc. The term "starlight problem" is generally used by people discussing creationist cosmological models, while "horizon problem" is more appropriate in the context of the big bang model.--[[User:JamesR|JamesR]] 20:07, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
: I've changed it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:27, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

== Inflation and YEC ==

Couldn't inflation make the Big Bang and YEC compatible? I mean if it happened faster than the speed of light. Then why couldn't it happen in the YEC time scale? [[jfraatz|jfraatz]]

== "God's Role" ==

Can someone help me come up with a better way of saying "God's role in creating the universe." ? Obviously God didn't just have a 'role,' He simply created it by Himself! Thanks! [[User:WillS|WillS]] 18:16, 21 May 2010 (EDT)

:I tried; do you think my wording is OK? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 03:06, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

::Looks great. And good job catching some other areas where liberal bias crept in as well!

== Correcting "scientific" ==

I just corrected "scientific" the word used in description of the Big Bang to the proper in this case term "pseudo scientific". See also my [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] where I explain why the Big Bang is a pseudo scientific hypothesis (between other things it assumes "curved" spacetime for which there is no evidence and a lot of to contrary) and how Einsteinian gravitation works. The essay is still not finished and so I invite anybody to expres their opinion on the talk page of the essay. Thanks. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:35, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:I have already expressed my opinion on the talk page of that essay: you're a crackpot. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:02, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Sam, the fact that I'm a crackpot has certain influence on my credibility (which I never claimed being high, while I'm only a sculptor, with only one year training in general realativity, and the rest of my formal education being in electrical engineeiring) but it surely has no influence on the truth of Big Bang hypothesis (BBH).

::The biggest flaw of BBH is an assumption that the universe is expanding while it is not.

::This error of expansion of universe was created many years ago by [[relativists]] giving up the checking what is the ''[[intrinsic redshift]]'' in the universe before jumping to conclusion that the ''redshift is a '''proof''' that the universe is expanding''. It is clearly a non scientific approach to science. There are no proofs in science (except in math, and that's why math is not considered to be science). There are only better or worse ''hypotheses'' that are surely no proof. Some last long time until they collapse when a '''proof of their invalidity''' turns up and usually it is not accepted since no scientist cares about looking like an idiot who overlooke something important and assumed an impossible. Error that Newton avoided, not believeing in his own theory being more than just math.

::[[Intrinsic redshift]] is as it is observed in our universe (see my step-by-step derivation in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] and please comment on possible errors in this derivation). My derivation is done in such a simple way that an intelligent high school student shouldn't have problems with repeating it him/herself. Besides I'm here to explain if something is too difficult. Just ask a question about this derivation or other things since from 1985, when I discovered this derivation, I found out also many other thing. E.g. why the universe is looking as if it were expanding with accelerating expansion and the acceleration has just its value, observed with accuracy of only one standard deviation (max possible) by Supernova Cosmology Project team in 1998, which is

:::<math>dH/dt=-H_o^2/2</math>

::where <math>dH/dt</math> is acceleration of expansion in terms of derivation of Hubble constant with respect to time <math>t</math>, and <math>H_o</math> is the Hubble constant itself. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 16:44, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

== "even though the theory is based on little more than guesswork, speculation, and dubious assumptions." ==

I must agree with the removal of the above sentence. The big bang theory is based on the observations of red shifts, background radiation and other observational and physical properties of the universe. However, it is the assumptions the Big Bang theorists draw from this that are the debatable part. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:51, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:Thanks Max. I don't accept the Big Bang theory myself, but only on the grounds of my faith. The error - and I think it's a sincere one - that astrophysicists are making is in the use of methodological naturalism, which of course is a requirement of the scientific method. Within the constraints of that method it's a very sound theory; it just isn't correct. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:01, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Yes Sam, ''"it just isn't correct"''. But can we say it while [[relativists]] maintain that it is correct? We have to have a proof that it isn't correct.

::I don't blame Max for him doing what he had to do not knowing such a proof. I just would like to start a discussion whether my proof is sound one, and justifying dumping BBH. I'm sure it is but I'm the author so I may be biased (though I took a general realtivity course at Harvard to be sure that I'm right and thought about this for over quater of a century so I'm relatively sure that it is a sound proof of invalidity of BBH).

::Anyway, I can only help in discussion by keeping it on track when I see wrong arguments, and without anybody discussing this issue it won't be even known that the proof of invalidity of BBH even exists. No mainstream scientific journal ever wanted to publish this proof despite it is only one page of print. It was published in conservapedia (after being blocked on my university server) as [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]] in a short form suitable for physicists. Longer form with step-by-step derivation of redshift in our universe, and more, is in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]]. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:25, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

::Just as a note, Sam, the Scientific Theory (i.e. Scientific Method) was codified by two individuals that were deeply religious (Descartes and Francis Bacon). It is also derived from the theories of logic codified by Roger Bacon, a monk. I don't think it is a difference between faith and reason. St. Thomas Aquinas made the argument that we should seek to combine the two, which John Calvin said was a very important advancement that allowed us to move beyond Greek philosophy/science. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 19:00, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:::It's irrelevant that Descartes and the Bacons were religious; the scientific method does NOT combine faith and reason and in fact explicitly rejects faith. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:14, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Additional note, Sam, what good it would do if we believed in things that are not true? As pseudo scientific theories usually are. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:29, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::It's interesting to our readers that the founders of the [[scientific method]] were religious. We always want to know more about people who have influenced currents of modern thought.

::::When someone proposes "[[intelligent design]]", do we respond to the challenge of the idea purely on its merits, or do we consider the motives of its proponents? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:32, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

== Hmm ==

As a Catholic, I hope people realize that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter. The Catholic Church is home to one of the most conservative Christian organizations in the US, the Knights of Columbus (1.8 million members), mind you. I do hope that we can at least acknowledge that this isn't an "atheist" view or a "liberal" view, but one that spreads across boundaries. :) After all, the Catholic Church's view about Genesis is based on St. Augustine's determination that Genesis was allegorical, which was something both Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed with. Just keep this in mind. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 18:56, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:In what sense ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''? The fact that ''"Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed (that Genesis was allegorical)"'' isn't a clear indication that ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''. At least to me (the crank :) that's why I'd appreciate if you explained it in more detail.

:My opinion is the same as yours that there was an involvement but I'm not sure that I understand it the same way as you do. I know that Gorges Lemaître, the Catholic prist, proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory<ref>

After wikipedia and believed this time.

</ref>, and also that the theory is false since I personally executed the for long time neglected calculation of value of [[intrinsic redshift]] and it turned out roughly as it is observed, which implies that practically there is no expansion of universe. Results of my calculations were not published since 1985 when they were done, except recently in conservapedia<ref>

[[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]].

</ref>, but I don't think that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter of blocking the publication. Do you? :) [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::Ottava, are you saying that a large percentage of Catholics accept the Big Bang theory? If so, is it because it seems reasonable to them? Or because it's Catholic dogma, or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:36, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::It is both accepted by Catholics and given official approval by the Vatican. After all, [[Georges-Henri Lemaitre]] was a famous Catholic Priest and the originator of it. The Catholic Church also says there is enough reason to believe that evolution is okay. Afterall, Darwin made it clear that he believed in Aristotelian theory (and thus, Aristotelian Metaphysics which St. Thomas Aquinas relied upon), and that Darwin was Anglican his whole life, whether High Church or not is a different matter. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:03, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::Actually Darwin was Unitarian, not Anglican (he was baptised Anglican mainly due to social pressure) and it's pretty clear that he at least partly abandoned Christianity. He intended to become an Anglican vicar at one point (mainly so he could spend six days a week collecting beetles) but his mother was a practicing Unitarian and took him to her church, and his father and paternal grandfather were atheists. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:33, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Unitarian at the time was not a set "religion" but a religious philosophy, with many Low Church Anglicans adopting it. Darwin trained to become an Anglican priest, and Anglican thought and wording is throughout his texts. Darwin's actions and ideals are in line with the Franciscan school of natural philosophy, which is deeply connected to Aristotelian belief. You can see that in the writings of Roger Bacon and many Franciscan scientists. Darwin's constant referral to Aristotelian beliefs and logic is inline with that. Darwin married as an Anglican, was buried as an Anglican, etc. Such things are stripped away by modern atheists who want to make their current view seem more "historic". Darwin had many supporters in the Anglican clergy, by the way. He was never "high church", but you don't have to be high church to be religious. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:02, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Darwin may well have been buried as an Anglican but he described himself as an agnostic. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 16:04, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::That term didn't exist at his time. So I doubt it highly. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::::Of course it did; it was coined by his friend Thomas Huxley. Darwin used it on at least one occasion. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 23:24, 17 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::[http://books.google.com/books?id=qjN6uTdy7hgC&pg=PA1&dq=Darwin+Anglican&hl=en&ei=xldyTtmGPOn00gGsiNWqCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Darwin%20Anglican&f=false By the way, a good read] on the matter. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Would you mind seeing to it that the above information gets into the appropriate articles? I'd like to see a [[Catholic views on evolution]] article, for example. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:06, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Eventually. However, I do have a rather strong conflict with my personal involvement with the Church, publications on Catholic Theology, Cathology apologia, my work with Catholic advocacy groups, etc. I merely wanted to add a little note that you don't have to be liberal to believe in it. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::JimJast, I'm a tad confused by your response. I was merely stating that belief in the Big Bang wasn't necessarily "liberal" or reflected a liberal bias. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Ottava, I agree on this point.

:::My question was whether you think that Catholics make it ''also'' a part of ''their faith'' (since the Pope accepts it).

:::Being from a Lutheran family, and being educated briefly by my grandpa in matters "of faith", mostly about "Catholic errors", and the absolute need to be trufhful, my concern was that the Catholics are wrong on one more point since the Big Bang was proven wrong in 1985 and then the sbject was considered not interesting enough to publish it, as editors of "''Physical Review Letters"'' wrote me).

:::There are many other pseudo scientific "theories" popping around and scientific journals can't waste space and time on rejecting them all and leave the rejection to "[[relativists]]". It creates an impression of the BBH being right which only "crackpots" like myself object to. But of course even a crackpot might be right especially when the ideas he/she supports are supported also by rigorous physics and math as in this case. Thanks for responding and consider the case explained. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:41, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::"you think that Catholics make it ''also'' a part of ''their faith'" I would say that many Catholics do. :) One of the reason why there were so many scientists who were Catholic monks is from St. Francis saying that we must understand nature so that we can most appreciate the world God has given us. Dominicans pursue science because they believe that knowledge is the path to God, which includes scientific knowledge. Combined with the allegorical interpretation of Genesis, many Catholics pursue these theories fully without seeing any contradiction with their faith (and instead see it as necessary to pursue them to best fulfill their faith). :) By the way, there has been no establishment of a universal understanding of matter, so the idea that the Big Bang was "proven" wrong is not true - there are a few contradictions, but there are a few contradictions in everything because we have not figured out how to tie all the loose ends together. P.S. I've had plenty of college level physics classes and not one ever dismissed the Big Bang. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:28, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

::::::Ottava, it is a '''fact''' that the Big Bang hangs only on the lack of understanding of gravitation among "[[relativists]]". It exists only since, as Feynman says, "no good men work in it". I strted my PhD in gravitation to see what's going on there. Einsteinian gravitation is against ''"[[relativists]]"'' and there is too many '''observations''' that support Einsteinian gravitation. Eventually someone with access to scientific publications starts treating astrophysics seriously and easily discovers that the Big Bang is a hoax. It is obvious for a real physicist (e.g. someone like Feynman). [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 21:48, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::"it is a '''fact''' the Big Bang hangs only on the lack of understanding" - you are the only person I have ever seen make such a claim, so I find it incredibly hard to believe. The absurdity also makes me doubt that you have ever worked at the graduate level in physics, especially with such strong terms which I have never seen any physicist use. As such, I do not think I can, in clean conscience, continue discussing the matter with you. Sorry. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 00:05, 17 September 2011 (EDT)

::::::::Before we part for good I'd like to appologise for hurting your feelings by doubting the infallibility of the Pope, and tell you briefly why I'm sure that the big bang is a fake. And BTW, why didn't you ask that question, before labeling me a lier, while the answer may satisfy your curiosity (as I believe you are a curious person).

::::::::You may ask your friends physicists who believe that the big bang is not a fake whether they know what is the [[intrinsic redshift]] in our universe. The possible answers are (i) "don't know", (ii) "negligible, I guess", (iii) "depending on density of universe, but I don't know how", (iv) "ca. 72km/s/Mpc".

:::::::::Redshift isn't measured in km/s/Mpc; it's measured in terms of z, or occasionally in terms of shifted frequency. You don't have any idea what you're talking about, do you? --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:30, 17 September 2011 (EDT)

::::::::I calculated this [[intrinsic redshift]] with very simple, easy to repeate for an intelligent high school student calculation, and the last answer is true. It means that there is no expansion of the universe since it is the redshift that astrophysicists observe but can't calculate since they don't know how. There is no such calculation in the whole scientific literature. The BBH theorists assume answer (ii) ("negligible"). Why, if I calculated it and got 72km/s/Mpc, which incidentally the Hubble redshift is observed as such?

::::::::And then I invented a relativistic theory explaining the illusion of expanding universe which predicted the illusion of accelerating expansion exacctly as Supernova Cosmology Project observed in 1998 with one standard deviation accuracy (max possible to confirm agreemant of theory with observations, predicted by little me 13 years earlier). Never published though (except in conservapedia) since editors '''belive''' that the universe is expanding and my university blocked my access to the university server so that I had to type the results into conservapedia manually instead just showing a link to them. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 20:19, 17 September 2011 (EDT)

My understanding is the Catholic Church has given ''qualified'' acceptance to Big Bang / evolution / etc., on the basis that that was the predominant scientific opinion, and they want Catholicism and Science to coexist harmoniously. The major qualification, as I understand it, is the need for a literal Adam and Eve and a literal Fall. But God could have say, permitted life to evolve up to higher animals, but then as a special act of creation God created Adam. (Maybe he created Adam out of some evolved primate species). The Church doesn't insist that Genesis need be read completely literally, but some elements (existence of Adam/Eve) are so important theologically they can't be dispensed with. How can Christ be the New Adam if there never was an old one? If the Fall never happened, who needs Redemption? Of course, while I understand this to be the official position, not all Catholics agree with it, or are even aware of it, which is not an uncommon thing in the Catholic church. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 15:22, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110113.htm See chapter XIII]. The Catholic Church was very anti-literalist and actually persecuted many literalist sects as heretics. :) I haven't seen anything in which they required a "literal Adam and Eve", but the "Fall" is different. See also [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05692b.htm Pope Leo XIII]'s warning about certain types of interpretation of the Bible in which we try to conform the divine into the human (i.e. trying to say things literally happened when our words cannot actually contain the divine). See also the statements about how "literal" we can interpret the Bible under "Literal sense". St. Augustine wrote a whole work criticizing taking the literal sense of Genesis (''The Literal Interpretation of Genesis'' which is anti-literalist). I don't want to get into a debate about this, though. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:53, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

===Georges Lemaître===
He was a big name in coming up with it, as well as a Catholic priest. See Wikipedia for a rough biography [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre#Work]--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 21:54, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:Woops, I just read JimJast's post more carefully. Georges Lemaître has already been acknowledged in this debate.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 21:56, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

==Religious views of Charles Darwin==

* In his autobiography, Darwin wrote – “The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic.” [http://www.darwinthenandnow.com/2010/04/darwin-an-agnostic/] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 23:15, 17 September 2011 (EDT)
:That is not our modern definition of "agnostic". Agnostic, at the time, was known to him as the Greek word for "ignorant" or "not knowing". An "agnostic" in the modern sense means something very different, just as atheist before the modern period meant "person who was a heretic to the standard faith" as opposed to "believing in no faiths". Furthermore, it is clear that he says he had doubts as to the proof of various aspects of religion, which is no real different from what Augustine and many others described (even Mother Theresa claimed that she had doubts until the end). Faith is not about knowing, after all. He goes through arguments based on "proof", and then ends up saying that he can't possibly know what the origin was. But he does not say that religion is wrong but that people could possibly be faulty. That is twisted around to say something far different than what Darwin said. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 00:41, 18 September 2011 (EDT)

==References==
<References/>

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-17T04:05:03Z

Ottava: /* Hmm */

It looks like this page may have to be protected, since evolutionists are getting on here and posting nonsense such as YEC being "non-scientific". [[User:Scorpionman|Scorpionman]] 22:39, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

::The only nonsense involves the religious thinking there is "proof" of YEC. Really? An article on the big bang contains one scientific paragraph and a longer one about creationist views? How does one explain cosmic background radiation? Or Hubble's Law? Or Deuterium Observation? Or the fact that if you use the big imaging telescopes to look beyond 14 billion light years in any direction all you see is, well, big bang? Inasmuch proof as science allows (remember, science can't "prove" anything, it can only disprove the false in order to make a better hypothesis) the Big Bang is accepted fact. In what peer-reviewed journal did Matthew, Mark, Luke or John publish? [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:46 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Feel free to expand the article if you wish. I might even join you. But you can do that without removing the creationist material. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 10:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::::What I'm saying is, that material is fine--provided one acknowledges that the opinion of creationists, ESPECIALLY YEC's--is viewed in the scientific community as belonging to the lunatic fringe. One can be socially and politically conservative without making oneself look like idiot by espousing such nonsense as YEC. Science shouldn't be politicized--far too many things already are!! Scientific method should have nothing to with ideology; it should have everything to do with coming up with better hypotheses about the universe based on empirical observations. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:56 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::There, finally finished typing it in Word. This works so much better, although feel free to add to its information. Quite frankly, its absurd to believe in YEC--and I'm a committed social, political and economic conservative!! Please don't associate lunatics with conservatives, because it hurts our credibility. In the 1800s, the Comte de Buffon took composite lumps of molten rock of varying sizes and estimated (based on how long it took his samples to cool to room temperature) that a molten ball the size of Earth would've taken at least 35,000 years just to cool. YEC is idiotic, and those who believe it are blinded by their own ignorance of basic physics. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:42 PM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:I'm confused, Scorpionman. Are you saying that YEC is scientific?
:Personally, I don't see why a discussion of Biblical literalism has any place in an article about the Big Bang. If you want to dispute the current prevailing theory behind the origin of the cosmos, then you should do it scientific evidence or at the very least an attempt at refuting evidence presented for the theory and not with the contents of one religious text. As it is, the article abruptly changes the subject and goes totally off-topic. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 13:53, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Please update the article to include peer-reviewed scientific criticisms of Big Bang-like theories. Right now the article looks ridiculous: a half of a dozen scientific references followed by a bunch of references dominated by the Apologetic Press. Clearly somebody misunderstands the modern scientific process.

== Dominant theory ==

Would it ruffle too many feathers to mention that it is the dominant theory amongst scientists today. I suggest that such a statement is an uncontroversial fact. Thoughts? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 05:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
:No, I agree, it is the dominant theory among scientists. [[User:Hengineer|Hengineer]] 05:23, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

== Sweeping generalisation ==

The following sentence should be removed:

:In contrast to young earth creationists, Old Earth Creationists and Theistic evolutionists agree that the Big Bang occured.

Just because you are an OEC or you believe evolution to be correct does not mean that you MUST believe in the Big Bang Theory. Does anyone remember Fred Hoyle?

Are there any objections to the removal of the sentence? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:18, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

I think this article looks good right now. Good edits guys. Hopefully expressing positive emotions is not violative of probation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:16, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

==Article split==

The intro confuses [[Big Bang]] with [[Expanding universe]]. I'd like to split the article up, with one short article treating each of these two distinct ideas. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:23, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:In fairness, no, an expanding universe is part of the "big bang" (which refers to far more than the universes creation. It's confusing, so I would leave it to someone with a background in physics. [[User:Nematocyte|Nematocyte]] 08:39, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::Have the bounds of [[outer space]] expanded? Or is it just that the galaxies have been getting farther apart within boundless space? What exactly does the theory state? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:59, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Apparently, the answer is "both", at least according to http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#MX --[[User:M|M]] 10:49, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, let's try to get this straight. Is [[outer space]] infinite or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:From what I understand most astrophysics believe that since the area that the universe is expanding into is void of matter and energy that yes currently, [[outer space]] is infinite.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:17, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:Unknown. The spatial extent of the Universe could be finite or infinite. If you're picturing a lump of matter dispersing in a larger void, you're thinking of the wrong thing, though. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 04:18, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:Again, I'm pretty much an amateur when it comes to astrophysics...but I think that the confusion comes from the fact that we're currently uncertain as to the actual curvature of space. I think I remember hearing that space seems to be curved enough that it's actually finite (though boundless, like the three-dimensional equivalent of the surface of a sphere), but I can't provide citation of that at the moment.--[[User:M|M]] 07:11, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't think a split is neccesary, however, on a related note, an article describing the Big Freeze, Big Rip, and Big Crunch theories for the end of the universe might be called for, as those also center on the way in which the universe is expanding (specifically, from measurements of type 1 supernovae in extremely distant galaxies, we have evidence that the universe's expansion is in fact, speeding up, giving support to the Big Freeze (everything expands until entropy is at a maximum), or possibly Big Rip (if Dark Energy is the cause of expansion, then if the universe keeps expanding, dark energy could start to rip apart galaxies, then solar systems, then stars and planets, and finally atoms). So yeah, an article on the possible ways the universe will 'end' (or if it is infinite) would probably help provide more information about the nature of the expanding universe, without having to create an article solely about the expansion of the universe. [[User:Warhawk|Warhawk]] 14:07, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== YEC Citations ==

Conservative, your citations don't appear to agree with each other...compare:
<blockquote>
A prediction had been made prior to the discovery, that if the Big Bang were true, there should be some sort of constant radiation in space, although the prediction was for a temperature several times higher. (http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/30)
</blockquote>

with

<blockquote>
All matter radiates heat, regardless of its temperature. Astronomers can detect an extremely uniform radiation, called cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, coming from all directions. It appears to come from perfectly radiating matter whose temperature is 2.73 K—nearly absolute zero. Many incorrectly believe that the big bang theory predicted this radiation.
</blockquote>

Is it standard procedure to use citations which don't agree with each other on the particulars?

:::Is it standard procedure to give me two citations without giving me the specific cite to the second citation? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:25, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:::I found the second citation and it appears to use the following to support its contention: “The big bang made no quantitative prediction that the ‘background’ radiation would have a temperature of 3 degrees Kelvin (in fact its initial prediction [by George Gamow in 1946] was 30 degrees Kelvin); whereas Eddington in 1926 had already calculated that the ‘temperature of space’ produced by the radiation of starlight would be found to be 3 degrees Kelvin.” Tom Van Flandern, “Did the Universe Have a Beginning?” Meta Research Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 3, 15 September 1994, p. 33. [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html][http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes55.html#wp1077943] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:08, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
::::It's a good thing Tom Van Flandern didn't publish in peer-reviewed journals. I'll believe your numbers, but current data indicates that BOTH were wrong. Redoing a computation of the ambient temperature of the Universe (given modern observations) will ''not'' yield Eddington's prediction; reworking Gamow's calculation ''will'' reproduce the CMB temperature very accurately. Additionally, the CMB data is more than just temperature data; the anisotropies in the CMB are also indicative of the premordial expansion. Just because you can dig up a citation doesn't mean it's correct.

== Common Misconceptions ==

As previously written, this was untrue. The Big Bang does not claim that all matter was tightly packed together before the Big Bang started. That is an assumption that the Big Bang does not address. It is unfortunate that in a section titled common misconceptions that a misconception was added. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:08, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

==Misconception about Evolution==
I think evolution discredits itself. But I think it is unfortunate when us anti-evolutionist mistrepresent the theory. It is discreditable on many points, but this sentence mistrepresents it:

:''Many scientists who believe in the Big Bang Theory are Evolutionists, though not all are. One can believe that God both created the Universe AND laid out the plan for all life in the Big Bang, as opposed to the idea that life evolved randomly after the Big Bang. ''

Evolution does not say life evolved randomly. It says the intitial organism came about through essentially "random" events. (although not strictly random).

Evolution is wrong for other reasons. And if we are going to make evolutionists see its falsity, we have to correctly represent the theory. Or atleast not MISREPRESENT the theory. [[User:InTheEvent|InTheEvent]] 00:00, 20 June 2007 (EDT)

I agree and I'm glad that the article at least makes that distinction, although as an a Creationist who believes the Big Bang is one of the strongest theistic arguments out there, I'm not incredibly happy about Evolution being mentioned in there; one has nothing to do with the other. However, I won't press the issue because I think what's there is a reasonable compromise. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:23, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
==Big Bang proves Universe had a beginning==
Why are so many creationists against the big bang, it proves that the universe had a beginning point. It also seems to violate physics because matter can't be created from nothing. It indicates a creative force behind the universe.

:Well, for one thing the "billions of years" makes it just laughable, but more importantly it goes against the Bible which says God created the Earth in 6 days around 6000 years ago. --[[User:Rolloffle|Rolloffle]] 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::Where, exactly, is the age of the Earth specified as being 6000 years in the Bible. Please reference the relevant chapters and verses. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 11:38, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

::"'Billions of years' makes it just laughable." The good old argument from ridiculity. It's like the argument from incredulity, but more fun.--[[User:All Fish Welcome|All Fish Welcome]] 12:10, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Most atheists?==
Does anyone have ANY reference that backs up the claim about "most atheists"? Or is it just made up off the top of people's heads?
: The scientific community (which I define as the doctorate-level degree holding scientists) in the U.S. overwhelmingly accept the Big Bang and old universe. I think most atheists just believe what scientists say is right despite the fact they don't know anything about it. I don't have a source for the U.S. public relating atheism to big bang belief, but I have a source for correlation between scientists' atheism and big bang belief, which we could extrapolate from. [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html From Nature magazine]. --[[User:Theonlyconservative|Theonlyconservative]] 12:38, 9 November 2007 (EST)

== Article Depth ==

In all honesty, this article does not tell anyone very much about the big bang theory, evidence for it, or the reasons why it was formulated in the first place. The article basically introduces the topic with a mish mash of unrelated facts in no particular order, then the next section is "dissent letter" followed by "starlight problem". These are hardly the most relevant topics about the Big Bang theory. May I suggest that as this article is (hopefully) reworked, those doing the writing keep in mind that the Big Bang Theory is a very general class of theories that all have one thing in common - the assertion that long ago the universe "began" from a mathematical singularity and has been increasing in size ever since. Also, be wary about the throwing around the word "singularity" - contrary to popular belief and science fiction, a singularity is not a physical thing - it is an asymptotic point in a mathematical function where the function breaks down and can no longer make any predictions. Other singularities include the center of black holes, and objects traveling at the speed of light. The mathematical models for these systems break down at these values and become meaningless. Likewise, the Big Bang Theory has nothing to say about the origin of the singularity or what came "before" it. It is outside the realm of the theory, and in the opinion of some scientist (I'm not comfortable saying most or few here, as I'm basing this statement only on my personal discussions) outside the realm of science as a whole.

== Georges-Henri Lemaître ==

Could somebody add something in about how Roman Catholic priest [[Georges-Henri Lemaître]], the original proposer of the Big Bang theory, felt that the theory fitted beautifully with his faith as it supports a "creation event"? [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 12:51, 8 January 2008 (EST)

== Change "Starlight problem" to "Horizon problem"? ==

There's a section in this article that refers to the "starlight problem" but I believe scientists actually refer to this issue as the "horizon problem." See [http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/HorizonProblem.html here] and [http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/cosmo.html#c5 here] for example. One reason is that the problem has to do with more than starlight--there are questions about density, temperature, etc. The term "starlight problem" is generally used by people discussing creationist cosmological models, while "horizon problem" is more appropriate in the context of the big bang model.--[[User:JamesR|JamesR]] 20:07, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
: I've changed it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:27, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

== Inflation and YEC ==

Couldn't inflation make the Big Bang and YEC compatible? I mean if it happened faster than the speed of light. Then why couldn't it happen in the YEC time scale? [[jfraatz|jfraatz]]

== "God's Role" ==

Can someone help me come up with a better way of saying "God's role in creating the universe." ? Obviously God didn't just have a 'role,' He simply created it by Himself! Thanks! [[User:WillS|WillS]] 18:16, 21 May 2010 (EDT)

:I tried; do you think my wording is OK? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 03:06, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

::Looks great. And good job catching some other areas where liberal bias crept in as well!

== Correcting "scientific" ==

I just corrected "scientific" the word used in description of the Big Bang to the proper in this case term "pseudo scientific". See also my [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] where I explain why the Big Bang is a pseudo scientific hypothesis (between other things it assumes "curved" spacetime for which there is no evidence and a lot of to contrary) and how Einsteinian gravitation works. The essay is still not finished and so I invite anybody to expres their opinion on the talk page of the essay. Thanks. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:35, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:I have already expressed my opinion on the talk page of that essay: you're a crackpot. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:02, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Sam, the fact that I'm a crackpot has certain influence on my credibility (which I never claimed being high, while I'm only a sculptor, with only one year training in general realativity, and the rest of my formal education being in electrical engineeiring) but it surely has no influence on the truth of Big Bang hypothesis (BBH).

::The biggest flaw of BBH is an assumption that the universe is expanding while it is not.

::This error of expansion of universe was created many years ago by [[relativists]] giving up the checking what is the ''[[intrinsic redshift]]'' in the universe before jumping to conclusion that the ''redshift is a '''proof''' that the universe is expanding''. It is clearly a non scientific approach to science. There are no proofs in science (except in math, and that's why math is not considered to be science). There are only better or worse ''hypotheses'' that are surely no proof. Some last long time until they collapse when a '''proof of their invalidity''' turns up and usually it is not accepted since no scientist cares about looking like an idiot who overlooke something important and assumed an impossible. Error that Newton avoided, not believeing in his own theory being more than just math.

::[[Intrinsic redshift]] is as it is observed in our universe (see my step-by-step derivation in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] and please comment on possible errors in this derivation). My derivation is done in such a simple way that an intelligent high school student shouldn't have problems with repeating it him/herself. Besides I'm here to explain if something is too difficult. Just ask a question about this derivation or other things since from 1985, when I discovered this derivation, I found out also many other thing. E.g. why the universe is looking as if it were expanding with accelerating expansion and the acceleration has just its value, observed with accuracy of only one standard deviation (max possible) by Supernova Cosmology Project team in 1998, which is

:::<math>dH/dt=-H_o^2/2</math>

::where <math>dH/dt</math> is acceleration of expansion in terms of derivation of Hubble constant with respect to time <math>t</math>, and <math>H_o</math> is the Hubble constant itself. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 16:44, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

== "even though the theory is based on little more than guesswork, speculation, and dubious assumptions." ==

I must agree with the removal of the above sentence. The big bang theory is based on the observations of red shifts, background radiation and other observational and physical properties of the universe. However, it is the assumptions the Big Bang theorists draw from this that are the debatable part. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:51, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:Thanks Max. I don't accept the Big Bang theory myself, but only on the grounds of my faith. The error - and I think it's a sincere one - that astrophysicists are making is in the use of methodological naturalism, which of course is a requirement of the scientific method. Within the constraints of that method it's a very sound theory; it just isn't correct. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:01, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Yes Sam, ''"it just isn't correct"''. But can we say it while [[relativists]] maintain that it is correct? We have to have a proof that it isn't correct.

::I don't blame Max for him doing what he had to do not knowing such a proof. I just would like to start a discussion whether my proof is sound one, and justifying dumping BBH. I'm sure it is but I'm the author so I may be biased (though I took a general realtivity course at Harvard to be sure that I'm right and thought about this for over quater of a century so I'm relatively sure that it is a sound proof of invalidity of BBH).

::Anyway, I can only help in discussion by keeping it on track when I see wrong arguments, and without anybody discussing this issue it won't be even known that the proof of invalidity of BBH even exists. No mainstream scientific journal ever wanted to publish this proof despite it is only one page of print. It was published in conservapedia (after being blocked on my university server) as [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]] in a short form suitable for physicists. Longer form with step-by-step derivation of redshift in our universe, and more, is in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]]. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:25, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

::Just as a note, Sam, the Scientific Theory (i.e. Scientific Method) was codified by two individuals that were deeply religious (Descartes and Francis Bacon). It is also derived from the theories of logic codified by Roger Bacon, a monk. I don't think it is a difference between faith and reason. St. Thomas Aquinas made the argument that we should seek to combine the two, which John Calvin said was a very important advancement that allowed us to move beyond Greek philosophy/science. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 19:00, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:::It's irrelevant that Descartes and the Bacons were religious; the scientific method does NOT combine faith and reason and in fact explicitly rejects faith. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:14, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Additional note, Sam, what good it would do if we believed in things that are not true? As pseudo scientific theories usually are. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:29, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::It's interesting to our readers that the founders of the [[scientific method]] were religious. We always want to know more about people who have influenced currents of modern thought.

::::When someone proposes "[[intelligent design]]", do we respond to the challenge of the idea purely on its merits, or do we consider the motives of its proponents? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:32, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

== Hmm ==

As a Catholic, I hope people realize that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter. The Catholic Church is home to one of the most conservative Christian organizations in the US, the Knights of Columbus (1.8 million members), mind you. I do hope that we can at least acknowledge that this isn't an "atheist" view or a "liberal" view, but one that spreads across boundaries. :) After all, the Catholic Church's view about Genesis is based on St. Augustine's determination that Genesis was allegorical, which was something both Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed with. Just keep this in mind. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 18:56, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:In what sense ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''? The fact that ''"Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed (that Genesis was allegorical)"'' isn't a clear indication that ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''. At least to me (the crank :) that's why I'd appreciate if you explained it in more detail.

:My opinion is the same as yours that there was an involvement but I'm not sure that I understand it the same way as you do. I know that Gorges Lemaître, the Catholic prist, proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory<ref>

After wikipedia and believed this time.

</ref>, and also that the theory is false since I personally executed the for long time neglected calculation of value of [[intrinsic redshift]] and it turned out roughly as it is observed, which implies that practically there is no expansion of universe. Results of my calculations were not published since 1985 when they were done, except recently in conservapedia<ref>

[[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]].

</ref>, but I don't think that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter of blocking the publication. Do you? :) [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::Ottava, are you saying that a large percentage of Catholics accept the Big Bang theory? If so, is it because it seems reasonable to them? Or because it's Catholic dogma, or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:36, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::It is both accepted by Catholics and given official approval by the Vatican. After all, [[Georges-Henri Lemaitre]] was a famous Catholic Priest and the originator of it. The Catholic Church also says there is enough reason to believe that evolution is okay. Afterall, Darwin made it clear that he believed in Aristotelian theory (and thus, Aristotelian Metaphysics which St. Thomas Aquinas relied upon), and that Darwin was Anglican his whole life, whether High Church or not is a different matter. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:03, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::Actually Darwin was Unitarian, not Anglican (he was baptised Anglican mainly due to social pressure) and it's pretty clear that he at least partly abandoned Christianity. He intended to become an Anglican vicar at one point (mainly so he could spend six days a week collecting beetles) but his mother was a practicing Unitarian and took him to her church, and his father and paternal grandfather were atheists. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:33, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Unitarian at the time was not a set "religion" but a religious philosophy, with many Low Church Anglicans adopting it. Darwin trained to become an Anglican priest, and Anglican thought and wording is throughout his texts. Darwin's actions and ideals are in line with the Franciscan school of natural philosophy, which is deeply connected to Aristotelian belief. You can see that in the writings of Roger Bacon and many Franciscan scientists. Darwin's constant referral to Aristotelian beliefs and logic is inline with that. Darwin married as an Anglican, was buried as an Anglican, etc. Such things are stripped away by modern atheists who want to make their current view seem more "historic". Darwin had many supporters in the Anglican clergy, by the way. He was never "high church", but you don't have to be high church to be religious. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:02, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Darwin may well have been buried as an Anglican but he described himself as an agnostic. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 16:04, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::That term didn't exist at his time. So I doubt it highly. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::[http://books.google.com/books?id=qjN6uTdy7hgC&pg=PA1&dq=Darwin+Anglican&hl=en&ei=xldyTtmGPOn00gGsiNWqCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Darwin%20Anglican&f=false By the way, a good read] on the matter. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Would you mind seeing to it that the above information gets into the appropriate articles? I'd like to see a [[Catholic views on evolution]] article, for example. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:06, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Eventually. However, I do have a rather strong conflict with my personal involvement with the Church, publications on Catholic Theology, Cathology apologia, my work with Catholic advocacy groups, etc. I merely wanted to add a little note that you don't have to be liberal to believe in it. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::JimJast, I'm a tad confused by your response. I was merely stating that belief in the Big Bang wasn't necessarily "liberal" or reflected a liberal bias. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Ottava, I agree on this point.

:::My question was whether you think that Catholics make it ''also'' a part of ''their faith'' (since the Pope accepts it).

:::Being from a Lutheran family, and being educated briefly by my grandpa in matters "of faith", mostly about "Catholic errors", and the absolute need to be trufhful, my concern was that the Catholics are wrong on one more point since the Big Bang was proven wrong in 1985 and then the sbject was considered not interesting enough to publish it, as editors of "''Physical Review Letters"'' wrote me).

:::There are many other pseudo scientific "theories" popping around and scientific journals can't waste space and time on rejecting them all and leave the rejection to "[[relativists]]". It creates an impression of the BBH being right which only "crackpots" like myself object to. But of course even a crackpot might be right especially when the ideas he/she supports are supported also by rigorous physics and math as in this case. Thanks for responding and consider the case explained. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:41, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::"you think that Catholics make it ''also'' a part of ''their faith'" I would say that many Catholics do. :) One of the reason why there were so many scientists who were Catholic monks is from St. Francis saying that we must understand nature so that we can most appreciate the world God has given us. Dominicans pursue science because they believe that knowledge is the path to God, which includes scientific knowledge. Combined with the allegorical interpretation of Genesis, many Catholics pursue these theories fully without seeing any contradiction with their faith (and instead see it as necessary to pursue them to best fulfill their faith). :) By the way, there has been no establishment of a universal understanding of matter, so the idea that the Big Bang was "proven" wrong is not true - there are a few contradictions, but there are a few contradictions in everything because we have not figured out how to tie all the loose ends together. P.S. I've had plenty of college level physics classes and not one ever dismissed the Big Bang. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:28, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

::::::Ottava, it is a '''fact''' that the Big Bang hangs only on the lack of understanding of gravitation among "[[relativists]]". It exists only since, as Feynman says, "no good men work in it". I strted my PhD in gravitation to see what's going on there. Einsteinian gravitation is against ''"[[relativists]]"'' and there is too many '''observations''' that support Einsteinian gravitation. Eventually someone with access to scientific publications starts treating astrophysics seriously and easily discovers that the Big Bang is a hoax. It is obvious for a real physicist (e.g. someone like Feynman). [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 21:48, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::"it is a '''fact''' the Big Bang hangs only on the lack of understanding" - you are the only person I have ever seen make such a claim, so I find it incredibly hard to believe. The absurdity also makes me doubt that you have ever worked at the graduate level in physics, especially with such strong terms which I have never seen any physicist use. As such, I do not think I can, in clean conscience, continue discussing the matter with you. Sorry. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 00:05, 17 September 2011 (EDT)

My understanding is the Catholic Church has given ''qualified'' acceptance to Big Bang / evolution / etc., on the basis that that was the predominant scientific opinion, and they want Catholicism and Science to coexist harmoniously. The major qualification, as I understand it, is the need for a literal Adam and Eve and a literal Fall. But God could have say, permitted life to evolve up to higher animals, but then as a special act of creation God created Adam. (Maybe he created Adam out of some evolved primate species). The Church doesn't insist that Genesis need be read completely literally, but some elements (existence of Adam/Eve) are so important theologically they can't be dispensed with. How can Christ be the New Adam if there never was an old one? If the Fall never happened, who needs Redemption? Of course, while I understand this to be the official position, not all Catholics agree with it, or are even aware of it, which is not an uncommon thing in the Catholic church. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 15:22, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110113.htm See chapter XIII]. The Catholic Church was very anti-literalist and actually persecuted many literalist sects as heretics. :) I haven't seen anything in which they required a "literal Adam and Eve", but the "Fall" is different. See also [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05692b.htm Pope Leo XIII]'s warning about certain types of interpretation of the Bible in which we try to conform the divine into the human (i.e. trying to say things literally happened when our words cannot actually contain the divine). See also the statements about how "literal" we can interpret the Bible under "Literal sense". St. Augustine wrote a whole work criticizing taking the literal sense of Genesis (''The Literal Interpretation of Genesis'' which is anti-literalist). I don't want to get into a debate about this, though. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:53, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

===Georges Lemaître===
He was a big name in coming up with it, as well as a Catholic priest. See Wikipedia for a rough biography [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre#Work]--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 21:54, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:Woops, I just read JimJast's post more carefully. Georges Lemaître has already been acknowledged in this debate.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 21:56, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

==References==
<References/>

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-16T19:28:57Z

Ottava: /* Hmm */

It looks like this page may have to be protected, since evolutionists are getting on here and posting nonsense such as YEC being "non-scientific". [[User:Scorpionman|Scorpionman]] 22:39, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

::The only nonsense involves the religious thinking there is "proof" of YEC. Really? An article on the big bang contains one scientific paragraph and a longer one about creationist views? How does one explain cosmic background radiation? Or Hubble's Law? Or Deuterium Observation? Or the fact that if you use the big imaging telescopes to look beyond 14 billion light years in any direction all you see is, well, big bang? Inasmuch proof as science allows (remember, science can't "prove" anything, it can only disprove the false in order to make a better hypothesis) the Big Bang is accepted fact. In what peer-reviewed journal did Matthew, Mark, Luke or John publish? [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:46 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Feel free to expand the article if you wish. I might even join you. But you can do that without removing the creationist material. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 10:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::::What I'm saying is, that material is fine--provided one acknowledges that the opinion of creationists, ESPECIALLY YEC's--is viewed in the scientific community as belonging to the lunatic fringe. One can be socially and politically conservative without making oneself look like idiot by espousing such nonsense as YEC. Science shouldn't be politicized--far too many things already are!! Scientific method should have nothing to with ideology; it should have everything to do with coming up with better hypotheses about the universe based on empirical observations. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:56 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::There, finally finished typing it in Word. This works so much better, although feel free to add to its information. Quite frankly, its absurd to believe in YEC--and I'm a committed social, political and economic conservative!! Please don't associate lunatics with conservatives, because it hurts our credibility. In the 1800s, the Comte de Buffon took composite lumps of molten rock of varying sizes and estimated (based on how long it took his samples to cool to room temperature) that a molten ball the size of Earth would've taken at least 35,000 years just to cool. YEC is idiotic, and those who believe it are blinded by their own ignorance of basic physics. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:42 PM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:I'm confused, Scorpionman. Are you saying that YEC is scientific?
:Personally, I don't see why a discussion of Biblical literalism has any place in an article about the Big Bang. If you want to dispute the current prevailing theory behind the origin of the cosmos, then you should do it scientific evidence or at the very least an attempt at refuting evidence presented for the theory and not with the contents of one religious text. As it is, the article abruptly changes the subject and goes totally off-topic. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 13:53, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Please update the article to include peer-reviewed scientific criticisms of Big Bang-like theories. Right now the article looks ridiculous: a half of a dozen scientific references followed by a bunch of references dominated by the Apologetic Press. Clearly somebody misunderstands the modern scientific process.

== Dominant theory ==

Would it ruffle too many feathers to mention that it is the dominant theory amongst scientists today. I suggest that such a statement is an uncontroversial fact. Thoughts? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 05:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
:No, I agree, it is the dominant theory among scientists. [[User:Hengineer|Hengineer]] 05:23, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

== Sweeping generalisation ==

The following sentence should be removed:

:In contrast to young earth creationists, Old Earth Creationists and Theistic evolutionists agree that the Big Bang occured.

Just because you are an OEC or you believe evolution to be correct does not mean that you MUST believe in the Big Bang Theory. Does anyone remember Fred Hoyle?

Are there any objections to the removal of the sentence? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:18, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

I think this article looks good right now. Good edits guys. Hopefully expressing positive emotions is not violative of probation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:16, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

==Article split==

The intro confuses [[Big Bang]] with [[Expanding universe]]. I'd like to split the article up, with one short article treating each of these two distinct ideas. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:23, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:In fairness, no, an expanding universe is part of the "big bang" (which refers to far more than the universes creation. It's confusing, so I would leave it to someone with a background in physics. [[User:Nematocyte|Nematocyte]] 08:39, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::Have the bounds of [[outer space]] expanded? Or is it just that the galaxies have been getting farther apart within boundless space? What exactly does the theory state? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:59, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Apparently, the answer is "both", at least according to http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#MX --[[User:M|M]] 10:49, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, let's try to get this straight. Is [[outer space]] infinite or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:From what I understand most astrophysics believe that since the area that the universe is expanding into is void of matter and energy that yes currently, [[outer space]] is infinite.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:17, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:Unknown. The spatial extent of the Universe could be finite or infinite. If you're picturing a lump of matter dispersing in a larger void, you're thinking of the wrong thing, though. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 04:18, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:Again, I'm pretty much an amateur when it comes to astrophysics...but I think that the confusion comes from the fact that we're currently uncertain as to the actual curvature of space. I think I remember hearing that space seems to be curved enough that it's actually finite (though boundless, like the three-dimensional equivalent of the surface of a sphere), but I can't provide citation of that at the moment.--[[User:M|M]] 07:11, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't think a split is neccesary, however, on a related note, an article describing the Big Freeze, Big Rip, and Big Crunch theories for the end of the universe might be called for, as those also center on the way in which the universe is expanding (specifically, from measurements of type 1 supernovae in extremely distant galaxies, we have evidence that the universe's expansion is in fact, speeding up, giving support to the Big Freeze (everything expands until entropy is at a maximum), or possibly Big Rip (if Dark Energy is the cause of expansion, then if the universe keeps expanding, dark energy could start to rip apart galaxies, then solar systems, then stars and planets, and finally atoms). So yeah, an article on the possible ways the universe will 'end' (or if it is infinite) would probably help provide more information about the nature of the expanding universe, without having to create an article solely about the expansion of the universe. [[User:Warhawk|Warhawk]] 14:07, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== YEC Citations ==

Conservative, your citations don't appear to agree with each other...compare:
<blockquote>
A prediction had been made prior to the discovery, that if the Big Bang were true, there should be some sort of constant radiation in space, although the prediction was for a temperature several times higher. (http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/30)
</blockquote>

with

<blockquote>
All matter radiates heat, regardless of its temperature. Astronomers can detect an extremely uniform radiation, called cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, coming from all directions. It appears to come from perfectly radiating matter whose temperature is 2.73 K—nearly absolute zero. Many incorrectly believe that the big bang theory predicted this radiation.
</blockquote>

Is it standard procedure to use citations which don't agree with each other on the particulars?

:::Is it standard procedure to give me two citations without giving me the specific cite to the second citation? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:25, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:::I found the second citation and it appears to use the following to support its contention: “The big bang made no quantitative prediction that the ‘background’ radiation would have a temperature of 3 degrees Kelvin (in fact its initial prediction [by George Gamow in 1946] was 30 degrees Kelvin); whereas Eddington in 1926 had already calculated that the ‘temperature of space’ produced by the radiation of starlight would be found to be 3 degrees Kelvin.” Tom Van Flandern, “Did the Universe Have a Beginning?” Meta Research Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 3, 15 September 1994, p. 33. [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html][http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes55.html#wp1077943] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:08, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
::::It's a good thing Tom Van Flandern didn't publish in peer-reviewed journals. I'll believe your numbers, but current data indicates that BOTH were wrong. Redoing a computation of the ambient temperature of the Universe (given modern observations) will ''not'' yield Eddington's prediction; reworking Gamow's calculation ''will'' reproduce the CMB temperature very accurately. Additionally, the CMB data is more than just temperature data; the anisotropies in the CMB are also indicative of the premordial expansion. Just because you can dig up a citation doesn't mean it's correct.

== Common Misconceptions ==

As previously written, this was untrue. The Big Bang does not claim that all matter was tightly packed together before the Big Bang started. That is an assumption that the Big Bang does not address. It is unfortunate that in a section titled common misconceptions that a misconception was added. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:08, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

==Misconception about Evolution==
I think evolution discredits itself. But I think it is unfortunate when us anti-evolutionist mistrepresent the theory. It is discreditable on many points, but this sentence mistrepresents it:

:''Many scientists who believe in the Big Bang Theory are Evolutionists, though not all are. One can believe that God both created the Universe AND laid out the plan for all life in the Big Bang, as opposed to the idea that life evolved randomly after the Big Bang. ''

Evolution does not say life evolved randomly. It says the intitial organism came about through essentially "random" events. (although not strictly random).

Evolution is wrong for other reasons. And if we are going to make evolutionists see its falsity, we have to correctly represent the theory. Or atleast not MISREPRESENT the theory. [[User:InTheEvent|InTheEvent]] 00:00, 20 June 2007 (EDT)

I agree and I'm glad that the article at least makes that distinction, although as an a Creationist who believes the Big Bang is one of the strongest theistic arguments out there, I'm not incredibly happy about Evolution being mentioned in there; one has nothing to do with the other. However, I won't press the issue because I think what's there is a reasonable compromise. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:23, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
==Big Bang proves Universe had a beginning==
Why are so many creationists against the big bang, it proves that the universe had a beginning point. It also seems to violate physics because matter can't be created from nothing. It indicates a creative force behind the universe.

:Well, for one thing the "billions of years" makes it just laughable, but more importantly it goes against the Bible which says God created the Earth in 6 days around 6000 years ago. --[[User:Rolloffle|Rolloffle]] 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::Where, exactly, is the age of the Earth specified as being 6000 years in the Bible. Please reference the relevant chapters and verses. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 11:38, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

::"'Billions of years' makes it just laughable." The good old argument from ridiculity. It's like the argument from incredulity, but more fun.--[[User:All Fish Welcome|All Fish Welcome]] 12:10, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Most atheists?==
Does anyone have ANY reference that backs up the claim about "most atheists"? Or is it just made up off the top of people's heads?
: The scientific community (which I define as the doctorate-level degree holding scientists) in the U.S. overwhelmingly accept the Big Bang and old universe. I think most atheists just believe what scientists say is right despite the fact they don't know anything about it. I don't have a source for the U.S. public relating atheism to big bang belief, but I have a source for correlation between scientists' atheism and big bang belief, which we could extrapolate from. [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html From Nature magazine]. --[[User:Theonlyconservative|Theonlyconservative]] 12:38, 9 November 2007 (EST)

== Article Depth ==

In all honesty, this article does not tell anyone very much about the big bang theory, evidence for it, or the reasons why it was formulated in the first place. The article basically introduces the topic with a mish mash of unrelated facts in no particular order, then the next section is "dissent letter" followed by "starlight problem". These are hardly the most relevant topics about the Big Bang theory. May I suggest that as this article is (hopefully) reworked, those doing the writing keep in mind that the Big Bang Theory is a very general class of theories that all have one thing in common - the assertion that long ago the universe "began" from a mathematical singularity and has been increasing in size ever since. Also, be wary about the throwing around the word "singularity" - contrary to popular belief and science fiction, a singularity is not a physical thing - it is an asymptotic point in a mathematical function where the function breaks down and can no longer make any predictions. Other singularities include the center of black holes, and objects traveling at the speed of light. The mathematical models for these systems break down at these values and become meaningless. Likewise, the Big Bang Theory has nothing to say about the origin of the singularity or what came "before" it. It is outside the realm of the theory, and in the opinion of some scientist (I'm not comfortable saying most or few here, as I'm basing this statement only on my personal discussions) outside the realm of science as a whole.

== Georges-Henri Lemaître ==

Could somebody add something in about how Roman Catholic priest [[Georges-Henri Lemaître]], the original proposer of the Big Bang theory, felt that the theory fitted beautifully with his faith as it supports a "creation event"? [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 12:51, 8 January 2008 (EST)

== Change "Starlight problem" to "Horizon problem"? ==

There's a section in this article that refers to the "starlight problem" but I believe scientists actually refer to this issue as the "horizon problem." See [http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/HorizonProblem.html here] and [http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/cosmo.html#c5 here] for example. One reason is that the problem has to do with more than starlight--there are questions about density, temperature, etc. The term "starlight problem" is generally used by people discussing creationist cosmological models, while "horizon problem" is more appropriate in the context of the big bang model.--[[User:JamesR|JamesR]] 20:07, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
: I've changed it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:27, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

== Inflation and YEC ==

Couldn't inflation make the Big Bang and YEC compatible? I mean if it happened faster than the speed of light. Then why couldn't it happen in the YEC time scale? [[jfraatz|jfraatz]]

== "God's Role" ==

Can someone help me come up with a better way of saying "God's role in creating the universe." ? Obviously God didn't just have a 'role,' He simply created it by Himself! Thanks! [[User:WillS|WillS]] 18:16, 21 May 2010 (EDT)

:I tried; do you think my wording is OK? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 03:06, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

::Looks great. And good job catching some other areas where liberal bias crept in as well!

== Correcting "scientific" ==

I just corrected "scientific" the word used in description of the Big Bang to the proper in this case term "pseudo scientific". See also my [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] where I explain why the Big Bang is a pseudo scientific hypothesis (between other things it assumes "curved" spacetime for which there is no evidence and a lot of to contrary) and how Einsteinian gravitation works. The essay is still not finished and so I invite anybody to expres their opinion on the talk page of the essay. Thanks. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:35, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:I have already expressed my opinion on the talk page of that essay: you're a crackpot. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:02, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Sam, the fact that I'm a crackpot has certain influence on my credibility (which I never claimed being high, while I'm only a sculptor, with only one year training in general realativity, and the rest of my formal education being in electrical engineeiring) but it surely has no influence on the truth of Big Bang hypothesis (BBH).

::The biggest flaw of BBH is an assumption that the universe is expanding while it is not.

::This error of expansion of universe was created many years ago by [[relativists]] giving up the checking what is the ''[[intrinsic redshift]]'' in the universe before jumping to conclusion that the ''redshift is a '''proof''' that the universe is expanding''. It is clearly a non scientific approach to science. There are no proofs in science (except in math, and that's why math is not considered to be science). There are only better or worse ''hypotheses'' that are surely no proof. Some last long time until they collapse when a '''proof of their invalidity''' turns up and usually it is not accepted since no scientist cares about looking like an idiot who overlooke something important and assumed an impossible. Error that Newton avoided, not believeing in his own theory being more than just math.

::[[Intrinsic redshift]] is as it is observed in our universe (see my step-by-step derivation in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] and please comment on possible errors in this derivation). My derivation is done in such a simple way that an intelligent high school student shouldn't have problems with repeating it him/herself. Besides I'm here to explain if something is too difficult. Just ask a question about this derivation or other things since from 1985, when I discovered this derivation, I found out also many other thing. E.g. why the universe is looking as if it were expanding with accelerating expansion and the acceleration has just its value, observed with accuracy of only one standard deviation (max possible) by Supernova Cosmology Project team in 1998, which is

:::<math>dH/dt=-H_o^2/2</math>

::where <math>dH/dt</math> is acceleration of expansion in terms of derivation of Hubble constant with respect to time <math>t</math>, and <math>H_o</math> is the Hubble constant itself. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 16:44, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

== "even though the theory is based on little more than guesswork, speculation, and dubious assumptions." ==

I must agree with the removal of the above sentence. The big bang theory is based on the observations of red shifts, background radiation and other observational and physical properties of the universe. However, it is the assumptions the Big Bang theorists draw from this that are the debatable part. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:51, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:Thanks Max. I don't accept the Big Bang theory myself, but only on the grounds of my faith. The error - and I think it's a sincere one - that astrophysicists are making is in the use of methodological naturalism, which of course is a requirement of the scientific method. Within the constraints of that method it's a very sound theory; it just isn't correct. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:01, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Yes Sam, ''"it just isn't correct"''. But can we say it while [[relativists]] maintain that it is correct? We have to have a proof that it isn't correct.

::I don't blame Max for him doing what he had to do not knowing such a proof. I just would like to start a discussion whether my proof is sound one, and justifying dumping BBH. I'm sure it is but I'm the author so I may be biased (though I took a general realtivity course at Harvard to be sure that I'm right and thought about this for over quater of a century so I'm relatively sure that it is a sound proof of invalidity of BBH).

::Anyway, I can only help in discussion by keeping it on track when I see wrong arguments, and without anybody discussing this issue it won't be even known that the proof of invalidity of BBH even exists. No mainstream scientific journal ever wanted to publish this proof despite it is only one page of print. It was published in conservapedia (after being blocked on my university server) as [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]] in a short form suitable for physicists. Longer form with step-by-step derivation of redshift in our universe, and more, is in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]]. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:25, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

::Just as a note, Sam, the Scientific Theory (i.e. Scientific Method) was codified by two individuals that were deeply religious (Descartes and Francis Bacon). It is also derived from the theories of logic codified by Roger Bacon, a monk. I don't think it is a difference between faith and reason. St. Thomas Aquinas made the argument that we should seek to combine the two, which John Calvin said was a very important advancement that allowed us to move beyond Greek philosophy/science. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 19:00, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:::It's irrelevant that Descartes and the Bacons were religious; the scientific method does NOT combine faith and reason and in fact explicitly rejects faith. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:14, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Additional note, Sam, what good it would do if we believed in things that are not true? As pseudo scientific theories usually are. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:29, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::It's interesting to our readers that the founders of the [[scientific method]] were religious. We always want to know more about people who have influenced currents of modern thought.

::::When someone proposes "[[intelligent design]]", do we respond to the challenge of the idea purely on its merits, or do we consider the motives of its proponents? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:32, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

== Hmm ==

As a Catholic, I hope people realize that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter. The Catholic Church is home to one of the most conservative Christian organizations in the US, the Knights of Columbus (1.8 million members), mind you. I do hope that we can at least acknowledge that this isn't an "atheist" view or a "liberal" view, but one that spreads across boundaries. :) After all, the Catholic Church's view about Genesis is based on St. Augustine's determination that Genesis was allegorical, which was something both Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed with. Just keep this in mind. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 18:56, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:In what sense ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''? The fact that ''"Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed (that Genesis was allegorical)"'' isn't a clear indication that ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''. At least to me (the crank :) that's why I'd appreciate if you explained it in more detail.

:My opinion is the same as yours that there was an involvement but I'm not sure that I understand it the same way as you do. I know that Gorges Lemaître, the Catholic prist, proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory<ref>

After wikipedia and believed this time.

</ref>, and also that the theory is false since I personally executed the for long time neglected calculation of value of [[intrinsic redshift]] and it turned out roughly as it is observed, which implies that practically there is no expansion of universe. Results of my calculations were not published since 1985 when they were done, except recently in conservapedia<ref>

[[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]].

</ref>, but I don't think that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter of blocking the publication. Do you? :) [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::Ottava, are you saying that a large percentage of Catholics accept the Big Bang theory? If so, is it because it seems reasonable to them? Or because it's Catholic dogma, or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:36, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::It is both accepted by Catholics and given official approval by the Vatican. After all, [[Georges-Henri Lemaitre]] was a famous Catholic Priest and the originator of it. The Catholic Church also says there is enough reason to believe that evolution is okay. Afterall, Darwin made it clear that he believed in Aristotelian theory (and thus, Aristotelian Metaphysics which St. Thomas Aquinas relied upon), and that Darwin was Anglican his whole life, whether High Church or not is a different matter. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:03, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::Actually Darwin was Unitarian, not Anglican (he was baptised Anglican mainly due to social pressure) and it's pretty clear that he at least partly abandoned Christianity. He intended to become an Anglican vicar at one point (mainly so he could spend six days a week collecting beetles) but his mother was a practicing Unitarian and took him to her church, and his father and paternal grandfather were atheists. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:33, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Unitarian at the time was not a set "religion" but a religious philosophy, with many Low Church Anglicans adopting it. Darwin trained to become an Anglican priest, and Anglican thought and wording is throughout his texts. Darwin's actions and ideals are in line with the Franciscan school of natural philosophy, which is deeply connected to Aristotelian belief. You can see that in the writings of Roger Bacon and many Franciscan scientists. Darwin's constant referral to Aristotelian beliefs and logic is inline with that. Darwin married as an Anglican, was buried as an Anglican, etc. Such things are stripped away by modern atheists who want to make their current view seem more "historic". Darwin had many supporters in the Anglican clergy, by the way. He was never "high church", but you don't have to be high church to be religious. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:02, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Darwin may well have been buried as an Anglican but he described himself as an agnostic. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 16:04, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::That term didn't exist at his time. So I doubt it highly. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::[http://books.google.com/books?id=qjN6uTdy7hgC&pg=PA1&dq=Darwin+Anglican&hl=en&ei=xldyTtmGPOn00gGsiNWqCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Darwin%20Anglican&f=false By the way, a good read] on the matter. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Would you mind seeing to it that the above information gets into the appropriate articles? I'd like to see a [[Catholic views on evolution]] article, for example. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:06, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Eventually. However, I do have a rather strong conflict with my personal involvement with the Church, publications on Catholic Theology, Cathology apologia, my work with Catholic advocacy groups, etc. I merely wanted to add a little note that you don't have to be liberal to believe in it. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::JimJast, I'm a tad confused by your response. I was merely stating that belief in the Big Bang wasn't necessarily "liberal" or reflected a liberal bias. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Ottava, I agree on this point.

:::My question was whether you think that Catholics make it ''also'' a part of ''their faith'' (since the Pope accepts it).

:::Being from a Lutheran family, and being educated briefly by my grandpa in matters "of faith", mostly about "Catholic errors", and the absolute need to be trufhful, my concern was that the Catholics are wrong on one more point since the Big Bang was proven wrong in 1985 and then the sbject was considered not interesting enough to publish it, as editors of "''Physical Review Letters"'' wrote me).

:::There are many other pseudo scientific "theories" popping around and scientific journals can't waste space and time on rejecting them all and leave the rejection to "[[relativists]]". It creates an impression of the BBH being right which only "crackpots" like myself object to. But of course even a crackpot might be right especially when the ideas he/she supports are supported also by rigorous physics and math as in this case. Thanks for responding and consider the case explained. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:41, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::"you think that Catholics make it ''also'' a part of ''their faith'" I would say that many Catholics do. :) One of the reason why there were so many scientists who were Catholic monks is from St. Francis saying that we must understand nature so that we can most appreciate the world God has given us. Dominicans pursue science because they believe that knowledge is the path to God, which includes scientific knowledge. Combined with the allegorical interpretation of Genesis, many Catholics pursue these theories fully without seeing any contradiction with their faith (and instead see it as necessary to pursue them to best fulfill their faith). :) By the way, there has been no establishment of a universal understanding of matter, so the idea that the Big Bang was "proven" wrong is not true - there are a few contradictions, but there are a few contradictions in everything because we have not figured out how to tie all the loose ends together. P.S. I've had plenty of college level physics classes and not one ever dismissed the Big Bang. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:28, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

My understanding is the Catholic Church has given ''qualified'' acceptance to Big Bang / evolution / etc., on the basis that that was the predominant scientific opinion, and they want Catholicism and Science to coexist harmoniously. The major qualification, as I understand it, is the need for a literal Adam and Eve and a literal Fall. But God could have say, permitted life to evolve up to higher animals, but then as a special act of creation God created Adam. (Maybe he created Adam out of some evolved primate species). The Church doesn't insist that Genesis need be read completely literally, but some elements (existence of Adam/Eve) are so important theologically they can't be dispensed with. How can Christ be the New Adam if there never was an old one? If the Fall never happened, who needs Redemption? Of course, while I understand this to be the official position, not all Catholics agree with it, or are even aware of it, which is not an uncommon thing in the Catholic church. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 15:22, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110113.htm See chapter XIII]. The Catholic Church was very anti-literalist and actually persecuted many literalist sects as heretics. :) I haven't seen anything in which they required a "literal Adam and Eve", but the "Fall" is different. See also [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05692b.htm Pope Leo XIII]'s warning about certain types of interpretation of the Bible in which we try to conform the divine into the human (i.e. trying to say things literally happened when our words cannot actually contain the divine). See also the statements about how "literal" we can interpret the Bible under "Literal sense". St. Augustine wrote a whole work criticizing taking the literal sense of Genesis (''The Literal Interpretation of Genesis'' which is anti-literalist). I don't want to get into a debate about this, though. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:53, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

==References==
<References/>

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-15T20:07:08Z

Ottava: /* Hmm */

It looks like this page may have to be protected, since evolutionists are getting on here and posting nonsense such as YEC being "non-scientific". [[User:Scorpionman|Scorpionman]] 22:39, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

::The only nonsense involves the religious thinking there is "proof" of YEC. Really? An article on the big bang contains one scientific paragraph and a longer one about creationist views? How does one explain cosmic background radiation? Or Hubble's Law? Or Deuterium Observation? Or the fact that if you use the big imaging telescopes to look beyond 14 billion light years in any direction all you see is, well, big bang? Inasmuch proof as science allows (remember, science can't "prove" anything, it can only disprove the false in order to make a better hypothesis) the Big Bang is accepted fact. In what peer-reviewed journal did Matthew, Mark, Luke or John publish? [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:46 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Feel free to expand the article if you wish. I might even join you. But you can do that without removing the creationist material. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 10:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::::What I'm saying is, that material is fine--provided one acknowledges that the opinion of creationists, ESPECIALLY YEC's--is viewed in the scientific community as belonging to the lunatic fringe. One can be socially and politically conservative without making oneself look like idiot by espousing such nonsense as YEC. Science shouldn't be politicized--far too many things already are!! Scientific method should have nothing to with ideology; it should have everything to do with coming up with better hypotheses about the universe based on empirical observations. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:56 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::There, finally finished typing it in Word. This works so much better, although feel free to add to its information. Quite frankly, its absurd to believe in YEC--and I'm a committed social, political and economic conservative!! Please don't associate lunatics with conservatives, because it hurts our credibility. In the 1800s, the Comte de Buffon took composite lumps of molten rock of varying sizes and estimated (based on how long it took his samples to cool to room temperature) that a molten ball the size of Earth would've taken at least 35,000 years just to cool. YEC is idiotic, and those who believe it are blinded by their own ignorance of basic physics. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:42 PM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:I'm confused, Scorpionman. Are you saying that YEC is scientific?
:Personally, I don't see why a discussion of Biblical literalism has any place in an article about the Big Bang. If you want to dispute the current prevailing theory behind the origin of the cosmos, then you should do it scientific evidence or at the very least an attempt at refuting evidence presented for the theory and not with the contents of one religious text. As it is, the article abruptly changes the subject and goes totally off-topic. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 13:53, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Please update the article to include peer-reviewed scientific criticisms of Big Bang-like theories. Right now the article looks ridiculous: a half of a dozen scientific references followed by a bunch of references dominated by the Apologetic Press. Clearly somebody misunderstands the modern scientific process.

== Dominant theory ==

Would it ruffle too many feathers to mention that it is the dominant theory amongst scientists today. I suggest that such a statement is an uncontroversial fact. Thoughts? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 05:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
:No, I agree, it is the dominant theory among scientists. [[User:Hengineer|Hengineer]] 05:23, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

== Sweeping generalisation ==

The following sentence should be removed:

:In contrast to young earth creationists, Old Earth Creationists and Theistic evolutionists agree that the Big Bang occured.

Just because you are an OEC or you believe evolution to be correct does not mean that you MUST believe in the Big Bang Theory. Does anyone remember Fred Hoyle?

Are there any objections to the removal of the sentence? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:18, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

I think this article looks good right now. Good edits guys. Hopefully expressing positive emotions is not violative of probation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:16, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

==Article split==

The intro confuses [[Big Bang]] with [[Expanding universe]]. I'd like to split the article up, with one short article treating each of these two distinct ideas. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:23, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:In fairness, no, an expanding universe is part of the "big bang" (which refers to far more than the universes creation. It's confusing, so I would leave it to someone with a background in physics. [[User:Nematocyte|Nematocyte]] 08:39, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::Have the bounds of [[outer space]] expanded? Or is it just that the galaxies have been getting farther apart within boundless space? What exactly does the theory state? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:59, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Apparently, the answer is "both", at least according to http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#MX --[[User:M|M]] 10:49, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, let's try to get this straight. Is [[outer space]] infinite or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:From what I understand most astrophysics believe that since the area that the universe is expanding into is void of matter and energy that yes currently, [[outer space]] is infinite.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:17, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:Unknown. The spatial extent of the Universe could be finite or infinite. If you're picturing a lump of matter dispersing in a larger void, you're thinking of the wrong thing, though. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 04:18, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:Again, I'm pretty much an amateur when it comes to astrophysics...but I think that the confusion comes from the fact that we're currently uncertain as to the actual curvature of space. I think I remember hearing that space seems to be curved enough that it's actually finite (though boundless, like the three-dimensional equivalent of the surface of a sphere), but I can't provide citation of that at the moment.--[[User:M|M]] 07:11, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't think a split is neccesary, however, on a related note, an article describing the Big Freeze, Big Rip, and Big Crunch theories for the end of the universe might be called for, as those also center on the way in which the universe is expanding (specifically, from measurements of type 1 supernovae in extremely distant galaxies, we have evidence that the universe's expansion is in fact, speeding up, giving support to the Big Freeze (everything expands until entropy is at a maximum), or possibly Big Rip (if Dark Energy is the cause of expansion, then if the universe keeps expanding, dark energy could start to rip apart galaxies, then solar systems, then stars and planets, and finally atoms). So yeah, an article on the possible ways the universe will 'end' (or if it is infinite) would probably help provide more information about the nature of the expanding universe, without having to create an article solely about the expansion of the universe. [[User:Warhawk|Warhawk]] 14:07, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== YEC Citations ==

Conservative, your citations don't appear to agree with each other...compare:
<blockquote>
A prediction had been made prior to the discovery, that if the Big Bang were true, there should be some sort of constant radiation in space, although the prediction was for a temperature several times higher. (http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/30)
</blockquote>

with

<blockquote>
All matter radiates heat, regardless of its temperature. Astronomers can detect an extremely uniform radiation, called cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, coming from all directions. It appears to come from perfectly radiating matter whose temperature is 2.73 K—nearly absolute zero. Many incorrectly believe that the big bang theory predicted this radiation.
</blockquote>

Is it standard procedure to use citations which don't agree with each other on the particulars?

:::Is it standard procedure to give me two citations without giving me the specific cite to the second citation? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:25, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:::I found the second citation and it appears to use the following to support its contention: “The big bang made no quantitative prediction that the ‘background’ radiation would have a temperature of 3 degrees Kelvin (in fact its initial prediction [by George Gamow in 1946] was 30 degrees Kelvin); whereas Eddington in 1926 had already calculated that the ‘temperature of space’ produced by the radiation of starlight would be found to be 3 degrees Kelvin.” Tom Van Flandern, “Did the Universe Have a Beginning?” Meta Research Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 3, 15 September 1994, p. 33. [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html][http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes55.html#wp1077943] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:08, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
::::It's a good thing Tom Van Flandern didn't publish in peer-reviewed journals. I'll believe your numbers, but current data indicates that BOTH were wrong. Redoing a computation of the ambient temperature of the Universe (given modern observations) will ''not'' yield Eddington's prediction; reworking Gamow's calculation ''will'' reproduce the CMB temperature very accurately. Additionally, the CMB data is more than just temperature data; the anisotropies in the CMB are also indicative of the premordial expansion. Just because you can dig up a citation doesn't mean it's correct.

== Common Misconceptions ==

As previously written, this was untrue. The Big Bang does not claim that all matter was tightly packed together before the Big Bang started. That is an assumption that the Big Bang does not address. It is unfortunate that in a section titled common misconceptions that a misconception was added. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:08, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

==Misconception about Evolution==
I think evolution discredits itself. But I think it is unfortunate when us anti-evolutionist mistrepresent the theory. It is discreditable on many points, but this sentence mistrepresents it:

:''Many scientists who believe in the Big Bang Theory are Evolutionists, though not all are. One can believe that God both created the Universe AND laid out the plan for all life in the Big Bang, as opposed to the idea that life evolved randomly after the Big Bang. ''

Evolution does not say life evolved randomly. It says the intitial organism came about through essentially "random" events. (although not strictly random).

Evolution is wrong for other reasons. And if we are going to make evolutionists see its falsity, we have to correctly represent the theory. Or atleast not MISREPRESENT the theory. [[User:InTheEvent|InTheEvent]] 00:00, 20 June 2007 (EDT)

I agree and I'm glad that the article at least makes that distinction, although as an a Creationist who believes the Big Bang is one of the strongest theistic arguments out there, I'm not incredibly happy about Evolution being mentioned in there; one has nothing to do with the other. However, I won't press the issue because I think what's there is a reasonable compromise. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:23, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
==Big Bang proves Universe had a beginning==
Why are so many creationists against the big bang, it proves that the universe had a beginning point. It also seems to violate physics because matter can't be created from nothing. It indicates a creative force behind the universe.

:Well, for one thing the "billions of years" makes it just laughable, but more importantly it goes against the Bible which says God created the Earth in 6 days around 6000 years ago. --[[User:Rolloffle|Rolloffle]] 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::Where, exactly, is the age of the Earth specified as being 6000 years in the Bible. Please reference the relevant chapters and verses. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 11:38, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

::"'Billions of years' makes it just laughable." The good old argument from ridiculity. It's like the argument from incredulity, but more fun.--[[User:All Fish Welcome|All Fish Welcome]] 12:10, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Most atheists?==
Does anyone have ANY reference that backs up the claim about "most atheists"? Or is it just made up off the top of people's heads?
: The scientific community (which I define as the doctorate-level degree holding scientists) in the U.S. overwhelmingly accept the Big Bang and old universe. I think most atheists just believe what scientists say is right despite the fact they don't know anything about it. I don't have a source for the U.S. public relating atheism to big bang belief, but I have a source for correlation between scientists' atheism and big bang belief, which we could extrapolate from. [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html From Nature magazine]. --[[User:Theonlyconservative|Theonlyconservative]] 12:38, 9 November 2007 (EST)

== Article Depth ==

In all honesty, this article does not tell anyone very much about the big bang theory, evidence for it, or the reasons why it was formulated in the first place. The article basically introduces the topic with a mish mash of unrelated facts in no particular order, then the next section is "dissent letter" followed by "starlight problem". These are hardly the most relevant topics about the Big Bang theory. May I suggest that as this article is (hopefully) reworked, those doing the writing keep in mind that the Big Bang Theory is a very general class of theories that all have one thing in common - the assertion that long ago the universe "began" from a mathematical singularity and has been increasing in size ever since. Also, be wary about the throwing around the word "singularity" - contrary to popular belief and science fiction, a singularity is not a physical thing - it is an asymptotic point in a mathematical function where the function breaks down and can no longer make any predictions. Other singularities include the center of black holes, and objects traveling at the speed of light. The mathematical models for these systems break down at these values and become meaningless. Likewise, the Big Bang Theory has nothing to say about the origin of the singularity or what came "before" it. It is outside the realm of the theory, and in the opinion of some scientist (I'm not comfortable saying most or few here, as I'm basing this statement only on my personal discussions) outside the realm of science as a whole.

== Georges-Henri Lemaître ==

Could somebody add something in about how Roman Catholic priest [[Georges-Henri Lemaître]], the original proposer of the Big Bang theory, felt that the theory fitted beautifully with his faith as it supports a "creation event"? [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 12:51, 8 January 2008 (EST)

== Change "Starlight problem" to "Horizon problem"? ==

There's a section in this article that refers to the "starlight problem" but I believe scientists actually refer to this issue as the "horizon problem." See [http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/HorizonProblem.html here] and [http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/cosmo.html#c5 here] for example. One reason is that the problem has to do with more than starlight--there are questions about density, temperature, etc. The term "starlight problem" is generally used by people discussing creationist cosmological models, while "horizon problem" is more appropriate in the context of the big bang model.--[[User:JamesR|JamesR]] 20:07, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
: I've changed it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:27, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

== Inflation and YEC ==

Couldn't inflation make the Big Bang and YEC compatible? I mean if it happened faster than the speed of light. Then why couldn't it happen in the YEC time scale? [[jfraatz|jfraatz]]

== "God's Role" ==

Can someone help me come up with a better way of saying "God's role in creating the universe." ? Obviously God didn't just have a 'role,' He simply created it by Himself! Thanks! [[User:WillS|WillS]] 18:16, 21 May 2010 (EDT)

:I tried; do you think my wording is OK? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 03:06, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

::Looks great. And good job catching some other areas where liberal bias crept in as well!

== Correcting "scientific" ==

I just corrected "scientific" the word used in description of the Big Bang to the proper in this case term "pseudo scientific". See also my [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] where I explain why the Big Bang is a pseudo scientific hypothesis (between other things it assumes "curved" spacetime for which there is no evidence and a lot of to contrary) and how Einsteinian gravitation works. The essay is still not finished and so I invite anybody to expres their opinion on the talk page of the essay. Thanks. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:35, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:I have already expressed my opinion on the talk page of that essay: you're a crackpot. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:02, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Sam, the fact that I'm a crackpot has certain influence on my credibility (which I never claimed being high, while I'm only a sculptor, with only one year training in general realativity, and the rest of my formal education being in electrical engineeiring) but it surely has no influence on the truth of Big Bang hypothesis (BBH).

::The biggest flaw of BBH is an assumption that the universe is expanding while it is not.

::This error of expansion of universe was created many years ago by [[relativists]] giving up the checking what is the ''[[intrinsic redshift]]'' in the universe before jumping to conclusion that the ''redshift is a '''proof''' that the universe is expanding''. It is clearly a non scientific approach to science. There are no proofs in science (except in math, and that's why math is not considered to be science). There are only better or worse ''hypotheses'' that are surely no proof. Some last long time until they collapse when a '''proof of their invalidity''' turns up and usually it is not accepted since no scientist cares about looking like an idiot who overlooke something important and assumed an impossible. Error that Newton avoided, not believeing in his own theory being more than just math.

::[[Intrinsic redshift]] is as it is observed in our universe (see my step-by-step derivation in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] and please comment on possible errors in this derivation). My derivation is done in such a simple way that an intelligent high school student shouldn't have problems with repeating it him/herself. Besides I'm here to explain if something is too difficult. Just ask a question about this derivation or other things since from 1985, when I discovered this derivation, I found out also many other thing. E.g. why the universe is looking as if it were expanding with accelerating expansion and the acceleration has just its value, observed with accuracy of only one standard deviation (max possible) by Supernova Cosmology Project team in 1998, which is

:::<math>dH/dt=-H_o^2/2</math>

::where <math>dH/dt</math> is acceleration of expansion in terms of derivation of Hubble constant with respect to time <math>t</math>, and <math>H_o</math> is the Hubble constant itself. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 16:44, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

== "even though the theory is based on little more than guesswork, speculation, and dubious assumptions." ==

I must agree with the removal of the above sentence. The big bang theory is based on the observations of red shifts, background radiation and other observational and physical properties of the universe. However, it is the assumptions the Big Bang theorists draw from this that are the debatable part. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:51, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:Thanks Max. I don't accept the Big Bang theory myself, but only on the grounds of my faith. The error - and I think it's a sincere one - that astrophysicists are making is in the use of methodological naturalism, which of course is a requirement of the scientific method. Within the constraints of that method it's a very sound theory; it just isn't correct. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:01, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Yes Sam, ''"it just isn't correct"''. But can we say it while [[relativists]] maintain that it is correct? We have to have a proof that it isn't correct.

::I don't blame Max for him doing what he had to do not knowing such a proof. I just would like to start a discussion whether my proof is sound one, and justifying dumping BBH. I'm sure it is but I'm the author so I may be biased (though I took a general realtivity course at Harvard to be sure that I'm right and thought about this for over quater of a century so I'm relatively sure that it is a sound proof of invalidity of BBH).

::Anyway, I can only help in discussion by keeping it on track when I see wrong arguments, and without anybody discussing this issue it won't be even known that the proof of invalidity of BBH even exists. No mainstream scientific journal ever wanted to publish this proof despite it is only one page of print. It was published in conservapedia (after being blocked on my university server) as [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]] in a short form suitable for physicists. Longer form with step-by-step derivation of redshift in our universe, and more, is in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]]. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:25, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

::Just as a note, Sam, the Scientific Theory (i.e. Scientific Method) was codified by two individuals that were deeply religious (Descartes and Francis Bacon). It is also derived from the theories of logic codified by Roger Bacon, a monk. I don't think it is a difference between faith and reason. St. Thomas Aquinas made the argument that we should seek to combine the two, which John Calvin said was a very important advancement that allowed us to move beyond Greek philosophy/science. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 19:00, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:::It's irrelevant that Descartes and the Bacons were religious; the scientific method does NOT combine faith and reason and in fact explicitly rejects faith. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:14, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Additional note, Sam, what good it would do if we believed in things that are not true? As pseudo scientific theories usually are. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:29, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::It's interesting to our readers that the founders of the [[scientific method]] were religious. We always want to know more about people who have influenced currents of modern thought.

::::When someone proposes "[[intelligent design]]", do we respond to the challenge of the idea purely on its merits, or do we consider the motives of its proponents? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:32, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

== Hmm ==

As a Catholic, I hope people realize that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter. The Catholic Church is home to one of the most conservative Christian organizations in the US, the Knights of Columbus (1.8 million members), mind you. I do hope that we can at least acknowledge that this isn't an "atheist" view or a "liberal" view, but one that spreads across boundaries. :) After all, the Catholic Church's view about Genesis is based on St. Augustine's determination that Genesis was allegorical, which was something both Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed with. Just keep this in mind. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 18:56, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:In what sense ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''? The fact that ''"Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed (that Genesis was allegorical)"'' isn't a clear indication that ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''. At least to me (the crank :) that's why I'd appreciate if you explained it in more detail.

:My opinion is the same as yours that there was an involvement but I'm not sure that I understand it the same way as you do. I know that Gorges Lemaître, the Catholic prist, proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory<ref>

After wikipedia and believed this time.

</ref>, and also that the theory is false since I personally executed the for long time neglected calculation of value of [[intrinsic redshift]] and it turned out roughly as it is observed, which implies that practically there is no expansion of universe. Results of my calculations were not published since 1985 when they were done, except recently in conservapedia<ref>

[[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]].

</ref>, but I don't think that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter of blocking the publication. Do you? :) [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::Ottava, are you saying that a large percentage of Catholics accept the Big Bang theory? If so, is it because it seems reasonable to them? Or because it's Catholic dogma, or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:36, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::It is both accepted by Catholics and given official approval by the Vatican. After all, [[Georges-Henri Lemaitre]] was a famous Catholic Priest and the originator of it. The Catholic Church also says there is enough reason to believe that evolution is okay. Afterall, Darwin made it clear that he believed in Aristotelian theory (and thus, Aristotelian Metaphysics which St. Thomas Aquinas relied upon), and that Darwin was Anglican his whole life, whether High Church or not is a different matter. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:03, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::Actually Darwin was Unitarian, not Anglican (he was baptised Anglican mainly due to social pressure) and it's pretty clear that he at least partly abandoned Christianity. He intended to become an Anglican vicar at one point (mainly so he could spend six days a week collecting beetles) but his mother was a practicing Unitarian and took him to her church, and his father and paternal grandfather were atheists. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:33, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Unitarian at the time was not a set "religion" but a religious philosophy, with many Low Church Anglicans adopting it. Darwin trained to become an Anglican priest, and Anglican thought and wording is throughout his texts. Darwin's actions and ideals are in line with the Franciscan school of natural philosophy, which is deeply connected to Aristotelian belief. You can see that in the writings of Roger Bacon and many Franciscan scientists. Darwin's constant referral to Aristotelian beliefs and logic is inline with that. Darwin married as an Anglican, was buried as an Anglican, etc. Such things are stripped away by modern atheists who want to make their current view seem more "historic". Darwin had many supporters in the Anglican clergy, by the way. He was never "high church", but you don't have to be high church to be religious. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:02, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::::Darwin may well have been buried as an Anglican but he described himself as an agnostic. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 16:04, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::::That term didn't exist at his time. So I doubt it highly. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::[http://books.google.com/books?id=qjN6uTdy7hgC&pg=PA1&dq=Darwin+Anglican&hl=en&ei=xldyTtmGPOn00gGsiNWqCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Darwin%20Anglican&f=false By the way, a good read] on the matter. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Would you mind seeing to it that the above information gets into the appropriate articles? I'd like to see a [[Catholic views on evolution]] article, for example. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:06, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Eventually. However, I do have a rather strong conflict with my personal involvement with the Church, publications on Catholic Theology, Cathology apologia, my work with Catholic advocacy groups, etc. I merely wanted to add a little note that you don't have to be liberal to believe in it. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::JimJast, I'm a tad confused by your response. I was merely stating that belief in the Big Bang wasn't necessarily "liberal" or reflected a liberal bias. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

My understanding is the Catholic Church has given ''qualified'' acceptance to Big Bang / evolution / etc., on the basis that that was the predominant scientific opinion, and they want Catholicism and Science to coexist harmoniously. The major qualification, as I understand it, is the need for a literal Adam and Eve and a literal Fall. But God could have say, permitted life to evolve up to higher animals, but then as a special act of creation God created Adam. (Maybe he created Adam out of some evolved primate species). The Church doesn't insist that Genesis need be read completely literally, but some elements (existence of Adam/Eve) are so important theologically they can't be dispensed with. How can Christ be the New Adam if there never was an old one? If the Fall never happened, who needs Redemption? Of course, while I understand this to be the official position, not all Catholics agree with it, or are even aware of it, which is not an uncommon thing in the Catholic church. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 15:22, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110113.htm See chapter XIII]. The Catholic Church was very anti-literalist and actually persecuted many literalist sects as heretics. :) I haven't seen anything in which they required a "literal Adam and Eve", but the "Fall" is different. See also [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05692b.htm Pope Leo XIII]'s warning about certain types of interpretation of the Bible in which we try to conform the divine into the human (i.e. trying to say things literally happened when our words cannot actually contain the divine). See also the statements about how "literal" we can interpret the Bible under "Literal sense". St. Augustine wrote a whole work criticizing taking the literal sense of Genesis (''The Literal Interpretation of Genesis'' which is anti-literalist). I don't want to get into a debate about this, though. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:53, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

==References==
<References/>

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-15T20:02:01Z

Ottava: /* Hmm */

It looks like this page may have to be protected, since evolutionists are getting on here and posting nonsense such as YEC being "non-scientific". [[User:Scorpionman|Scorpionman]] 22:39, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

::The only nonsense involves the religious thinking there is "proof" of YEC. Really? An article on the big bang contains one scientific paragraph and a longer one about creationist views? How does one explain cosmic background radiation? Or Hubble's Law? Or Deuterium Observation? Or the fact that if you use the big imaging telescopes to look beyond 14 billion light years in any direction all you see is, well, big bang? Inasmuch proof as science allows (remember, science can't "prove" anything, it can only disprove the false in order to make a better hypothesis) the Big Bang is accepted fact. In what peer-reviewed journal did Matthew, Mark, Luke or John publish? [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:46 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Feel free to expand the article if you wish. I might even join you. But you can do that without removing the creationist material. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 10:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::::What I'm saying is, that material is fine--provided one acknowledges that the opinion of creationists, ESPECIALLY YEC's--is viewed in the scientific community as belonging to the lunatic fringe. One can be socially and politically conservative without making oneself look like idiot by espousing such nonsense as YEC. Science shouldn't be politicized--far too many things already are!! Scientific method should have nothing to with ideology; it should have everything to do with coming up with better hypotheses about the universe based on empirical observations. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:56 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::There, finally finished typing it in Word. This works so much better, although feel free to add to its information. Quite frankly, its absurd to believe in YEC--and I'm a committed social, political and economic conservative!! Please don't associate lunatics with conservatives, because it hurts our credibility. In the 1800s, the Comte de Buffon took composite lumps of molten rock of varying sizes and estimated (based on how long it took his samples to cool to room temperature) that a molten ball the size of Earth would've taken at least 35,000 years just to cool. YEC is idiotic, and those who believe it are blinded by their own ignorance of basic physics. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:42 PM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:I'm confused, Scorpionman. Are you saying that YEC is scientific?
:Personally, I don't see why a discussion of Biblical literalism has any place in an article about the Big Bang. If you want to dispute the current prevailing theory behind the origin of the cosmos, then you should do it scientific evidence or at the very least an attempt at refuting evidence presented for the theory and not with the contents of one religious text. As it is, the article abruptly changes the subject and goes totally off-topic. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 13:53, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Please update the article to include peer-reviewed scientific criticisms of Big Bang-like theories. Right now the article looks ridiculous: a half of a dozen scientific references followed by a bunch of references dominated by the Apologetic Press. Clearly somebody misunderstands the modern scientific process.

== Dominant theory ==

Would it ruffle too many feathers to mention that it is the dominant theory amongst scientists today. I suggest that such a statement is an uncontroversial fact. Thoughts? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 05:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
:No, I agree, it is the dominant theory among scientists. [[User:Hengineer|Hengineer]] 05:23, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

== Sweeping generalisation ==

The following sentence should be removed:

:In contrast to young earth creationists, Old Earth Creationists and Theistic evolutionists agree that the Big Bang occured.

Just because you are an OEC or you believe evolution to be correct does not mean that you MUST believe in the Big Bang Theory. Does anyone remember Fred Hoyle?

Are there any objections to the removal of the sentence? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:18, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

I think this article looks good right now. Good edits guys. Hopefully expressing positive emotions is not violative of probation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:16, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

==Article split==

The intro confuses [[Big Bang]] with [[Expanding universe]]. I'd like to split the article up, with one short article treating each of these two distinct ideas. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:23, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:In fairness, no, an expanding universe is part of the "big bang" (which refers to far more than the universes creation. It's confusing, so I would leave it to someone with a background in physics. [[User:Nematocyte|Nematocyte]] 08:39, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::Have the bounds of [[outer space]] expanded? Or is it just that the galaxies have been getting farther apart within boundless space? What exactly does the theory state? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:59, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Apparently, the answer is "both", at least according to http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#MX --[[User:M|M]] 10:49, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, let's try to get this straight. Is [[outer space]] infinite or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:From what I understand most astrophysics believe that since the area that the universe is expanding into is void of matter and energy that yes currently, [[outer space]] is infinite.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:17, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:Unknown. The spatial extent of the Universe could be finite or infinite. If you're picturing a lump of matter dispersing in a larger void, you're thinking of the wrong thing, though. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 04:18, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:Again, I'm pretty much an amateur when it comes to astrophysics...but I think that the confusion comes from the fact that we're currently uncertain as to the actual curvature of space. I think I remember hearing that space seems to be curved enough that it's actually finite (though boundless, like the three-dimensional equivalent of the surface of a sphere), but I can't provide citation of that at the moment.--[[User:M|M]] 07:11, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't think a split is neccesary, however, on a related note, an article describing the Big Freeze, Big Rip, and Big Crunch theories for the end of the universe might be called for, as those also center on the way in which the universe is expanding (specifically, from measurements of type 1 supernovae in extremely distant galaxies, we have evidence that the universe's expansion is in fact, speeding up, giving support to the Big Freeze (everything expands until entropy is at a maximum), or possibly Big Rip (if Dark Energy is the cause of expansion, then if the universe keeps expanding, dark energy could start to rip apart galaxies, then solar systems, then stars and planets, and finally atoms). So yeah, an article on the possible ways the universe will 'end' (or if it is infinite) would probably help provide more information about the nature of the expanding universe, without having to create an article solely about the expansion of the universe. [[User:Warhawk|Warhawk]] 14:07, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== YEC Citations ==

Conservative, your citations don't appear to agree with each other...compare:
<blockquote>
A prediction had been made prior to the discovery, that if the Big Bang were true, there should be some sort of constant radiation in space, although the prediction was for a temperature several times higher. (http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/30)
</blockquote>

with

<blockquote>
All matter radiates heat, regardless of its temperature. Astronomers can detect an extremely uniform radiation, called cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, coming from all directions. It appears to come from perfectly radiating matter whose temperature is 2.73 K—nearly absolute zero. Many incorrectly believe that the big bang theory predicted this radiation.
</blockquote>

Is it standard procedure to use citations which don't agree with each other on the particulars?

:::Is it standard procedure to give me two citations without giving me the specific cite to the second citation? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:25, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:::I found the second citation and it appears to use the following to support its contention: “The big bang made no quantitative prediction that the ‘background’ radiation would have a temperature of 3 degrees Kelvin (in fact its initial prediction [by George Gamow in 1946] was 30 degrees Kelvin); whereas Eddington in 1926 had already calculated that the ‘temperature of space’ produced by the radiation of starlight would be found to be 3 degrees Kelvin.” Tom Van Flandern, “Did the Universe Have a Beginning?” Meta Research Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 3, 15 September 1994, p. 33. [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html][http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes55.html#wp1077943] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:08, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
::::It's a good thing Tom Van Flandern didn't publish in peer-reviewed journals. I'll believe your numbers, but current data indicates that BOTH were wrong. Redoing a computation of the ambient temperature of the Universe (given modern observations) will ''not'' yield Eddington's prediction; reworking Gamow's calculation ''will'' reproduce the CMB temperature very accurately. Additionally, the CMB data is more than just temperature data; the anisotropies in the CMB are also indicative of the premordial expansion. Just because you can dig up a citation doesn't mean it's correct.

== Common Misconceptions ==

As previously written, this was untrue. The Big Bang does not claim that all matter was tightly packed together before the Big Bang started. That is an assumption that the Big Bang does not address. It is unfortunate that in a section titled common misconceptions that a misconception was added. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:08, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

==Misconception about Evolution==
I think evolution discredits itself. But I think it is unfortunate when us anti-evolutionist mistrepresent the theory. It is discreditable on many points, but this sentence mistrepresents it:

:''Many scientists who believe in the Big Bang Theory are Evolutionists, though not all are. One can believe that God both created the Universe AND laid out the plan for all life in the Big Bang, as opposed to the idea that life evolved randomly after the Big Bang. ''

Evolution does not say life evolved randomly. It says the intitial organism came about through essentially "random" events. (although not strictly random).

Evolution is wrong for other reasons. And if we are going to make evolutionists see its falsity, we have to correctly represent the theory. Or atleast not MISREPRESENT the theory. [[User:InTheEvent|InTheEvent]] 00:00, 20 June 2007 (EDT)

I agree and I'm glad that the article at least makes that distinction, although as an a Creationist who believes the Big Bang is one of the strongest theistic arguments out there, I'm not incredibly happy about Evolution being mentioned in there; one has nothing to do with the other. However, I won't press the issue because I think what's there is a reasonable compromise. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:23, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
==Big Bang proves Universe had a beginning==
Why are so many creationists against the big bang, it proves that the universe had a beginning point. It also seems to violate physics because matter can't be created from nothing. It indicates a creative force behind the universe.

:Well, for one thing the "billions of years" makes it just laughable, but more importantly it goes against the Bible which says God created the Earth in 6 days around 6000 years ago. --[[User:Rolloffle|Rolloffle]] 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::Where, exactly, is the age of the Earth specified as being 6000 years in the Bible. Please reference the relevant chapters and verses. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 11:38, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

::"'Billions of years' makes it just laughable." The good old argument from ridiculity. It's like the argument from incredulity, but more fun.--[[User:All Fish Welcome|All Fish Welcome]] 12:10, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Most atheists?==
Does anyone have ANY reference that backs up the claim about "most atheists"? Or is it just made up off the top of people's heads?
: The scientific community (which I define as the doctorate-level degree holding scientists) in the U.S. overwhelmingly accept the Big Bang and old universe. I think most atheists just believe what scientists say is right despite the fact they don't know anything about it. I don't have a source for the U.S. public relating atheism to big bang belief, but I have a source for correlation between scientists' atheism and big bang belief, which we could extrapolate from. [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html From Nature magazine]. --[[User:Theonlyconservative|Theonlyconservative]] 12:38, 9 November 2007 (EST)

== Article Depth ==

In all honesty, this article does not tell anyone very much about the big bang theory, evidence for it, or the reasons why it was formulated in the first place. The article basically introduces the topic with a mish mash of unrelated facts in no particular order, then the next section is "dissent letter" followed by "starlight problem". These are hardly the most relevant topics about the Big Bang theory. May I suggest that as this article is (hopefully) reworked, those doing the writing keep in mind that the Big Bang Theory is a very general class of theories that all have one thing in common - the assertion that long ago the universe "began" from a mathematical singularity and has been increasing in size ever since. Also, be wary about the throwing around the word "singularity" - contrary to popular belief and science fiction, a singularity is not a physical thing - it is an asymptotic point in a mathematical function where the function breaks down and can no longer make any predictions. Other singularities include the center of black holes, and objects traveling at the speed of light. The mathematical models for these systems break down at these values and become meaningless. Likewise, the Big Bang Theory has nothing to say about the origin of the singularity or what came "before" it. It is outside the realm of the theory, and in the opinion of some scientist (I'm not comfortable saying most or few here, as I'm basing this statement only on my personal discussions) outside the realm of science as a whole.

== Georges-Henri Lemaître ==

Could somebody add something in about how Roman Catholic priest [[Georges-Henri Lemaître]], the original proposer of the Big Bang theory, felt that the theory fitted beautifully with his faith as it supports a "creation event"? [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 12:51, 8 January 2008 (EST)

== Change "Starlight problem" to "Horizon problem"? ==

There's a section in this article that refers to the "starlight problem" but I believe scientists actually refer to this issue as the "horizon problem." See [http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/HorizonProblem.html here] and [http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/cosmo.html#c5 here] for example. One reason is that the problem has to do with more than starlight--there are questions about density, temperature, etc. The term "starlight problem" is generally used by people discussing creationist cosmological models, while "horizon problem" is more appropriate in the context of the big bang model.--[[User:JamesR|JamesR]] 20:07, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
: I've changed it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:27, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

== Inflation and YEC ==

Couldn't inflation make the Big Bang and YEC compatible? I mean if it happened faster than the speed of light. Then why couldn't it happen in the YEC time scale? [[jfraatz|jfraatz]]

== "God's Role" ==

Can someone help me come up with a better way of saying "God's role in creating the universe." ? Obviously God didn't just have a 'role,' He simply created it by Himself! Thanks! [[User:WillS|WillS]] 18:16, 21 May 2010 (EDT)

:I tried; do you think my wording is OK? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 03:06, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

::Looks great. And good job catching some other areas where liberal bias crept in as well!

== Correcting "scientific" ==

I just corrected "scientific" the word used in description of the Big Bang to the proper in this case term "pseudo scientific". See also my [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] where I explain why the Big Bang is a pseudo scientific hypothesis (between other things it assumes "curved" spacetime for which there is no evidence and a lot of to contrary) and how Einsteinian gravitation works. The essay is still not finished and so I invite anybody to expres their opinion on the talk page of the essay. Thanks. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:35, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:I have already expressed my opinion on the talk page of that essay: you're a crackpot. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:02, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Sam, the fact that I'm a crackpot has certain influence on my credibility (which I never claimed being high, while I'm only a sculptor, with only one year training in general realativity, and the rest of my formal education being in electrical engineeiring) but it surely has no influence on the truth of Big Bang hypothesis (BBH).

::The biggest flaw of BBH is an assumption that the universe is expanding while it is not.

::This error of expansion of universe was created many years ago by [[relativists]] giving up the checking what is the ''[[intrinsic redshift]]'' in the universe before jumping to conclusion that the ''redshift is a '''proof''' that the universe is expanding''. It is clearly a non scientific approach to science. There are no proofs in science (except in math, and that's why math is not considered to be science). There are only better or worse ''hypotheses'' that are surely no proof. Some last long time until they collapse when a '''proof of their invalidity''' turns up and usually it is not accepted since no scientist cares about looking like an idiot who overlooke something important and assumed an impossible. Error that Newton avoided, not believeing in his own theory being more than just math.

::[[Intrinsic redshift]] is as it is observed in our universe (see my step-by-step derivation in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] and please comment on possible errors in this derivation). My derivation is done in such a simple way that an intelligent high school student shouldn't have problems with repeating it him/herself. Besides I'm here to explain if something is too difficult. Just ask a question about this derivation or other things since from 1985, when I discovered this derivation, I found out also many other thing. E.g. why the universe is looking as if it were expanding with accelerating expansion and the acceleration has just its value, observed with accuracy of only one standard deviation (max possible) by Supernova Cosmology Project team in 1998, which is

:::<math>dH/dt=-H_o^2/2</math>

::where <math>dH/dt</math> is acceleration of expansion in terms of derivation of Hubble constant with respect to time <math>t</math>, and <math>H_o</math> is the Hubble constant itself. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 16:44, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

== "even though the theory is based on little more than guesswork, speculation, and dubious assumptions." ==

I must agree with the removal of the above sentence. The big bang theory is based on the observations of red shifts, background radiation and other observational and physical properties of the universe. However, it is the assumptions the Big Bang theorists draw from this that are the debatable part. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:51, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:Thanks Max. I don't accept the Big Bang theory myself, but only on the grounds of my faith. The error - and I think it's a sincere one - that astrophysicists are making is in the use of methodological naturalism, which of course is a requirement of the scientific method. Within the constraints of that method it's a very sound theory; it just isn't correct. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:01, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Yes Sam, ''"it just isn't correct"''. But can we say it while [[relativists]] maintain that it is correct? We have to have a proof that it isn't correct.

::I don't blame Max for him doing what he had to do not knowing such a proof. I just would like to start a discussion whether my proof is sound one, and justifying dumping BBH. I'm sure it is but I'm the author so I may be biased (though I took a general realtivity course at Harvard to be sure that I'm right and thought about this for over quater of a century so I'm relatively sure that it is a sound proof of invalidity of BBH).

::Anyway, I can only help in discussion by keeping it on track when I see wrong arguments, and without anybody discussing this issue it won't be even known that the proof of invalidity of BBH even exists. No mainstream scientific journal ever wanted to publish this proof despite it is only one page of print. It was published in conservapedia (after being blocked on my university server) as [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]] in a short form suitable for physicists. Longer form with step-by-step derivation of redshift in our universe, and more, is in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]]. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:25, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

::Just as a note, Sam, the Scientific Theory (i.e. Scientific Method) was codified by two individuals that were deeply religious (Descartes and Francis Bacon). It is also derived from the theories of logic codified by Roger Bacon, a monk. I don't think it is a difference between faith and reason. St. Thomas Aquinas made the argument that we should seek to combine the two, which John Calvin said was a very important advancement that allowed us to move beyond Greek philosophy/science. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 19:00, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:::It's irrelevant that Descartes and the Bacons were religious; the scientific method does NOT combine faith and reason and in fact explicitly rejects faith. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:14, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Additional note, Sam, what good it would do if we believed in things that are not true? As pseudo scientific theories usually are. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:29, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::It's interesting to our readers that the founders of the [[scientific method]] were religious. We always want to know more about people who have influenced currents of modern thought.

::::When someone proposes "[[intelligent design]]", do we respond to the challenge of the idea purely on its merits, or do we consider the motives of its proponents? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:32, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

== Hmm ==

As a Catholic, I hope people realize that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter. The Catholic Church is home to one of the most conservative Christian organizations in the US, the Knights of Columbus (1.8 million members), mind you. I do hope that we can at least acknowledge that this isn't an "atheist" view or a "liberal" view, but one that spreads across boundaries. :) After all, the Catholic Church's view about Genesis is based on St. Augustine's determination that Genesis was allegorical, which was something both Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed with. Just keep this in mind. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 18:56, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:In what sense ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''? The fact that ''"Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed (that Genesis was allegorical)"'' isn't a clear indication that ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''. At least to me (the crank :) that's why I'd appreciate if you explained it in more detail.

:My opinion is the same as yours that there was an involvement but I'm not sure that I understand it the same way as you do. I know that Gorges Lemaître, the Catholic prist, proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory<ref>

After wikipedia and believed this time.

</ref>, and also that the theory is false since I personally executed the for long time neglected calculation of value of [[intrinsic redshift]] and it turned out roughly as it is observed, which implies that practically there is no expansion of universe. Results of my calculations were not published since 1985 when they were done, except recently in conservapedia<ref>

[[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]].

</ref>, but I don't think that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter of blocking the publication. Do you? :) [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::Ottava, are you saying that a large percentage of Catholics accept the Big Bang theory? If so, is it because it seems reasonable to them? Or because it's Catholic dogma, or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:36, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::It is both accepted by Catholics and given official approval by the Vatican. After all, [[Georges-Henri Lemaitre]] was a famous Catholic Priest and the originator of it. The Catholic Church also says there is enough reason to believe that evolution is okay. Afterall, Darwin made it clear that he believed in Aristotelian theory (and thus, Aristotelian Metaphysics which St. Thomas Aquinas relied upon), and that Darwin was Anglican his whole life, whether High Church or not is a different matter. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:03, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::Actually Darwin was Unitarian, not Anglican (he was baptised Anglican mainly due to social pressure) and it's pretty clear that he at least partly abandoned Christianity. He intended to become an Anglican vicar at one point (mainly so he could spend six days a week collecting beetles) but his mother was a practicing Unitarian and took him to her church, and his father and paternal grandfather were atheists. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:33, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::::Unitarian at the time was not a set "religion" but a religious philosophy, with many Low Church Anglicans adopting it. Darwin trained to become an Anglican priest, and Anglican thought and wording is throughout his texts. Darwin's actions and ideals are in line with the Franciscan school of natural philosophy, which is deeply connected to Aristotelian belief. You can see that in the writings of Roger Bacon and many Franciscan scientists. Darwin's constant referral to Aristotelian beliefs and logic is inline with that. Darwin married as an Anglican, was buried as an Anglican, etc. Such things are stripped away by modern atheists who want to make their current view seem more "historic". Darwin had many supporters in the Anglican clergy, by the way. He was never "high church", but you don't have to be high church to be religious. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 16:02, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Would you mind seeing to it that the above information gets into the appropriate articles? I'd like to see a [[Catholic views on evolution]] article, for example. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:06, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Eventually. However, I do have a rather strong conflict with my personal involvement with the Church, publications on Catholic Theology, Cathology apologia, my work with Catholic advocacy groups, etc. I merely wanted to add a little note that you don't have to be liberal to believe in it. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::JimJast, I'm a tad confused by your response. I was merely stating that belief in the Big Bang wasn't necessarily "liberal" or reflected a liberal bias. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

My understanding is the Catholic Church has given ''qualified'' acceptance to Big Bang / evolution / etc., on the basis that that was the predominant scientific opinion, and they want Catholicism and Science to coexist harmoniously. The major qualification, as I understand it, is the need for a literal Adam and Eve and a literal Fall. But God could have say, permitted life to evolve up to higher animals, but then as a special act of creation God created Adam. (Maybe he created Adam out of some evolved primate species). The Church doesn't insist that Genesis need be read completely literally, but some elements (existence of Adam/Eve) are so important theologically they can't be dispensed with. How can Christ be the New Adam if there never was an old one? If the Fall never happened, who needs Redemption? Of course, while I understand this to be the official position, not all Catholics agree with it, or are even aware of it, which is not an uncommon thing in the Catholic church. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 15:22, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110113.htm See chapter XIII]. The Catholic Church was very anti-literalist and actually persecuted many literalist sects as heretics. :) I haven't seen anything in which they required a "literal Adam and Eve", but the "Fall" is different. See also [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05692b.htm Pope Leo XIII]'s warning about certain types of interpretation of the Bible in which we try to conform the divine into the human (i.e. trying to say things literally happened when our words cannot actually contain the divine). See also the statements about how "literal" we can interpret the Bible under "Literal sense". St. Augustine wrote a whole work criticizing taking the literal sense of Genesis (''The Literal Interpretation of Genesis'' which is anti-literalist). I don't want to get into a debate about this, though. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:53, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

==References==
<References/>

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-15T19:53:14Z

Ottava: /* Hmm */

It looks like this page may have to be protected, since evolutionists are getting on here and posting nonsense such as YEC being "non-scientific". [[User:Scorpionman|Scorpionman]] 22:39, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

::The only nonsense involves the religious thinking there is "proof" of YEC. Really? An article on the big bang contains one scientific paragraph and a longer one about creationist views? How does one explain cosmic background radiation? Or Hubble's Law? Or Deuterium Observation? Or the fact that if you use the big imaging telescopes to look beyond 14 billion light years in any direction all you see is, well, big bang? Inasmuch proof as science allows (remember, science can't "prove" anything, it can only disprove the false in order to make a better hypothesis) the Big Bang is accepted fact. In what peer-reviewed journal did Matthew, Mark, Luke or John publish? [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:46 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Feel free to expand the article if you wish. I might even join you. But you can do that without removing the creationist material. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 10:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::::What I'm saying is, that material is fine--provided one acknowledges that the opinion of creationists, ESPECIALLY YEC's--is viewed in the scientific community as belonging to the lunatic fringe. One can be socially and politically conservative without making oneself look like idiot by espousing such nonsense as YEC. Science shouldn't be politicized--far too many things already are!! Scientific method should have nothing to with ideology; it should have everything to do with coming up with better hypotheses about the universe based on empirical observations. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:56 AM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::There, finally finished typing it in Word. This works so much better, although feel free to add to its information. Quite frankly, its absurd to believe in YEC--and I'm a committed social, political and economic conservative!! Please don't associate lunatics with conservatives, because it hurts our credibility. In the 1800s, the Comte de Buffon took composite lumps of molten rock of varying sizes and estimated (based on how long it took his samples to cool to room temperature) that a molten ball the size of Earth would've taken at least 35,000 years just to cool. YEC is idiotic, and those who believe it are blinded by their own ignorance of basic physics. [[User:Scientz|Scientz]] 10:42 PM, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:I'm confused, Scorpionman. Are you saying that YEC is scientific?
:Personally, I don't see why a discussion of Biblical literalism has any place in an article about the Big Bang. If you want to dispute the current prevailing theory behind the origin of the cosmos, then you should do it scientific evidence or at the very least an attempt at refuting evidence presented for the theory and not with the contents of one religious text. As it is, the article abruptly changes the subject and goes totally off-topic. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 13:53, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Please update the article to include peer-reviewed scientific criticisms of Big Bang-like theories. Right now the article looks ridiculous: a half of a dozen scientific references followed by a bunch of references dominated by the Apologetic Press. Clearly somebody misunderstands the modern scientific process.

== Dominant theory ==

Would it ruffle too many feathers to mention that it is the dominant theory amongst scientists today. I suggest that such a statement is an uncontroversial fact. Thoughts? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 05:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
:No, I agree, it is the dominant theory among scientists. [[User:Hengineer|Hengineer]] 05:23, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

== Sweeping generalisation ==

The following sentence should be removed:

:In contrast to young earth creationists, Old Earth Creationists and Theistic evolutionists agree that the Big Bang occured.

Just because you are an OEC or you believe evolution to be correct does not mean that you MUST believe in the Big Bang Theory. Does anyone remember Fred Hoyle?

Are there any objections to the removal of the sentence? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:18, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

I think this article looks good right now. Good edits guys. Hopefully expressing positive emotions is not violative of probation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:16, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

==Article split==

The intro confuses [[Big Bang]] with [[Expanding universe]]. I'd like to split the article up, with one short article treating each of these two distinct ideas. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:23, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:In fairness, no, an expanding universe is part of the "big bang" (which refers to far more than the universes creation. It's confusing, so I would leave it to someone with a background in physics. [[User:Nematocyte|Nematocyte]] 08:39, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::Have the bounds of [[outer space]] expanded? Or is it just that the galaxies have been getting farther apart within boundless space? What exactly does the theory state? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:59, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Apparently, the answer is "both", at least according to http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#MX --[[User:M|M]] 10:49, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, let's try to get this straight. Is [[outer space]] infinite or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:From what I understand most astrophysics believe that since the area that the universe is expanding into is void of matter and energy that yes currently, [[outer space]] is infinite.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:17, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:Unknown. The spatial extent of the Universe could be finite or infinite. If you're picturing a lump of matter dispersing in a larger void, you're thinking of the wrong thing, though. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 04:18, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:Again, I'm pretty much an amateur when it comes to astrophysics...but I think that the confusion comes from the fact that we're currently uncertain as to the actual curvature of space. I think I remember hearing that space seems to be curved enough that it's actually finite (though boundless, like the three-dimensional equivalent of the surface of a sphere), but I can't provide citation of that at the moment.--[[User:M|M]] 07:11, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't think a split is neccesary, however, on a related note, an article describing the Big Freeze, Big Rip, and Big Crunch theories for the end of the universe might be called for, as those also center on the way in which the universe is expanding (specifically, from measurements of type 1 supernovae in extremely distant galaxies, we have evidence that the universe's expansion is in fact, speeding up, giving support to the Big Freeze (everything expands until entropy is at a maximum), or possibly Big Rip (if Dark Energy is the cause of expansion, then if the universe keeps expanding, dark energy could start to rip apart galaxies, then solar systems, then stars and planets, and finally atoms). So yeah, an article on the possible ways the universe will 'end' (or if it is infinite) would probably help provide more information about the nature of the expanding universe, without having to create an article solely about the expansion of the universe. [[User:Warhawk|Warhawk]] 14:07, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== YEC Citations ==

Conservative, your citations don't appear to agree with each other...compare:
<blockquote>
A prediction had been made prior to the discovery, that if the Big Bang were true, there should be some sort of constant radiation in space, although the prediction was for a temperature several times higher. (http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/30)
</blockquote>

with

<blockquote>
All matter radiates heat, regardless of its temperature. Astronomers can detect an extremely uniform radiation, called cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, coming from all directions. It appears to come from perfectly radiating matter whose temperature is 2.73 K—nearly absolute zero. Many incorrectly believe that the big bang theory predicted this radiation.
</blockquote>

Is it standard procedure to use citations which don't agree with each other on the particulars?

:::Is it standard procedure to give me two citations without giving me the specific cite to the second citation? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:25, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

:::I found the second citation and it appears to use the following to support its contention: “The big bang made no quantitative prediction that the ‘background’ radiation would have a temperature of 3 degrees Kelvin (in fact its initial prediction [by George Gamow in 1946] was 30 degrees Kelvin); whereas Eddington in 1926 had already calculated that the ‘temperature of space’ produced by the radiation of starlight would be found to be 3 degrees Kelvin.” Tom Van Flandern, “Did the Universe Have a Beginning?” Meta Research Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 3, 15 September 1994, p. 33. [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html][http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes55.html#wp1077943] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:08, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
::::It's a good thing Tom Van Flandern didn't publish in peer-reviewed journals. I'll believe your numbers, but current data indicates that BOTH were wrong. Redoing a computation of the ambient temperature of the Universe (given modern observations) will ''not'' yield Eddington's prediction; reworking Gamow's calculation ''will'' reproduce the CMB temperature very accurately. Additionally, the CMB data is more than just temperature data; the anisotropies in the CMB are also indicative of the premordial expansion. Just because you can dig up a citation doesn't mean it's correct.

== Common Misconceptions ==

As previously written, this was untrue. The Big Bang does not claim that all matter was tightly packed together before the Big Bang started. That is an assumption that the Big Bang does not address. It is unfortunate that in a section titled common misconceptions that a misconception was added. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:08, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

==Misconception about Evolution==
I think evolution discredits itself. But I think it is unfortunate when us anti-evolutionist mistrepresent the theory. It is discreditable on many points, but this sentence mistrepresents it:

:''Many scientists who believe in the Big Bang Theory are Evolutionists, though not all are. One can believe that God both created the Universe AND laid out the plan for all life in the Big Bang, as opposed to the idea that life evolved randomly after the Big Bang. ''

Evolution does not say life evolved randomly. It says the intitial organism came about through essentially "random" events. (although not strictly random).

Evolution is wrong for other reasons. And if we are going to make evolutionists see its falsity, we have to correctly represent the theory. Or atleast not MISREPRESENT the theory. [[User:InTheEvent|InTheEvent]] 00:00, 20 June 2007 (EDT)

I agree and I'm glad that the article at least makes that distinction, although as an a Creationist who believes the Big Bang is one of the strongest theistic arguments out there, I'm not incredibly happy about Evolution being mentioned in there; one has nothing to do with the other. However, I won't press the issue because I think what's there is a reasonable compromise. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:23, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
==Big Bang proves Universe had a beginning==
Why are so many creationists against the big bang, it proves that the universe had a beginning point. It also seems to violate physics because matter can't be created from nothing. It indicates a creative force behind the universe.

:Well, for one thing the "billions of years" makes it just laughable, but more importantly it goes against the Bible which says God created the Earth in 6 days around 6000 years ago. --[[User:Rolloffle|Rolloffle]] 15:43, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::Where, exactly, is the age of the Earth specified as being 6000 years in the Bible. Please reference the relevant chapters and verses. [[User:Dimensio|Dimensio]] 11:38, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

::"'Billions of years' makes it just laughable." The good old argument from ridiculity. It's like the argument from incredulity, but more fun.--[[User:All Fish Welcome|All Fish Welcome]] 12:10, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Most atheists?==
Does anyone have ANY reference that backs up the claim about "most atheists"? Or is it just made up off the top of people's heads?
: The scientific community (which I define as the doctorate-level degree holding scientists) in the U.S. overwhelmingly accept the Big Bang and old universe. I think most atheists just believe what scientists say is right despite the fact they don't know anything about it. I don't have a source for the U.S. public relating atheism to big bang belief, but I have a source for correlation between scientists' atheism and big bang belief, which we could extrapolate from. [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html From Nature magazine]. --[[User:Theonlyconservative|Theonlyconservative]] 12:38, 9 November 2007 (EST)

== Article Depth ==

In all honesty, this article does not tell anyone very much about the big bang theory, evidence for it, or the reasons why it was formulated in the first place. The article basically introduces the topic with a mish mash of unrelated facts in no particular order, then the next section is "dissent letter" followed by "starlight problem". These are hardly the most relevant topics about the Big Bang theory. May I suggest that as this article is (hopefully) reworked, those doing the writing keep in mind that the Big Bang Theory is a very general class of theories that all have one thing in common - the assertion that long ago the universe "began" from a mathematical singularity and has been increasing in size ever since. Also, be wary about the throwing around the word "singularity" - contrary to popular belief and science fiction, a singularity is not a physical thing - it is an asymptotic point in a mathematical function where the function breaks down and can no longer make any predictions. Other singularities include the center of black holes, and objects traveling at the speed of light. The mathematical models for these systems break down at these values and become meaningless. Likewise, the Big Bang Theory has nothing to say about the origin of the singularity or what came "before" it. It is outside the realm of the theory, and in the opinion of some scientist (I'm not comfortable saying most or few here, as I'm basing this statement only on my personal discussions) outside the realm of science as a whole.

== Georges-Henri Lemaître ==

Could somebody add something in about how Roman Catholic priest [[Georges-Henri Lemaître]], the original proposer of the Big Bang theory, felt that the theory fitted beautifully with his faith as it supports a "creation event"? [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 12:51, 8 January 2008 (EST)

== Change "Starlight problem" to "Horizon problem"? ==

There's a section in this article that refers to the "starlight problem" but I believe scientists actually refer to this issue as the "horizon problem." See [http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/HorizonProblem.html here] and [http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/cosmo.html#c5 here] for example. One reason is that the problem has to do with more than starlight--there are questions about density, temperature, etc. The term "starlight problem" is generally used by people discussing creationist cosmological models, while "horizon problem" is more appropriate in the context of the big bang model.--[[User:JamesR|JamesR]] 20:07, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
: I've changed it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:27, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

== Inflation and YEC ==

Couldn't inflation make the Big Bang and YEC compatible? I mean if it happened faster than the speed of light. Then why couldn't it happen in the YEC time scale? [[jfraatz|jfraatz]]

== "God's Role" ==

Can someone help me come up with a better way of saying "God's role in creating the universe." ? Obviously God didn't just have a 'role,' He simply created it by Himself! Thanks! [[User:WillS|WillS]] 18:16, 21 May 2010 (EDT)

:I tried; do you think my wording is OK? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 03:06, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

::Looks great. And good job catching some other areas where liberal bias crept in as well!

== Correcting "scientific" ==

I just corrected "scientific" the word used in description of the Big Bang to the proper in this case term "pseudo scientific". See also my [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] where I explain why the Big Bang is a pseudo scientific hypothesis (between other things it assumes "curved" spacetime for which there is no evidence and a lot of to contrary) and how Einsteinian gravitation works. The essay is still not finished and so I invite anybody to expres their opinion on the talk page of the essay. Thanks. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:35, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:I have already expressed my opinion on the talk page of that essay: you're a crackpot. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:02, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Sam, the fact that I'm a crackpot has certain influence on my credibility (which I never claimed being high, while I'm only a sculptor, with only one year training in general realativity, and the rest of my formal education being in electrical engineeiring) but it surely has no influence on the truth of Big Bang hypothesis (BBH).

::The biggest flaw of BBH is an assumption that the universe is expanding while it is not.

::This error of expansion of universe was created many years ago by [[relativists]] giving up the checking what is the ''[[intrinsic redshift]]'' in the universe before jumping to conclusion that the ''redshift is a '''proof''' that the universe is expanding''. It is clearly a non scientific approach to science. There are no proofs in science (except in math, and that's why math is not considered to be science). There are only better or worse ''hypotheses'' that are surely no proof. Some last long time until they collapse when a '''proof of their invalidity''' turns up and usually it is not accepted since no scientist cares about looking like an idiot who overlooke something important and assumed an impossible. Error that Newton avoided, not believeing in his own theory being more than just math.

::[[Intrinsic redshift]] is as it is observed in our universe (see my step-by-step derivation in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] and please comment on possible errors in this derivation). My derivation is done in such a simple way that an intelligent high school student shouldn't have problems with repeating it him/herself. Besides I'm here to explain if something is too difficult. Just ask a question about this derivation or other things since from 1985, when I discovered this derivation, I found out also many other thing. E.g. why the universe is looking as if it were expanding with accelerating expansion and the acceleration has just its value, observed with accuracy of only one standard deviation (max possible) by Supernova Cosmology Project team in 1998, which is

:::<math>dH/dt=-H_o^2/2</math>

::where <math>dH/dt</math> is acceleration of expansion in terms of derivation of Hubble constant with respect to time <math>t</math>, and <math>H_o</math> is the Hubble constant itself. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 16:44, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

== "even though the theory is based on little more than guesswork, speculation, and dubious assumptions." ==

I must agree with the removal of the above sentence. The big bang theory is based on the observations of red shifts, background radiation and other observational and physical properties of the universe. However, it is the assumptions the Big Bang theorists draw from this that are the debatable part. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:51, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

:Thanks Max. I don't accept the Big Bang theory myself, but only on the grounds of my faith. The error - and I think it's a sincere one - that astrophysicists are making is in the use of methodological naturalism, which of course is a requirement of the scientific method. Within the constraints of that method it's a very sound theory; it just isn't correct. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 20:01, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

::Yes Sam, ''"it just isn't correct"''. But can we say it while [[relativists]] maintain that it is correct? We have to have a proof that it isn't correct.

::I don't blame Max for him doing what he had to do not knowing such a proof. I just would like to start a discussion whether my proof is sound one, and justifying dumping BBH. I'm sure it is but I'm the author so I may be biased (though I took a general realtivity course at Harvard to be sure that I'm right and thought about this for over quater of a century so I'm relatively sure that it is a sound proof of invalidity of BBH).

::Anyway, I can only help in discussion by keeping it on track when I see wrong arguments, and without anybody discussing this issue it won't be even known that the proof of invalidity of BBH even exists. No mainstream scientific journal ever wanted to publish this proof despite it is only one page of print. It was published in conservapedia (after being blocked on my university server) as [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]] in a short form suitable for physicists. Longer form with step-by-step derivation of redshift in our universe, and more, is in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]]. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:25, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

::Just as a note, Sam, the Scientific Theory (i.e. Scientific Method) was codified by two individuals that were deeply religious (Descartes and Francis Bacon). It is also derived from the theories of logic codified by Roger Bacon, a monk. I don't think it is a difference between faith and reason. St. Thomas Aquinas made the argument that we should seek to combine the two, which John Calvin said was a very important advancement that allowed us to move beyond Greek philosophy/science. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 19:00, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:::It's irrelevant that Descartes and the Bacons were religious; the scientific method does NOT combine faith and reason and in fact explicitly rejects faith. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:14, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Additional note, Sam, what good it would do if we believed in things that are not true? As pseudo scientific theories usually are. [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:29, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::It's interesting to our readers that the founders of the [[scientific method]] were religious. We always want to know more about people who have influenced currents of modern thought.

::::When someone proposes "[[intelligent design]]", do we respond to the challenge of the idea purely on its merits, or do we consider the motives of its proponents? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:32, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

== Hmm ==

As a Catholic, I hope people realize that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter. The Catholic Church is home to one of the most conservative Christian organizations in the US, the Knights of Columbus (1.8 million members), mind you. I do hope that we can at least acknowledge that this isn't an "atheist" view or a "liberal" view, but one that spreads across boundaries. :) After all, the Catholic Church's view about Genesis is based on St. Augustine's determination that Genesis was allegorical, which was something both Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed with. Just keep this in mind. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 18:56, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

:In what sense ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''? The fact that ''"Martin Luther and John Calvin agreed (that Genesis was allegorical)"'' isn't a clear indication that ''"the Catholic Church was involved in the matter"''. At least to me (the crank :) that's why I'd appreciate if you explained it in more detail.

:My opinion is the same as yours that there was an involvement but I'm not sure that I understand it the same way as you do. I know that Gorges Lemaître, the Catholic prist, proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory<ref>

After wikipedia and believed this time.

</ref>, and also that the theory is false since I personally executed the for long time neglected calculation of value of [[intrinsic redshift]] and it turned out roughly as it is observed, which implies that practically there is no expansion of universe. Results of my calculations were not published since 1985 when they were done, except recently in conservapedia<ref>

[[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]].

</ref>, but I don't think that the Catholic Church was involved in the matter of blocking the publication. Do you? :) [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 14:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::Ottava, are you saying that a large percentage of Catholics accept the Big Bang theory? If so, is it because it seems reasonable to them? Or because it's Catholic dogma, or what? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:36, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:::It is both accepted by Catholics and given official approval by the Vatican. After all, [[Georges-Henri Lemaitre]] was a famous Catholic Priest and the originator of it. The Catholic Church also says there is enough reason to believe that evolution is okay. Afterall, Darwin made it clear that he believed in Aristotelian theory (and thus, Aristotelian Metaphysics which St. Thomas Aquinas relied upon), and that Darwin was Anglican his whole life, whether High Church or not is a different matter. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:03, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::::Actually Darwin was Unitarian, not Anglican (he was baptised Anglican mainly due to social pressure) and it's pretty clear that he at least partly abandoned Christianity. He intended to become an Anglican vicar at one point (mainly so he could spend six days a week collecting beetles) but his mother was a practicing Unitarian and took him to her church, and his father and paternal grandfather were atheists. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 15:33, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

:::Would you mind seeing to it that the above information gets into the appropriate articles? I'd like to see a [[Catholic views on evolution]] article, for example. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:06, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
::::Eventually. However, I do have a rather strong conflict with my personal involvement with the Church, publications on Catholic Theology, Cathology apologia, my work with Catholic advocacy groups, etc. I merely wanted to add a little note that you don't have to be liberal to believe in it. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

::JimJast, I'm a tad confused by your response. I was merely stating that belief in the Big Bang wasn't necessarily "liberal" or reflected a liberal bias. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:08, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

My understanding is the Catholic Church has given ''qualified'' acceptance to Big Bang / evolution / etc., on the basis that that was the predominant scientific opinion, and they want Catholicism and Science to coexist harmoniously. The major qualification, as I understand it, is the need for a literal Adam and Eve and a literal Fall. But God could have say, permitted life to evolve up to higher animals, but then as a special act of creation God created Adam. (Maybe he created Adam out of some evolved primate species). The Church doesn't insist that Genesis need be read completely literally, but some elements (existence of Adam/Eve) are so important theologically they can't be dispensed with. How can Christ be the New Adam if there never was an old one? If the Fall never happened, who needs Redemption? Of course, while I understand this to be the official position, not all Catholics agree with it, or are even aware of it, which is not an uncommon thing in the Catholic church. [[User:Maratrean|Maratrean]] 15:22, 15 September 2011 (EDT)
:[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110113.htm See chapter XIII]. The Catholic Church was very anti-literalist and actually persecuted many literalist sects as heretics. :) I haven't seen anything in which they required a "literal Adam and Eve", but the "Fall" is different. See also [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05692b.htm Pope Leo XIII]'s warning about certain types of interpretation of the Bible in which we try to conform the divine into the human (i.e. trying to say things literally happened when our words cannot actually contain the divine). See also the statements about how "literal" we can interpret the Bible under "Literal sense". St. Augustine wrote a whole work criticizing taking the literal sense of Genesis (''The Literal Interpretation of Genesis'' which is anti-literalist). I don't want to get into a debate about this, though. :) [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 15:53, 15 September 2011 (EDT)

==References==
<References/>

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-15T19:08:22Z

Ottava: /* Hmm */

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-15T19:03:42Z

Ottava: /* Hmm */

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-15T00:38:07Z

Ottava: /* "even though the theory is based on little more than guesswork, speculation, and dubious assumptions." */ paranthetical note

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-14T23:00:38Z

Ottava: /* "even though the theory is based on little more than guesswork, speculation, and dubious assumptions." */

Talk:Big Bang theory

2011-09-14T22:56:14Z

Ottava: /* Hmm */ new section

User talk:Wh

2011-09-14T21:21:27Z

Ottava: welcome

<div style="background: #FFFFFF; width:95%; border: 4px solid blue; padding:0.5em;">
{{useful links|background=#FF6666|float=right}}
'''<big><big>Welcome!</big></big>'''
 
 
Hello, {{PAGENAME}}, and '''''welcome''''' to [[Conservapedia]]!

We're glad you are here to edit. '''We ask that you read our [[Conservapedia:Editor's guide|Editor's Guide]] ''before you edit.'''''

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{tl|Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!

Thanks for reading, {{PAGENAME}}!

:
{{clear}}</div>
- [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 17:21, 14 September 2011 (EDT)

Articles for Deletion

2011-09-13T15:37:45Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT [[Conservapedia:Articles for deletion]]

Articles on Conservapedia from Conservative Sources

2011-09-13T15:37:37Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT [[Conservapedia:Articles mentioning Conservapedia]]

Articles of Religious Freedom

2011-09-13T15:37:33Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT [[Article of Religious Freedom]]

Articles on Conservapedia from Conservatives Sources

2011-09-13T15:37:28Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT [[Conservapedia:Articles mentioning Conservapedia]]

Artie Lange

2011-09-13T15:37:25Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT[[Artie Lang]]

Ashcan School

2011-09-13T15:34:12Z

Ottava: fix

The '''Ashcan School''' was an art movement which lasted from 1908 to 1913 in New York City. It earned its name from critics who deemed its art fitting for the "Ash can". The Ashcan School portrayed urban scenes in a realistic, stretch-like manner and is recognized as the first uniquely American art movement. While it is best known for its subject matter, it is also known for its loose, spontaneous style and its dark, subdued palette. Prominent Ashcan School artists were [[Henri]], [[Sloan]], and [[Bellows]].
==References==
*[http://www.artmovements.co.uk/ashcanschool.htm Ashcan School]
[[Category:Artistic Movements]]

Aryan

2011-09-13T15:34:02Z

Ottava: fix

#redirect[[Aryans]]

Asclepius

2011-09-13T15:33:53Z

Ottava: fix

'''Asclepius''' was the ancient god of medicine in [[Greek mythology]]. Born a mortal, he was trained as a physician by [[Chiron]], and became so skilled in the art of medicine that he could resurrect the dead. For this arrogance, [[Zeus]] smote him with a thunderbolt. However, [[Apollo (mythology)|Apollo]] rescued him from [[Hades]] and made him a god on [[Olympus]] where he became physician to the gods.

Because of his supposed healing powers, Asclepius was worshipped all over [[Ancient Greece|Greece]]. His temples were usually built in "healthy" places, such as hills outside of the towns where they would be away from disease or near wells with alleged healing properties.

{{Nb mythology greece}}
[[Category:Medicine]]

Asphalt

2011-09-13T15:31:26Z

Ottava: fix

'''Asphalt''' (known in the industry as Hot Mix Asphalt, or HMA), is a combination of aggregates (usually crushed stone and some sand), filler (cement, hydrated lime or stone dust) and a [[coal|bituminous]] binder called "asphalt cement". Additives are sometimes used (e.g. rubber from old car tires) . Reclaimed "asphalt" from old roads, called RAP (recycled asphalt pavement), is also, increasingly, being used.

When hot, HMA is pliable and can be rolled flat to create a smooth, durable, water proof substrate.

==Standards==
Hot Mix Asphalts are defined by the gradation of the aggregate. This includes the maximum size of crushed stone present in the mix. Most asphalt specifications state what mix type to use for various projects and give the range of particle size that the aggregate gradation must fall within.

Asphalt mix types are referred to by the gradation limits. Each state, city or municipality has their own designation for asphalt mixes suitable for use in their jurisdiction. For example Florida DOT refers to S1 mixes while Texas DOT uses Type A, B C or D mixes.

To adopt a national standard for HMA all States are moving to the SuperPave method of describing asphalt mixes.

===SuperPave===
SuperPave is not a type of hot mix asphalt. SuperPave is a method of designing Hot Mix Asphalt. SuperPave stands for Superior Performing HMA Pavements.

Prior to SuperPave, there were two recognized methods of asphalt mix design, the Hveem and Marshall methods.

Both of these design methods are named after their inventors. Both methods describe a series of standardized tests and testing equipment that is to be used to determine the optimum aggregate and asphalt binder (liquid asphalt) blend needed for an asphalt mix to perform. The Marshal method of mix design is the most widely used.

There have been many minor changes to the types of asphalt mixes since the turn of the millennium. These changes were needed to ensure that the performance of HMA meets today's traffic counts and loads. All of these changes, described different mix criteria, aggregate types and sizes, and asphalt binder (liquid asphalt), but all these changes continued to use the outdated Marshall method of mix design.
SuperPave is a new design method was developed to adopt a national standard for HMA pavements. This standards allows our industry to measure HMA performance on a national level. Therefore a new design method was needed that better simulated the traffic loads expected; one that would perform better under those loads.

It was also decided that the asphalt binder used needed to do a better job of fitting to the climate in which the mix was to be laid. This resulted in the development of the "performance graded" (PG) asphalt binder.

===PG Graded Asphalt Binder===
'''Binder''' is the new name for asphalt cements. It is the glue that holds the aggregate together and makes asphalt black. PG graded asphalt binder is a new method of specifying binder appropriate for the climate where the asphalt mixture is to be laid. The binder is tested to make sure it gives the greatest amount of flexibility during cold temperatures (to resist cracking) and the greatest amount of rigidity during warmer temperatures (to resist rutting). The type of PG graded asphalt binder used depends on the temperatures of the area. For example, in Florida, binders need to be able to deal with extended periods of heat. In Alaska binders need to deal with prolonged periods of cold. In Wisconsin the binders need to have flexibility to deal with both types of climates.<ref>http://auto.ihs.com/document/abstract/BGMEIBAAAAAAAAAA</ref>

===Grades===
Not all agencies have adopted SuperPave mix design technology or the PG graded asphalt binder system, and continue to use the old terminology for describing asphalt binders. The following describes three methods still widely used to describe asphalt binders:

All of the above methods of describing the asphalt binder are based on some measure of the asphalt viscosity.

For Example: 
'''Penetration Grades''' (such as pen 85 -100) is based on how deep a needle will push into the asphalt under a certain weight and at a certain temperature. Viscosity Grades are based on the measured viscosity at a certain temperature, and AC Grades are also based on measured viscosity, but after aging or hardening the asphalt in an oven to simulate the effect of heat on the asphalt during making of the mixture.

'''Compaction:''' This is the process of densifying the HMA while it is in a hot, pliable state, to pack the aggregate particles together and to remove as much of the air voids as possible. Compaction gives the mix strength, resistance to rutting (i.e. resistance to additional densification under the action of vehicular traffic), it seals the surface from the ingress of water, and gives a smooth riding surface.

During compaction of asphalt hot mix three very important factors that will affect pavement performance take place. The asphalt coated aggregate particles are pressed together, air voids are reduced, and mix density (weight to volume ratio) increases.<ref>http://www.trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=3405</ref>

# This squeezing together of the aggregates increases their surface to surface contact and interparticle friction, resulting in higher mix stability and pavement strength.
#The reduction of air voids to the optimum level in the mix produces a pavement that is nearly impermeable. In an under compacted mix the voids tend to be interconnected thereby permitting the intrusion of air and water into the pavement structure. The air oxidizes the asphalt binder, making it brittle and causing the mix to crack under the repeated deflections due to traffic loads. Water permeating into and through the pavement can lead to stripping of the asphalt from the aggregate, weakening of the base and subgrade soils under the pavement, or freeze-thaw damage in colder climates. Premature pavement distress can occur in any of these situations.
#Finally, if a high level of compaction (concurrently with items 1 and 2 above) is not achieved during construction, subsequent traffic will further consolidate the mix. This will occur principally in the wheel paths and the resulting ruts could be a safety hazard to traffic using the road.

==Fundamental principles==
The goal of compacting an asphalt concrete pavement is to achieve the optimum air void content and provide a smooth riding surface. Behind the paver, the mat has 15 to 20% air voids. It is the task of the [[steamroller|rollers]] to reduce that void content to 8% or less for dense-graded mixes. At that level, the voids are usually not interconnected and the detrimental effects of air and water are avoided. Caution must be exercised, however, not to compact the pavement to a very low air void level. This minimum void level is necessary to allow for thermal expansion.

Even with a properly designed mix, compaction of the mat is possible only if correct mix temperature exists.

At temperatures between 85°C (185°F) and 150°C (300°F), the asphalt binder is fluid enough to act as a lubricant in the compaction process aiding movement of the mix aggregates into a dense configuration. As it cools below this temperature range, asphalt becomes very stiff and sticky making further mix densification extremely difficult. Therefore, compaction must be completed before the mix cools to 85°C (185°F).

==Definitions==
'''Asphalt cement''' or "binder" is a complex hydrocarbon found as a natural deposit or as a residue from distilling crude oil to remove petroleum, motor oils, naphtha and kerosene. Asphalt cement is dark brown or black in color and at normal temperature is a solid but as the temperature is increased it becomes sticky and then oily. Asphalt cement makes up about 5% of the volume of the mix and is used to hold together (or cement or glue) the aggregate particles together in the HMA.

'''Aggregates''' are crushed stone, [[sand]] and fine ground rock, mixed in a predetermined proportion to obtain desired properties in the HMA. Aggregates and fillers make up about 90% of the volume of the mix.

'''Filler''' is a fine dust used to harden the asphalt cement, and improve adhesion of the asphalt cement to the aggregates.

'''Aggregate gradation''' HMA is graded by the percentages of different-size aggregate particles it contains. Aggregate gradation is a way of describing the proportions of the various sizes of crushed stone, sand and filler, by passing the aggregate through a set of sieves and measuring the weight retained on each sieve.

'''Compaction''' this is the process of densifying the HMA while it is in a hot, pliable state, to pack the aggregate particles together and to remove as much of the air voids as possible. Compaction gives the mix strength, resistance to rutting (the additional densification under the action of vehicular traffic), it seals the surface from the ingress of water and gives a smooth riding surface.

'''SuperPave''' is a method of [[design|designing]] Hot Mix Asphalt.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Construction]]

Aseismic

2011-09-13T15:31:18Z

Ottava: fix

An '''aseismic''' region is one without [[earthquake]]s, or other [[seismic]] activity.<ref>http://wrgis.wr.usgs.gov/docs/parks/misc/glossaryAtoC.html</ref>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Geology]]

Asia Minor

2011-09-13T15:30:54Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT [[Anatolia]]

Ashkenazi

2011-09-13T15:27:52Z

Ottava: fix

[[Image:Rembrandt Portrait of an Old Jewish Man.jpg|right|170px]]
'''Ashkenazi''' (from the name of one of [[Noah]]'s grandsons) is a Jew of eastern European or [[German]] descent; as compared with [[Sephardi|Sephardim]], refers to the group of [[Judaism|Jews]] who, after the [[diaspora]], settled in central and northern [[Europe]]. Many famous Jews are Ashkenazi (which is both a noun and an adjective), [[Albert Einstein]] among them.

Ashkenazi Jews follow many different practices than Sephardim. For instance, Sephardi Jews eat rice on [[Passover]], but Ashkenazi Jews do not.
{{Clear}}

== External links ==

*[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Ashkenazis Ashkenazi]

[[category:Judaism]]

Asian Tigers

2011-09-13T15:27:41Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT [[Four Tigers]]

Ascorbic acid

2011-09-13T15:27:33Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT [[Vitamin C]]

Asama-yama

2011-09-13T15:27:13Z

Ottava: fix

#redirect[[Mount Asama]]

Aspatha

2011-09-13T15:27:09Z

Ottava: fix

#REDIRECT [[Sons of Haman]]

Asperger's syndrome

2011-09-13T15:25:52Z

Ottava: fix

'''Asperger's syndrome''' (sometimes referred to as "High-Functioning Autism" or "HFA") is an umbrella term used to classify problematic behaviours similar to, but less severe than, those within the lower reaches of the [[Autism|autistic spectrum]]. As such, symptoms can vary widely in type and severity between individuals, though difficulties with social interaction<ref>Especially in the reading and understanding of non-verbal cues.</ref> and obsessive-compulsive routines are reasonably common diagnostic themes.

It was first described by an Austrian pediatrician, Hans Asperger, in 1944 (one year after Leo Kanner's first paper on [[autism]]). In his paper, he discusses "a pattern of behaviors in several young boys who had normal intelligence and language development, but who also exhibited autistic-like behaviors and marked deficiencies in social, communication, and fine motor skills."<ref>http://www.udel.edu/bkirby/asperger/aswhatisit.html#DSM</ref> Research continues into the condition's underlying causes.

The term ''Asperger's syndrome'' was first used in a paper by British psychiatrist, Lorna Wing.

Other persons involved in studying Asperger's syndrome include Tony Attwood and Simon Baron-Cohen.

A Christian mother wrote this heart-warming piece on caring for a child with Asperger's: http://autismisok.com/blog/category/Christian-Autism-Stories.aspx

==Effects of Asperger's syndrome==

Children with Asperger's syndrome tend to exhibit the following qualities:

- Difficulty socializing and understanding social cues. Asperger's sufferers may stuggle to find friends, which is why a homeschooled environment away from bullies for education and a church environment for socialization can work wonders.
- No significant loss of language skills (loss of language ability, especially in young children, is more a sign of classical [[autism]].
- Increased raw intelligence (especially in subjects dealing with absolutes, such as math).

==The case for homeschooling==

As with children with [[Autism]] (high functioning or otherwise), homeschooling is a valuable resource (along with the power of [[prayer]]) for helping the child grow and adapt to a society that struggles to accept them.

Rachael Evans wrote in [http://ezinearticles.com/?Home-Schooling-Your-Autistic-Child&id=303099 her Ezinezone article],

"While public schools are funded to handle children with special needs, these locations are not always the best arenas for autistic children. One of the reasons that home-schooling your autistic child is a good idea is because special education programs may lump autistic children in with others who have maladaptive behavioral problems.

Remember, autistic children have behavioral problems due to their developmental inability to properly function normally in social situations. If they are placed in with others who have emotional problems they may regress instead of progress. However, if home-schooled, parents can control the social influences that are likely to either help or hinder the progress of their child. They can keep them away from insensitive teachers, bullies, and have greater control of their education."

Dozens of other sources point to [[homeschooling]] as a strong choice, if not '''the only viable alternative''', for special needs children, including children with Autism and Asperger's syndrome.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/303099

==Resources for Parents of Autistic Children==

http://homeschoolaustralia.com/index/specialneeds.html - [http://homeschoolaustralia.com/index/specialneeds.html Homeschooling and Special Needs]

http://homeschooling.gomilpitas.com/weblinks/autism.htm - [http://homeschooling.gomilpitas.com/weblinks/autism.htm Homeschooling Autistic Children]

== References ==
<references/>
[[category:medicine]]
[[Category:Syndromes]]
[[Category:autism]]

Ascension of Christ

2011-09-13T15:25:40Z

Ottava: fix

'''The Ascension of Christ''' is His glorification.

<blockquote>
"After the Lord [[Jesus]] had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and He sat at the right hand of [[God]]" Mark 16:19.
</blockquote>

<center>
[[Image:Rembrandt Ascension.jpg]]

Ascension by [[Rembrandt]].
</center>

<blockquote>
His ascension meant that He would send the [[Holy Spirit]] to dwell in believers, taking the place of His bodily presence, and continuing what He had done while here (John 14:16-17; 16:5-7). "All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you" (John 14:25-26). And, "He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you" (John 16:14) [http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/ascension-of-christ-faq.htm]
</blockquote>

''Although the place of the Ascension is not distinctly stated, it would appear from the Acts that it was Mount Olivet.'' [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01767a.htm] The Feast of the Ascension, commemorating the Ascension of Christ into heaven, according to Mark 16:19, Luke 24:51, and Acts 1:2, take universal observance the fortieth day after Easter Sunday.

== See also ==
* [[The Ascension]]
* [[Easter]]
* [[Christian Cross]]
* [[Bible Art Gallery]]
* [[Christianity in Conservapedia]]

[[Category:Christianity]]
[[Category:New Testament]]

Ashgabad

2011-09-13T15:25:13Z

Ottava: fix

'''Ashgabad''' is the capital city of [[Turkmenistan]].

[[Category:Turkmenistan]]
[[Category:Capital Cities]]
[[Category:Asian Cities and Towns]]

Ashcroft v. ACLU

2011-09-13T15:21:38Z

Ottava: restoring

In '''''Ashcroft v. ACLU''''', 542 U.S. 656 (2004), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] invalidated the [[Child Online Protection Act]], which would have required pornographers to take reasonable steps to restrict access by minors to porn on the internet.

This law, which the Supreme Court struck down, did not censor a single word or picture. It merely required the pornographers to screen their websites from minors, which can be done by credit card or other verification.

The Court shifted the burden to families to screen out the pornography rather than requiring the companies profiting from the pornography to keep its own pollution from children.
[[Category:Law]]

User talk:KevinDavis

2011-09-09T14:47:37Z

Ottava: /* Style */

== I want to start correcting misspelled words ==

:Go right ahead. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:30, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
::Thank you. I have a script searching for commonly misspelled words at the moment. Hopefully it will return something. [[User:KevinDavis|KevinDavis]] 09:38, 20 August 2011 (EDT)

==Spell check==
In case of essays where it says no other contributions, I think minor spelling corrections are fine. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 11:28, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
::Ok thank you. I'll refrain if a correction would change the meaning at all (I don't know why it would, but still). [[User:KevinDavis|KevinDavis]] 09:37, 20 August 2011 (EDT)

== RE:James Bond? ==

Yes, that is correct.--[[User:GOPFan2011|GOPFan2011]] 13:40, 5 September 2011 (EDT)

== Style ==

[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Samuel_Johnson&action=historysubmit&diff=912711&oldid=912612 Regarding this]: there are two ways to approach quotes and punctuation. One format (which I prefer) is to only have the quotes represent the quote punctuation, i.e. if there is a comma or period at the end of the quote then put that punctuation, if not leave punctuation outside of the quote. Some others prefer to have all punctuation within a quote. One is based on quotation correctness logic, the other is based on uniformity. Which does Conservapedia prefer so that can be established (or you'll have to be doing a lot of changes to switch it over :) )? I do have a program that can swap the punctuation more easily so I can handle some of it without a problem. [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 10:19, 9 September 2011 (EDT)
:I was always taught that punctuation is placed within quotes, regardless of context or content (with a few rare exceptions, none of which I've seen used here). I've used that method for years in my work, and it's what I pass on to my students. However, if you have any lingering questions, I would ask [[User:Aschlafly]], since he's who I've turned to for help with other issues. [[User:KevinDavis|Kevin Davis]] [[User talk:KevinDavis|Talk]] 10:22, 9 September 2011 (EDT)
::[http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/quotation_%28speech%29_marks_punctuation_in_or_out.htm Looking briefly] online, it appears it is more of a UK/US thing, and looking at some of my critical books it seems to be a pre-1980 (logic) vs post-1980 (uniform). [[User:Ottava|Ottava]] ([[user talk:Ottava|talk]]) 10:47, 9 September 2011 (EDT)

User talk:KevinDavis

2011-09-09T14:19:11Z

Ottava: /* Style */ new section

Samuel Johnson

2011-09-09T04:55:02Z

Ottava: missed one

'''Samuel Johnson''' (18 September 1709 (O.S.) 7 September – 13 December 1784), often referred to as '''Dr. Johnson''', was an English author who made lasting contributions to English literature as a poet, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and lexicographer . Johnson was a devout Anglican and committed Tory, and has been described as "arguably the most distinguished man of letters in English history".<ref>Rogers, Pat (2006), "Johnson, Samuel (1709–1784)", ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'' (online ed.), Oxford University Press, [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/14918], retrieved 25 August 2008</ref> He is also the subject of "the most famous single work of biographical art in the whole of literature": James Boswell 's '' Life of Samuel Johnson ''.<ref name="Batexix">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=xix}}</ref>

Johnson was born in Lichfield, Staffordshire, and attended Pembroke College, Oxford for just over a year, before his lack of funds forced him to leave. After working as a teacher he moved to London, where he began to write miscellaneous pieces for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''. His early works include the biography ''The Life of Richard Savage'', the poems "London " and "The Vanity of Human Wishes", and the play ''Irene''.

After nine years of work, Johnson's ''Dictionary of the English Language '' was published in 1755; it had a far-reaching effect on Modern English and has been described as "one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship."<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> The ''Dictionary'' brought Johnson popularity and success. Until the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' 150 years later, Johnson's was viewed as the pre-eminent British dictionary.<ref name="Lynch p. 1">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 1}}</ref> His later works included essays, an influential annotated edition of William Shakespeare's plays, and the widely read tale ''Rasselas''. In 1763, he befriended James Boswell, with whom he later travelled to Scotland; Johnson described their travels in '' A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland ''. Towards the end of his life, he produced the massive and influential '' Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets '', a collection of biographies and evaluations of 17th- and 18th-century poets.

Johnson had a tall and robust figure, but his odd gestures and tic s were confusing to some on their first encounter with him. Boswell's ''Life'', along with other biographies, documented Johnson's behaviour and mannerisms in such detail that they have informed the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome (TS),<ref name="ContTSDiagnosis">{{Harvnb|Murray|1979}} and {{Harvnb|Stern|2005}}</ref> a condition not defined or diagnosed in the 18th century. After a series of illnesses he died on the evening of 13 December 1784, and was buried in Westminster Abbey . In the years following his death, Johnson began to be recognised as having had a lasting effect on literary criticism, and even as the only great critic of English literature.<ref name="Winters p. 240">{{Harvnb|Winters|1943|p=240}}</ref>

==Biography==
===Early life and education===
Born on 18 September 1709 (New Style) to Michael Johnson, a bookseller, and his wife, Sarah Ford,<ref name="Bate p. 5">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=5}}</ref> Samuel Johnson often claimed that he grew up in poverty. Since both families had money, it is uncertain what happened between Michael and Sarah's marriage and the birth of Samuel just three years later to provoke such a change in fortune.<ref name="Lane p. 1314">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=13–14}}</ref> Johnson was born in the home above his father's bookshop in Lichfield, Staffordshire and,<ref name="Bate p. 5"/> because his mother Sarah was 40 when she gave birth, a "man-midwife" and surgeon of "great reputation" named George Hector was brought in to assist.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=15–16}}</ref> He did not cry and, with doubts surrounding the newborn's health, his aunt claimed "that she would not have picked such a poor creature up in the street".<ref name = "Watkins p.25"/> As it was feared the baby might die, the vicar of St Mary's was summoned to perform a baptism.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=16}}</ref> Two godfathers were chosen: Samuel Swynfen, a physician and graduate of Pembroke College, Oxford, and Richard Wakefield, a lawyer, coroner, and Lichfield town clerk.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=5–6}}</ref>

Johnson's health improved and he was put to wet-nurse with Joan Marklew. He soon contracted scrofula,<ref name="Lane pp. 16-17">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=16–17}}</ref> known at that time as the "King's Evil" because it was thought royalty could cure it. Sir John Floyer, former physician to Charles II of England|Charles II, recommended that the young Johnson should receive the " scrofula|royal touch ",<ref name="Lane p. 18">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=18}}</ref> which he received from Queen Anne on 30 March 1712. However, the ritual was ineffective, and an operation was performed that left him with permanent scars across his face and body.<ref name="Lane pp. 19-20">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=19–20}}</ref> With the birth of Johnson's brother, Nathaniel, a few months later, Michael was unable to keep on top of the debts he had accumulated over the years, and his family was no longer able to live in the style to which it had been accustomed.<ref name="Lane pp. 20-21">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=20–21}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=When he was a child in petticoats, and had learned to read, Mrs Johnson one morning put the common prayer-book into his hands, pointed to the collect for the day, and said, 'Sam, you must get this by heart.' She went up stairs, leaving him to study it: But by the time she had reached the second floor, she heard him following her. 'What's the matter?' said she. 'I can say it,' he replied; and repeated it distinctly, though he could not have read it over more than twice.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=38}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Johnson demonstrated signs of great intelligence as a child, and his parents, to his later disgust, would show off his "newly acquired accomplishments".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=18–19}}</ref> His education began at the age of three, and came from his mother who had him memorise and recite passages from the Book of Common Prayer .<ref name="Bate p. 21">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=21}}</ref> When Johnson turned four, he was sent to a nearby school, and, when he reached the age of six, he was sent to a retired shoemaker to continue his education.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=25–26}}</ref> A year later, Johnson was sent to Lichfield Grammar School, where he excelled in Latin.<ref name="Lane p. 26">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p= 26}}</ref> During this time, Johnson started to exhibit the tics that would influence how people viewed him in his later years, and which formed the basis for the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome .<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6">{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=5–6}}</ref> He excelled at his studies and was promoted to the upper school at the age of nine.<ref name="Lane p. 26"/> During this time, he befriended Edmund Hector, nephew of his "man-midwife" George Hector, and John Taylor, with whom he remained in contact for the rest of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=23, 31}}</ref>

At the age of 16, Johnson was given the opportunity to stay with his cousins, the Fords, at Pedmore, Worcestershire.<ref name="Lane p. 29">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=29}}</ref> There he became a close friend of Cornelius Ford, who employed his knowledge of the classics to tutor Johnson while he was not attending school.<ref name="Wain p. 32">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=32}}</ref> Ford was a successful, well-connected academic, but was also a notorious alcoholic whose excesses contributed to his death six years after Johnson's visit.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=30}}</ref> Having spent six months with his cousins, Johnson returned to Lichfield, but Mr. Hunter, the headmaster, "angered by the impertinence of this long absence", refused to allow him to continue at the grammar school.<ref name="Lane p. 33">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=33}}</ref> Unable to return to Lichfield Grammar School, Johnson was enrolled into the King Edward VI grammar school at Stourbridge.<ref name="Wain p. 32"/> Because the school was located near Pedmore, Johnson was able to spend more time with the Fords, and he began to write poems and verse translations.<ref name="Lane p. 33"/> However, he spent only six months at Stourbridge before returning once again to his parents' home in Lichfield.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=61}}</ref>

During this time, Johnson's future was uncertain as his father was deeply in debt.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=34}}</ref> To earn money, Johnson began to stitch books for his father, and it is possible that Johnson spent most of his time in his father's bookshop reading various works and building his literary knowledge. They remained in poverty until Sarah Johnson's cousin, Elizabeth Harriotts, died in February 1728 and left enough money to send Johnson to college.<ref name="Bate p. 87"/> On 31 October 1728, a few weeks after he turned 19, Johnson entered Pembroke College, Oxford.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=39}}</ref> The inheritance did not cover all of his expenses at Pembroke, but Andrew Corbet, a friend and fellow student at Pembroke, offered to make up the deficit.<ref name="Bate p. 88">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=88}}</ref>

Johnson made friends at Pembroke and read much. In later life, he told stories of his idleness.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=90–100}}. Bate also comments that Johnson's standard of effort was very high, so high that Johnson said he had never known a man to study hard.</ref> He was later asked by his tutor to produce a Latin translation of Alexander Pope 's ''Messiah'' as a Christmas exercise.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=91–92}}</ref> Johnson completed half of the translation in one afternoon and the rest the following morning. Although the poem brought him praise, it did not bring the material benefit he had hoped for.<ref name="Bate p. 92">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=92}}</ref> The poem later appeared in ''Miscellany of Poems'' (1731), edited by John Husbands, a Pembroke tutor, and is the earliest surviving publication of any of Johnson's writings. Johnson spent the rest of his time studying, even over the Christmas vacation. He drafted a "plan of study" called "Adversaria", which was left unfinished, and used his time to learn French while working on his knowledge of Greek.<ref name="Bate p. 9394">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=93–94}}</ref>

After thirteen months, a shortage of funds forced Johnson to leave Oxford without a degree, and he returned to Lichfield.<ref name="Bate p. 87">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=87}}</ref> Towards the end of Johnson's stay at Oxford his tutor, Jorden, left Pembroke and was replaced by William Adams (master)|William Adams . He enjoyed Adams as a tutor, but by December, Johnson was already a quarter behind in his student fees, and he was forced to return home. He left behind many books that he had borrowed from his father because he could not afford to transport them and as a symbolic gesture in that he hoped to return to his studies soon.<ref name="Bate p. 106107">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=106–107}}</ref>

He eventually received a degree: just before the publication of his ''Dictionary'' in 1755, Oxford University awarded Johnson the degree of Master of Arts (Oxbridge and Dublin)|Master of Arts .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=128–129}}</ref> He was awarded an honorary doctorate in 1765 by Trinity College Dublin and in 1775 by Oxford University.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=36}}</ref> In 1776, he returned to Pembroke with Boswell and toured the college with his previous tutor Adams, who was then its Master. He used that visit to recount his time at the college, his early career, and to express his later fondness for Jorden.<ref name="Bate p. 99">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=99}}</ref>

===Early career===
Little is known about Johnson's life between the end of 1729 and 1731; it is likely that he lived with his parents. He experienced bouts of mental anguish and physical pain during years of illness;<ref name="Bate p. 127">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=127}}</ref> his tics and gesticulations associated with Tourette syndrome became more noticeable and were often commented upon.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=24}}</ref> By 1731 Johnson's father was deeply in debt and had lost much of his standing in Lichfield. Johnson hoped to get an usher's position which became available at Stourbridge Grammar School, but as he did not have a degree his application was passed over on 6 September 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 127"/> At about this time, Johnson's father became ill and developed an "inflammatory fever" which led to his death in December 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 129">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=129}}</ref> Johnson eventually found employment as undermaster at a school in Market Bosworth, run by Sir Wolstan Dixie, 4th Baronet who allowed Johnson to teach without a degree.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=130–131}}</ref> Although Johnson was treated as a servant,<ref>{{Harvnb|Hopewell|1950|p= 53}}</ref> he found pleasure in teaching despite thinking it boring. After an argument with Dixie he quit the school, and by June 1732 he had returned home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=131–132}}</ref>

Johnson continued to look for a position at a Lichfield school. After being turned down for a position in Ashbourne, he spent his time with his friend Edmund Hector, who was living in the home of the publisher Thomas Warren. At the time Warren was starting his '' Birmingham Journal (eighteenth century)|Birmingham Journal '', and he enlisted Johnson's help.<ref name="Bate p. 134">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=134}}</ref> This connection with Warren grew, and Johnson proposed a translation of Jeronimo Lobo 's account of the Ethiopian Empire|Abyssinians .<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=137–138}}</ref> Johnson read Abbé Joachim Le Grand's French translations, and thought that a shorter version might be "useful and profitable".<ref name="Bate p. 138">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=138}}</ref> Instead of writing the whole work himself, he dictated to Hector, who then took the copy to the printer and made any corrections. Johnson's ''A Voyage to Abyssinia'' was published a year later.<ref name="Bate p. 138"/> He returned to Lichfield in February 1734, and began an annotated edition of Poliziano 's Latin poems, along with a history of Latin poetry from Petrarch to Poliziano; a ''Proposal'' was soon printed, but a lack of funds halted the project.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=140–141}}</ref>

Johnson remained with his close friend Harry Porter during a terminal illness,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=144}}</ref> which culminated when Porter died on 3 September 1734, leaving his wife Elizabeth Jervis Porter (otherwise known as "Tetty") widowed at the age of 45, with three children.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=143}}</ref> Some months later, Johnson began to court her. The Reverend William Shaw claims that "the first advances probably proceeded from her, as her attachment to Johnson was in opposition to the advice and desire of all her relations".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1969|p=88}}</ref> Johnson was inexperienced in such relationships, but the well-to-do widow encouraged him and promised to provide for him with her substantial savings.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=145}}</ref> They married on 9 July 1735, at St Werburgh's Church, Derby|St Werburgh's Church in Derby .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=147}}</ref> The Porter family did not approve of the match, partly because Johnson was 25 and Elizabeth was 21 years his elder, and Elizabeth's marriage to Johnson so disgusted her son Jervis that he severed relations with her.<ref name="Wain p. 65">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=65}}</ref> However, her daughter Lucy had accepted Johnson from the start, and her other son, Joseph, accepted the marriage later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=146}}</ref>

In June 1735, while working as a tutor for Thomas Whitby's children, Johnson had applied for the position of headmaster at Solihull School .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=153–154}}</ref> Although Walmesley gave his support, Johnson was passed over because the school's directors thought he was "a very haughty, ill-natured gent., and that he has such a way of distorting his face (which though he can't help) the gent[s] think it may affect some lads".<ref name="Bate p. 154">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=154}}</ref> With Walmesley's encouragement, Johnson decided that he could be a successful teacher if he ran his own school.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=153}}</ref> In the autumn of 1735, Johnson opened Edial Hall School as a private academy at Edial, near Lichfield. He had only three pupils: Lawrence Offley, George Garrick, and the 18-year-old David Garrick, who later became one of the most famous actors of his day.<ref name="Bate p. 154"/> The venture was unsuccessful and cost Tetty a substantial portion of her fortune. Instead of trying to keep the failing school going, Johnson began to write his first major work, the historical tragedy ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=156}}</ref> Biographer Robert DeMaria believed that Tourette syndrome likely made public occupations like schoolmaster or tutor almost impossible for Johnson to hold; this may have led Johnson to "the invisible occupation of authorship".<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6"/>

Johnson left for London with his former pupil David Garrick on 2 March 1737, the day Johnson's brother had died. He was penniless and pessimistic about their travel, but fortunately for them, Garrick had connections in London, and the two were able to stay with his distant relative, Richard Norris.<ref name="Bate p. 16465">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=164–165}}</ref> Johnson soon moved to Greenwich near the Golden Hart Tavern to finish ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=168–169}}</ref> On 12 July 1737 he wrote to Edward Cave with a proposal for a translation of Paolo Sarpi 's ''The History of the Council of Trent'' (1619), which Cave did not accept until months later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=81}}; {{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=169}}</ref> In October 1737 Johnson brought his wife to London, and he found employment with Cave as a writer for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=169–170}}</ref> His assignments for the magazine and other publishers during this time were "almost unparalleled in range and variety", and "so numerous, so varied and scattered" that "Johnson himself could not make a complete list".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=14}}</ref> The name '' Columbia (name)|Columbia '', a poetic name for America coined by Johnson, first appears in a 1738 weekly publication of the debates of the British Parliament in the Magazine.<ref>[http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ilej/image1.pl?item=page&seq=5&size=1&id=gm.1738.6.x.8.x.x.285a The Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. 8, June 1738, p. 285] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref><ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=_DoJAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Debates in Parliament'', Samuel Johnson.] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref>

In May 1738 his first major work, the poem '' London (1738 poem)‎|London '', was published anonymously.<ref name="Lynch p. 5">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 5}}</ref> Based on Juvenal's Satires of Juvenal#Satire III: There is no Room in Roma for a Roman|Satire III, it describes the character Thales leaving for Wales to escape the problems of London,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=172}}</ref> which it portrays as a place of crime, corruption, and neglect of the poor. Johnson could not bring himself to regard the poem as earning him any merit as a poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=18}}</ref> Alexander Pope claimed that the author "will soon be déterré" (brought to light, become well known), but this would not happen until 15 years later.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/>

In August, Johnson's lack of an MA degree from Oxford or Cambridge led to his being denied a position as master of the Appleby Grammar School. In an effort to end such rejections, Pope asked Lord Gower to use his influence to have a degree awarded to Johnson.<ref name="Watkins p.25">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=25}}</ref> Gower petitioned Oxford for an honorary degree to be awarded to Johnson, but was told that it was "too much to be asked".<ref name="Bate p. 182">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=182}}</ref> Gower then asked a friend of Jonathan Swift to plead with Swift to use his influence at the University of Dublin to have a Masters degree awarded to Johnson, in the hope that this could then be used to justify an MA from Oxford,<ref name="Bate p. 182"/> but Swift refused to act on Johnson's behalf.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=25–26}}</ref>

Between 1737 and 1739, Johnson befriended Richard Savage .<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=51}}</ref> Feeling guilty about living on Tetty's money, Johnson stopped living with her and spent his time with Savage. They were poor and would stay in taverns or sleep in "night-cellars" except for nights that they would roam the streets because they lacked the necessary funds.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=178–179}}</ref> Savage's friends tried to help him by attempting to persuade him to move to Wales, but Savage ended up in Bristol and again fell into debt. He was committed to debtors' prison and died in 1743. A year later, Johnson wrote '' Life of Mr Richard Savage '' (1744), a "moving" work which, in the words of the biographer and critic Walter Jackson Bate, "remains one of the innovative works in the history of biography".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=180–181}}</ref>

===''A Dictionary of the English Language''===

In 1746, a group of publishers approached Johnson about creating an authoritative dictionary of the English language;<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> a contract with William Strahan and associates, worth 1,500 guineas, was signed on the morning of 18 June 1746.<ref name="Hitchings">{{Harvnb|Hitchings|2005|p=54}}</ref> Johnson claimed that he could finish the project in three years. In comparison, the Académie Française had forty scholars spending forty years to complete its dictionary, which prompted Johnson to claim, "This is the proportion. Let me see; forty times forty is sixteen hundred. As three to sixteen hundred, so is the proportion of an Englishman to a Frenchman".<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> Although he did not succeed in completing the work in three years, he did manage to finish it in nine, justifying his boast.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> According to Bate, the ''Dictionary'' "easily ranks as one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship, and probably the greatest ever performed by one individual who laboured under anything like the disadvantages in a comparable length of time".<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> However, others, such as Thomas Babington Macaulay who described Johnson as "a wretched etymologist," have criticised Johnson's dictionary.<ref>Winchester 2003, p.33</ref>

Johnson's dictionary was not the first, nor was it unique. It was, however, the most commonly used and imitated for the 150 years between its first publication and the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' in 1928. Other dictionaries, such as Nathan Bailey 's ''Dictionarium Britannicum'', included more words,<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> and in the 150 years preceding Johnson's dictionary about twenty other general-purpose monolingual "English" dictionaries had been produced.<ref name="Lynch p. 2">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=2}}</ref> However, there was open dissatisfaction with the dictionaries of the period. In 1741, David Hume claimed: "The Elegance and Propriety of Stile have been very much neglected among us. We have no Dictionary of our Language, and scarce a tolerable Grammar".<ref name="Lynch p. 4">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=4}}</ref> Johnson's ''Dictionary'' offers insights into the 18th century and "a faithful record of the language people used".<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> It is more than a reference book; it is a work of literature.<ref name="Lynch p. 2"/>

For a decade, Johnson's constant work on the ''Dictionary'' disrupted his and Tetty's living conditions. He had to employ a number of assistants for the copying and mechanical work, which filled the house with incessant noise and clutter. He was always busy with his work, and kept hundreds of books around.<ref name="Lane p. 109">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=109}}</ref> John Hawkins described the scene: "The books he used for this purpose were what he had in his own collection, a copious but a miserably ragged one, and all such as he could borrow; which latter, if ever they came back to those that lent them, were so defaced as to be scarce worth owning".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hawkins|1787|p=175}}</ref> Johnson was also distracted by Tetty's health, as she started to show signs of a terminal illness.<ref name="Lane p. 109"/> To accommodate both his wife and his work, he moved to 17 Gough Square near his printer, William Strahan.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=110}}</ref>

In preparation for the work, Johnson wrote a ''Plan'' for the ''Dictionary''. Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield, was the patron of the ''Plan'', to Johnson's displeasure.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=117–118}}</ref> Seven years after first meeting Johnson to go over the work, Chesterfield wrote two anonymous essays in ''The World'' recommending the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Lane p. 118">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=118}}</ref> He complained that the English language lacked structure and argued in support of the dictionary. Johnson did not like the tone of the essay, and he felt that Chesterfield had not fulfilled his obligations as the work's patron.<ref name="Lane p. 121">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=121}}</ref> Johnson wrote a letter expressing this view and harshly criticising Chesterfield, saying "Is not a patron, my lord, one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help? The notice which you have been pleased to take of my labours, had it been early, had been kind: but it has been delayed till I am indifferent and cannot enjoy it; till I am solitary and cannot impart it; till I am known and do not want it."<ref name="Bate p. 257">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=257}}</ref> Chesterfield, impressed by the language, kept the letter displayed on a table for anyone to read.<ref name="Bate p. 257"/>

The ''Dictionary'' was finally published in April 1755, with the title page acknowledging that Oxford had awarded Johnson a Master of Arts degree in anticipation of the work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=256, 318}}</ref> The published dictionary was a huge book. Its pages were nearly 18" tall, and the book was 20" wide when opened; it contained 42,773 entries, to which only a few more were added in subsequent editions, and sold for the extravagant price of £4 10s, perhaps the rough equivalent of £350 today.<ref name=CC>{{citation1|chapter=Currency Converter|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/currency/|title=The National Archives|place= Kew, Richmond, Surrey|accessdate=24 July 2008}}</ref> An important innovation in English lexicography was to illustrate the meanings of his words by literary quotation, of which there are around 114,000. The authors most frequently cited include Shakespeare, Milton and Dryden .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|pp=8–11}}</ref> It was years before "Johnson's Dictionary", as it came to be known, turned a profit. Author's royalties were unknown at that time, and Johnson, once his contract to deliver the book was fulfilled, received no further money from its sale. Years later, many of its quotations would be repeated by various editions of the '' Webster's Dictionary '' and the '' New English Dictionary ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=25}}</ref>

Besides working on the ''Dictionary'', Johnson also wrote various essays, sermons, and poems during these nine years.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=113}}</ref> He decided to produce a series of essays under the title '' The Rambler '' that would run every Tuesday and Saturday for twopence each. Explaining the title years later, he told his friend, the painter Joshua Reynolds : "I was at a loss how to name it. I sat down at night upon my bedside, and resolved that I would not go to sleep till I had fixed its title. ''The Rambler'' seemed the best that occurred, and I took it".<ref name="Lane p. 115">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=115}}</ref> These essays, often on moral topics, tended to be more grave than the title of the series would suggest; his first comments in ''The Rambler'' were to ask "that in this undertaking thy Holy Spirit may not be withheld from me, but that I may promote thy glory, and the salvation of myself and others".<ref name="Lane p. 115"/> The popularity of ''The Rambler'' took off once the issues were collected as a volume; they were reprinted nine times during Johnson's life. Writer and printer Samuel Richardson, enjoying the essays greatly, questioned the publisher as to who wrote the works; only he and a few of Johnson's friends were told of Johnson's authorship.<ref name="Lane p. 116">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=116}}</ref> One friend, the novelist Charlotte Lennox, includes a defence of ''The Rambler'' in her novel ''The Female Quixote'' (1752). In particular, the character Mr. Glanville says, "you may sit in Judgment upon the Productions of a ''Young'', a ''Richardson'', or a ''Johnson''. Rail with premeditated Malice at the ''Rambler''; and for the want of Faults, turn even its inimitable Beauties into Ridicule" (Book VI, Chapter XI). Later, she claims Johnson as "the greatest Genius in the present Age".<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynn|1997|p=241}}</ref>

{{Quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|quote=His necessary attendance while his play was in rehearsal, and during its performance, brought him acquainted with many of the performers of both sexes, which produced a more favourable opinion of their profession than he had harshly expressed in his Life of Savage ... He for considerable time used to frequent the Green Room, and seemed to take delight in dissipating his gloom, by mixing in the sprightly chit-chat of the motley circle then to be found there. Mr David Hume related to me from Mr Garrick, that Johnson at last denied himself this amusement, from considerations of rigid virtue; saying, "I'll come no more behind your scenes, David; for the silk stockings and white bosoms of your actresses excite my amorous propensities".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=67}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

However, not all of his work was confined to ''The Rambler''. His most highly regarded poem, '' The Vanity of Human Wishes '', was written with such "extraordinary speed" that Boswell claimed Johnson "might have been perpetually a poet".<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 22">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=22}}</ref> The poem is an imitation of Juvenal's '' Satires of Juvenal#Satire X: Wrong Desire is the Source of Suffering|Satire X '' and claims that "the antidote to vain human wishes is non-vain spiritual wishes".<ref>{{Harvnb|Weinbrot|1997|p=49}}</ref> In particular, Johnson emphasises "the helpless vulnerability of the individual before the social context" and the "inevitable self-deception by which human beings are led astray".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=281}}</ref> The poem was critically celebrated but it failed to become popular, and sold less than ''London''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=113–114}}</ref> In 1749, Garrick made good on his promise that he would produce ''Irene'', but its title was altered to '' Irene (play)#Stage history|Mahomet and Irene '' to make it "fit for the stage".<ref name="Lane p. 114">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=114}}</ref> The show eventually ran for nine nights.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=17}}</ref>

Tetty Johnson spent most of her time in London ill, and in 1752 she decided to return to the countryside while Johnson was busy working on his ''Dictionary''. She died on 17 March 1752, and, at word of her death, Johnson wrote a letter to his old friend Taylor, which according to Taylor "expressed grief in the strongest manner he had ever read".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=272–273}}</ref> He wrote a sermon in her honour, to be read at her funeral, but Taylor refused to read it, for reasons which are unknown. This only exacerbated Johnson's feelings of being lost, and his despair after the death of his wife, and John Hawkesworth had to take over organising the funeral. Johnson felt guilty about the poverty in which he believed he had forced Tetty to live, and blamed himself for neglecting her. He became outwardly discontent, and his diary was filled with prayers and laments over her death until his own. She was his primary motivation, and her death hindered his ability to complete his work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=273–275}}</ref>

===Later career===
On 16 March 1756, Johnson was arrested for an outstanding debt of £5 18 Shilling|s . Unable to contact anyone else, he wrote to the writer and publisher Samuel Richardson . Richardson, who had previously lent Johnson money, sent him six guineas to show his good will, and the two became friends.<ref name="Bate p. 321">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=321}}</ref> Soon after, Johnson met and befriended the painter Joshua Reynolds, who so impressed Johnson that he declared him "almost the only man whom I call a friend".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=324}}</ref> Reynolds' younger sister Frances observed during their time together "that men, women and children gathered around him [Johnson]", laughing at his gestures and gesticulations.<ref name=Murray1611>{{Harvnb|Murray|1979|p=1611}}</ref> In addition to Reynolds, Johnson was close to Bennet Langton and Arthur Murphy . Langton was a scholar and an admirer of Johnson who persuaded his way into a meeting with Johnson which led to a long friendship. Johnson met Murphy during the summer of 1754 after Murphy came to Johnson about the accidental republishing of the ''Rambler'' No. 190, and the two became friends.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=322–323}}</ref> Around this time, Anna Williams began boarding with Johnson. She was a minor poet who was poor and becoming blind, two conditions that Johnson attempted to change by providing room for her and paying for a failed cataract surgery. Williams, in turn, became Johnson's housekeeper.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|p=319}}</ref>

To occupy himself, Johnson began to work on ''The Literary Magazine, or Universal Review'', the first issue of which was printed on 19 March 1756. Philosophical disagreements erupted over the purpose of the publication when the Seven Years' War began and Johnson started to write polemical essays attacking the war. After the war began, the ''Magazine'' included many reviews, at least 34 of which were written by Johnson.<ref name="Bate p. 328">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=328}}</ref> When not working on the ''Magazine'', Johnson wrote a series of prefaces for other writers, such as Giuseppe Baretti, William Payne and Charlotte Lennox .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=329}}</ref> Johnson's relationship with Lennox and her works was particularly close during these years, and she in turn relied so heavily upon Johnson that he was "the most important single fact in Mrs Lennox's literary life".<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=221–222}}</ref> He later attempted to produce a new edition of her works, but even with his support they were unable to find enough interest to follow through with its publication.<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=223–224}}</ref> To help with domestic duties while Johnson was busy with his various projects, Richard Bathurst, a physician and a member of Johnson's Club, pressured him to take on a free slave, Francis Barber, as his servant.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=325–326}}</ref>

These efforts, however, consumed only a small portion of his time; his work on '' The Plays of William Shakespeare|Edition of Shakespeare '' took up the rest. On 8 June 1756, Johnson published his '' The Plays of William Shakespeare#Proposal|Proposals for Printing, by Subscription, the Dramatick Works of William Shakespeare '', which argued that previous editions of Shakespeare were edited incorrectly and needed to be corrected.<ref name="Bate p. 330">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=330}}</ref> However, Johnson's progress on the work slowed as the months passed, and he told music historian Charles Burney in December 1757 that it would take him until the following March to complete it. Before that could happen, he was arrested again, for a debt of £40, in February 1758. The debt was soon repaid by Jacob Tonson, who had contracted Johnson to publish ''Shakespeare'', and this encouraged Johnson to finish his edition to repay the favour. Although it took him another seven years to finish, Johnson completed a few volumes of his ''Shakespeare'' to prove his commitment to the project.<ref name="Bate p. 332">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=332}}</ref>

In 1758, Johnson began to write a weekly series, ''The Idler'', which ran from 15 April 1758 to 5 April 1760, as a way to avoid finishing his ''Shakespeare''. This series was shorter and lacked many features of ''The Rambler''. Unlike his independent publication of ''The Rambler'', ''The Idler'' was published in a weekly news journal ''The Universal Chronicle'', a publication supported by John Payne, John Newbery, Robert Stevens and William Faden.<ref name="Bate p. 334">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=334}}</ref> Since ''The Idler'' did not occupy all Johnson's time, he was able to publish his philosophical novella '' The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia|Rasselas '' on 19 April 1759. The "little story book", as Johnson described it, describes the life of Prince Rasselas and Nekayah, his sister, who are kept in a place called the Happy Valley in the land of Abyssinia. The Valley is a place free of problems, where any desire is quickly satisfied. The constant pleasure does not, however, lead to satisfaction; and, with the help of a philosopher named Imlac, Rasselas escapes and explores the world to witness how all aspects of society and life in the outside world are filled with suffering. They return to Abyssinia, but do not wish to return to the state of constantly fulfilled pleasures found in the Happy Valley.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=337–338}}</ref> ''Rasselas'' was written in one week to pay for his mother's funeral and settle her debts; it became so popular that there was a new English edition of the work almost every year. References to it appear in many later works of fiction, including '' Jane Eyre '', '' Cranford (novel)|Cranford '' and '' The House of the Seven Gables ''. Its fame was not limited to English-speaking nations: ''Rasselas'' was immediately translated into five languages (French, Dutch, German, Russian and Italian), and later into nine others.<ref name="Bate p. 337">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=337}}</ref>

By 1762, however, Johnson had gained notoriety for his dilatoriness in writing; the contemporary poet Churchill teased Johnson for the delay in producing his long-promised edition of Shakespeare: "He for subscribers baits his hook / and takes your cash, but where's the book?"<ref name="Bate p. 391">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=391}}</ref> The comments soon motivated Johnson to finish his ''Shakespeare'', and, after receiving the first payment from a government pension on 20 July 1762, he was able to dedicate most of his time towards this goal.<ref name="Bate p. 391"/> Earlier that July, the 24-year-old King George III granted Johnson an annual pension of £300 in appreciation for the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36"/> While the pension did not make Johnson wealthy, it did allow him a modest yet comfortable independence for the remaining 22 years of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=356}}</ref> The award came largely through the efforts of Thomas Sheridan (actor)|Sheridan and the John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute|Earl of Bute . When Johnson questioned if the pension would force him to promote a political agenda or support various officials, he was told by Bute that the pension "is not given you for anything you are to do, but for what you have done".<ref name="Bate p. 354-356">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=354–356}}</ref>

On 16 May 1763, Johnson first met 22-year-old James Boswell —who would later become Johnson's first major biographer—in the bookshop of Johnson's friend, Tom Davies. They quickly became friends, although Boswell would return to his home in Scotland or travel abroad for months at a time.<ref name="Bate p. 360">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=360}}</ref> Around the spring of 1763, Johnson formed " The Club (dining club)|The Club ", a social group that included his friends Reynolds, Edmund Burke|Burke, Garrick, Goldsmith and others (the membership later expanded to include Adam Smith and Edward Gibbon ). They decided to meet every Monday at 7:00 pm at the Turk's Head in Gerrard Street, Soho, and these meetings continued until long after the deaths of the original members.<ref name="Bate p. 366">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=366}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=During the whole of the interview, Johnson talked to his Majesty with profound respect, but still in his firm manly manner, with a sonorous voice, and never in that subdued tone which is commonly used at the levee and in the drawing-room. After the King withdrew, Johnson shewed himself highly pleased with his Majesty's conversation and gracious behaviour. He said to Mr Barnard, 'Sir, they may talk of the King as they will; but he is the finest gentleman I have ever seen.'<ref name="Boswell p. 135">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 135}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 9 January 1765, Murphy introduced Johnson to Henry Thrale, a wealthy brewer and Member of Parliament|MP, and his wife Hester Thrale|Hester . They struck up an instant friendship; Johnson was treated as a member of the family, and was once more motivated to continue working on his ''Shakespeare''.<ref name="Bate p. 393">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=393}}</ref> Afterwards, Johnson stayed with the Thrales for 17 years until Henry's death in 1781, sometimes staying in rooms at Thrale's Anchor Brewery in Southwark .<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=262}}</ref> Hester Thrale's documentation of Johnson's life during this time, in her correspondence and her diary ('' Thraliana ''), became an important source of biographical information on Johnson after his death.<ref name="Keymer p. 186">{{Harvnb|Keymer|1999|p=186}}</ref>

Johnson's edition of ''Shakespeare'' was finally published on 10 October 1765 as ''The Plays of William Shakespeare, in Eight Volumes ... To which are added Notes by Sam. Johnson'' in a printing of one thousand copies. The first edition quickly sold out, and a second was soon printed.<ref name="Bate p. 395">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=395}}</ref> The plays themselves were in a version that Johnson felt most true to the original based on his analysis of the manuscript editions. Johnson's revolutionary innovation was to create a set of corresponding notes that allow readers to identify the meaning behind many of Shakespeare's more complicated passages or ones that may have been transcribed incorrectly over time.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=397}}</ref> Included within the notes are occasional attacks upon rival editors of Shakespeare's works and their editions.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=194}}</ref> Years later, Edmond Malone, an important Shakespearean scholar and friend of Johnson's, stated that Johnson's "vigorous and comprehensive understanding threw more light on his authour than all his predecessors had done".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=396}}</ref>

In February 1767 Johnson was granted a special meeting with King George III. This took place at the library of the Queen's house, and it was organised by Frederick Augusta Barnard, the King's librarian.<ref name="Boswell p. 133">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 133}}</ref> The King, hearing that Johnson would visit the library, commanded Barnard to introduce him to Johnson.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 134}}</ref> After a short meeting, Johnson was impressed with both the King himself and their conversation.<ref name="Boswell p. 135"/>

===Final works===
On 6 August 1773, eleven years after first meeting Boswell, Johnson set out to visit his friend in Scotland, to begin "a journey to the western islands of Scotland", as Johnson's 1775 account of their travels would put it.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=463}}</ref> The work was intended to discuss the social problems and struggles that affected the Scottish people, but it also praised many of the unique facets of Scottish society, such as a school in Edinburgh for the deaf and mute.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=471}}</ref> Also, Johnson used the work to enter into the dispute over the authenticity of James Macpherson's Ossian poems, claiming they could not have been translations of ancient Scottish literature on the grounds that "in those times nothing had been written in the Earse [i.e. Gaelic] language".<ref>{{Harvnb|Johnson|1970|pp=104–105}}</ref> There were heated exchanges between the two, and according to one of Johnson's letters, MacPherson threatened physical violence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=331}}</ref> Boswell's account, '' The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides '' (1786), was a preliminary attempt at a biography before his '' Life of Johnson ''. Included were various quotes and descriptions of events, including anecdotes such as Johnson swinging around a broadsword while wearing Scottish garb, or dancing a Highland jig.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=468–469}}</ref>

In the 1770s, Johnson, who had tended to be an opponent of the government early in life, published a series of pamphlets in favour of various government policies. In 1770 he produced ''The False Alarm'', a political pamphlet attacking John Wilkes . In 1771, his ''Thoughts on the Late Transactions Respecting Falkland's Islands'' cautioned against war with Spain.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=443–445}}</ref> In 1774 he printed ''The Patriot'', a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1996|p=182}}</ref> This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson opposed "self-professed Patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" patriotism.<ref name="Griffin p. 21">{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=21}}</ref>

The last of these pamphlets, ''Taxation No Tyranny'' (1775), was a defence of the Coercive Acts and a response to the Declaration of Rights of the First Continental Congress of America, which protested against taxation without representation .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=446}}</ref> Johnson argued that in emigrating to America, colonists had "voluntarily resigned the power of voting", but they still had " virtual representation " in Parliament. In a parody of the Declaration of Rights, Johnson suggested that the Americans had no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish people . If the Americans wanted to participate in Parliament, said Johnson, they could move to England and purchase an estate.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ammerman|1974|p=13}}</ref> Johnson denounced English supporters of American separatists as "traitors to this country", and hoped that the matter would be settled without bloodshed, but that it would end with "English superiority and American obedience".<ref>{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=252–256}}</ref> Years before, Johnson had advocated that the English and the French were just "two robbers" who were stealing land from the natives, and that neither deserved to live there.<ref name="Bate p. 328"/> After the signing of the 1783 Peace of Paris treaties, marking the colonists' defeat of the British, Johnson was "deeply disturbed" with the "state of this kingdom".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=15}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=Mr Thrale's death was a very essential loss to Johnson, who, although he did not foresee all that afterwards happened, was sufficiently convinced that the comforts which Mr Thrale's family afforded him, would now in great measure cease.<ref name="Boswell p. 273">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 273}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 3 May 1777, while Johnson was trying to save Reverend William Dodd from execution, he wrote to Boswell that he was busy preparing a "little Lives" and "little Prefaces, to a little edition of the English Poets".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=525}}</ref> Tom Davies, William Strahan and Thomas Cadell had asked Johnson to create this final major work, the '' Lives of the English Poets '', for which he asked 200 guineas, an amount significantly less than the price he could have demanded.<ref name="Bate p. 526">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=526}}</ref> The ''Lives'', which were critical as well as biographical studies, appeared as prefaces to selections of each poet's work, and they were quite larger than originally expected.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=527}}</ref> The work was finished in March 1781 and the whole collection was published in six volumes. As Johnson justified in the advertisement for the work, "my purpose was only to have allotted to every Poet an Advertisement, like those which we find in the French Miscellanies, containing a few dates and a general character."<ref>{{Harvnb|Clingham|1997|p=161}}</ref>

Johnson was unable to enjoy this success because Henry Thrale, the dear friend with whom he lived, died on 4 April 1781.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=546–547}}</ref> Life changed quickly for Johnson, and Hester Thrale became interested in the Italian singing teacher Gabriel Mario Piozzi, which forced Johnson to move on from his previous lifestyle.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=557, 561}}</ref> After returning home and then travelling for a short period, Johnson received word that his friend and tenant Robert Levet, had died on 17 January 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=562}}</ref> Johnson was shocked by the death of Levet, who had resided at Johnson's London home since 1762.<ref>{{citation1|url=http://books.google.com/?id=qXHv5EClgZgC&pg=PA231&lpg=PA231&dq=wakefield+levett|title= The Samuel Johnson Encyclopedia|author=Rogers, Pat|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|location= Westport, CT|year=1996|isbn=978-0-313-29411-2}}</ref> Shortly afterwards Johnson caught a cold which turned into bronchitis, lasting for several months, and his health was further complicated by "feeling forlorn and lonely" by Levet's death being accompanied by the deaths of Johnson's friend Thomas Lawrence and his housekeeper Williams.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|pp=501–502}}</ref>

===Final years===
Although he had recovered his health by August, he experienced emotional trauma when he was given word that Hester Thrale would sell the residence that Johnson shared with the family. What hurt Johnson the most was the possibility that he would be left without her constant company.<ref name="Bate p. 566">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=566}}</ref> Months later, on 6 October 1782, Johnson attended church for the final time in his life, to say goodbye to his former residence and life. The walk to the church strained him, but he managed the journey unaccompanied.<ref name="Bate p. 569">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=569}}</ref> While there, he wrote a prayer for the Thrale family:

<blockquote>To thy fatherly protection, O Lord, I commend this family. Bless, guide, and defend them, that they may pass through this world, as finally to enjoy in thy presence everlasting happiness, for Jesus Christ's sake. Amen.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=284}}</ref></blockquote>

Hester Thrale did not completely abandon Johnson, and asked him to accompany the family on a trip to Brighton.<ref name="Bate p. 569"/> He agreed, and was with them from 7 October until 20 November 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=570}}</ref> On his return, his health began to fail him, and he was left alone following Boswell's visit on 29 May 1783 until he travelled to Scotland.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=575}}</ref>

On 17 June 1783, Johnson's poor circulation resulted in a stroke<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=51}}</ref> and he wrote to his neighbour, Edmund Allen, that he had lost the ability to speak.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=71}}</ref> Two doctors were brought in to aid Johnson; he regained his ability to speak two days later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=71–72}}</ref> Johnson feared that he was dying, and wrote:
<blockquote>The black dog I hope always to resist, and in time to drive, though I am deprived of almost all those that used to help me. The neighbourhood is impoverished. I had once Richardson and Lawrence in my reach. Mrs. Allen is dead. My house has lost Levet, a man who took interest in everything, and therefore ready at conversation. Mrs. Williams is so weak that she can be a companion no longer. When I rise my breakfast is solitary, the black dog waits to share it, from breakfast to dinner he continues barking, except that Dr. Brocklesby for a little keeps him at a distance. Dinner with a sick woman you may venture to suppose not much better than solitary. After dinner, what remains but to count the clock, and hope for that sleep which I can scarce expect. Night comes at last, and some hours of restlessness and confusion bring me again to a day of solitude. What shall exclude the black dog from an habitation like this?<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=72}}</ref></blockquote>
By this time he was sick and gout -ridden. He had surgery for gout, and his remaining friends, including novelist Fanny Burney (the daughter of Charles Burney), came to keep him company.<ref name="Watkins p.73">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=73}}</ref> He was confined to his room from 14 December 1783 to 21 April 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=74}}</ref>

His health had begun to improve by May 1784, and he travelled to Oxford with Boswell on 5 May 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74"/> By July, many of Johnson's friends were either dead or gone; Boswell had left for Scotland and Hester Thrale had become engaged to Piozzi. With nobody to visit, Johnson expressed a desire to die in London and arrived there on 16 November 1784. On 25 November 1784, he allowed Burney to visit him and expressed an interest to her that he should leave London; he soon left for Islington, to George Strahan's home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=76–77}}</ref> His final moments were filled with mental anguish and delusions; when his physician, Thomas Warren, visited and asked him if he were feeling better, Johnson burst out with: "No, Sir; you cannot conceive with what acceleration I advance towards death."<ref name="Watkins p.78">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=78}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=A few days before his death, he had asked Sir John Hawkins, as one of his executors, where he should be buried; and on being answered, "Doubtless, in Westminster Abbey," seemed to feel a satisfaction, very natural to a Poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=341}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Many visitors came to see Johnson as he lay sick in bed, but he preferred only Langton's company.<ref name="Watkins p.78"/> Burney waited for word of Johnson's condition, along with Windham, Strahan, Hoole, Cruikshank, Des Moulins and Barber.<ref name="Watkins p.79">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=79}}</ref> On 13 December 1784, Johnson met with two others: a young woman, Miss Morris, whom Johnson blessed, and Francesco Sastres, an Italian teacher, who was given some of Johnson's final words: "''Iam Moriturus''" ("I who am about to die").<ref name="Bate p. 599">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=599}}</ref> Shortly afterwards he fell into a coma, and died at 7:00 pm.<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

Langton waited until 11:00 pm to tell the others, which led to John Hawkins' becoming pale and overcome with "an agony of mind", along with Seward and Hoole describing Johnson's death as "the most awful sight".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hill|1897|p=160 (Vol. 2)}}</ref> Boswell remarked, "My feeling was just one large expanse of Stupor ... I could not believe it. My imagination was not convinced."<ref name="Bate p. 599"/> William Gerard Hamilton joined in and stated, "He has made a chasm, which not only nothing can fill up, but which ''nothing has a tendency to fill up''. -Johnson is dead.- Let us go to the next best: There is nobody; -''no man can be said to put you in mind of Johnson''."<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

He was buried on 20 December 1784 at Westminster Abbey with an inscription that reads:
:Samuel Johnson, LL.D.
:''Obiit XIII die Decembris,''
:''Anno Domini''
:M.DCC.LXXXIV.
:''Ætatis suœ'' LXXV.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=341–342}}</ref>

==Bibliography==
===Works===
* [http://books.google.com/books?id=CxATAAAAYAAJ&ots=V-uf-Ec85P&dq=Samuel%20Johnson%20%22Dictionary%20of%20the%20English%20Language%22&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q=&f=false ''A Dictionary of the English Language''], 1755. (Available online from Google Book Search.)
** ([http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/5430 Preface available separately from Project Gutenberg])
* ''The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia'', 1759.
* ''A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland'', 1775.
* ''Lives of the Poets'', 1799-81.
* ''Samuel Johnson: The Major Works,'' ed. Donald Greene, 2009. ([http://www.amazon.com/Samuel-Johnson-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199538336/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256974594&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search])

===Biographies===

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}

==References==
* {{Citation1|last=Ammerman|first=David|title=In the Common Cause: American Response to the Coercive Acts of 1774|location=New York|publisher=Norton|year=1974|isbn=0-393-00787-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Arnold|first=Matthew|authorlink=Matthew Arnold|editor1-last=Ricks|editor1-first=Christopher|editor1-link=Christopher Ricks|title=Selected Criticism of Matthew Arnold|year=1972|publisher=New American Library|location=New York|oclc=6338231}}
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|authorlink=Walter Jackson Bate|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1977|publisher=Harcourt Brace Jovanovich|location=New York|isbn=0-15-179260-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|title=The Achievement of Samuel Johnson|year=1955|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|oclc=355413}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|contribution=Hester Thrale Piozzi 1741–1821|title=Women Memoirists Vol. II|year=1998|editor-last=Bloom|editor-first=Harold|pages=74–76|publisher=Chelsea House|location=Philadelphia|isbn=0-7910-4655-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|title=The Western Canon|year=1995|publisher=Macmillan|location=London|isbn=0-333-64813-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=Correspondence and Other Papers of James Boswell Relating to the Making of the Life of Johnson|editor-last=Waingrow|editor-first=Marshall|publisher=McGraw-Hill|location=New York|year=1969|oclc=59269}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|year=1986|editor-last=Hibbert|editor-first=Christopher|publisher=Penguin Classics|location=New York|isbn=0-14-043116-0}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clarke|first=Norma|title=Dr Johnson's Women|year=2000|publisher=Hambledon|location=London|isbn=1-85285-254-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clingham|first= Greg|year=1997|contribution= Life and literature in the ''Lives''| title= The Cambridge companion to Samuel Johnson|editor1-last= Clingham|editor1-first= Greg| pages= 161–191|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Davis|first=Bertram|contribution=Introduction|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL. D.|year=1961|editor-last=Davis|editor-first=Bertram|pages=vii–xxx|publisher=Macmillan Company|location=New York|oclc=739445}}.
* {{Citation1|last=DeMaria, Jr.|first=Robert|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|publisher=Blackwell|location=Oxford|year=1994|isbn=1-55786-664-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Fine|first=LG|title=Samuel Johnson's illnesses|journal=J Nephrol|volume=19|issue=Suppl 10|pages=S110–4|date=May–June 2006|pmid=16874722}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|authorlink=Donald Greene|title=Samuel Johnson: Updated Edition|publisher=Twayne Publishers|location= Boston|year=1989|isbn=0-8057-6962-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|contribution=Introduction|title=Political Writings|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first=Donald|publisher=Liberty Fund|location=Indianapolis|isbn=0-86597-275-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Griffin|first=Dustin|title=Patriotism and Poetry in Eighteenth-Century Britain|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|year=2005|isbn=0-521-00959-6}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Grundy|first=Isobel|year=1997|contribution= Jane Austen and literary traditions| title= The Cambridge companion to Jane Austen|editor1-last=Copeland|editor1-first=Edward|editor2-last=McMaster|editor2-first=Juliet| pages= 189–210|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-49867-8}}
* {{Citation1|last=Hawkins|first=John|title=Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D.|publisher=J. Buckland|location=London|year=1787|oclc=173965}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hibbert|first=Christopher|authorlink=Christopher Hibbert|title=The Personal History of Samuel Johnson|location=New York|publisher=Harper & Row|year=1971|isbn=0-06-011879-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hitchings|first=Henry|authorlink=Henry Hitchings|title=Dr Johnson's Dictionary: The Extraordinary Story of the Book that Defined the World|publisher=John Murray|location=London|year=2005|isbn=0-7195-6631-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hill|first=G. Birkbeck, editor|authorlink=George Birkbeck Norman Hill|title=Johnsonian Miscellanies|location=London|publisher=Oxford Clarendon Press|year=1897|oclc=61906024}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hopewell|first=Sydney|title=The Book of Bosworth School, 1320–1920|year=1950|location=Leicester|publisher=W. Thornley & Son|oclc=6808364}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Letters| editor-last = Chapman| editor-first = R. W.|year=1952|location= Oxford|publisher=Clarendon|isbn=0-19-818538-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Johnson's Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and Boswell's Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides|editor-last= Chapman|editor-first= R. W.|location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1970|isbn=0-19-281072-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Major Works|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first= Donald|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=0-19-284042-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Kammer|first=Thomas|year=2007|chapter=Mozart in the Neurological Department: Who has the Tic?|editor1-first= Julien|editor1-last= Bogousslavsky|editor2-first= M|editor2-last= Hennerici|title=Neurological Disorders in Famous Artists, Part 2|pages=184–92|isbn=978-3-8055-8265-0|pmid= 17495512|publisher=Karger|location=Basel|volume=22|journal=Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience|doi=10.1159/0000102880}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Keymer|first=Thomas|year=1999|contribution= Johnson, Madness, and Smart|title=Christopher Smart and the Enlightenment|editor1-last=Hawes|editor1-first= Clement|location=New York, NY|publisher=St. Martin's Press|isbn=0-312-21369-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lane|first=Margaret|title=Samuel Johnson & his World|year=1975|publisher=Harper & Row Publishers|location=New York|isbn=0-06-012496-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Leavis|first=FR|authorlink=F. R. Leavis|title=Johnson as Critic|journal= Scrutiny (journal)|Scrutiny |volume=12|pages=187–204|year=1944}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynch|first=Jack|contribution=Introduction to this Edition|title=Samuel Johnson's Dictionary|year=2003|editor-last=Lynch|editor-first=Jack|pages=1–21|publisher=Walker & Co|location=New York|isbn=0-8027-1421-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynn|first=Steven|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's critical reception|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Martin|first=Peter|title=Samuel Johnson:A Biography|year=2008|publisher=Belknap Press|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts|isbn=978-0-674-03160-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=McHenry|first=LC Jr|title=Samuel Johnson's tics and gesticulations|journal=Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences|volume=22|issue=2|pages=152–68|date=April 1967|pmid=5341871|doi=10.1093/jhmas/XXII.2.152}}
* {{Citation1|last=Murray|first=TJ|date=16 June 1979|pmc=1599158|title=Dr Samuel Johnson's movement disorder|periodical= British Medical Journal |volume=1|issue=6178|pages=1610–14|pmid= 380753|doi=10.1136/bmj.1.6178.1610}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Murray|first= TJ|title= Samuel Johnson: his ills, his pills and his physician friends|journal=Clin Med|volume=3|issue=4|pages=368–72|date=July–August 2003|pmid=12938754}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Needham|first=John|title=The Completest Mode|location=Edinburgh|publisher=Edinburgh University Press|year=1982|isbn=0-85224-387-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pearce|first=JMS|date=July 1994|pmc=1294650|title=Doctor Samuel Johnson: 'the Great Convulsionary' a victim of Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome|journal= Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine |volume=87|pages=396–399|pmid= 8046726|issue=7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Piozzi|first=Hester|title=Thraliana: The Diary of Mrs. Hester Lynch Thrale (Later Mrs. Piozzi) 1776–1809|year=1951|editor1-last=Balderson|editor1-first=Katharine|publisher=Clarendon|place= Oxford|oclc= 359617}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pittock|first=Murray|year=2004|contribution= Johnson, Boswell, and their circle|title=The Cambridge companion to English literature from 1740 to 1830|editor1-last= Keymer|editor1-first= Thomas|editor2-last= Mee|editor2-first= Jon|pages= 157–172|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-00757-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Rogers|first=Pat|title=Johnson and Boswell: The Transit of Caledonia|publisher=Oxford University Press|place= Oxford|year=1995|isbn=0-19-818259-7}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Sacks|first=Oliver|author-link= Oliver Sacks|date=19–26 December 1992|title=Tourette's Syndrome and creativity|journal= British Medical Journal |volume=305|issue= 6868|pages=1515–16|pmc=1884721|pmid=1286364|quote=... the case for Samuel Johnson having the syndrome, though [...] circumstantial, is extremely strong and, to my mind, entirely convincing|doi=10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1515|issue=6868}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Shapiro|first=Arthur K|authorlink=Arthur K. Shapiro|title=Gilles de la Tourette syndrome|year=1978|publisher=Raven Press|location=New York|isbn=0-89004-057-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Skargon|first=Yvonne|title=The Importance of Being Oscar: Lily and Hodge and Dr. Johnson|place= London|publisher=Primrose Academy|year=1999|oclc= 56542613}}.
* {{Citation1|author=Stern JS, Burza S, Robertson MM |title=Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome and its impact in the UK |journal=Postgrad Med J |volume=81 |issue=951 |pages=12–9 |date = January 2005|pmid=15640424 |doi=10.1136/pgmj.2004.023614 |quote=It is now widely accepted that Dr Samuel Johnson had Tourette's syndrome |pmc=1743178 }}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wain|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1974|publisher=Viking Press|place= New York|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Watkins|first=WBC|title=Perilous Balance: The Tragic Genius of Swift, Johnson, and Sterne|year=1960|publisher=Walker-deBerry, Inc.|place= Cambridge, MA|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Weinbrot|first= Howard D.|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's Poetry|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wilson|first=Edmund|year=1950|contribution= Reexamining Dr. Johnson|title=Classics and Commercials|editor1-last=Wilson|editor1-first=Edmund|location=New York|publisher=Farrar, Straus & Giroux|oclc=185571431}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wiltshire|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson in the Medical World|year=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|isbn=0-521-38326-9}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Winchester|first=Simon|title=The Meaning of Everything|year=2003|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-517500-4}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Winters|first=Yvor|authorlink=Yvor Winters|title=The Anatomy of Nonsense|location=Norfolk, Conn.|publisher=New Directions|year=1943|oclc=191540}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Yung|first=Kai Kin|title=Samuel Johnson, 1709–84|publisher=Herbert Press|place= London|year=1984|isbn=0-906969-45-X}}.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Johnson, Samuel}}
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]

Samuel Johnson

2011-09-09T04:53:24Z

Ottava: fix

'''Samuel Johnson''' (18 September 1709 (O.S.) 7 September – 13 December 1784), often referred to as '''Dr. Johnson''', was an English author who made lasting contributions to English literature as a poet, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and lexicographer . Johnson was a devout Anglican and committed Tory, and has been described as "arguably the most distinguished man of letters in English history".<ref>Rogers, Pat (2006), "Johnson, Samuel (1709–1784)", ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'' (online ed.), Oxford University Press, [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/14918], retrieved 25 August 2008</ref> He is also the subject of "the most famous single work of biographical art in the whole of literature": James Boswell 's '' Life of Samuel Johnson ''.<ref name="Batexix">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=xix}}</ref>

Johnson was born in Lichfield, Staffordshire, and attended Pembroke College, Oxford for just over a year, before his lack of funds forced him to leave. After working as a teacher he moved to London, where he began to write miscellaneous pieces for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''. His early works include the biography ''The Life of Richard Savage'', the poems "London " and "The Vanity of Human Wishes", and the play ''Irene''.

After nine years of work, Johnson's ''Dictionary of the English Language '' was published in 1755; it had a far-reaching effect on Modern English and has been described as "one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship."<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> The ''Dictionary'' brought Johnson popularity and success. Until the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' 150 years later, Johnson's was viewed as the pre-eminent British dictionary.<ref name="Lynch p. 1">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 1}}</ref> His later works included essays, an influential annotated edition of William Shakespeare's plays, and the widely read tale ''Rasselas''. In 1763, he befriended James Boswell, with whom he later travelled to Scotland; Johnson described their travels in '' A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland ''. Towards the end of his life, he produced the massive and influential '' Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets '', a collection of biographies and evaluations of 17th- and 18th-century poets.

Johnson had a tall and robust figure, but his odd gestures and tic s were confusing to some on their first encounter with him. Boswell's ''Life'', along with other biographies, documented Johnson's behaviour and mannerisms in such detail that they have informed the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome (TS),<ref name="ContTSDiagnosis">{{Harvnb|Murray|1979}} and {{Harvnb|Stern|2005}}</ref> a condition not defined or diagnosed in the 18th century. After a series of illnesses he died on the evening of 13 December 1784, and was buried in Westminster Abbey . In the years following his death, Johnson began to be recognised as having had a lasting effect on literary criticism, and even as the only great critic of English literature.<ref name="Winters p. 240">{{Harvnb|Winters|1943|p=240}}</ref>

==Biography==
===Early life and education===
Born on 18 September 1709 (New Style) to Michael Johnson, a bookseller, and his wife, Sarah Ford,<ref name="Bate p. 5">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=5}}</ref> Samuel Johnson often claimed that he grew up in poverty. Since both families had money, it is uncertain what happened between Michael and Sarah's marriage and the birth of Samuel just three years later to provoke such a change in fortune.<ref name="Lane p. 1314">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=13–14}}</ref> Johnson was born in the home above his father's bookshop in Lichfield, Staffordshire and,<ref name="Bate p. 5"/> because his mother Sarah was 40 when she gave birth, a "man-midwife" and surgeon of "great reputation" named George Hector was brought in to assist.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=15–16}}</ref> He did not cry and, with doubts surrounding the newborn's health, his aunt claimed "that she would not have picked such a poor creature up in the street".<ref name = "Watkins p.25"/> As it was feared the baby might die, the vicar of St Mary's was summoned to perform a baptism.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=16}}</ref> Two godfathers were chosen: Samuel Swynfen, a physician and graduate of Pembroke College, Oxford, and Richard Wakefield, a lawyer, coroner, and Lichfield town clerk.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=5–6}}</ref>

Johnson's health improved and he was put to wet-nurse with Joan Marklew. He soon contracted scrofula,<ref name="Lane pp. 16-17">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=16–17}}</ref> known at that time as the "King's Evil" because it was thought royalty could cure it. Sir John Floyer, former physician to Charles II of England|Charles II, recommended that the young Johnson should receive the " scrofula|royal touch ",<ref name="Lane p. 18">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=18}}</ref> which he received from Queen Anne on 30 March 1712. However, the ritual was ineffective, and an operation was performed that left him with permanent scars across his face and body.<ref name="Lane pp. 19-20">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=19–20}}</ref> With the birth of Johnson's brother, Nathaniel, a few months later, Michael was unable to keep on top of the debts he had accumulated over the years, and his family was no longer able to live in the style to which it had been accustomed.<ref name="Lane pp. 20-21">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=20–21}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=When he was a child in petticoats, and had learned to read, Mrs Johnson one morning put the common prayer-book into his hands, pointed to the collect for the day, and said, 'Sam, you must get this by heart.' She went up stairs, leaving him to study it: But by the time she had reached the second floor, she heard him following her. 'What's the matter?' said she. 'I can say it,' he replied; and repeated it distinctly, though he could not have read it over more than twice.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=38}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Johnson demonstrated signs of great intelligence as a child, and his parents, to his later disgust, would show off his "newly acquired accomplishments".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=18–19}}</ref> His education began at the age of three, and came from his mother who had him memorise and recite passages from the Book of Common Prayer .<ref name="Bate p. 21">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=21}}</ref> When Johnson turned four, he was sent to a nearby school, and, when he reached the age of six, he was sent to a retired shoemaker to continue his education.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=25–26}}</ref> A year later, Johnson was sent to Lichfield Grammar School, where he excelled in Latin.<ref name="Lane p. 26">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p= 26}}</ref> During this time, Johnson started to exhibit the tics that would influence how people viewed him in his later years, and which formed the basis for the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome .<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6">{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=5–6}}</ref> He excelled at his studies and was promoted to the upper school at the age of nine.<ref name="Lane p. 26"/> During this time, he befriended Edmund Hector, nephew of his "man-midwife" George Hector, and John Taylor, with whom he remained in contact for the rest of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=23, 31}}</ref>

At the age of 16, Johnson was given the opportunity to stay with his cousins, the Fords, at Pedmore, Worcestershire.<ref name="Lane p. 29">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=29}}</ref> There he became a close friend of Cornelius Ford, who employed his knowledge of the classics to tutor Johnson while he was not attending school.<ref name="Wain p. 32">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=32}}</ref> Ford was a successful, well-connected academic, but was also a notorious alcoholic whose excesses contributed to his death six years after Johnson's visit.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=30}}</ref> Having spent six months with his cousins, Johnson returned to Lichfield, but Mr. Hunter, the headmaster, "angered by the impertinence of this long absence", refused to allow him to continue at the grammar school.<ref name="Lane p. 33">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=33}}</ref> Unable to return to Lichfield Grammar School, Johnson was enrolled into the King Edward VI grammar school at Stourbridge.<ref name="Wain p. 32"/> Because the school was located near Pedmore, Johnson was able to spend more time with the Fords, and he began to write poems and verse translations.<ref name="Lane p. 33"/> However, he spent only six months at Stourbridge before returning once again to his parents' home in Lichfield.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=61}}</ref>

During this time, Johnson's future was uncertain as his father was deeply in debt.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=34}}</ref> To earn money, Johnson began to stitch books for his father, and it is possible that Johnson spent most of his time in his father's bookshop reading various works and building his literary knowledge. They remained in poverty until Sarah Johnson's cousin, Elizabeth Harriotts, died in February 1728 and left enough money to send Johnson to college.<ref name="Bate p. 87"/> On 31 October 1728, a few weeks after he turned 19, Johnson entered Pembroke College, Oxford.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=39}}</ref> The inheritance did not cover all of his expenses at Pembroke, but Andrew Corbet, a friend and fellow student at Pembroke, offered to make up the deficit.<ref name="Bate p. 88">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=88}}</ref>

Johnson made friends at Pembroke and read much. In later life, he told stories of his idleness.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=90–100}}. Bate also comments that Johnson's standard of effort was very high, so high that Johnson said he had never known a man to study hard.</ref> He was later asked by his tutor to produce a Latin translation of Alexander Pope 's ''Messiah'' as a Christmas exercise.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=91–92}}</ref> Johnson completed half of the translation in one afternoon and the rest the following morning. Although the poem brought him praise, it did not bring the material benefit he had hoped for.<ref name="Bate p. 92">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=92}}</ref> The poem later appeared in ''Miscellany of Poems'' (1731), edited by John Husbands, a Pembroke tutor, and is the earliest surviving publication of any of Johnson's writings. Johnson spent the rest of his time studying, even over the Christmas vacation. He drafted a "plan of study" called "Adversaria", which was left unfinished, and used his time to learn French while working on his knowledge of Greek.<ref name="Bate p. 9394">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=93–94}}</ref>

After thirteen months, a shortage of funds forced Johnson to leave Oxford without a degree, and he returned to Lichfield.<ref name="Bate p. 87">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=87}}</ref> Towards the end of Johnson's stay at Oxford his tutor, Jorden, left Pembroke and was replaced by William Adams (master)|William Adams . He enjoyed Adams as a tutor, but by December, Johnson was already a quarter behind in his student fees, and he was forced to return home. He left behind many books that he had borrowed from his father because he could not afford to transport them and as a symbolic gesture in that he hoped to return to his studies soon.<ref name="Bate p. 106107">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=106–107}}</ref>

He eventually received a degree: just before the publication of his ''Dictionary'' in 1755, Oxford University awarded Johnson the degree of Master of Arts (Oxbridge and Dublin)|Master of Arts .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=128–129}}</ref> He was awarded an honorary doctorate in 1765 by Trinity College Dublin and in 1775 by Oxford University.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=36}}</ref> In 1776, he returned to Pembroke with Boswell and toured the college with his previous tutor Adams, who was then its Master. He used that visit to recount his time at the college, his early career, and to express his later fondness for Jorden.<ref name="Bate p. 99">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=99}}</ref>

===Early career===
Little is known about Johnson's life between the end of 1729 and 1731; it is likely that he lived with his parents. He experienced bouts of mental anguish and physical pain during years of illness;<ref name="Bate p. 127">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=127}}</ref> his tics and gesticulations associated with Tourette syndrome became more noticeable and were often commented upon.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=24}}</ref> By 1731 Johnson's father was deeply in debt and had lost much of his standing in Lichfield. Johnson hoped to get an usher's position which became available at Stourbridge Grammar School, but as he did not have a degree his application was passed over on 6 September 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 127"/> At about this time, Johnson's father became ill and developed an "inflammatory fever" which led to his death in December 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 129">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=129}}</ref> Johnson eventually found employment as undermaster at a school in Market Bosworth, run by Sir Wolstan Dixie, 4th Baronet who allowed Johnson to teach without a degree.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=130–131}}</ref> Although Johnson was treated as a servant,<ref>{{Harvnb|Hopewell|1950|p= 53}}</ref> he found pleasure in teaching despite thinking it boring. After an argument with Dixie he quit the school, and by June 1732 he had returned home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=131–132}}</ref>

Johnson continued to look for a position at a Lichfield school. After being turned down for a position in Ashbourne, he spent his time with his friend Edmund Hector, who was living in the home of the publisher Thomas Warren. At the time Warren was starting his '' Birmingham Journal (eighteenth century)|Birmingham Journal '', and he enlisted Johnson's help.<ref name="Bate p. 134">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=134}}</ref> This connection with Warren grew, and Johnson proposed a translation of Jeronimo Lobo 's account of the Ethiopian Empire|Abyssinians .<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=137–138}}</ref> Johnson read Abbé Joachim Le Grand's French translations, and thought that a shorter version might be "useful and profitable".<ref name="Bate p. 138">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=138}}</ref> Instead of writing the whole work himself, he dictated to Hector, who then took the copy to the printer and made any corrections. Johnson's ''A Voyage to Abyssinia'' was published a year later.<ref name="Bate p. 138"/> He returned to Lichfield in February 1734, and began an annotated edition of Poliziano 's Latin poems, along with a history of Latin poetry from Petrarch to Poliziano; a ''Proposal'' was soon printed, but a lack of funds halted the project.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=140–141}}</ref>

Johnson remained with his close friend Harry Porter during a terminal illness,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=144}}</ref> which culminated when Porter died on 3 September 1734, leaving his wife Elizabeth Jervis Porter (otherwise known as "Tetty") widowed at the age of 45, with three children.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=143}}</ref> Some months later, Johnson began to court her. The Reverend William Shaw claims that "the first advances probably proceeded from her, as her attachment to Johnson was in opposition to the advice and desire of all her relations".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1969|p=88}}</ref> Johnson was inexperienced in such relationships, but the well-to-do widow encouraged him and promised to provide for him with her substantial savings.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=145}}</ref> They married on 9 July 1735, at St Werburgh's Church, Derby|St Werburgh's Church in Derby .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=147}}</ref> The Porter family did not approve of the match, partly because Johnson was 25 and Elizabeth was 21 years his elder, and Elizabeth's marriage to Johnson so disgusted her son Jervis that he severed relations with her.<ref name="Wain p. 65">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=65}}</ref> However, her daughter Lucy had accepted Johnson from the start, and her other son, Joseph, accepted the marriage later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=146}}</ref>

In June 1735, while working as a tutor for Thomas Whitby's children, Johnson had applied for the position of headmaster at Solihull School .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=153–154}}</ref> Although Walmesley gave his support, Johnson was passed over because the school's directors thought he was "a very haughty, ill-natured gent., and that he has such a way of distorting his face (which though he can't help) the gent[s] think it may affect some lads".<ref name="Bate p. 154">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=154}}</ref> With Walmesley's encouragement, Johnson decided that he could be a successful teacher if he ran his own school.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=153}}</ref> In the autumn of 1735, Johnson opened Edial Hall School as a private academy at Edial, near Lichfield. He had only three pupils: Lawrence Offley, George Garrick, and the 18-year-old David Garrick, who later became one of the most famous actors of his day.<ref name="Bate p. 154"/> The venture was unsuccessful and cost Tetty a substantial portion of her fortune. Instead of trying to keep the failing school going, Johnson began to write his first major work, the historical tragedy ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=156}}</ref> Biographer Robert DeMaria believed that Tourette syndrome likely made public occupations like schoolmaster or tutor almost impossible for Johnson to hold; this may have led Johnson to "the invisible occupation of authorship".<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6"/>

Johnson left for London with his former pupil David Garrick on 2 March 1737, the day Johnson's brother had died. He was penniless and pessimistic about their travel, but fortunately for them, Garrick had connections in London, and the two were able to stay with his distant relative, Richard Norris.<ref name="Bate p. 16465">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=164–165}}</ref> Johnson soon moved to Greenwich near the Golden Hart Tavern to finish ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=168–169}}</ref> On 12 July 1737 he wrote to Edward Cave with a proposal for a translation of Paolo Sarpi 's ''The History of the Council of Trent'' (1619), which Cave did not accept until months later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=81}}; {{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=169}}</ref> In October 1737 Johnson brought his wife to London, and he found employment with Cave as a writer for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=169–170}}</ref> His assignments for the magazine and other publishers during this time were "almost unparalleled in range and variety", and "so numerous, so varied and scattered" that "Johnson himself could not make a complete list".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=14}}</ref> The name '' Columbia (name)|Columbia '', a poetic name for America coined by Johnson, first appears in a 1738 weekly publication of the debates of the British Parliament in the Magazine.<ref>[http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ilej/image1.pl?item=page&seq=5&size=1&id=gm.1738.6.x.8.x.x.285a The Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. 8, June 1738, p. 285] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref><ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=_DoJAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Debates in Parliament'', Samuel Johnson.] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref>

In May 1738 his first major work, the poem '' London (1738 poem)‎|London '', was published anonymously.<ref name="Lynch p. 5">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 5}}</ref> Based on Juvenal's Satires of Juvenal#Satire III: There is no Room in Roma for a Roman|Satire III, it describes the character Thales leaving for Wales to escape the problems of London,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=172}}</ref> which it portrays as a place of crime, corruption, and neglect of the poor. Johnson could not bring himself to regard the poem as earning him any merit as a poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=18}}</ref> Alexander Pope claimed that the author "will soon be déterré" (brought to light, become well known), but this would not happen until 15 years later.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/>

In August, Johnson's lack of an MA degree from Oxford or Cambridge led to his being denied a position as master of the Appleby Grammar School. In an effort to end such rejections, Pope asked Lord Gower to use his influence to have a degree awarded to Johnson.<ref name="Watkins p.25">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=25}}</ref> Gower petitioned Oxford for an honorary degree to be awarded to Johnson, but was told that it was "too much to be asked".<ref name="Bate p. 182">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=182}}</ref> Gower then asked a friend of Jonathan Swift to plead with Swift to use his influence at the University of Dublin to have a Masters degree awarded to Johnson, in the hope that this could then be used to justify an MA from Oxford,<ref name="Bate p. 182"/> but Swift refused to act on Johnson's behalf.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=25–26}}</ref>

Between 1737 and 1739, Johnson befriended Richard Savage .<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=51}}</ref> Feeling guilty about living on Tetty's money, Johnson stopped living with her and spent his time with Savage. They were poor and would stay in taverns or sleep in "night-cellars" except for nights that they would roam the streets because they lacked the necessary funds.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=178–179}}</ref> Savage's friends tried to help him by attempting to persuade him to move to Wales, but Savage ended up in Bristol and again fell into debt. He was committed to debtors' prison and died in 1743. A year later, Johnson wrote '' Life of Mr Richard Savage '' (1744), a "moving" work which, in the words of the biographer and critic Walter Jackson Bate, "remains one of the innovative works in the history of biography".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=180–181}}</ref>

===''A Dictionary of the English Language''===

In 1746, a group of publishers approached Johnson about creating an authoritative dictionary of the English language;<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> a contract with William Strahan and associates, worth 1,500 guineas, was signed on the morning of 18 June 1746.<ref name="Hitchings">{{Harvnb|Hitchings|2005|p=54}}</ref> Johnson claimed that he could finish the project in three years. In comparison, the Académie Française had forty scholars spending forty years to complete its dictionary, which prompted Johnson to claim, "This is the proportion. Let me see; forty times forty is sixteen hundred. As three to sixteen hundred, so is the proportion of an Englishman to a Frenchman".<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> Although he did not succeed in completing the work in three years, he did manage to finish it in nine, justifying his boast.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> According to Bate, the ''Dictionary'' "easily ranks as one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship, and probably the greatest ever performed by one individual who laboured under anything like the disadvantages in a comparable length of time".<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> However, others, such as Thomas Babington Macaulay who described Johnson as "a wretched etymologist," have criticised Johnson's dictionary.<ref>Winchester 2003, p.33</ref>

Johnson's dictionary was not the first, nor was it unique. It was, however, the most commonly used and imitated for the 150 years between its first publication and the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' in 1928. Other dictionaries, such as Nathan Bailey 's ''Dictionarium Britannicum'', included more words,<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> and in the 150 years preceding Johnson's dictionary about twenty other general-purpose monolingual "English" dictionaries had been produced.<ref name="Lynch p. 2">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=2}}</ref> However, there was open dissatisfaction with the dictionaries of the period. In 1741, David Hume claimed: "The Elegance and Propriety of Stile have been very much neglected among us. We have no Dictionary of our Language, and scarce a tolerable Grammar".<ref name="Lynch p. 4">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=4}}</ref> Johnson's ''Dictionary'' offers insights into the 18th century and "a faithful record of the language people used".<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> It is more than a reference book; it is a work of literature.<ref name="Lynch p. 2"/>

For a decade, Johnson's constant work on the ''Dictionary'' disrupted his and Tetty's living conditions. He had to employ a number of assistants for the copying and mechanical work, which filled the house with incessant noise and clutter. He was always busy with his work, and kept hundreds of books around.<ref name="Lane p. 109">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=109}}</ref> John Hawkins described the scene: "The books he used for this purpose were what he had in his own collection, a copious but a miserably ragged one, and all such as he could borrow; which latter, if ever they came back to those that lent them, were so defaced as to be scarce worth owning".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hawkins|1787|p=175}}</ref> Johnson was also distracted by Tetty's health, as she started to show signs of a terminal illness.<ref name="Lane p. 109"/> To accommodate both his wife and his work, he moved to 17 Gough Square near his printer, William Strahan.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=110}}</ref>

In preparation for the work, Johnson wrote a ''Plan'' for the ''Dictionary''. Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield, was the patron of the ''Plan'', to Johnson's displeasure.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=117–118}}</ref> Seven years after first meeting Johnson to go over the work, Chesterfield wrote two anonymous essays in ''The World'' recommending the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Lane p. 118">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=118}}</ref> He complained that the English language lacked structure and argued in support of the dictionary. Johnson did not like the tone of the essay, and he felt that Chesterfield had not fulfilled his obligations as the work's patron.<ref name="Lane p. 121">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=121}}</ref> Johnson wrote a letter expressing this view and harshly criticising Chesterfield, saying "Is not a patron, my lord, one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help? The notice which you have been pleased to take of my labours, had it been early, had been kind: but it has been delayed till I am indifferent and cannot enjoy it; till I am solitary and cannot impart it; till I am known and do not want it."<ref name="Bate p. 257">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=257}}</ref> Chesterfield, impressed by the language, kept the letter displayed on a table for anyone to read.<ref name="Bate p. 257"/>

The ''Dictionary'' was finally published in April 1755, with the title page acknowledging that Oxford had awarded Johnson a Master of Arts degree in anticipation of the work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=256, 318}}</ref> The published dictionary was a huge book. Its pages were nearly 18" tall, and the book was 20" wide when opened; it contained 42,773 entries, to which only a few more were added in subsequent editions, and sold for the extravagant price of £4 10s, perhaps the rough equivalent of £350 today.<ref name=CC>{{citation1|chapter=Currency Converter|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/currency/|title=The National Archives|place= Kew, Richmond, Surrey|accessdate=24 July 2008}}</ref> An important innovation in English lexicography was to illustrate the meanings of his words by literary quotation, of which there are around 114,000. The authors most frequently cited include Shakespeare, Milton and Dryden .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|pp=8–11}}</ref> It was years before "Johnson's Dictionary", as it came to be known, turned a profit. Author's royalties were unknown at that time, and Johnson, once his contract to deliver the book was fulfilled, received no further money from its sale. Years later, many of its quotations would be repeated by various editions of the '' Webster's Dictionary '' and the '' New English Dictionary ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=25}}</ref>

Besides working on the ''Dictionary'', Johnson also wrote various essays, sermons, and poems during these nine years.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=113}}</ref> He decided to produce a series of essays under the title '' The Rambler '' that would run every Tuesday and Saturday for twopence each. Explaining the title years later, he told his friend, the painter Joshua Reynolds : "I was at a loss how to name it. I sat down at night upon my bedside, and resolved that I would not go to sleep till I had fixed its title. ''The Rambler'' seemed the best that occurred, and I took it".<ref name="Lane p. 115">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=115}}</ref> These essays, often on moral topics, tended to be more grave than the title of the series would suggest; his first comments in ''The Rambler'' were to ask "that in this undertaking thy Holy Spirit may not be withheld from me, but that I may promote thy glory, and the salvation of myself and others".<ref name="Lane p. 115"/> The popularity of ''The Rambler'' took off once the issues were collected as a volume; they were reprinted nine times during Johnson's life. Writer and printer Samuel Richardson, enjoying the essays greatly, questioned the publisher as to who wrote the works; only he and a few of Johnson's friends were told of Johnson's authorship.<ref name="Lane p. 116">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=116}}</ref> One friend, the novelist Charlotte Lennox, includes a defence of ''The Rambler'' in her novel ''The Female Quixote'' (1752). In particular, the character Mr. Glanville says, "you may sit in Judgment upon the Productions of a ''Young'', a ''Richardson'', or a ''Johnson''. Rail with premeditated Malice at the ''Rambler''; and for the want of Faults, turn even its inimitable Beauties into Ridicule" (Book VI, Chapter XI). Later, she claims Johnson as "the greatest Genius in the present Age".<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynn|1997|p=241}}</ref>

{{Quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|quote=His necessary attendance while his play was in rehearsal, and during its performance, brought him acquainted with many of the performers of both sexes, which produced a more favourable opinion of their profession than he had harshly expressed in his Life of Savage ... He for considerable time used to frequent the Green Room, and seemed to take delight in dissipating his gloom, by mixing in the sprightly chit-chat of the motley circle then to be found there. Mr David Hume related to me from Mr Garrick, that Johnson at last denied himself this amusement, from considerations of rigid virtue; saying, "I'll come no more behind your scenes, David; for the silk stockings and white bosoms of your actresses excite my amorous propensities".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=67}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

However, not all of his work was confined to ''The Rambler''. His most highly regarded poem, '' The Vanity of Human Wishes '', was written with such "extraordinary speed" that Boswell claimed Johnson "might have been perpetually a poet".<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 22">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=22}}</ref> The poem is an imitation of Juvenal's '' Satires of Juvenal#Satire X: Wrong Desire is the Source of Suffering|Satire X '' and claims that "the antidote to vain human wishes is non-vain spiritual wishes".<ref>{{Harvnb|Weinbrot|1997|p=49}}</ref> In particular, Johnson emphasises "the helpless vulnerability of the individual before the social context" and the "inevitable self-deception by which human beings are led astray".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=281}}</ref> The poem was critically celebrated but it failed to become popular, and sold less than ''London''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=113–114}}</ref> In 1749, Garrick made good on his promise that he would produce ''Irene'', but its title was altered to '' Irene (play)#Stage history|Mahomet and Irene '' to make it "fit for the stage".<ref name="Lane p. 114">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=114}}</ref> The show eventually ran for nine nights.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=17}}</ref>

Tetty Johnson spent most of her time in London ill, and in 1752 she decided to return to the countryside while Johnson was busy working on his ''Dictionary''. She died on 17 March 1752, and, at word of her death, Johnson wrote a letter to his old friend Taylor, which according to Taylor "expressed grief in the strongest manner he had ever read".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=272–273}}</ref> He wrote a sermon in her honour, to be read at her funeral, but Taylor refused to read it, for reasons which are unknown. This only exacerbated Johnson's feelings of being lost, and his despair after the death of his wife, and John Hawkesworth had to take over organising the funeral. Johnson felt guilty about the poverty in which he believed he had forced Tetty to live, and blamed himself for neglecting her. He became outwardly discontent, and his diary was filled with prayers and laments over her death until his own. She was his primary motivation, and her death hindered his ability to complete his work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=273–275}}</ref>

===Later career===
On 16 March 1756, Johnson was arrested for an outstanding debt of £5 18 Shilling|s . Unable to contact anyone else, he wrote to the writer and publisher Samuel Richardson . Richardson, who had previously lent Johnson money, sent him six guineas to show his good will, and the two became friends.<ref name="Bate p. 321">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=321}}</ref> Soon after, Johnson met and befriended the painter Joshua Reynolds, who so impressed Johnson that he declared him "almost the only man whom I call a friend".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=324}}</ref> Reynolds' younger sister Frances observed during their time together "that men, women and children gathered around him [Johnson]", laughing at his gestures and gesticulations.<ref name=Murray1611>{{Harvnb|Murray|1979|p=1611}}</ref> In addition to Reynolds, Johnson was close to Bennet Langton and Arthur Murphy . Langton was a scholar and an admirer of Johnson who persuaded his way into a meeting with Johnson which led to a long friendship. Johnson met Murphy during the summer of 1754 after Murphy came to Johnson about the accidental republishing of the ''Rambler'' No. 190, and the two became friends.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=322–323}}</ref> Around this time, Anna Williams began boarding with Johnson. She was a minor poet who was poor and becoming blind, two conditions that Johnson attempted to change by providing room for her and paying for a failed cataract surgery. Williams, in turn, became Johnson's housekeeper.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|p=319}}</ref>

To occupy himself, Johnson began to work on ''The Literary Magazine, or Universal Review'', the first issue of which was printed on 19 March 1756. Philosophical disagreements erupted over the purpose of the publication when the Seven Years' War began and Johnson started to write polemical essays attacking the war. After the war began, the ''Magazine'' included many reviews, at least 34 of which were written by Johnson.<ref name="Bate p. 328">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=328}}</ref> When not working on the ''Magazine'', Johnson wrote a series of prefaces for other writers, such as Giuseppe Baretti, William Payne and Charlotte Lennox .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=329}}</ref> Johnson's relationship with Lennox and her works was particularly close during these years, and she in turn relied so heavily upon Johnson that he was "the most important single fact in Mrs Lennox's literary life".<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=221–222}}</ref> He later attempted to produce a new edition of her works, but even with his support they were unable to find enough interest to follow through with its publication.<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=223–224}}</ref> To help with domestic duties while Johnson was busy with his various projects, Richard Bathurst, a physician and a member of Johnson's Club, pressured him to take on a free slave, Francis Barber, as his servant.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=325–326}}</ref>

These efforts, however, consumed only a small portion of his time; his work on '' The Plays of William Shakespeare|Edition of Shakespeare '' took up the rest. On 8 June 1756, Johnson published his '' The Plays of William Shakespeare#Proposal|Proposals for Printing, by Subscription, the Dramatick Works of William Shakespeare '', which argued that previous editions of Shakespeare were edited incorrectly and needed to be corrected.<ref name="Bate p. 330">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=330}}</ref> However, Johnson's progress on the work slowed as the months passed, and he told music historian Charles Burney in December 1757 that it would take him until the following March to complete it. Before that could happen, he was arrested again, for a debt of £40, in February 1758. The debt was soon repaid by Jacob Tonson, who had contracted Johnson to publish ''Shakespeare'', and this encouraged Johnson to finish his edition to repay the favour. Although it took him another seven years to finish, Johnson completed a few volumes of his ''Shakespeare'' to prove his commitment to the project.<ref name="Bate p. 332">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=332}}</ref>

In 1758, Johnson began to write a weekly series, ''The Idler'', which ran from 15 April 1758 to 5 April 1760, as a way to avoid finishing his ''Shakespeare''. This series was shorter and lacked many features of ''The Rambler''. Unlike his independent publication of ''The Rambler'', ''The Idler'' was published in a weekly news journal ''The Universal Chronicle'', a publication supported by John Payne, John Newbery, Robert Stevens and William Faden.<ref name="Bate p. 334">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=334}}</ref> Since ''The Idler'' did not occupy all Johnson's time, he was able to publish his philosophical novella '' The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia|Rasselas '' on 19 April 1759. The "little story book", as Johnson described it, describes the life of Prince Rasselas and Nekayah, his sister, who are kept in a place called the Happy Valley in the land of Abyssinia. The Valley is a place free of problems, where any desire is quickly satisfied. The constant pleasure does not, however, lead to satisfaction; and, with the help of a philosopher named Imlac, Rasselas escapes and explores the world to witness how all aspects of society and life in the outside world are filled with suffering. They return to Abyssinia, but do not wish to return to the state of constantly fulfilled pleasures found in the Happy Valley.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=337–338}}</ref> ''Rasselas'' was written in one week to pay for his mother's funeral and settle her debts; it became so popular that there was a new English edition of the work almost every year. References to it appear in many later works of fiction, including '' Jane Eyre '', '' Cranford (novel)|Cranford '' and '' The House of the Seven Gables ''. Its fame was not limited to English-speaking nations: ''Rasselas'' was immediately translated into five languages (French, Dutch, German, Russian and Italian), and later into nine others.<ref name="Bate p. 337">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=337}}</ref>

By 1762, however, Johnson had gained notoriety for his dilatoriness in writing; the contemporary poet Churchill teased Johnson for the delay in producing his long-promised edition of Shakespeare: "He for subscribers baits his hook / and takes your cash, but where's the book?"<ref name="Bate p. 391">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=391}}</ref> The comments soon motivated Johnson to finish his ''Shakespeare'', and, after receiving the first payment from a government pension on 20 July 1762, he was able to dedicate most of his time towards this goal.<ref name="Bate p. 391"/> Earlier that July, the 24-year-old King George III granted Johnson an annual pension of £300 in appreciation for the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36"/> While the pension did not make Johnson wealthy, it did allow him a modest yet comfortable independence for the remaining 22 years of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=356}}</ref> The award came largely through the efforts of Thomas Sheridan (actor)|Sheridan and the John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute|Earl of Bute . When Johnson questioned if the pension would force him to promote a political agenda or support various officials, he was told by Bute that the pension "is not given you for anything you are to do, but for what you have done".<ref name="Bate p. 354-356">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=354–356}}</ref>

On 16 May 1763, Johnson first met 22-year-old James Boswell —who would later become Johnson's first major biographer—in the bookshop of Johnson's friend, Tom Davies. They quickly became friends, although Boswell would return to his home in Scotland or travel abroad for months at a time.<ref name="Bate p. 360">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=360}}</ref> Around the spring of 1763, Johnson formed " The Club (dining club)|The Club ", a social group that included his friends Reynolds, Edmund Burke|Burke, Garrick, Goldsmith and others (the membership later expanded to include Adam Smith and Edward Gibbon ). They decided to meet every Monday at 7:00 pm at the Turk's Head in Gerrard Street, Soho, and these meetings continued until long after the deaths of the original members.<ref name="Bate p. 366">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=366}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=During the whole of the interview, Johnson talked to his Majesty with profound respect, but still in his firm manly manner, with a sonorous voice, and never in that subdued tone which is commonly used at the levee and in the drawing-room. After the King withdrew, Johnson shewed himself highly pleased with his Majesty's conversation and gracious behaviour. He said to Mr Barnard, 'Sir, they may talk of the King as they will; but he is the finest gentleman I have ever seen.'<ref name="Boswell p. 135">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 135}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 9 January 1765, Murphy introduced Johnson to Henry Thrale, a wealthy brewer and Member of Parliament|MP, and his wife Hester Thrale|Hester . They struck up an instant friendship; Johnson was treated as a member of the family, and was once more motivated to continue working on his ''Shakespeare''.<ref name="Bate p. 393">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=393}}</ref> Afterwards, Johnson stayed with the Thrales for 17 years until Henry's death in 1781, sometimes staying in rooms at Thrale's Anchor Brewery in Southwark .<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=262}}</ref> Hester Thrale's documentation of Johnson's life during this time, in her correspondence and her diary ('' Thraliana ''), became an important source of biographical information on Johnson after his death.<ref name="Keymer p. 186">{{Harvnb|Keymer|1999|p=186}}</ref>

Johnson's edition of ''Shakespeare'' was finally published on 10 October 1765 as ''The Plays of William Shakespeare, in Eight Volumes ... To which are added Notes by Sam. Johnson'' in a printing of one thousand copies. The first edition quickly sold out, and a second was soon printed.<ref name="Bate p. 395">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=395}}</ref> The plays themselves were in a version that Johnson felt most true to the original based on his analysis of the manuscript editions. Johnson's revolutionary innovation was to create a set of corresponding notes that allow readers to identify the meaning behind many of Shakespeare's more complicated passages or ones that may have been transcribed incorrectly over time.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=397}}</ref> Included within the notes are occasional attacks upon rival editors of Shakespeare's works and their editions.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=194}}</ref> Years later, Edmond Malone, an important Shakespearean scholar and friend of Johnson's, stated that Johnson's "vigorous and comprehensive understanding threw more light on his authour than all his predecessors had done".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=396}}</ref>

In February 1767 Johnson was granted a special meeting with King George III. This took place at the library of the Queen's house, and it was organised by Frederick Augusta Barnard, the King's librarian.<ref name="Boswell p. 133">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 133}}</ref> The King, hearing that Johnson would visit the library, commanded Barnard to introduce him to Johnson.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 134}}</ref> After a short meeting, Johnson was impressed with both the King himself and their conversation.<ref name="Boswell p. 135"/>

===Final works===
On 6 August 1773, eleven years after first meeting Boswell, Johnson set out to visit his friend in Scotland, to begin "a journey to the western islands of Scotland", as Johnson's 1775 account of their travels would put it.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=463}}</ref> The work was intended to discuss the social problems and struggles that affected the Scottish people, but it also praised many of the unique facets of Scottish society, such as a school in Edinburgh for the deaf and mute.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=471}}</ref> Also, Johnson used the work to enter into the dispute over the authenticity of James Macpherson's Ossian poems, claiming they could not have been translations of ancient Scottish literature on the grounds that "in those times nothing had been written in the Earse [i.e. Gaelic] language".<ref>{{Harvnb|Johnson|1970|pp=104–105}}</ref> There were heated exchanges between the two, and according to one of Johnson's letters, MacPherson threatened physical violence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=331}}</ref> Boswell's account, '' The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides '' (1786), was a preliminary attempt at a biography before his '' Life of Johnson ''. Included were various quotes and descriptions of events, including anecdotes such as Johnson swinging around a broadsword while wearing Scottish garb, or dancing a Highland jig.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=468–469}}</ref>

In the 1770s, Johnson, who had tended to be an opponent of the government early in life, published a series of pamphlets in favour of various government policies. In 1770 he produced ''The False Alarm'', a political pamphlet attacking John Wilkes . In 1771, his ''Thoughts on the Late Transactions Respecting Falkland's Islands'' cautioned against war with Spain.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=443–445}}</ref> In 1774 he printed ''The Patriot'', a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1996|p=182}}</ref> This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson opposed "self-professed Patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" patriotism.<ref name="Griffin p. 21">{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=21}}</ref>

The last of these pamphlets, ''Taxation No Tyranny'' (1775), was a defence of the Coercive Acts and a response to the Declaration of Rights of the First Continental Congress of America, which protested against taxation without representation .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=446}}</ref> Johnson argued that in emigrating to America, colonists had "voluntarily resigned the power of voting", but they still had " virtual representation " in Parliament. In a parody of the Declaration of Rights, Johnson suggested that the Americans had no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish people . If the Americans wanted to participate in Parliament, said Johnson, they could move to England and purchase an estate.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ammerman|1974|p=13}}</ref> Johnson denounced English supporters of American separatists as "traitors to this country", and hoped that the matter would be settled without bloodshed, but that it would end with "English superiority and American obedience".<ref>{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=252–256}}</ref> Years before, Johnson had advocated that the English and the French were just "two robbers" who were stealing land from the natives, and that neither deserved to live there.<ref name="Bate p. 328"/> After the signing of the 1783 Peace of Paris treaties, marking the colonists' defeat of the British, Johnson was "deeply disturbed" with the "state of this kingdom".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=15}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=Mr Thrale's death was a very essential loss to Johnson, who, although he did not foresee all that afterwards happened, was sufficiently convinced that the comforts which Mr Thrale's family afforded him, would now in great measure cease.<ref name="Boswell p. 273">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 273}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 3 May 1777, while Johnson was trying to save Reverend William Dodd from execution, he wrote to Boswell that he was busy preparing a "little Lives" and "little Prefaces, to a little edition of the English Poets".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=525}}</ref> Tom Davies, William Strahan and Thomas Cadell had asked Johnson to create this final major work, the '' Lives of the English Poets '', for which he asked 200 guineas, an amount significantly less than the price he could have demanded.<ref name="Bate p. 526">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=526}}</ref> The ''Lives'', which were critical as well as biographical studies, appeared as prefaces to selections of each poet's work, and they were quite larger than originally expected.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=527}}</ref> The work was finished in March 1781 and the whole collection was published in six volumes. As Johnson justified in the advertisement for the work, "my purpose was only to have allotted to every Poet an Advertisement, like those which we find in the French Miscellanies, containing a few dates and a general character."<ref>{{Harvnb|Clingham|1997|p=161}}</ref>

Johnson was unable to enjoy this success because Henry Thrale, the dear friend with whom he lived, died on 4 April 1781.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=546–547}}</ref> Life changed quickly for Johnson, and Hester Thrale became interested in the Italian singing teacher Gabriel Mario Piozzi, which forced Johnson to move on from his previous lifestyle.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=557, 561}}</ref> After returning home and then travelling for a short period, Johnson received word that his friend and tenant Robert Levet, had died on 17 January 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=562}}</ref> Johnson was shocked by the death of Levet, who had resided at Johnson's London home since 1762.<ref>{{citation|url=http://books.google.com/?id=qXHv5EClgZgC&pg=PA231&lpg=PA231&dq=wakefield+levett|title= The Samuel Johnson Encyclopedia|author=Rogers, Pat|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|location= Westport, CT|year=1996|isbn=978-0-313-29411-2}}</ref> Shortly afterwards Johnson caught a cold which turned into bronchitis, lasting for several months, and his health was further complicated by "feeling forlorn and lonely" by Levet's death being accompanied by the deaths of Johnson's friend Thomas Lawrence and his housekeeper Williams.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|pp=501–502}}</ref>

===Final years===
Although he had recovered his health by August, he experienced emotional trauma when he was given word that Hester Thrale would sell the residence that Johnson shared with the family. What hurt Johnson the most was the possibility that he would be left without her constant company.<ref name="Bate p. 566">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=566}}</ref> Months later, on 6 October 1782, Johnson attended church for the final time in his life, to say goodbye to his former residence and life. The walk to the church strained him, but he managed the journey unaccompanied.<ref name="Bate p. 569">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=569}}</ref> While there, he wrote a prayer for the Thrale family:

<blockquote>To thy fatherly protection, O Lord, I commend this family. Bless, guide, and defend them, that they may pass through this world, as finally to enjoy in thy presence everlasting happiness, for Jesus Christ's sake. Amen.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=284}}</ref></blockquote>

Hester Thrale did not completely abandon Johnson, and asked him to accompany the family on a trip to Brighton.<ref name="Bate p. 569"/> He agreed, and was with them from 7 October until 20 November 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=570}}</ref> On his return, his health began to fail him, and he was left alone following Boswell's visit on 29 May 1783 until he travelled to Scotland.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=575}}</ref>

On 17 June 1783, Johnson's poor circulation resulted in a stroke<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=51}}</ref> and he wrote to his neighbour, Edmund Allen, that he had lost the ability to speak.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=71}}</ref> Two doctors were brought in to aid Johnson; he regained his ability to speak two days later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=71–72}}</ref> Johnson feared that he was dying, and wrote:
<blockquote>The black dog I hope always to resist, and in time to drive, though I am deprived of almost all those that used to help me. The neighbourhood is impoverished. I had once Richardson and Lawrence in my reach. Mrs. Allen is dead. My house has lost Levet, a man who took interest in everything, and therefore ready at conversation. Mrs. Williams is so weak that she can be a companion no longer. When I rise my breakfast is solitary, the black dog waits to share it, from breakfast to dinner he continues barking, except that Dr. Brocklesby for a little keeps him at a distance. Dinner with a sick woman you may venture to suppose not much better than solitary. After dinner, what remains but to count the clock, and hope for that sleep which I can scarce expect. Night comes at last, and some hours of restlessness and confusion bring me again to a day of solitude. What shall exclude the black dog from an habitation like this?<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=72}}</ref></blockquote>
By this time he was sick and gout -ridden. He had surgery for gout, and his remaining friends, including novelist Fanny Burney (the daughter of Charles Burney), came to keep him company.<ref name="Watkins p.73">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=73}}</ref> He was confined to his room from 14 December 1783 to 21 April 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=74}}</ref>

His health had begun to improve by May 1784, and he travelled to Oxford with Boswell on 5 May 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74"/> By July, many of Johnson's friends were either dead or gone; Boswell had left for Scotland and Hester Thrale had become engaged to Piozzi. With nobody to visit, Johnson expressed a desire to die in London and arrived there on 16 November 1784. On 25 November 1784, he allowed Burney to visit him and expressed an interest to her that he should leave London; he soon left for Islington, to George Strahan's home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=76–77}}</ref> His final moments were filled with mental anguish and delusions; when his physician, Thomas Warren, visited and asked him if he were feeling better, Johnson burst out with: "No, Sir; you cannot conceive with what acceleration I advance towards death."<ref name="Watkins p.78">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=78}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=A few days before his death, he had asked Sir John Hawkins, as one of his executors, where he should be buried; and on being answered, "Doubtless, in Westminster Abbey," seemed to feel a satisfaction, very natural to a Poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=341}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Many visitors came to see Johnson as he lay sick in bed, but he preferred only Langton's company.<ref name="Watkins p.78"/> Burney waited for word of Johnson's condition, along with Windham, Strahan, Hoole, Cruikshank, Des Moulins and Barber.<ref name="Watkins p.79">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=79}}</ref> On 13 December 1784, Johnson met with two others: a young woman, Miss Morris, whom Johnson blessed, and Francesco Sastres, an Italian teacher, who was given some of Johnson's final words: "''Iam Moriturus''" ("I who am about to die").<ref name="Bate p. 599">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=599}}</ref> Shortly afterwards he fell into a coma, and died at 7:00 pm.<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

Langton waited until 11:00 pm to tell the others, which led to John Hawkins' becoming pale and overcome with "an agony of mind", along with Seward and Hoole describing Johnson's death as "the most awful sight".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hill|1897|p=160 (Vol. 2)}}</ref> Boswell remarked, "My feeling was just one large expanse of Stupor ... I could not believe it. My imagination was not convinced."<ref name="Bate p. 599"/> William Gerard Hamilton joined in and stated, "He has made a chasm, which not only nothing can fill up, but which ''nothing has a tendency to fill up''. -Johnson is dead.- Let us go to the next best: There is nobody; -''no man can be said to put you in mind of Johnson''."<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

He was buried on 20 December 1784 at Westminster Abbey with an inscription that reads:
:Samuel Johnson, LL.D.
:''Obiit XIII die Decembris,''
:''Anno Domini''
:M.DCC.LXXXIV.
:''Ætatis suœ'' LXXV.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=341–342}}</ref>

==Bibliography==
===Works===
* [http://books.google.com/books?id=CxATAAAAYAAJ&ots=V-uf-Ec85P&dq=Samuel%20Johnson%20%22Dictionary%20of%20the%20English%20Language%22&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q=&f=false ''A Dictionary of the English Language''], 1755. (Available online from Google Book Search.)
** ([http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/5430 Preface available separately from Project Gutenberg])
* ''The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia'', 1759.
* ''A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland'', 1775.
* ''Lives of the Poets'', 1799-81.
* ''Samuel Johnson: The Major Works,'' ed. Donald Greene, 2009. ([http://www.amazon.com/Samuel-Johnson-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199538336/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256974594&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search])

===Biographies===

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}

==References==
* {{Citation1|last=Ammerman|first=David|title=In the Common Cause: American Response to the Coercive Acts of 1774|location=New York|publisher=Norton|year=1974|isbn=0-393-00787-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Arnold|first=Matthew|authorlink=Matthew Arnold|editor1-last=Ricks|editor1-first=Christopher|editor1-link=Christopher Ricks|title=Selected Criticism of Matthew Arnold|year=1972|publisher=New American Library|location=New York|oclc=6338231}}
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|authorlink=Walter Jackson Bate|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1977|publisher=Harcourt Brace Jovanovich|location=New York|isbn=0-15-179260-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|title=The Achievement of Samuel Johnson|year=1955|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|oclc=355413}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|contribution=Hester Thrale Piozzi 1741–1821|title=Women Memoirists Vol. II|year=1998|editor-last=Bloom|editor-first=Harold|pages=74–76|publisher=Chelsea House|location=Philadelphia|isbn=0-7910-4655-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|title=The Western Canon|year=1995|publisher=Macmillan|location=London|isbn=0-333-64813-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=Correspondence and Other Papers of James Boswell Relating to the Making of the Life of Johnson|editor-last=Waingrow|editor-first=Marshall|publisher=McGraw-Hill|location=New York|year=1969|oclc=59269}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|year=1986|editor-last=Hibbert|editor-first=Christopher|publisher=Penguin Classics|location=New York|isbn=0-14-043116-0}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clarke|first=Norma|title=Dr Johnson's Women|year=2000|publisher=Hambledon|location=London|isbn=1-85285-254-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clingham|first= Greg|year=1997|contribution= Life and literature in the ''Lives''| title= The Cambridge companion to Samuel Johnson|editor1-last= Clingham|editor1-first= Greg| pages= 161–191|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Davis|first=Bertram|contribution=Introduction|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL. D.|year=1961|editor-last=Davis|editor-first=Bertram|pages=vii–xxx|publisher=Macmillan Company|location=New York|oclc=739445}}.
* {{Citation1|last=DeMaria, Jr.|first=Robert|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|publisher=Blackwell|location=Oxford|year=1994|isbn=1-55786-664-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Fine|first=LG|title=Samuel Johnson's illnesses|journal=J Nephrol|volume=19|issue=Suppl 10|pages=S110–4|date=May–June 2006|pmid=16874722}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|authorlink=Donald Greene|title=Samuel Johnson: Updated Edition|publisher=Twayne Publishers|location= Boston|year=1989|isbn=0-8057-6962-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|contribution=Introduction|title=Political Writings|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first=Donald|publisher=Liberty Fund|location=Indianapolis|isbn=0-86597-275-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Griffin|first=Dustin|title=Patriotism and Poetry in Eighteenth-Century Britain|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|year=2005|isbn=0-521-00959-6}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Grundy|first=Isobel|year=1997|contribution= Jane Austen and literary traditions| title= The Cambridge companion to Jane Austen|editor1-last=Copeland|editor1-first=Edward|editor2-last=McMaster|editor2-first=Juliet| pages= 189–210|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-49867-8}}
* {{Citation1|last=Hawkins|first=John|title=Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D.|publisher=J. Buckland|location=London|year=1787|oclc=173965}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hibbert|first=Christopher|authorlink=Christopher Hibbert|title=The Personal History of Samuel Johnson|location=New York|publisher=Harper & Row|year=1971|isbn=0-06-011879-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hitchings|first=Henry|authorlink=Henry Hitchings|title=Dr Johnson's Dictionary: The Extraordinary Story of the Book that Defined the World|publisher=John Murray|location=London|year=2005|isbn=0-7195-6631-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hill|first=G. Birkbeck, editor|authorlink=George Birkbeck Norman Hill|title=Johnsonian Miscellanies|location=London|publisher=Oxford Clarendon Press|year=1897|oclc=61906024}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hopewell|first=Sydney|title=The Book of Bosworth School, 1320–1920|year=1950|location=Leicester|publisher=W. Thornley & Son|oclc=6808364}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Letters| editor-last = Chapman| editor-first = R. W.|year=1952|location= Oxford|publisher=Clarendon|isbn=0-19-818538-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Johnson's Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and Boswell's Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides|editor-last= Chapman|editor-first= R. W.|location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1970|isbn=0-19-281072-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Major Works|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first= Donald|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=0-19-284042-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Kammer|first=Thomas|year=2007|chapter=Mozart in the Neurological Department: Who has the Tic?|editor1-first= Julien|editor1-last= Bogousslavsky|editor2-first= M|editor2-last= Hennerici|title=Neurological Disorders in Famous Artists, Part 2|pages=184–92|isbn=978-3-8055-8265-0|pmid= 17495512|publisher=Karger|location=Basel|volume=22|journal=Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience|doi=10.1159/0000102880}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Keymer|first=Thomas|year=1999|contribution= Johnson, Madness, and Smart|title=Christopher Smart and the Enlightenment|editor1-last=Hawes|editor1-first= Clement|location=New York, NY|publisher=St. Martin's Press|isbn=0-312-21369-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lane|first=Margaret|title=Samuel Johnson & his World|year=1975|publisher=Harper & Row Publishers|location=New York|isbn=0-06-012496-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Leavis|first=FR|authorlink=F. R. Leavis|title=Johnson as Critic|journal= Scrutiny (journal)|Scrutiny |volume=12|pages=187–204|year=1944}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynch|first=Jack|contribution=Introduction to this Edition|title=Samuel Johnson's Dictionary|year=2003|editor-last=Lynch|editor-first=Jack|pages=1–21|publisher=Walker & Co|location=New York|isbn=0-8027-1421-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynn|first=Steven|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's critical reception|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Martin|first=Peter|title=Samuel Johnson:A Biography|year=2008|publisher=Belknap Press|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts|isbn=978-0-674-03160-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=McHenry|first=LC Jr|title=Samuel Johnson's tics and gesticulations|journal=Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences|volume=22|issue=2|pages=152–68|date=April 1967|pmid=5341871|doi=10.1093/jhmas/XXII.2.152}}
* {{Citation1|last=Murray|first=TJ|date=16 June 1979|pmc=1599158|title=Dr Samuel Johnson's movement disorder|periodical= British Medical Journal |volume=1|issue=6178|pages=1610–14|pmid= 380753|doi=10.1136/bmj.1.6178.1610}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Murray|first= TJ|title= Samuel Johnson: his ills, his pills and his physician friends|journal=Clin Med|volume=3|issue=4|pages=368–72|date=July–August 2003|pmid=12938754}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Needham|first=John|title=The Completest Mode|location=Edinburgh|publisher=Edinburgh University Press|year=1982|isbn=0-85224-387-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pearce|first=JMS|date=July 1994|pmc=1294650|title=Doctor Samuel Johnson: 'the Great Convulsionary' a victim of Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome|journal= Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine |volume=87|pages=396–399|pmid= 8046726|issue=7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Piozzi|first=Hester|title=Thraliana: The Diary of Mrs. Hester Lynch Thrale (Later Mrs. Piozzi) 1776–1809|year=1951|editor1-last=Balderson|editor1-first=Katharine|publisher=Clarendon|place= Oxford|oclc= 359617}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pittock|first=Murray|year=2004|contribution= Johnson, Boswell, and their circle|title=The Cambridge companion to English literature from 1740 to 1830|editor1-last= Keymer|editor1-first= Thomas|editor2-last= Mee|editor2-first= Jon|pages= 157–172|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-00757-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Rogers|first=Pat|title=Johnson and Boswell: The Transit of Caledonia|publisher=Oxford University Press|place= Oxford|year=1995|isbn=0-19-818259-7}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Sacks|first=Oliver|author-link= Oliver Sacks|date=19–26 December 1992|title=Tourette's Syndrome and creativity|journal= British Medical Journal |volume=305|issue= 6868|pages=1515–16|pmc=1884721|pmid=1286364|quote=... the case for Samuel Johnson having the syndrome, though [...] circumstantial, is extremely strong and, to my mind, entirely convincing|doi=10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1515|issue=6868}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Shapiro|first=Arthur K|authorlink=Arthur K. Shapiro|title=Gilles de la Tourette syndrome|year=1978|publisher=Raven Press|location=New York|isbn=0-89004-057-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Skargon|first=Yvonne|title=The Importance of Being Oscar: Lily and Hodge and Dr. Johnson|place= London|publisher=Primrose Academy|year=1999|oclc= 56542613}}.
* {{Citation1|author=Stern JS, Burza S, Robertson MM |title=Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome and its impact in the UK |journal=Postgrad Med J |volume=81 |issue=951 |pages=12–9 |date = January 2005|pmid=15640424 |doi=10.1136/pgmj.2004.023614 |quote=It is now widely accepted that Dr Samuel Johnson had Tourette's syndrome |pmc=1743178 }}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wain|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1974|publisher=Viking Press|place= New York|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Watkins|first=WBC|title=Perilous Balance: The Tragic Genius of Swift, Johnson, and Sterne|year=1960|publisher=Walker-deBerry, Inc.|place= Cambridge, MA|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Weinbrot|first= Howard D.|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's Poetry|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wilson|first=Edmund|year=1950|contribution= Reexamining Dr. Johnson|title=Classics and Commercials|editor1-last=Wilson|editor1-first=Edmund|location=New York|publisher=Farrar, Straus & Giroux|oclc=185571431}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wiltshire|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson in the Medical World|year=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|isbn=0-521-38326-9}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Winchester|first=Simon|title=The Meaning of Everything|year=2003|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-517500-4}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Winters|first=Yvor|authorlink=Yvor Winters|title=The Anatomy of Nonsense|location=Norfolk, Conn.|publisher=New Directions|year=1943|oclc=191540}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Yung|first=Kai Kin|title=Samuel Johnson, 1709–84|publisher=Herbert Press|place= London|year=1984|isbn=0-906969-45-X}}.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Johnson, Samuel}}
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]

Samuel Johnson

2011-09-09T02:55:10Z

Ottava: /* Biography */

'''Samuel Johnson''' (18 September 1709 (O.S.) 7 September – 13 December 1784), often referred to as '''Dr. Johnson''', was an English author who made lasting contributions to English literature as a poet, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and lexicographer . Johnson was a devout Anglican and committed Tory, and has been described as "arguably the most distinguished man of letters in English history".<ref>Rogers, Pat (2006), "Johnson, Samuel (1709–1784)", ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'' (online ed.), Oxford University Press, [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/14918], retrieved 25 August 2008</ref> He is also the subject of "the most famous single work of biographical art in the whole of literature": James Boswell 's '' Life of Samuel Johnson ''.<ref name="Batexix">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=xix}}</ref>

Johnson was born in Lichfield, Staffordshire, and attended Pembroke College, Oxford for just over a year, before his lack of funds forced him to leave. After working as a teacher he moved to London, where he began to write miscellaneous pieces for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''. His early works include the biography ''The Life of Richard Savage'', the poems "London " and "The Vanity of Human Wishes", and the play ''Irene''.

After nine years of work, Johnson's ''Dictionary of the English Language '' was published in 1755; it had a far-reaching effect on Modern English and has been described as "one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship."<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> The ''Dictionary'' brought Johnson popularity and success. Until the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' 150 years later, Johnson's was viewed as the pre-eminent British dictionary.<ref name="Lynch p. 1">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 1}}</ref> His later works included essays, an influential annotated edition of William Shakespeare's plays, and the widely read tale ''Rasselas''. In 1763, he befriended James Boswell, with whom he later travelled to Scotland; Johnson described their travels in '' A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland ''. Towards the end of his life, he produced the massive and influential '' Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets '', a collection of biographies and evaluations of 17th- and 18th-century poets.

Johnson had a tall and robust figure, but his odd gestures and tic s were confusing to some on their first encounter with him. Boswell's ''Life'', along with other biographies, documented Johnson's behaviour and mannerisms in such detail that they have informed the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome (TS),<ref name="ContTSDiagnosis">{{Harvnb|Murray|1979}} and {{Harvnb|Stern|2005}}</ref> a condition not defined or diagnosed in the 18th century. After a series of illnesses he died on the evening of 13 December 1784, and was buried in Westminster Abbey . In the years following his death, Johnson began to be recognised as having had a lasting effect on literary criticism, and even as the only great critic of English literature.<ref name="Winters p. 240">{{Harvnb|Winters|1943|p=240}}</ref>

==Biography==
===Early life and education===
Born on 18 September 1709 (New Style) to Michael Johnson, a bookseller, and his wife, Sarah Ford,<ref name="Bate p. 5">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=5}}</ref> Samuel Johnson often claimed that he grew up in poverty. Since both families had money, it is uncertain what happened between Michael and Sarah's marriage and the birth of Samuel just three years later to provoke such a change in fortune.<ref name="Lane p. 1314">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=13–14}}</ref> Johnson was born in the home above his father's bookshop in Lichfield, Staffordshire and,<ref name="Bate p. 5"/> because his mother Sarah was 40 when she gave birth, a "man-midwife" and surgeon of "great reputation" named George Hector was brought in to assist.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=15–16}}</ref> He did not cry and, with doubts surrounding the newborn's health, his aunt claimed "that she would not have picked such a poor creature up in the street".<ref name = "Watkins p.25"/> As it was feared the baby might die, the vicar of St Mary's was summoned to perform a baptism.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=16}}</ref> Two godfathers were chosen: Samuel Swynfen, a physician and graduate of Pembroke College, Oxford, and Richard Wakefield, a lawyer, coroner, and Lichfield town clerk.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=5–6}}</ref>

Johnson's health improved and he was put to wet-nurse with Joan Marklew. He soon contracted scrofula,<ref name="Lane pp. 16-17">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=16–17}}</ref> known at that time as the "King's Evil" because it was thought royalty could cure it. Sir John Floyer, former physician to Charles II of England|Charles II, recommended that the young Johnson should receive the " scrofula|royal touch ",<ref name="Lane p. 18">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=18}}</ref> which he received from Queen Anne on 30 March 1712. However, the ritual was ineffective, and an operation was performed that left him with permanent scars across his face and body.<ref name="Lane pp. 19-20">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=19–20}}</ref> With the birth of Johnson's brother, Nathaniel, a few months later, Michael was unable to keep on top of the debts he had accumulated over the years, and his family was no longer able to live in the style to which it had been accustomed.<ref name="Lane pp. 20-21">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=20–21}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=When he was a child in petticoats, and had learned to read, Mrs Johnson one morning put the common prayer-book into his hands, pointed to the collect for the day, and said, 'Sam, you must get this by heart.' She went up stairs, leaving him to study it: But by the time she had reached the second floor, she heard him following her. 'What's the matter?' said she. 'I can say it,' he replied; and repeated it distinctly, though he could not have read it over more than twice.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=38}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Johnson demonstrated signs of great intelligence as a child, and his parents, to his later disgust, would show off his "newly acquired accomplishments".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=18–19}}</ref> His education began at the age of three, and came from his mother who had him memorise and recite passages from the Book of Common Prayer .<ref name="Bate p. 21">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=21}}</ref> When Johnson turned four, he was sent to a nearby school, and, when he reached the age of six, he was sent to a retired shoemaker to continue his education.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=25–26}}</ref> A year later, Johnson was sent to Lichfield Grammar School, where he excelled in Latin.<ref name="Lane p. 26">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p= 26}}</ref> During this time, Johnson started to exhibit the tics that would influence how people viewed him in his later years, and which formed the basis for the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome .<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6">{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=5–6}}</ref> He excelled at his studies and was promoted to the upper school at the age of nine.<ref name="Lane p. 26"/> During this time, he befriended Edmund Hector, nephew of his "man-midwife" George Hector, and John Taylor, with whom he remained in contact for the rest of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=23, 31}}</ref>

At the age of 16, Johnson was given the opportunity to stay with his cousins, the Fords, at Pedmore, Worcestershire.<ref name="Lane p. 29">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=29}}</ref> There he became a close friend of Cornelius Ford, who employed his knowledge of the classics to tutor Johnson while he was not attending school.<ref name="Wain p. 32">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=32}}</ref> Ford was a successful, well-connected academic, but was also a notorious alcoholic whose excesses contributed to his death six years after Johnson's visit.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=30}}</ref> Having spent six months with his cousins, Johnson returned to Lichfield, but Mr. Hunter, the headmaster, "angered by the impertinence of this long absence", refused to allow him to continue at the grammar school.<ref name="Lane p. 33">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=33}}</ref> Unable to return to Lichfield Grammar School, Johnson was enrolled into the King Edward VI grammar school at Stourbridge.<ref name="Wain p. 32"/> Because the school was located near Pedmore, Johnson was able to spend more time with the Fords, and he began to write poems and verse translations.<ref name="Lane p. 33"/> However, he spent only six months at Stourbridge before returning once again to his parents' home in Lichfield.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=61}}</ref>

During this time, Johnson's future was uncertain as his father was deeply in debt.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=34}}</ref> To earn money, Johnson began to stitch books for his father, and it is possible that Johnson spent most of his time in his father's bookshop reading various works and building his literary knowledge. They remained in poverty until Sarah Johnson's cousin, Elizabeth Harriotts, died in February 1728 and left enough money to send Johnson to college.<ref name="Bate p. 87"/> On 31 October 1728, a few weeks after he turned 19, Johnson entered Pembroke College, Oxford.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=39}}</ref> The inheritance did not cover all of his expenses at Pembroke, but Andrew Corbet, a friend and fellow student at Pembroke, offered to make up the deficit.<ref name="Bate p. 88">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=88}}</ref>

Johnson made friends at Pembroke and read much. In later life, he told stories of his idleness.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=90–100}}. Bate also comments that Johnson's standard of effort was very high, so high that Johnson said he had never known a man to study hard.</ref> He was later asked by his tutor to produce a Latin translation of Alexander Pope 's ''Messiah'' as a Christmas exercise.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=91–92}}</ref> Johnson completed half of the translation in one afternoon and the rest the following morning. Although the poem brought him praise, it did not bring the material benefit he had hoped for.<ref name="Bate p. 92">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=92}}</ref> The poem later appeared in ''Miscellany of Poems'' (1731), edited by John Husbands, a Pembroke tutor, and is the earliest surviving publication of any of Johnson's writings. Johnson spent the rest of his time studying, even over the Christmas vacation. He drafted a "plan of study" called "Adversaria", which was left unfinished, and used his time to learn French while working on his knowledge of Greek.<ref name="Bate p. 9394">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=93–94}}</ref>

After thirteen months, a shortage of funds forced Johnson to leave Oxford without a degree, and he returned to Lichfield.<ref name="Bate p. 87">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=87}}</ref> Towards the end of Johnson's stay at Oxford his tutor, Jorden, left Pembroke and was replaced by William Adams (master)|William Adams . He enjoyed Adams as a tutor, but by December, Johnson was already a quarter behind in his student fees, and he was forced to return home. He left behind many books that he had borrowed from his father because he could not afford to transport them and as a symbolic gesture in that he hoped to return to his studies soon.<ref name="Bate p. 106107">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=106–107}}</ref>

He eventually received a degree: just before the publication of his ''Dictionary'' in 1755, Oxford University awarded Johnson the degree of Master of Arts (Oxbridge and Dublin)|Master of Arts .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=128–129}}</ref> He was awarded an honorary doctorate in 1765 by Trinity College Dublin and in 1775 by Oxford University.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=36}}</ref> In 1776, he returned to Pembroke with Boswell and toured the college with his previous tutor Adams, who was then its Master. He used that visit to recount his time at the college, his early career, and to express his later fondness for Jorden.<ref name="Bate p. 99">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=99}}</ref>

===Early career===
Little is known about Johnson's life between the end of 1729 and 1731; it is likely that he lived with his parents. He experienced bouts of mental anguish and physical pain during years of illness;<ref name="Bate p. 127">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=127}}</ref> his tics and gesticulations associated with Tourette syndrome became more noticeable and were often commented upon.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=24}}</ref> By 1731 Johnson's father was deeply in debt and had lost much of his standing in Lichfield. Johnson hoped to get an usher's position which became available at Stourbridge Grammar School, but as he did not have a degree his application was passed over on 6 September 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 127"/> At about this time, Johnson's father became ill and developed an "inflammatory fever" which led to his death in December 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 129">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=129}}</ref> Johnson eventually found employment as undermaster at a school in Market Bosworth, run by Sir Wolstan Dixie, 4th Baronet who allowed Johnson to teach without a degree.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=130–131}}</ref> Although Johnson was treated as a servant,<ref>{{Harvnb|Hopewell|1950|p= 53}}</ref> he found pleasure in teaching despite thinking it boring. After an argument with Dixie he quit the school, and by June 1732 he had returned home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=131–132}}</ref>

Johnson continued to look for a position at a Lichfield school. After being turned down for a position in Ashbourne, he spent his time with his friend Edmund Hector, who was living in the home of the publisher Thomas Warren. At the time Warren was starting his '' Birmingham Journal (eighteenth century)|Birmingham Journal '', and he enlisted Johnson's help.<ref name="Bate p. 134">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=134}}</ref> This connection with Warren grew, and Johnson proposed a translation of Jeronimo Lobo 's account of the Ethiopian Empire|Abyssinians .<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=137–138}}</ref> Johnson read Abbé Joachim Le Grand's French translations, and thought that a shorter version might be "useful and profitable".<ref name="Bate p. 138">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=138}}</ref> Instead of writing the whole work himself, he dictated to Hector, who then took the copy to the printer and made any corrections. Johnson's ''A Voyage to Abyssinia'' was published a year later.<ref name="Bate p. 138"/> He returned to Lichfield in February 1734, and began an annotated edition of Poliziano 's Latin poems, along with a history of Latin poetry from Petrarch to Poliziano; a ''Proposal'' was soon printed, but a lack of funds halted the project.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=140–141}}</ref>

Johnson remained with his close friend Harry Porter during a terminal illness,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=144}}</ref> which culminated when Porter died on 3 September 1734, leaving his wife Elizabeth Jervis Porter (otherwise known as "Tetty") widowed at the age of 45, with three children.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=143}}</ref> Some months later, Johnson began to court her. The Reverend William Shaw claims that "the first advances probably proceeded from her, as her attachment to Johnson was in opposition to the advice and desire of all her relations".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1969|p=88}}</ref> Johnson was inexperienced in such relationships, but the well-to-do widow encouraged him and promised to provide for him with her substantial savings.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=145}}</ref> They married on 9 July 1735, at St Werburgh's Church, Derby|St Werburgh's Church in Derby .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=147}}</ref> The Porter family did not approve of the match, partly because Johnson was 25 and Elizabeth was 21 years his elder, and Elizabeth's marriage to Johnson so disgusted her son Jervis that he severed relations with her.<ref name="Wain p. 65">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=65}}</ref> However, her daughter Lucy had accepted Johnson from the start, and her other son, Joseph, accepted the marriage later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=146}}</ref>

In June 1735, while working as a tutor for Thomas Whitby's children, Johnson had applied for the position of headmaster at Solihull School .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=153–154}}</ref> Although Walmesley gave his support, Johnson was passed over because the school's directors thought he was "a very haughty, ill-natured gent., and that he has such a way of distorting his face (which though he can't help) the gent[s] think it may affect some lads".<ref name="Bate p. 154">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=154}}</ref> With Walmesley's encouragement, Johnson decided that he could be a successful teacher if he ran his own school.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=153}}</ref> In the autumn of 1735, Johnson opened Edial Hall School as a private academy at Edial, near Lichfield. He had only three pupils: Lawrence Offley, George Garrick, and the 18-year-old David Garrick, who later became one of the most famous actors of his day.<ref name="Bate p. 154"/> The venture was unsuccessful and cost Tetty a substantial portion of her fortune. Instead of trying to keep the failing school going, Johnson began to write his first major work, the historical tragedy ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=156}}</ref> Biographer Robert DeMaria believed that Tourette syndrome likely made public occupations like schoolmaster or tutor almost impossible for Johnson to hold; this may have led Johnson to "the invisible occupation of authorship".<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6"/>

Johnson left for London with his former pupil David Garrick on 2 March 1737, the day Johnson's brother had died. He was penniless and pessimistic about their travel, but fortunately for them, Garrick had connections in London, and the two were able to stay with his distant relative, Richard Norris.<ref name="Bate p. 16465">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=164–165}}</ref> Johnson soon moved to Greenwich near the Golden Hart Tavern to finish ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=168–169}}</ref> On 12 July 1737 he wrote to Edward Cave with a proposal for a translation of Paolo Sarpi 's ''The History of the Council of Trent'' (1619), which Cave did not accept until months later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=81}}; {{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=169}}</ref> In October 1737 Johnson brought his wife to London, and he found employment with Cave as a writer for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=169–170}}</ref> His assignments for the magazine and other publishers during this time were "almost unparalleled in range and variety", and "so numerous, so varied and scattered" that "Johnson himself could not make a complete list".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=14}}</ref> The name '' Columbia (name)|Columbia '', a poetic name for America coined by Johnson, first appears in a 1738 weekly publication of the debates of the British Parliament in the Magazine.<ref>[http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ilej/image1.pl?item=page&seq=5&size=1&id=gm.1738.6.x.8.x.x.285a The Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. 8, June 1738, p. 285] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref><ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=_DoJAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Debates in Parliament'', Samuel Johnson.] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref>

In May 1738 his first major work, the poem '' London (1738 poem)‎|London '', was published anonymously.<ref name="Lynch p. 5">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 5}}</ref> Based on Juvenal's Satires of Juvenal#Satire III: There is no Room in Roma for a Roman|Satire III, it describes the character Thales leaving for Wales to escape the problems of London,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=172}}</ref> which it portrays as a place of crime, corruption, and neglect of the poor. Johnson could not bring himself to regard the poem as earning him any merit as a poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=18}}</ref> Alexander Pope claimed that the author "will soon be déterré" (brought to light, become well known), but this would not happen until 15 years later.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/>

In August, Johnson's lack of an MA degree from Oxford or Cambridge led to his being denied a position as master of the Appleby Grammar School. In an effort to end such rejections, Pope asked Lord Gower to use his influence to have a degree awarded to Johnson.<ref name="Watkins p.25">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=25}}</ref> Gower petitioned Oxford for an honorary degree to be awarded to Johnson, but was told that it was "too much to be asked".<ref name="Bate p. 182">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=182}}</ref> Gower then asked a friend of Jonathan Swift to plead with Swift to use his influence at the University of Dublin to have a Masters degree awarded to Johnson, in the hope that this could then be used to justify an MA from Oxford,<ref name="Bate p. 182"/> but Swift refused to act on Johnson's behalf.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=25–26}}</ref>

Between 1737 and 1739, Johnson befriended Richard Savage .<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=51}}</ref> Feeling guilty about living on Tetty's money, Johnson stopped living with her and spent his time with Savage. They were poor and would stay in taverns or sleep in "night-cellars" except for nights that they would roam the streets because they lacked the necessary funds.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=178–179}}</ref> Savage's friends tried to help him by attempting to persuade him to move to Wales, but Savage ended up in Bristol and again fell into debt. He was committed to debtors' prison and died in 1743. A year later, Johnson wrote '' Life of Mr Richard Savage '' (1744), a "moving" work which, in the words of the biographer and critic Walter Jackson Bate, "remains one of the innovative works in the history of biography".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=180–181}}</ref>

===''A Dictionary of the English Language''===

In 1746, a group of publishers approached Johnson about creating an authoritative dictionary of the English language;<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> a contract with William Strahan and associates, worth 1,500 guineas, was signed on the morning of 18 June 1746.<ref name="Hitchings">{{Harvnb|Hitchings|2005|p=54}}</ref> Johnson claimed that he could finish the project in three years. In comparison, the Académie Française had forty scholars spending forty years to complete its dictionary, which prompted Johnson to claim, "This is the proportion. Let me see; forty times forty is sixteen hundred. As three to sixteen hundred, so is the proportion of an Englishman to a Frenchman".<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> Although he did not succeed in completing the work in three years, he did manage to finish it in nine, justifying his boast.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> According to Bate, the ''Dictionary'' "easily ranks as one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship, and probably the greatest ever performed by one individual who laboured under anything like the disadvantages in a comparable length of time".<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> However, others, such as Thomas Babington Macaulay who described Johnson as "a wretched etymologist," have criticised Johnson's dictionary.<ref>Winchester 2003, p.33</ref>

Johnson's dictionary was not the first, nor was it unique. It was, however, the most commonly used and imitated for the 150 years between its first publication and the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' in 1928. Other dictionaries, such as Nathan Bailey 's ''Dictionarium Britannicum'', included more words,<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> and in the 150 years preceding Johnson's dictionary about twenty other general-purpose monolingual "English" dictionaries had been produced.<ref name="Lynch p. 2">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=2}}</ref> However, there was open dissatisfaction with the dictionaries of the period. In 1741, David Hume claimed: "The Elegance and Propriety of Stile have been very much neglected among us. We have no Dictionary of our Language, and scarce a tolerable Grammar".<ref name="Lynch p. 4">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=4}}</ref> Johnson's ''Dictionary'' offers insights into the 18th century and "a faithful record of the language people used".<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> It is more than a reference book; it is a work of literature.<ref name="Lynch p. 2"/>

For a decade, Johnson's constant work on the ''Dictionary'' disrupted his and Tetty's living conditions. He had to employ a number of assistants for the copying and mechanical work, which filled the house with incessant noise and clutter. He was always busy with his work, and kept hundreds of books around.<ref name="Lane p. 109">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=109}}</ref> John Hawkins described the scene: "The books he used for this purpose were what he had in his own collection, a copious but a miserably ragged one, and all such as he could borrow; which latter, if ever they came back to those that lent them, were so defaced as to be scarce worth owning".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hawkins|1787|p=175}}</ref> Johnson was also distracted by Tetty's health, as she started to show signs of a terminal illness.<ref name="Lane p. 109"/> To accommodate both his wife and his work, he moved to 17 Gough Square near his printer, William Strahan.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=110}}</ref>

In preparation for the work, Johnson wrote a ''Plan'' for the ''Dictionary''. Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield, was the patron of the ''Plan'', to Johnson's displeasure.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=117–118}}</ref> Seven years after first meeting Johnson to go over the work, Chesterfield wrote two anonymous essays in ''The World'' recommending the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Lane p. 118">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=118}}</ref> He complained that the English language lacked structure and argued in support of the dictionary. Johnson did not like the tone of the essay, and he felt that Chesterfield had not fulfilled his obligations as the work's patron.<ref name="Lane p. 121">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=121}}</ref> Johnson wrote a letter expressing this view and harshly criticising Chesterfield, saying "Is not a patron, my lord, one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help? The notice which you have been pleased to take of my labours, had it been early, had been kind: but it has been delayed till I am indifferent and cannot enjoy it; till I am solitary and cannot impart it; till I am known and do not want it."<ref name="Bate p. 257">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=257}}</ref> Chesterfield, impressed by the language, kept the letter displayed on a table for anyone to read.<ref name="Bate p. 257"/>

The ''Dictionary'' was finally published in April 1755, with the title page acknowledging that Oxford had awarded Johnson a Master of Arts degree in anticipation of the work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=256, 318}}</ref> The published dictionary was a huge book. Its pages were nearly 18" tall, and the book was 20" wide when opened; it contained 42,773 entries, to which only a few more were added in subsequent editions, and sold for the extravagant price of £4 10s, perhaps the rough equivalent of £350 today.<ref name=CC>{{citation|chapter=Currency Converter|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/currency/|title=The National Archives|place= Kew, Richmond, Surrey|accessdate=24 July 2008}}</ref> An important innovation in English lexicography was to illustrate the meanings of his words by literary quotation, of which there are around 114,000. The authors most frequently cited include Shakespeare, Milton and Dryden .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|pp=8–11}}</ref> It was years before "Johnson's Dictionary", as it came to be known, turned a profit. Author's royalties were unknown at that time, and Johnson, once his contract to deliver the book was fulfilled, received no further money from its sale. Years later, many of its quotations would be repeated by various editions of the '' Webster's Dictionary '' and the '' New English Dictionary ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=25}}</ref>

Besides working on the ''Dictionary'', Johnson also wrote various essays, sermons, and poems during these nine years.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=113}}</ref> He decided to produce a series of essays under the title '' The Rambler '' that would run every Tuesday and Saturday for twopence each. Explaining the title years later, he told his friend, the painter Joshua Reynolds : "I was at a loss how to name it. I sat down at night upon my bedside, and resolved that I would not go to sleep till I had fixed its title. ''The Rambler'' seemed the best that occurred, and I took it".<ref name="Lane p. 115">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=115}}</ref> These essays, often on moral topics, tended to be more grave than the title of the series would suggest; his first comments in ''The Rambler'' were to ask "that in this undertaking thy Holy Spirit may not be withheld from me, but that I may promote thy glory, and the salvation of myself and others".<ref name="Lane p. 115"/> The popularity of ''The Rambler'' took off once the issues were collected as a volume; they were reprinted nine times during Johnson's life. Writer and printer Samuel Richardson, enjoying the essays greatly, questioned the publisher as to who wrote the works; only he and a few of Johnson's friends were told of Johnson's authorship.<ref name="Lane p. 116">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=116}}</ref> One friend, the novelist Charlotte Lennox, includes a defence of ''The Rambler'' in her novel ''The Female Quixote'' (1752). In particular, the character Mr. Glanville says, "you may sit in Judgment upon the Productions of a ''Young'', a ''Richardson'', or a ''Johnson''. Rail with premeditated Malice at the ''Rambler''; and for the want of Faults, turn even its inimitable Beauties into Ridicule" (Book VI, Chapter XI). Later, she claims Johnson as "the greatest Genius in the present Age".<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynn|1997|p=241}}</ref>

{{Quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|quote=His necessary attendance while his play was in rehearsal, and during its performance, brought him acquainted with many of the performers of both sexes, which produced a more favourable opinion of their profession than he had harshly expressed in his Life of Savage ... He for considerable time used to frequent the Green Room, and seemed to take delight in dissipating his gloom, by mixing in the sprightly chit-chat of the motley circle then to be found there. Mr David Hume related to me from Mr Garrick, that Johnson at last denied himself this amusement, from considerations of rigid virtue; saying, "I'll come no more behind your scenes, David; for the silk stockings and white bosoms of your actresses excite my amorous propensities".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=67}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

However, not all of his work was confined to ''The Rambler''. His most highly regarded poem, '' The Vanity of Human Wishes '', was written with such "extraordinary speed" that Boswell claimed Johnson "might have been perpetually a poet".<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 22">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=22}}</ref> The poem is an imitation of Juvenal's '' Satires of Juvenal#Satire X: Wrong Desire is the Source of Suffering|Satire X '' and claims that "the antidote to vain human wishes is non-vain spiritual wishes".<ref>{{Harvnb|Weinbrot|1997|p=49}}</ref> In particular, Johnson emphasises "the helpless vulnerability of the individual before the social context" and the "inevitable self-deception by which human beings are led astray".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=281}}</ref> The poem was critically celebrated but it failed to become popular, and sold less than ''London''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=113–114}}</ref> In 1749, Garrick made good on his promise that he would produce ''Irene'', but its title was altered to '' Irene (play)#Stage history|Mahomet and Irene '' to make it "fit for the stage".<ref name="Lane p. 114">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=114}}</ref> The show eventually ran for nine nights.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=17}}</ref>

Tetty Johnson spent most of her time in London ill, and in 1752 she decided to return to the countryside while Johnson was busy working on his ''Dictionary''. She died on 17 March 1752, and, at word of her death, Johnson wrote a letter to his old friend Taylor, which according to Taylor "expressed grief in the strongest manner he had ever read".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=272–273}}</ref> He wrote a sermon in her honour, to be read at her funeral, but Taylor refused to read it, for reasons which are unknown. This only exacerbated Johnson's feelings of being lost, and his despair after the death of his wife, and John Hawkesworth had to take over organising the funeral. Johnson felt guilty about the poverty in which he believed he had forced Tetty to live, and blamed himself for neglecting her. He became outwardly discontent, and his diary was filled with prayers and laments over her death until his own. She was his primary motivation, and her death hindered his ability to complete his work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=273–275}}</ref>

===Later career===
On 16 March 1756, Johnson was arrested for an outstanding debt of £5 18 Shilling|s . Unable to contact anyone else, he wrote to the writer and publisher Samuel Richardson . Richardson, who had previously lent Johnson money, sent him six guineas to show his good will, and the two became friends.<ref name="Bate p. 321">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=321}}</ref> Soon after, Johnson met and befriended the painter Joshua Reynolds, who so impressed Johnson that he declared him "almost the only man whom I call a friend".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=324}}</ref> Reynolds' younger sister Frances observed during their time together "that men, women and children gathered around him [Johnson]", laughing at his gestures and gesticulations.<ref name=Murray1611>{{Harvnb|Murray|1979|p=1611}}</ref> In addition to Reynolds, Johnson was close to Bennet Langton and Arthur Murphy . Langton was a scholar and an admirer of Johnson who persuaded his way into a meeting with Johnson which led to a long friendship. Johnson met Murphy during the summer of 1754 after Murphy came to Johnson about the accidental republishing of the ''Rambler'' No. 190, and the two became friends.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=322–323}}</ref> Around this time, Anna Williams began boarding with Johnson. She was a minor poet who was poor and becoming blind, two conditions that Johnson attempted to change by providing room for her and paying for a failed cataract surgery. Williams, in turn, became Johnson's housekeeper.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|p=319}}</ref>

To occupy himself, Johnson began to work on ''The Literary Magazine, or Universal Review'', the first issue of which was printed on 19 March 1756. Philosophical disagreements erupted over the purpose of the publication when the Seven Years' War began and Johnson started to write polemical essays attacking the war. After the war began, the ''Magazine'' included many reviews, at least 34 of which were written by Johnson.<ref name="Bate p. 328">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=328}}</ref> When not working on the ''Magazine'', Johnson wrote a series of prefaces for other writers, such as Giuseppe Baretti, William Payne and Charlotte Lennox .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=329}}</ref> Johnson's relationship with Lennox and her works was particularly close during these years, and she in turn relied so heavily upon Johnson that he was "the most important single fact in Mrs Lennox's literary life".<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=221–222}}</ref> He later attempted to produce a new edition of her works, but even with his support they were unable to find enough interest to follow through with its publication.<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=223–224}}</ref> To help with domestic duties while Johnson was busy with his various projects, Richard Bathurst, a physician and a member of Johnson's Club, pressured him to take on a free slave, Francis Barber, as his servant.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=325–326}}</ref>

These efforts, however, consumed only a small portion of his time; his work on '' The Plays of William Shakespeare|Edition of Shakespeare '' took up the rest. On 8 June 1756, Johnson published his '' The Plays of William Shakespeare#Proposal|Proposals for Printing, by Subscription, the Dramatick Works of William Shakespeare '', which argued that previous editions of Shakespeare were edited incorrectly and needed to be corrected.<ref name="Bate p. 330">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=330}}</ref> However, Johnson's progress on the work slowed as the months passed, and he told music historian Charles Burney in December 1757 that it would take him until the following March to complete it. Before that could happen, he was arrested again, for a debt of £40, in February 1758. The debt was soon repaid by Jacob Tonson, who had contracted Johnson to publish ''Shakespeare'', and this encouraged Johnson to finish his edition to repay the favour. Although it took him another seven years to finish, Johnson completed a few volumes of his ''Shakespeare'' to prove his commitment to the project.<ref name="Bate p. 332">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=332}}</ref>

In 1758, Johnson began to write a weekly series, ''The Idler'', which ran from 15 April 1758 to 5 April 1760, as a way to avoid finishing his ''Shakespeare''. This series was shorter and lacked many features of ''The Rambler''. Unlike his independent publication of ''The Rambler'', ''The Idler'' was published in a weekly news journal ''The Universal Chronicle'', a publication supported by John Payne, John Newbery, Robert Stevens and William Faden.<ref name="Bate p. 334">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=334}}</ref> Since ''The Idler'' did not occupy all Johnson's time, he was able to publish his philosophical novella '' The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia|Rasselas '' on 19 April 1759. The "little story book", as Johnson described it, describes the life of Prince Rasselas and Nekayah, his sister, who are kept in a place called the Happy Valley in the land of Abyssinia. The Valley is a place free of problems, where any desire is quickly satisfied. The constant pleasure does not, however, lead to satisfaction; and, with the help of a philosopher named Imlac, Rasselas escapes and explores the world to witness how all aspects of society and life in the outside world are filled with suffering. They return to Abyssinia, but do not wish to return to the state of constantly fulfilled pleasures found in the Happy Valley.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=337–338}}</ref> ''Rasselas'' was written in one week to pay for his mother's funeral and settle her debts; it became so popular that there was a new English edition of the work almost every year. References to it appear in many later works of fiction, including '' Jane Eyre '', '' Cranford (novel)|Cranford '' and '' The House of the Seven Gables ''. Its fame was not limited to English-speaking nations: ''Rasselas'' was immediately translated into five languages (French, Dutch, German, Russian and Italian), and later into nine others.<ref name="Bate p. 337">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=337}}</ref>

By 1762, however, Johnson had gained notoriety for his dilatoriness in writing; the contemporary poet Churchill teased Johnson for the delay in producing his long-promised edition of Shakespeare: "He for subscribers baits his hook / and takes your cash, but where's the book?"<ref name="Bate p. 391">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=391}}</ref> The comments soon motivated Johnson to finish his ''Shakespeare'', and, after receiving the first payment from a government pension on 20 July 1762, he was able to dedicate most of his time towards this goal.<ref name="Bate p. 391"/> Earlier that July, the 24-year-old King George III granted Johnson an annual pension of £300 in appreciation for the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36"/> While the pension did not make Johnson wealthy, it did allow him a modest yet comfortable independence for the remaining 22 years of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=356}}</ref> The award came largely through the efforts of Thomas Sheridan (actor)|Sheridan and the John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute|Earl of Bute . When Johnson questioned if the pension would force him to promote a political agenda or support various officials, he was told by Bute that the pension "is not given you for anything you are to do, but for what you have done".<ref name="Bate p. 354-356">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=354–356}}</ref>

On 16 May 1763, Johnson first met 22-year-old James Boswell —who would later become Johnson's first major biographer—in the bookshop of Johnson's friend, Tom Davies. They quickly became friends, although Boswell would return to his home in Scotland or travel abroad for months at a time.<ref name="Bate p. 360">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=360}}</ref> Around the spring of 1763, Johnson formed " The Club (dining club)|The Club ", a social group that included his friends Reynolds, Edmund Burke|Burke, Garrick, Goldsmith and others (the membership later expanded to include Adam Smith and Edward Gibbon ). They decided to meet every Monday at 7:00 pm at the Turk's Head in Gerrard Street, Soho, and these meetings continued until long after the deaths of the original members.<ref name="Bate p. 366">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=366}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=During the whole of the interview, Johnson talked to his Majesty with profound respect, but still in his firm manly manner, with a sonorous voice, and never in that subdued tone which is commonly used at the levee and in the drawing-room. After the King withdrew, Johnson shewed himself highly pleased with his Majesty's conversation and gracious behaviour. He said to Mr Barnard, 'Sir, they may talk of the King as they will; but he is the finest gentleman I have ever seen.'<ref name="Boswell p. 135">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 135}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 9 January 1765, Murphy introduced Johnson to Henry Thrale, a wealthy brewer and Member of Parliament|MP, and his wife Hester Thrale|Hester . They struck up an instant friendship; Johnson was treated as a member of the family, and was once more motivated to continue working on his ''Shakespeare''.<ref name="Bate p. 393">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=393}}</ref> Afterwards, Johnson stayed with the Thrales for 17 years until Henry's death in 1781, sometimes staying in rooms at Thrale's Anchor Brewery in Southwark .<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=262}}</ref> Hester Thrale's documentation of Johnson's life during this time, in her correspondence and her diary ('' Thraliana ''), became an important source of biographical information on Johnson after his death.<ref name="Keymer p. 186">{{Harvnb|Keymer|1999|p=186}}</ref>

Johnson's edition of ''Shakespeare'' was finally published on 10 October 1765 as ''The Plays of William Shakespeare, in Eight Volumes ... To which are added Notes by Sam. Johnson'' in a printing of one thousand copies. The first edition quickly sold out, and a second was soon printed.<ref name="Bate p. 395">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=395}}</ref> The plays themselves were in a version that Johnson felt most true to the original based on his analysis of the manuscript editions. Johnson's revolutionary innovation was to create a set of corresponding notes that allow readers to identify the meaning behind many of Shakespeare's more complicated passages or ones that may have been transcribed incorrectly over time.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=397}}</ref> Included within the notes are occasional attacks upon rival editors of Shakespeare's works and their editions.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=194}}</ref> Years later, Edmond Malone, an important Shakespearean scholar and friend of Johnson's, stated that Johnson's "vigorous and comprehensive understanding threw more light on his authour than all his predecessors had done".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=396}}</ref>

In February 1767 Johnson was granted a special meeting with King George III. This took place at the library of the Queen's house, and it was organised by Frederick Augusta Barnard, the King's librarian.<ref name="Boswell p. 133">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 133}}</ref> The King, hearing that Johnson would visit the library, commanded Barnard to introduce him to Johnson.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 134}}</ref> After a short meeting, Johnson was impressed with both the King himself and their conversation.<ref name="Boswell p. 135"/>

===Final works===
On 6 August 1773, eleven years after first meeting Boswell, Johnson set out to visit his friend in Scotland, to begin "a journey to the western islands of Scotland", as Johnson's 1775 account of their travels would put it.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=463}}</ref> The work was intended to discuss the social problems and struggles that affected the Scottish people, but it also praised many of the unique facets of Scottish society, such as a school in Edinburgh for the deaf and mute.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=471}}</ref> Also, Johnson used the work to enter into the dispute over the authenticity of James Macpherson's Ossian poems, claiming they could not have been translations of ancient Scottish literature on the grounds that "in those times nothing had been written in the Earse [i.e. Gaelic] language".<ref>{{Harvnb|Johnson|1970|pp=104–105}}</ref> There were heated exchanges between the two, and according to one of Johnson's letters, MacPherson threatened physical violence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=331}}</ref> Boswell's account, '' The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides '' (1786), was a preliminary attempt at a biography before his '' Life of Johnson ''. Included were various quotes and descriptions of events, including anecdotes such as Johnson swinging around a broadsword while wearing Scottish garb, or dancing a Highland jig.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=468–469}}</ref>

In the 1770s, Johnson, who had tended to be an opponent of the government early in life, published a series of pamphlets in favour of various government policies. In 1770 he produced ''The False Alarm'', a political pamphlet attacking John Wilkes . In 1771, his ''Thoughts on the Late Transactions Respecting Falkland's Islands'' cautioned against war with Spain.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=443–445}}</ref> In 1774 he printed ''The Patriot'', a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1996|p=182}}</ref> This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson opposed "self-professed Patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" patriotism.<ref name="Griffin p. 21">{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=21}}</ref>

The last of these pamphlets, ''Taxation No Tyranny'' (1775), was a defence of the Coercive Acts and a response to the Declaration of Rights of the First Continental Congress of America, which protested against taxation without representation .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=446}}</ref> Johnson argued that in emigrating to America, colonists had "voluntarily resigned the power of voting", but they still had " virtual representation " in Parliament. In a parody of the Declaration of Rights, Johnson suggested that the Americans had no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish people . If the Americans wanted to participate in Parliament, said Johnson, they could move to England and purchase an estate.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ammerman|1974|p=13}}</ref> Johnson denounced English supporters of American separatists as "traitors to this country", and hoped that the matter would be settled without bloodshed, but that it would end with "English superiority and American obedience".<ref>{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=252–256}}</ref> Years before, Johnson had advocated that the English and the French were just "two robbers" who were stealing land from the natives, and that neither deserved to live there.<ref name="Bate p. 328"/> After the signing of the 1783 Peace of Paris treaties, marking the colonists' defeat of the British, Johnson was "deeply disturbed" with the "state of this kingdom".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=15}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=Mr Thrale's death was a very essential loss to Johnson, who, although he did not foresee all that afterwards happened, was sufficiently convinced that the comforts which Mr Thrale's family afforded him, would now in great measure cease.<ref name="Boswell p. 273">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 273}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 3 May 1777, while Johnson was trying to save Reverend William Dodd from execution, he wrote to Boswell that he was busy preparing a "little Lives" and "little Prefaces, to a little edition of the English Poets".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=525}}</ref> Tom Davies, William Strahan and Thomas Cadell had asked Johnson to create this final major work, the '' Lives of the English Poets '', for which he asked 200 guineas, an amount significantly less than the price he could have demanded.<ref name="Bate p. 526">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=526}}</ref> The ''Lives'', which were critical as well as biographical studies, appeared as prefaces to selections of each poet's work, and they were quite larger than originally expected.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=527}}</ref> The work was finished in March 1781 and the whole collection was published in six volumes. As Johnson justified in the advertisement for the work, "my purpose was only to have allotted to every Poet an Advertisement, like those which we find in the French Miscellanies, containing a few dates and a general character."<ref>{{Harvnb|Clingham|1997|p=161}}</ref>

Johnson was unable to enjoy this success because Henry Thrale, the dear friend with whom he lived, died on 4 April 1781.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=546–547}}</ref> Life changed quickly for Johnson, and Hester Thrale became interested in the Italian singing teacher Gabriel Mario Piozzi, which forced Johnson to move on from his previous lifestyle.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=557, 561}}</ref> After returning home and then travelling for a short period, Johnson received word that his friend and tenant Robert Levet, had died on 17 January 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=562}}</ref> Johnson was shocked by the death of Levet, who had resided at Johnson's London home since 1762.<ref>{{citation|url=http://books.google.com/?id=qXHv5EClgZgC&pg=PA231&lpg=PA231&dq=wakefield+levett|title= The Samuel Johnson Encyclopedia|author=Rogers, Pat|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|location= Westport, CT|year=1996|isbn=978-0-313-29411-2}}</ref> Shortly afterwards Johnson caught a cold which turned into bronchitis, lasting for several months, and his health was further complicated by "feeling forlorn and lonely" by Levet's death being accompanied by the deaths of Johnson's friend Thomas Lawrence and his housekeeper Williams.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|pp=501–502}}</ref>

===Final years===
Although he had recovered his health by August, he experienced emotional trauma when he was given word that Hester Thrale would sell the residence that Johnson shared with the family. What hurt Johnson the most was the possibility that he would be left without her constant company.<ref name="Bate p. 566">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=566}}</ref> Months later, on 6 October 1782, Johnson attended church for the final time in his life, to say goodbye to his former residence and life. The walk to the church strained him, but he managed the journey unaccompanied.<ref name="Bate p. 569">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=569}}</ref> While there, he wrote a prayer for the Thrale family:

<blockquote>To thy fatherly protection, O Lord, I commend this family. Bless, guide, and defend them, that they may pass through this world, as finally to enjoy in thy presence everlasting happiness, for Jesus Christ's sake. Amen.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=284}}</ref></blockquote>

Hester Thrale did not completely abandon Johnson, and asked him to accompany the family on a trip to Brighton.<ref name="Bate p. 569"/> He agreed, and was with them from 7 October until 20 November 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=570}}</ref> On his return, his health began to fail him, and he was left alone following Boswell's visit on 29 May 1783 until he travelled to Scotland.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=575}}</ref>

On 17 June 1783, Johnson's poor circulation resulted in a stroke<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=51}}</ref> and he wrote to his neighbour, Edmund Allen, that he had lost the ability to speak.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=71}}</ref> Two doctors were brought in to aid Johnson; he regained his ability to speak two days later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=71–72}}</ref> Johnson feared that he was dying, and wrote:
<blockquote>The black dog I hope always to resist, and in time to drive, though I am deprived of almost all those that used to help me. The neighbourhood is impoverished. I had once Richardson and Lawrence in my reach. Mrs. Allen is dead. My house has lost Levet, a man who took interest in everything, and therefore ready at conversation. Mrs. Williams is so weak that she can be a companion no longer. When I rise my breakfast is solitary, the black dog waits to share it, from breakfast to dinner he continues barking, except that Dr. Brocklesby for a little keeps him at a distance. Dinner with a sick woman you may venture to suppose not much better than solitary. After dinner, what remains but to count the clock, and hope for that sleep which I can scarce expect. Night comes at last, and some hours of restlessness and confusion bring me again to a day of solitude. What shall exclude the black dog from an habitation like this?<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=72}}</ref></blockquote>
By this time he was sick and gout -ridden. He had surgery for gout, and his remaining friends, including novelist Fanny Burney (the daughter of Charles Burney), came to keep him company.<ref name="Watkins p.73">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=73}}</ref> He was confined to his room from 14 December 1783 to 21 April 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=74}}</ref>

His health had begun to improve by May 1784, and he travelled to Oxford with Boswell on 5 May 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74"/> By July, many of Johnson's friends were either dead or gone; Boswell had left for Scotland and Hester Thrale had become engaged to Piozzi. With nobody to visit, Johnson expressed a desire to die in London and arrived there on 16 November 1784. On 25 November 1784, he allowed Burney to visit him and expressed an interest to her that he should leave London; he soon left for Islington, to George Strahan's home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=76–77}}</ref> His final moments were filled with mental anguish and delusions; when his physician, Thomas Warren, visited and asked him if he were feeling better, Johnson burst out with: "No, Sir; you cannot conceive with what acceleration I advance towards death."<ref name="Watkins p.78">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=78}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=A few days before his death, he had asked Sir John Hawkins, as one of his executors, where he should be buried; and on being answered, "Doubtless, in Westminster Abbey," seemed to feel a satisfaction, very natural to a Poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=341}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Many visitors came to see Johnson as he lay sick in bed, but he preferred only Langton's company.<ref name="Watkins p.78"/> Burney waited for word of Johnson's condition, along with Windham, Strahan, Hoole, Cruikshank, Des Moulins and Barber.<ref name="Watkins p.79">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=79}}</ref> On 13 December 1784, Johnson met with two others: a young woman, Miss Morris, whom Johnson blessed, and Francesco Sastres, an Italian teacher, who was given some of Johnson's final words: "''Iam Moriturus''" ("I who am about to die").<ref name="Bate p. 599">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=599}}</ref> Shortly afterwards he fell into a coma, and died at 7:00 pm.<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

Langton waited until 11:00 pm to tell the others, which led to John Hawkins' becoming pale and overcome with "an agony of mind", along with Seward and Hoole describing Johnson's death as "the most awful sight".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hill|1897|p=160 (Vol. 2)}}</ref> Boswell remarked, "My feeling was just one large expanse of Stupor ... I could not believe it. My imagination was not convinced."<ref name="Bate p. 599"/> William Gerard Hamilton joined in and stated, "He has made a chasm, which not only nothing can fill up, but which ''nothing has a tendency to fill up''. -Johnson is dead.- Let us go to the next best: There is nobody; -''no man can be said to put you in mind of Johnson''."<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

He was buried on 20 December 1784 at Westminster Abbey with an inscription that reads:
:Samuel Johnson, LL.D.
:''Obiit XIII die Decembris,''
:''Anno Domini''
:M.DCC.LXXXIV.
:''Ætatis suœ'' LXXV.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=341–342}}</ref>

==Bibliography==
===Works===
* [http://books.google.com/books?id=CxATAAAAYAAJ&ots=V-uf-Ec85P&dq=Samuel%20Johnson%20%22Dictionary%20of%20the%20English%20Language%22&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q=&f=false ''A Dictionary of the English Language''], 1755. (Available online from Google Book Search.)
** ([http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/5430 Preface available separately from Project Gutenberg])
* ''The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia'', 1759.
* ''A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland'', 1775.
* ''Lives of the Poets'', 1799-81.
* ''Samuel Johnson: The Major Works,'' ed. Donald Greene, 2009. ([http://www.amazon.com/Samuel-Johnson-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199538336/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256974594&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search])

===Biographies===

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}

==References==
* {{Citation1|last=Ammerman|first=David|title=In the Common Cause: American Response to the Coercive Acts of 1774|location=New York|publisher=Norton|year=1974|isbn=0-393-00787-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Arnold|first=Matthew|authorlink=Matthew Arnold|editor1-last=Ricks|editor1-first=Christopher|editor1-link=Christopher Ricks|title=Selected Criticism of Matthew Arnold|year=1972|publisher=New American Library|location=New York|oclc=6338231}}
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|authorlink=Walter Jackson Bate|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1977|publisher=Harcourt Brace Jovanovich|location=New York|isbn=0-15-179260-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|title=The Achievement of Samuel Johnson|year=1955|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|oclc=355413}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|contribution=Hester Thrale Piozzi 1741–1821|title=Women Memoirists Vol. II|year=1998|editor-last=Bloom|editor-first=Harold|pages=74–76|publisher=Chelsea House|location=Philadelphia|isbn=0-7910-4655-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|title=The Western Canon|year=1995|publisher=Macmillan|location=London|isbn=0-333-64813-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=Correspondence and Other Papers of James Boswell Relating to the Making of the Life of Johnson|editor-last=Waingrow|editor-first=Marshall|publisher=McGraw-Hill|location=New York|year=1969|oclc=59269}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|year=1986|editor-last=Hibbert|editor-first=Christopher|publisher=Penguin Classics|location=New York|isbn=0-14-043116-0}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clarke|first=Norma|title=Dr Johnson's Women|year=2000|publisher=Hambledon|location=London|isbn=1-85285-254-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clingham|first= Greg|year=1997|contribution= Life and literature in the ''Lives''| title= The Cambridge companion to Samuel Johnson|editor1-last= Clingham|editor1-first= Greg| pages= 161–191|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Davis|first=Bertram|contribution=Introduction|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL. D.|year=1961|editor-last=Davis|editor-first=Bertram|pages=vii–xxx|publisher=Macmillan Company|location=New York|oclc=739445}}.
* {{Citation1|last=DeMaria, Jr.|first=Robert|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|publisher=Blackwell|location=Oxford|year=1994|isbn=1-55786-664-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Fine|first=LG|title=Samuel Johnson's illnesses|journal=J Nephrol|volume=19|issue=Suppl 10|pages=S110–4|date=May–June 2006|pmid=16874722}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|authorlink=Donald Greene|title=Samuel Johnson: Updated Edition|publisher=Twayne Publishers|location= Boston|year=1989|isbn=0-8057-6962-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|contribution=Introduction|title=Political Writings|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first=Donald|publisher=Liberty Fund|location=Indianapolis|isbn=0-86597-275-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Griffin|first=Dustin|title=Patriotism and Poetry in Eighteenth-Century Britain|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|year=2005|isbn=0-521-00959-6}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Grundy|first=Isobel|year=1997|contribution= Jane Austen and literary traditions| title= The Cambridge companion to Jane Austen|editor1-last=Copeland|editor1-first=Edward|editor2-last=McMaster|editor2-first=Juliet| pages= 189–210|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-49867-8}}
* {{Citation1|last=Hawkins|first=John|title=Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D.|publisher=J. Buckland|location=London|year=1787|oclc=173965}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hibbert|first=Christopher|authorlink=Christopher Hibbert|title=The Personal History of Samuel Johnson|location=New York|publisher=Harper & Row|year=1971|isbn=0-06-011879-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hitchings|first=Henry|authorlink=Henry Hitchings|title=Dr Johnson's Dictionary: The Extraordinary Story of the Book that Defined the World|publisher=John Murray|location=London|year=2005|isbn=0-7195-6631-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hill|first=G. Birkbeck, editor|authorlink=George Birkbeck Norman Hill|title=Johnsonian Miscellanies|location=London|publisher=Oxford Clarendon Press|year=1897|oclc=61906024}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hopewell|first=Sydney|title=The Book of Bosworth School, 1320–1920|year=1950|location=Leicester|publisher=W. Thornley & Son|oclc=6808364}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Letters| editor-last = Chapman| editor-first = R. W.|year=1952|location= Oxford|publisher=Clarendon|isbn=0-19-818538-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Johnson's Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and Boswell's Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides|editor-last= Chapman|editor-first= R. W.|location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1970|isbn=0-19-281072-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Major Works|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first= Donald|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=0-19-284042-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Kammer|first=Thomas|year=2007|chapter=Mozart in the Neurological Department: Who has the Tic?|editor1-first= Julien|editor1-last= Bogousslavsky|editor2-first= M|editor2-last= Hennerici|title=Neurological Disorders in Famous Artists, Part 2|pages=184–92|isbn=978-3-8055-8265-0|pmid= 17495512|publisher=Karger|location=Basel|volume=22|journal=Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience|doi=10.1159/0000102880}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Keymer|first=Thomas|year=1999|contribution= Johnson, Madness, and Smart|title=Christopher Smart and the Enlightenment|editor1-last=Hawes|editor1-first= Clement|location=New York, NY|publisher=St. Martin's Press|isbn=0-312-21369-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lane|first=Margaret|title=Samuel Johnson & his World|year=1975|publisher=Harper & Row Publishers|location=New York|isbn=0-06-012496-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Leavis|first=FR|authorlink=F. R. Leavis|title=Johnson as Critic|journal= Scrutiny (journal)|Scrutiny |volume=12|pages=187–204|year=1944}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynch|first=Jack|contribution=Introduction to this Edition|title=Samuel Johnson's Dictionary|year=2003|editor-last=Lynch|editor-first=Jack|pages=1–21|publisher=Walker & Co|location=New York|isbn=0-8027-1421-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynn|first=Steven|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's critical reception|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Martin|first=Peter|title=Samuel Johnson:A Biography|year=2008|publisher=Belknap Press|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts|isbn=978-0-674-03160-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=McHenry|first=LC Jr|title=Samuel Johnson's tics and gesticulations|journal=Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences|volume=22|issue=2|pages=152–68|date=April 1967|pmid=5341871|doi=10.1093/jhmas/XXII.2.152}}
* {{Citation1|last=Murray|first=TJ|date=16 June 1979|pmc=1599158|title=Dr Samuel Johnson's movement disorder|periodical= British Medical Journal |volume=1|issue=6178|pages=1610–14|pmid= 380753|doi=10.1136/bmj.1.6178.1610}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Murray|first= TJ|title= Samuel Johnson: his ills, his pills and his physician friends|journal=Clin Med|volume=3|issue=4|pages=368–72|date=July–August 2003|pmid=12938754}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Needham|first=John|title=The Completest Mode|location=Edinburgh|publisher=Edinburgh University Press|year=1982|isbn=0-85224-387-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pearce|first=JMS|date=July 1994|pmc=1294650|title=Doctor Samuel Johnson: 'the Great Convulsionary' a victim of Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome|journal= Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine |volume=87|pages=396–399|pmid= 8046726|issue=7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Piozzi|first=Hester|title=Thraliana: The Diary of Mrs. Hester Lynch Thrale (Later Mrs. Piozzi) 1776–1809|year=1951|editor1-last=Balderson|editor1-first=Katharine|publisher=Clarendon|place= Oxford|oclc= 359617}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pittock|first=Murray|year=2004|contribution= Johnson, Boswell, and their circle|title=The Cambridge companion to English literature from 1740 to 1830|editor1-last= Keymer|editor1-first= Thomas|editor2-last= Mee|editor2-first= Jon|pages= 157–172|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-00757-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Rogers|first=Pat|title=Johnson and Boswell: The Transit of Caledonia|publisher=Oxford University Press|place= Oxford|year=1995|isbn=0-19-818259-7}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Sacks|first=Oliver|author-link= Oliver Sacks|date=19–26 December 1992|title=Tourette's Syndrome and creativity|journal= British Medical Journal |volume=305|issue= 6868|pages=1515–16|pmc=1884721|pmid=1286364|quote=... the case for Samuel Johnson having the syndrome, though [...] circumstantial, is extremely strong and, to my mind, entirely convincing|doi=10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1515|issue=6868}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Shapiro|first=Arthur K|authorlink=Arthur K. Shapiro|title=Gilles de la Tourette syndrome|year=1978|publisher=Raven Press|location=New York|isbn=0-89004-057-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Skargon|first=Yvonne|title=The Importance of Being Oscar: Lily and Hodge and Dr. Johnson|place= London|publisher=Primrose Academy|year=1999|oclc= 56542613}}.
* {{Citation1|author=Stern JS, Burza S, Robertson MM |title=Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome and its impact in the UK |journal=Postgrad Med J |volume=81 |issue=951 |pages=12–9 |date = January 2005|pmid=15640424 |doi=10.1136/pgmj.2004.023614 |quote=It is now widely accepted that Dr Samuel Johnson had Tourette's syndrome |pmc=1743178 }}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wain|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1974|publisher=Viking Press|place= New York|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Watkins|first=WBC|title=Perilous Balance: The Tragic Genius of Swift, Johnson, and Sterne|year=1960|publisher=Walker-deBerry, Inc.|place= Cambridge, MA|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Weinbrot|first= Howard D.|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's Poetry|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wilson|first=Edmund|year=1950|contribution= Reexamining Dr. Johnson|title=Classics and Commercials|editor1-last=Wilson|editor1-first=Edmund|location=New York|publisher=Farrar, Straus & Giroux|oclc=185571431}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wiltshire|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson in the Medical World|year=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|isbn=0-521-38326-9}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Winchester|first=Simon|title=The Meaning of Everything|year=2003|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-517500-4}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Winters|first=Yvor|authorlink=Yvor Winters|title=The Anatomy of Nonsense|location=Norfolk, Conn.|publisher=New Directions|year=1943|oclc=191540}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Yung|first=Kai Kin|title=Samuel Johnson, 1709–84|publisher=Herbert Press|place= London|year=1984|isbn=0-906969-45-X}}.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Johnson, Samuel}}
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]

Samuel Johnson

2011-09-09T02:53:01Z

Ottava: /* Biography */

'''Samuel Johnson''' (18 September 1709 (O.S.) 7 September – 13 December 1784), often referred to as '''Dr. Johnson''', was an English author who made lasting contributions to English literature as a poet, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and lexicographer . Johnson was a devout Anglican and committed Tory, and has been described as "arguably the most distinguished man of letters in English history".<ref>Rogers, Pat (2006), "Johnson, Samuel (1709–1784)", ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'' (online ed.), Oxford University Press, [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/14918], retrieved 25 August 2008</ref> He is also the subject of "the most famous single work of biographical art in the whole of literature": James Boswell 's '' Life of Samuel Johnson ''.<ref name="Batexix">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=xix}}</ref>

Johnson was born in Lichfield, Staffordshire, and attended Pembroke College, Oxford for just over a year, before his lack of funds forced him to leave. After working as a teacher he moved to London, where he began to write miscellaneous pieces for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''. His early works include the biography ''The Life of Richard Savage'', the poems "London " and "The Vanity of Human Wishes", and the play ''Irene''.

After nine years of work, Johnson's ''Dictionary of the English Language '' was published in 1755; it had a far-reaching effect on Modern English and has been described as "one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship."<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> The ''Dictionary'' brought Johnson popularity and success. Until the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' 150 years later, Johnson's was viewed as the pre-eminent British dictionary.<ref name="Lynch p. 1">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 1}}</ref> His later works included essays, an influential annotated edition of William Shakespeare's plays, and the widely read tale ''Rasselas''. In 1763, he befriended James Boswell, with whom he later travelled to Scotland; Johnson described their travels in '' A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland ''. Towards the end of his life, he produced the massive and influential '' Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets '', a collection of biographies and evaluations of 17th- and 18th-century poets.

Johnson had a tall and robust figure, but his odd gestures and tic s were confusing to some on their first encounter with him. Boswell's ''Life'', along with other biographies, documented Johnson's behaviour and mannerisms in such detail that they have informed the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome (TS),<ref name="ContTSDiagnosis">{{Harvnb|Murray|1979}} and {{Harvnb|Stern|2005}}</ref> a condition not defined or diagnosed in the 18th century. After a series of illnesses he died on the evening of 13 December 1784, and was buried in Westminster Abbey . In the years following his death, Johnson began to be recognised as having had a lasting effect on literary criticism, and even as the only great critic of English literature.<ref name="Winters p. 240">{{Harvnb|Winters|1943|p=240}}</ref>

==Biography==
===Early life and education===
Born on 18 September 1709 (New Style) to Michael Johnson, a bookseller, and his wife, Sarah Ford,<ref name="Bate p. 5">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=5}}</ref> Samuel Johnson often claimed that he grew up in poverty. Since both families had money, it is uncertain what happened between Michael and Sarah's marriage and the birth of Samuel just three years later to provoke such a change in fortune.<ref name="Lane p. 1314">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=13–14}}</ref> Johnson was born in the home above his father's bookshop in Lichfield, Staffordshire and,<ref name="Bate p. 5"/> because his mother Sarah was 40 when she gave birth, a "man-midwife" and surgeon of "great reputation" named George Hector was brought in to assist.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=15–16}}</ref> He did not cry and, with doubts surrounding the newborn's health, his aunt claimed "that she would not have picked such a poor creature up in the street".<ref name = "Watkins p.25"/> As it was feared the baby might die, the vicar of St Mary's was summoned to perform a baptism.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=16}}</ref> Two godfathers were chosen: Samuel Swynfen, a physician and graduate of Pembroke College, Oxford, and Richard Wakefield, a lawyer, coroner, and Lichfield town clerk.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=5–6}}</ref>

Johnson's health improved and he was put to wet-nurse with Joan Marklew. He soon contracted scrofula,<ref name="Lane pp. 16-17">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=16–17}}</ref> known at that time as the "King's Evil" because it was thought royalty could cure it. Sir John Floyer, former physician to Charles II of England|Charles II, recommended that the young Johnson should receive the " scrofula|royal touch ",<ref name="Lane p. 18">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=18}}</ref> which he received from Queen Anne on 30 March 1712. However, the ritual was ineffective, and an operation was performed that left him with permanent scars across his face and body.<ref name="Lane pp. 19-20">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=19–20}}</ref> With the birth of Johnson's brother, Nathaniel, a few months later, Michael was unable to keep on top of the debts he had accumulated over the years, and his family was no longer able to live in the style to which it had been accustomed.<ref name="Lane pp. 20-21">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=20–21}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=When he was a child in petticoats, and had learned to read, Mrs Johnson one morning put the common prayer-book into his hands, pointed to the collect for the day, and said, 'Sam, you must get this by heart.' She went up stairs, leaving him to study it: But by the time she had reached the second floor, she heard him following her. 'What's the matter?' said she. 'I can say it,' he replied; and repeated it distinctly, though he could not have read it over more than twice.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=38}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Johnson demonstrated signs of great intelligence as a child, and his parents, to his later disgust, would show off his "newly acquired accomplishments".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=18–19}}</ref> His education began at the age of three, and came from his mother who had him memorise and recite passages from the Book of Common Prayer .<ref name="Bate p. 21">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=21}}</ref> When Johnson turned four, he was sent to a nearby school, and, when he reached the age of six, he was sent to a retired shoemaker to continue his education.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=25–26}}</ref> A year later, Johnson was sent to Lichfield Grammar School, where he excelled in Latin.<ref name="Lane p. 26">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p= 26}}</ref> During this time, Johnson started to exhibit the tics that would influence how people viewed him in his later years, and which formed the basis for the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome .<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6">{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=5–6}}</ref> He excelled at his studies and was promoted to the upper school at the age of nine.<ref name="Lane p. 26"/> During this time, he befriended Edmund Hector, nephew of his "man-midwife" George Hector, and John Taylor, with whom he remained in contact for the rest of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=23, 31}}</ref>

At the age of 16, Johnson was given the opportunity to stay with his cousins, the Fords, at Pedmore, Worcestershire.<ref name="Lane p. 29">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=29}}</ref> There he became a close friend of Cornelius Ford, who employed his knowledge of the classics to tutor Johnson while he was not attending school.<ref name="Wain p. 32">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=32}}</ref> Ford was a successful, well-connected academic, but was also a notorious alcoholic whose excesses contributed to his death six years after Johnson's visit.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=30}}</ref> Having spent six months with his cousins, Johnson returned to Lichfield, but Mr. Hunter, the headmaster, "angered by the impertinence of this long absence", refused to allow him to continue at the grammar school.<ref name="Lane p. 33">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=33}}</ref> Unable to return to Lichfield Grammar School, Johnson was enrolled into the King Edward VI grammar school at Stourbridge.<ref name="Wain p. 32"/> Because the school was located near Pedmore, Johnson was able to spend more time with the Fords, and he began to write poems and verse translations.<ref name="Lane p. 33"/> However, he spent only six months at Stourbridge before returning once again to his parents' home in Lichfield.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=61}}</ref>

During this time, Johnson's future was uncertain as his father was deeply in debt.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=34}}</ref> To earn money, Johnson began to stitch books for his father, and it is possible that Johnson spent most of his time in his father's bookshop reading various works and building his literary knowledge. They remained in poverty until Sarah Johnson's cousin, Elizabeth Harriotts, died in February 1728 and left enough money to send Johnson to college.<ref name="Bate p. 87"/> On 31 October 1728, a few weeks after he turned 19, Johnson entered Pembroke College, Oxford.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=39}}</ref> The inheritance did not cover all of his expenses at Pembroke, but Andrew Corbet, a friend and fellow student at Pembroke, offered to make up the deficit.<ref name="Bate p. 88">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=88}}</ref>

Johnson made friends at Pembroke and read much. In later life, he told stories of his idleness.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=90–100}}. Bate also comments that Johnson's standard of effort was very high, so high that Johnson said he had never known a man to study hard.</ref> He was later asked by his tutor to produce a Latin translation of Alexander Pope 's ''Messiah'' as a Christmas exercise.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=91–92}}</ref> Johnson completed half of the translation in one afternoon and the rest the following morning. Although the poem brought him praise, it did not bring the material benefit he had hoped for.<ref name="Bate p. 92">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=92}}</ref> The poem later appeared in ''Miscellany of Poems'' (1731), edited by John Husbands, a Pembroke tutor, and is the earliest surviving publication of any of Johnson's writings. Johnson spent the rest of his time studying, even over the Christmas vacation. He drafted a "plan of study" called "Adversaria", which was left unfinished, and used his time to learn French while working on his knowledge of Greek.<ref name="Bate p. 9394">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=93–94}}</ref>

After thirteen months, a shortage of funds forced Johnson to leave Oxford without a degree, and he returned to Lichfield.<ref name="Bate p. 87">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=87}}</ref> Towards the end of Johnson's stay at Oxford his tutor, Jorden, left Pembroke and was replaced by William Adams (master)|William Adams . He enjoyed Adams as a tutor, but by December, Johnson was already a quarter behind in his student fees, and he was forced to return home. He left behind many books that he had borrowed from his father because he could not afford to transport them and as a symbolic gesture in that he hoped to return to his studies soon.<ref name="Bate p. 106107">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=106–107}}</ref>

He eventually received a degree: just before the publication of his ''Dictionary'' in 1755, Oxford University awarded Johnson the degree of Master of Arts (Oxbridge and Dublin)|Master of Arts .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=128–129}}</ref> He was awarded an honorary doctorate in 1765 by Trinity College Dublin and in 1775 by Oxford University.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=36}}</ref> In 1776, he returned to Pembroke with Boswell and toured the college with his previous tutor Adams, who was then its Master. He used that visit to recount his time at the college, his early career, and to express his later fondness for Jorden.<ref name="Bate p. 99">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=99}}</ref>

===Early career===
Little is known about Johnson's life between the end of 1729 and 1731; it is likely that he lived with his parents. He experienced bouts of mental anguish and physical pain during years of illness;<ref name="Bate p. 127">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=127}}</ref> his tics and gesticulations associated with Tourette syndrome became more noticeable and were often commented upon.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=24}}</ref> By 1731 Johnson's father was deeply in debt and had lost much of his standing in Lichfield. Johnson hoped to get an usher's position which became available at Stourbridge Grammar School, but as he did not have a degree his application was passed over on 6 September 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 127"/> At about this time, Johnson's father became ill and developed an "inflammatory fever" which led to his death in December 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 129">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=129}}</ref> Johnson eventually found employment as undermaster at a school in Market Bosworth, run by Sir Wolstan Dixie, 4th Baronet who allowed Johnson to teach without a degree.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=130–131}}</ref> Although Johnson was treated as a servant,<ref>{{Harvnb|Hopewell|1950|p= 53}}</ref> he found pleasure in teaching despite thinking it boring. After an argument with Dixie he quit the school, and by June 1732 he had returned home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=131–132}}</ref>

Johnson continued to look for a position at a Lichfield school. After being turned down for a position in Ashbourne, he spent his time with his friend Edmund Hector, who was living in the home of the publisher Thomas Warren. At the time Warren was starting his '' Birmingham Journal (eighteenth century)|Birmingham Journal '', and he enlisted Johnson's help.<ref name="Bate p. 134">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=134}}</ref> This connection with Warren grew, and Johnson proposed a translation of Jeronimo Lobo 's account of the Ethiopian Empire|Abyssinians .<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=137–138}}</ref> Johnson read Abbé Joachim Le Grand's French translations, and thought that a shorter version might be "useful and profitable".<ref name="Bate p. 138">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=138}}</ref> Instead of writing the whole work himself, he dictated to Hector, who then took the copy to the printer and made any corrections. Johnson's ''A Voyage to Abyssinia'' was published a year later.<ref name="Bate p. 138"/> He returned to Lichfield in February 1734, and began an annotated edition of Poliziano 's Latin poems, along with a history of Latin poetry from Petrarch to Poliziano; a ''Proposal'' was soon printed, but a lack of funds halted the project.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=140–141}}</ref>

Johnson remained with his close friend Harry Porter during a terminal illness,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=144}}</ref> which culminated when Porter died on 3 September 1734, leaving his wife Elizabeth Jervis Porter (otherwise known as "Tetty") widowed at the age of 45, with three children.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=143}}</ref> Some months later, Johnson began to court her. The Reverend William Shaw claims that "the first advances probably proceeded from her, as her attachment to Johnson was in opposition to the advice and desire of all her relations".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1969|p=88}}</ref> Johnson was inexperienced in such relationships, but the well-to-do widow encouraged him and promised to provide for him with her substantial savings.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=145}}</ref> They married on 9 July 1735, at St Werburgh's Church, Derby|St Werburgh's Church in Derby .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=147}}</ref> The Porter family did not approve of the match, partly because Johnson was 25 and Elizabeth was 21 years his elder, and Elizabeth's marriage to Johnson so disgusted her son Jervis that he severed relations with her.<ref name="Wain p. 65">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=65}}</ref> However, her daughter Lucy had accepted Johnson from the start, and her other son, Joseph, accepted the marriage later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=146}}</ref>

In June 1735, while working as a tutor for Thomas Whitby's children, Johnson had applied for the position of headmaster at Solihull School .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=153–154}}</ref> Although Walmesley gave his support, Johnson was passed over because the school's directors thought he was "a very haughty, ill-natured gent., and that he has such a way of distorting his face (which though he can't help) the gent[s] think it may affect some lads".<ref name="Bate p. 154">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=154}}</ref> With Walmesley's encouragement, Johnson decided that he could be a successful teacher if he ran his own school.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=153}}</ref> In the autumn of 1735, Johnson opened Edial Hall School as a private academy at Edial, near Lichfield. He had only three pupils: Lawrence Offley, George Garrick, and the 18-year-old David Garrick, who later became one of the most famous actors of his day.<ref name="Bate p. 154"/> The venture was unsuccessful and cost Tetty a substantial portion of her fortune. Instead of trying to keep the failing school going, Johnson began to write his first major work, the historical tragedy '' Irene (play)|Irene ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=156}}</ref> Biographer Robert DeMaria believed that Tourette syndrome likely made public occupations like schoolmaster or tutor almost impossible for Johnson to hold; this may have led Johnson to "the invisible occupation of authorship".<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6"/>

Johnson left for London with his former pupil David Garrick on 2 March 1737, the day Johnson's brother had died. He was penniless and pessimistic about their travel, but fortunately for them, Garrick had connections in London, and the two were able to stay with his distant relative, Richard Norris.<ref name="Bate p. 16465">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=164–165}}</ref> Johnson soon moved to Greenwich near the Golden Hart Tavern to finish ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=168–169}}</ref> On 12 July 1737 he wrote to Edward Cave with a proposal for a translation of Paolo Sarpi 's ''The History of the Council of Trent'' (1619), which Cave did not accept until months later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=81}}; {{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=169}}</ref> In October 1737 Johnson brought his wife to London, and he found employment with Cave as a writer for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=169–170}}</ref> His assignments for the magazine and other publishers during this time were "almost unparalleled in range and variety", and "so numerous, so varied and scattered" that "Johnson himself could not make a complete list".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=14}}</ref> The name '' Columbia (name)|Columbia '', a poetic name for America coined by Johnson, first appears in a 1738 weekly publication of the debates of the British Parliament in the Magazine.<ref>[http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ilej/image1.pl?item=page&seq=5&size=1&id=gm.1738.6.x.8.x.x.285a The Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. 8, June 1738, p. 285] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref><ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=_DoJAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Debates in Parliament'', Samuel Johnson.] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref>

In May 1738 his first major work, the poem '' London (1738 poem)‎|London '', was published anonymously.<ref name="Lynch p. 5">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 5}}</ref> Based on Juvenal's Satires of Juvenal#Satire III: There is no Room in Roma for a Roman|Satire III, it describes the character Thales leaving for Wales to escape the problems of London,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=172}}</ref> which it portrays as a place of crime, corruption, and neglect of the poor. Johnson could not bring himself to regard the poem as earning him any merit as a poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=18}}</ref> Alexander Pope claimed that the author "will soon be déterré" (brought to light, become well known), but this would not happen until 15 years later.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/>

In August, Johnson's lack of an MA degree from Oxford or Cambridge led to his being denied a position as master of the Appleby Grammar School. In an effort to end such rejections, Pope asked Lord Gower to use his influence to have a degree awarded to Johnson.<ref name="Watkins p.25">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=25}}</ref> Gower petitioned Oxford for an honorary degree to be awarded to Johnson, but was told that it was "too much to be asked".<ref name="Bate p. 182">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=182}}</ref> Gower then asked a friend of Jonathan Swift to plead with Swift to use his influence at the University of Dublin to have a Masters degree awarded to Johnson, in the hope that this could then be used to justify an MA from Oxford,<ref name="Bate p. 182"/> but Swift refused to act on Johnson's behalf.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=25–26}}</ref>

Between 1737 and 1739, Johnson befriended Richard Savage .<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=51}}</ref> Feeling guilty about living on Tetty's money, Johnson stopped living with her and spent his time with Savage. They were poor and would stay in taverns or sleep in "night-cellars" except for nights that they would roam the streets because they lacked the necessary funds.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=178–179}}</ref> Savage's friends tried to help him by attempting to persuade him to move to Wales, but Savage ended up in Bristol and again fell into debt. He was committed to debtors' prison and died in 1743. A year later, Johnson wrote '' Life of Mr Richard Savage '' (1744), a "moving" work which, in the words of the biographer and critic Walter Jackson Bate, "remains one of the innovative works in the history of biography".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=180–181}}</ref>

===''A Dictionary of the English Language''===

In 1746, a group of publishers approached Johnson about creating an authoritative dictionary of the English language;<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> a contract with William Strahan and associates, worth 1,500 guineas, was signed on the morning of 18 June 1746.<ref name="Hitchings">{{Harvnb|Hitchings|2005|p=54}}</ref> Johnson claimed that he could finish the project in three years. In comparison, the Académie Française had forty scholars spending forty years to complete its dictionary, which prompted Johnson to claim, "This is the proportion. Let me see; forty times forty is sixteen hundred. As three to sixteen hundred, so is the proportion of an Englishman to a Frenchman".<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> Although he did not succeed in completing the work in three years, he did manage to finish it in nine, justifying his boast.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> According to Bate, the ''Dictionary'' "easily ranks as one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship, and probably the greatest ever performed by one individual who laboured under anything like the disadvantages in a comparable length of time".<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> However, others, such as Thomas Babington Macaulay who described Johnson as "a wretched etymologist," have criticised Johnson's dictionary.<ref>Winchester 2003, p.33</ref>

Johnson's dictionary was not the first, nor was it unique. It was, however, the most commonly used and imitated for the 150 years between its first publication and the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' in 1928. Other dictionaries, such as Nathan Bailey 's ''Dictionarium Britannicum'', included more words,<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> and in the 150 years preceding Johnson's dictionary about twenty other general-purpose monolingual "English" dictionaries had been produced.<ref name="Lynch p. 2">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=2}}</ref> However, there was open dissatisfaction with the dictionaries of the period. In 1741, David Hume claimed: "The Elegance and Propriety of Stile have been very much neglected among us. We have no Dictionary of our Language, and scarce a tolerable Grammar".<ref name="Lynch p. 4">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=4}}</ref> Johnson's ''Dictionary'' offers insights into the 18th century and "a faithful record of the language people used".<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> It is more than a reference book; it is a work of literature.<ref name="Lynch p. 2"/>

For a decade, Johnson's constant work on the ''Dictionary'' disrupted his and Tetty's living conditions. He had to employ a number of assistants for the copying and mechanical work, which filled the house with incessant noise and clutter. He was always busy with his work, and kept hundreds of books around.<ref name="Lane p. 109">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=109}}</ref> John Hawkins described the scene: "The books he used for this purpose were what he had in his own collection, a copious but a miserably ragged one, and all such as he could borrow; which latter, if ever they came back to those that lent them, were so defaced as to be scarce worth owning".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hawkins|1787|p=175}}</ref> Johnson was also distracted by Tetty's health, as she started to show signs of a terminal illness.<ref name="Lane p. 109"/> To accommodate both his wife and his work, he moved to 17 Gough Square near his printer, William Strahan.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=110}}</ref>

Image:Johnson Dictionary3.jpg|left|thumb|upright|Johnson's ''Dictionary'' Vol. 2 (1755) title page

In preparation for the work, Johnson wrote a ''Plan'' for the ''Dictionary''. Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield, was the patron of the ''Plan'', to Johnson's displeasure.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=117–118}}</ref> Seven years after first meeting Johnson to go over the work, Chesterfield wrote two anonymous essays in ''The World'' recommending the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Lane p. 118">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=118}}</ref> He complained that the English language lacked structure and argued in support of the dictionary. Johnson did not like the tone of the essay, and he felt that Chesterfield had not fulfilled his obligations as the work's patron.<ref name="Lane p. 121">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=121}}</ref> Johnson wrote a letter expressing this view and harshly criticising Chesterfield, saying "Is not a patron, my lord, one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help? The notice which you have been pleased to take of my labours, had it been early, had been kind: but it has been delayed till I am indifferent and cannot enjoy it; till I am solitary and cannot impart it; till I am known and do not want it."<ref name="Bate p. 257">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=257}}</ref> Chesterfield, impressed by the language, kept the letter displayed on a table for anyone to read.<ref name="Bate p. 257"/>

The ''Dictionary'' was finally published in April 1755, with the title page acknowledging that Oxford had awarded Johnson a Master of Arts degree in anticipation of the work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=256, 318}}</ref> The published dictionary was a huge book. Its pages were nearly 18" tall, and the book was 20" wide when opened; it contained 42,773 entries, to which only a few more were added in subsequent editions, and sold for the extravagant price of £4 10s, perhaps the rough equivalent of £350 today.<ref name=CC>{{citation|chapter=Currency Converter|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/currency/|title=The National Archives|place= Kew, Richmond, Surrey|accessdate=24 July 2008}}</ref> An important innovation in English lexicography was to illustrate the meanings of his words by literary quotation, of which there are around 114,000. The authors most frequently cited include Shakespeare, Milton and Dryden .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|pp=8–11}}</ref> It was years before "Johnson's Dictionary", as it came to be known, turned a profit. Author's royalties were unknown at that time, and Johnson, once his contract to deliver the book was fulfilled, received no further money from its sale. Years later, many of its quotations would be repeated by various editions of the '' Webster's Dictionary '' and the '' New English Dictionary ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=25}}</ref>

Besides working on the ''Dictionary'', Johnson also wrote various essays, sermons, and poems during these nine years.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=113}}</ref> He decided to produce a series of essays under the title '' The Rambler '' that would run every Tuesday and Saturday for twopence each. Explaining the title years later, he told his friend, the painter Joshua Reynolds : "I was at a loss how to name it. I sat down at night upon my bedside, and resolved that I would not go to sleep till I had fixed its title. ''The Rambler'' seemed the best that occurred, and I took it".<ref name="Lane p. 115">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=115}}</ref> These essays, often on moral topics, tended to be more grave than the title of the series would suggest; his first comments in ''The Rambler'' were to ask "that in this undertaking thy Holy Spirit may not be withheld from me, but that I may promote thy glory, and the salvation of myself and others".<ref name="Lane p. 115"/> The popularity of ''The Rambler'' took off once the issues were collected as a volume; they were reprinted nine times during Johnson's life. Writer and printer Samuel Richardson, enjoying the essays greatly, questioned the publisher as to who wrote the works; only he and a few of Johnson's friends were told of Johnson's authorship.<ref name="Lane p. 116">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=116}}</ref> One friend, the novelist Charlotte Lennox, includes a defence of ''The Rambler'' in her novel ''The Female Quixote'' (1752). In particular, the character Mr. Glanville says, "you may sit in Judgment upon the Productions of a ''Young'', a ''Richardson'', or a ''Johnson''. Rail with premeditated Malice at the ''Rambler''; and for the want of Faults, turn even its inimitable Beauties into Ridicule" (Book VI, Chapter XI). Later, she claims Johnson as "the greatest Genius in the present Age".<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynn|1997|p=241}}</ref>

{{Quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|quote=His necessary attendance while his play was in rehearsal, and during its performance, brought him acquainted with many of the performers of both sexes, which produced a more favourable opinion of their profession than he had harshly expressed in his Life of Savage ... He for considerable time used to frequent the Green Room, and seemed to take delight in dissipating his gloom, by mixing in the sprightly chit-chat of the motley circle then to be found there. Mr David Hume related to me from Mr Garrick, that Johnson at last denied himself this amusement, from considerations of rigid virtue; saying, "I'll come no more behind your scenes, David; for the silk stockings and white bosoms of your actresses excite my amorous propensities".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=67}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

However, not all of his work was confined to ''The Rambler''. His most highly regarded poem, '' The Vanity of Human Wishes '', was written with such "extraordinary speed" that Boswell claimed Johnson "might have been perpetually a poet".<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 22">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=22}}</ref> The poem is an imitation of Juvenal's '' Satires of Juvenal#Satire X: Wrong Desire is the Source of Suffering|Satire X '' and claims that "the antidote to vain human wishes is non-vain spiritual wishes".<ref>{{Harvnb|Weinbrot|1997|p=49}}</ref> In particular, Johnson emphasises "the helpless vulnerability of the individual before the social context" and the "inevitable self-deception by which human beings are led astray".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=281}}</ref> The poem was critically celebrated but it failed to become popular, and sold less than ''London''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=113–114}}</ref> In 1749, Garrick made good on his promise that he would produce ''Irene'', but its title was altered to '' Irene (play)#Stage history|Mahomet and Irene '' to make it "fit for the stage".<ref name="Lane p. 114">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=114}}</ref> The show eventually ran for nine nights.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=17}}</ref>

Tetty Johnson spent most of her time in London ill, and in 1752 she decided to return to the countryside while Johnson was busy working on his ''Dictionary''. She died on 17 March 1752, and, at word of her death, Johnson wrote a letter to his old friend Taylor, which according to Taylor "expressed grief in the strongest manner he had ever read".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=272–273}}</ref> He wrote a sermon in her honour, to be read at her funeral, but Taylor refused to read it, for reasons which are unknown. This only exacerbated Johnson's feelings of being lost, and his despair after the death of his wife, and John Hawkesworth had to take over organising the funeral. Johnson felt guilty about the poverty in which he believed he had forced Tetty to live, and blamed himself for neglecting her. He became outwardly discontent, and his diary was filled with prayers and laments over her death until his own. She was his primary motivation, and her death hindered his ability to complete his work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=273–275}}</ref>

===Later career===
On 16 March 1756, Johnson was arrested for an outstanding debt of £5 18 Shilling|s . Unable to contact anyone else, he wrote to the writer and publisher Samuel Richardson . Richardson, who had previously lent Johnson money, sent him six guineas to show his good will, and the two became friends.<ref name="Bate p. 321">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=321}}</ref> Soon after, Johnson met and befriended the painter Joshua Reynolds, who so impressed Johnson that he declared him "almost the only man whom I call a friend".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=324}}</ref> Reynolds' younger sister Frances observed during their time together "that men, women and children gathered around him [Johnson]", laughing at his gestures and gesticulations.<ref name=Murray1611>{{Harvnb|Murray|1979|p=1611}}</ref> In addition to Reynolds, Johnson was close to Bennet Langton and Arthur Murphy . Langton was a scholar and an admirer of Johnson who persuaded his way into a meeting with Johnson which led to a long friendship. Johnson met Murphy during the summer of 1754 after Murphy came to Johnson about the accidental republishing of the ''Rambler'' No. 190, and the two became friends.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=322–323}}</ref> Around this time, Anna Williams began boarding with Johnson. She was a minor poet who was poor and becoming blind, two conditions that Johnson attempted to change by providing room for her and paying for a failed cataract surgery. Williams, in turn, became Johnson's housekeeper.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|p=319}}</ref>

To occupy himself, Johnson began to work on ''The Literary Magazine, or Universal Review'', the first issue of which was printed on 19 March 1756. Philosophical disagreements erupted over the purpose of the publication when the Seven Years' War began and Johnson started to write polemical essays attacking the war. After the war began, the ''Magazine'' included many reviews, at least 34 of which were written by Johnson.<ref name="Bate p. 328">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=328}}</ref> When not working on the ''Magazine'', Johnson wrote a series of prefaces for other writers, such as Giuseppe Baretti, William Payne and Charlotte Lennox .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=329}}</ref> Johnson's relationship with Lennox and her works was particularly close during these years, and she in turn relied so heavily upon Johnson that he was "the most important single fact in Mrs Lennox's literary life".<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=221–222}}</ref> He later attempted to produce a new edition of her works, but even with his support they were unable to find enough interest to follow through with its publication.<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=223–224}}</ref> To help with domestic duties while Johnson was busy with his various projects, Richard Bathurst, a physician and a member of Johnson's Club, pressured him to take on a free slave, Francis Barber, as his servant.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=325–326}}</ref>

These efforts, however, consumed only a small portion of his time; his work on '' The Plays of William Shakespeare|Edition of Shakespeare '' took up the rest. On 8 June 1756, Johnson published his '' The Plays of William Shakespeare#Proposal|Proposals for Printing, by Subscription, the Dramatick Works of William Shakespeare '', which argued that previous editions of Shakespeare were edited incorrectly and needed to be corrected.<ref name="Bate p. 330">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=330}}</ref> However, Johnson's progress on the work slowed as the months passed, and he told music historian Charles Burney in December 1757 that it would take him until the following March to complete it. Before that could happen, he was arrested again, for a debt of £40, in February 1758. The debt was soon repaid by Jacob Tonson, who had contracted Johnson to publish ''Shakespeare'', and this encouraged Johnson to finish his edition to repay the favour. Although it took him another seven years to finish, Johnson completed a few volumes of his ''Shakespeare'' to prove his commitment to the project.<ref name="Bate p. 332">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=332}}</ref>

In 1758, Johnson began to write a weekly series, ''The Idler'', which ran from 15 April 1758 to 5 April 1760, as a way to avoid finishing his ''Shakespeare''. This series was shorter and lacked many features of ''The Rambler''. Unlike his independent publication of ''The Rambler'', ''The Idler'' was published in a weekly news journal ''The Universal Chronicle'', a publication supported by John Payne, John Newbery, Robert Stevens and William Faden.<ref name="Bate p. 334">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=334}}</ref> Since ''The Idler'' did not occupy all Johnson's time, he was able to publish his philosophical novella '' The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia|Rasselas '' on 19 April 1759. The "little story book", as Johnson described it, describes the life of Prince Rasselas and Nekayah, his sister, who are kept in a place called the Happy Valley in the land of Abyssinia. The Valley is a place free of problems, where any desire is quickly satisfied. The constant pleasure does not, however, lead to satisfaction; and, with the help of a philosopher named Imlac, Rasselas escapes and explores the world to witness how all aspects of society and life in the outside world are filled with suffering. They return to Abyssinia, but do not wish to return to the state of constantly fulfilled pleasures found in the Happy Valley.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=337–338}}</ref> ''Rasselas'' was written in one week to pay for his mother's funeral and settle her debts; it became so popular that there was a new English edition of the work almost every year. References to it appear in many later works of fiction, including '' Jane Eyre '', '' Cranford (novel)|Cranford '' and '' The House of the Seven Gables ''. Its fame was not limited to English-speaking nations: ''Rasselas'' was immediately translated into five languages (French, Dutch, German, Russian and Italian), and later into nine others.<ref name="Bate p. 337">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=337}}</ref>

By 1762, however, Johnson had gained notoriety for his dilatoriness in writing; the contemporary poet Churchill teased Johnson for the delay in producing his long-promised edition of Shakespeare: "He for subscribers baits his hook / and takes your cash, but where's the book?"<ref name="Bate p. 391">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=391}}</ref> The comments soon motivated Johnson to finish his ''Shakespeare'', and, after receiving the first payment from a government pension on 20 July 1762, he was able to dedicate most of his time towards this goal.<ref name="Bate p. 391"/> Earlier that July, the 24-year-old King George III granted Johnson an annual pension of £300 in appreciation for the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36"/> While the pension did not make Johnson wealthy, it did allow him a modest yet comfortable independence for the remaining 22 years of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=356}}</ref> The award came largely through the efforts of Thomas Sheridan (actor)|Sheridan and the John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute|Earl of Bute . When Johnson questioned if the pension would force him to promote a political agenda or support various officials, he was told by Bute that the pension "is not given you for anything you are to do, but for what you have done".<ref name="Bate p. 354-356">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=354–356}}</ref>

On 16 May 1763, Johnson first met 22-year-old James Boswell —who would later become Johnson's first major biographer—in the bookshop of Johnson's friend, Tom Davies. They quickly became friends, although Boswell would return to his home in Scotland or travel abroad for months at a time.<ref name="Bate p. 360">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=360}}</ref> Around the spring of 1763, Johnson formed " The Club (dining club)|The Club ", a social group that included his friends Reynolds, Edmund Burke|Burke, Garrick, Goldsmith and others (the membership later expanded to include Adam Smith and Edward Gibbon ). They decided to meet every Monday at 7:00 pm at the Turk's Head in Gerrard Street, Soho, and these meetings continued until long after the deaths of the original members.<ref name="Bate p. 366">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=366}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=During the whole of the interview, Johnson talked to his Majesty with profound respect, but still in his firm manly manner, with a sonorous voice, and never in that subdued tone which is commonly used at the levee and in the drawing-room. After the King withdrew, Johnson shewed himself highly pleased with his Majesty's conversation and gracious behaviour. He said to Mr Barnard, 'Sir, they may talk of the King as they will; but he is the finest gentleman I have ever seen.'<ref name="Boswell p. 135">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 135}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 9 January 1765, Murphy introduced Johnson to Henry Thrale, a wealthy brewer and Member of Parliament|MP, and his wife Hester Thrale|Hester . They struck up an instant friendship; Johnson was treated as a member of the family, and was once more motivated to continue working on his ''Shakespeare''.<ref name="Bate p. 393">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=393}}</ref> Afterwards, Johnson stayed with the Thrales for 17 years until Henry's death in 1781, sometimes staying in rooms at Thrale's Anchor Brewery in Southwark .<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=262}}</ref> Hester Thrale's documentation of Johnson's life during this time, in her correspondence and her diary ('' Thraliana ''), became an important source of biographical information on Johnson after his death.<ref name="Keymer p. 186">{{Harvnb|Keymer|1999|p=186}}</ref>

Johnson's edition of ''Shakespeare'' was finally published on 10 October 1765 as ''The Plays of William Shakespeare, in Eight Volumes ... To which are added Notes by Sam. Johnson'' in a printing of one thousand copies. The first edition quickly sold out, and a second was soon printed.<ref name="Bate p. 395">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=395}}</ref> The plays themselves were in a version that Johnson felt most true to the original based on his analysis of the manuscript editions. Johnson's revolutionary innovation was to create a set of corresponding notes that allow readers to identify the meaning behind many of Shakespeare's more complicated passages or ones that may have been transcribed incorrectly over time.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=397}}</ref> Included within the notes are occasional attacks upon rival editors of Shakespeare's works and their editions.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=194}}</ref> Years later, Edmond Malone, an important Shakespearean scholar and friend of Johnson's, stated that Johnson's "vigorous and comprehensive understanding threw more light on his authour than all his predecessors had done".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=396}}</ref>

In February 1767 Johnson was granted a special meeting with King George III. This took place at the library of the Queen's house, and it was organised by Frederick Augusta Barnard, the King's librarian.<ref name="Boswell p. 133">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 133}}</ref> The King, hearing that Johnson would visit the library, commanded Barnard to introduce him to Johnson.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 134}}</ref> After a short meeting, Johnson was impressed with both the King himself and their conversation.<ref name="Boswell p. 135"/>

===Final works===
On 6 August 1773, eleven years after first meeting Boswell, Johnson set out to visit his friend in Scotland, to begin "a journey to the western islands of Scotland", as Johnson's 1775 account of their travels would put it.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=463}}</ref> The work was intended to discuss the social problems and struggles that affected the Scottish people, but it also praised many of the unique facets of Scottish society, such as a school in Edinburgh for the deaf and mute.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=471}}</ref> Also, Johnson used the work to enter into the dispute over the authenticity of James Macpherson's Ossian poems, claiming they could not have been translations of ancient Scottish literature on the grounds that "in those times nothing had been written in the Earse [i.e. Gaelic] language".<ref>{{Harvnb|Johnson|1970|pp=104–105}}</ref> There were heated exchanges between the two, and according to one of Johnson's letters, MacPherson threatened physical violence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=331}}</ref> Boswell's account, '' The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides '' (1786), was a preliminary attempt at a biography before his '' Life of Johnson ''. Included were various quotes and descriptions of events, including anecdotes such as Johnson swinging around a broadsword while wearing Scottish garb, or dancing a Highland jig.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=468–469}}</ref>

In the 1770s, Johnson, who had tended to be an opponent of the government early in life, published a series of pamphlets in favour of various government policies. In 1770 he produced ''The False Alarm'', a political pamphlet attacking John Wilkes . In 1771, his ''Thoughts on the Late Transactions Respecting Falkland's Islands'' cautioned against war with Spain.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=443–445}}</ref> In 1774 he printed ''The Patriot'', a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1996|p=182}}</ref> This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson opposed "self-professed Patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" patriotism.<ref name="Griffin p. 21">{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=21}}</ref>

The last of these pamphlets, ''Taxation No Tyranny'' (1775), was a defence of the Coercive Acts and a response to the Declaration of Rights of the First Continental Congress of America, which protested against taxation without representation .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=446}}</ref> Johnson argued that in emigrating to America, colonists had "voluntarily resigned the power of voting", but they still had " virtual representation " in Parliament. In a parody of the Declaration of Rights, Johnson suggested that the Americans had no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish people . If the Americans wanted to participate in Parliament, said Johnson, they could move to England and purchase an estate.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ammerman|1974|p=13}}</ref> Johnson denounced English supporters of American separatists as "traitors to this country", and hoped that the matter would be settled without bloodshed, but that it would end with "English superiority and American obedience".<ref>{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=252–256}}</ref> Years before, Johnson had advocated that the English and the French were just "two robbers" who were stealing land from the natives, and that neither deserved to live there.<ref name="Bate p. 328"/> After the signing of the 1783 Peace of Paris treaties, marking the colonists' defeat of the British, Johnson was "deeply disturbed" with the "state of this kingdom".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=15}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=Mr Thrale's death was a very essential loss to Johnson, who, although he did not foresee all that afterwards happened, was sufficiently convinced that the comforts which Mr Thrale's family afforded him, would now in great measure cease.<ref name="Boswell p. 273">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 273}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 3 May 1777, while Johnson was trying to save Reverend William Dodd from execution, he wrote to Boswell that he was busy preparing a "little Lives" and "little Prefaces, to a little edition of the English Poets".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=525}}</ref> Tom Davies, William Strahan and Thomas Cadell had asked Johnson to create this final major work, the '' Lives of the English Poets '', for which he asked 200 guineas, an amount significantly less than the price he could have demanded.<ref name="Bate p. 526">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=526}}</ref> The ''Lives'', which were critical as well as biographical studies, appeared as prefaces to selections of each poet's work, and they were quite larger than originally expected.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=527}}</ref> The work was finished in March 1781 and the whole collection was published in six volumes. As Johnson justified in the advertisement for the work, "my purpose was only to have allotted to every Poet an Advertisement, like those which we find in the French Miscellanies, containing a few dates and a general character."<ref>{{Harvnb|Clingham|1997|p=161}}</ref>

Johnson was unable to enjoy this success because Henry Thrale, the dear friend with whom he lived, died on 4 April 1781.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=546–547}}</ref> Life changed quickly for Johnson, and Hester Thrale became interested in the Italian singing teacher Gabriel Mario Piozzi, which forced Johnson to move on from his previous lifestyle.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=557, 561}}</ref> After returning home and then travelling for a short period, Johnson received word that his friend and tenant Robert Levet, had died on 17 January 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=562}}</ref> Johnson was shocked by the death of Levet, who had resided at Johnson's London home since 1762.<ref>{{citation|url=http://books.google.com/?id=qXHv5EClgZgC&pg=PA231&lpg=PA231&dq=wakefield+levett|title= The Samuel Johnson Encyclopedia|author=Rogers, Pat|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|location= Westport, CT|year=1996|isbn=978-0-313-29411-2}}</ref> Shortly afterwards Johnson caught a cold which turned into bronchitis, lasting for several months, and his health was further complicated by "feeling forlorn and lonely" by Levet's death being accompanied by the deaths of Johnson's friend Thomas Lawrence and his housekeeper Williams.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|pp=501–502}}</ref>

===Final years===
Although he had recovered his health by August, he experienced emotional trauma when he was given word that Hester Thrale would sell the residence that Johnson shared with the family. What hurt Johnson the most was the possibility that he would be left without her constant company.<ref name="Bate p. 566">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=566}}</ref> Months later, on 6 October 1782, Johnson attended church for the final time in his life, to say goodbye to his former residence and life. The walk to the church strained him, but he managed the journey unaccompanied.<ref name="Bate p. 569">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=569}}</ref> While there, he wrote a prayer for the Thrale family:

<blockquote>To thy fatherly protection, O Lord, I commend this family. Bless, guide, and defend them, that they may pass through this world, as finally to enjoy in thy presence everlasting happiness, for Jesus Christ's sake. Amen.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=284}}</ref></blockquote>

Hester Thrale did not completely abandon Johnson, and asked him to accompany the family on a trip to Brighton.<ref name="Bate p. 569"/> He agreed, and was with them from 7 October until 20 November 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=570}}</ref> On his return, his health began to fail him, and he was left alone following Boswell's visit on 29 May 1783 until he travelled to Scotland.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=575}}</ref>

On 17 June 1783, Johnson's poor circulation resulted in a stroke<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=51}}</ref> and he wrote to his neighbour, Edmund Allen, that he had lost the ability to speak.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=71}}</ref> Two doctors were brought in to aid Johnson; he regained his ability to speak two days later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=71–72}}</ref> Johnson feared that he was dying, and wrote:
<blockquote>The black dog I hope always to resist, and in time to drive, though I am deprived of almost all those that used to help me. The neighbourhood is impoverished. I had once Richardson and Lawrence in my reach. Mrs. Allen is dead. My house has lost Levet, a man who took interest in everything, and therefore ready at conversation. Mrs. Williams is so weak that she can be a companion no longer. When I rise my breakfast is solitary, the black dog waits to share it, from breakfast to dinner he continues barking, except that Dr. Brocklesby for a little keeps him at a distance. Dinner with a sick woman you may venture to suppose not much better than solitary. After dinner, what remains but to count the clock, and hope for that sleep which I can scarce expect. Night comes at last, and some hours of restlessness and confusion bring me again to a day of solitude. What shall exclude the black dog from an habitation like this?<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=72}}</ref></blockquote>
By this time he was sick and gout -ridden. He had surgery for gout, and his remaining friends, including novelist Fanny Burney (the daughter of Charles Burney), came to keep him company.<ref name="Watkins p.73">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=73}}</ref> He was confined to his room from 14 December 1783 to 21 April 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=74}}</ref>

His health had begun to improve by May 1784, and he travelled to Oxford with Boswell on 5 May 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74"/> By July, many of Johnson's friends were either dead or gone; Boswell had left for Scotland and Hester Thrale had become engaged to Piozzi. With nobody to visit, Johnson expressed a desire to die in London and arrived there on 16 November 1784. On 25 November 1784, he allowed Burney to visit him and expressed an interest to her that he should leave London; he soon left for Islington, to George Strahan's home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=76–77}}</ref> His final moments were filled with mental anguish and delusions; when his physician, Thomas Warren, visited and asked him if he were feeling better, Johnson burst out with: "No, Sir; you cannot conceive with what acceleration I advance towards death."<ref name="Watkins p.78">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=78}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=A few days before his death, he had asked Sir John Hawkins, as one of his executors, where he should be buried; and on being answered, "Doubtless, in Westminster Abbey," seemed to feel a satisfaction, very natural to a Poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=341}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Many visitors came to see Johnson as he lay sick in bed, but he preferred only Langton's company.<ref name="Watkins p.78"/> Burney waited for word of Johnson's condition, along with Windham, Strahan, Hoole, Cruikshank, Des Moulins and Barber.<ref name="Watkins p.79">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=79}}</ref> On 13 December 1784, Johnson met with two others: a young woman, Miss Morris, whom Johnson blessed, and Francesco Sastres, an Italian teacher, who was given some of Johnson's final words: "''Iam Moriturus''" ("I who am about to die").<ref name="Bate p. 599">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=599}}</ref> Shortly afterwards he fell into a coma, and died at 7:00 pm.<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

Langton waited until 11:00 pm to tell the others, which led to John Hawkins' becoming pale and overcome with "an agony of mind", along with Seward and Hoole describing Johnson's death as "the most awful sight".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hill|1897|p=160 (Vol. 2)}}</ref> Boswell remarked, "My feeling was just one large expanse of Stupor ... I could not believe it. My imagination was not convinced."<ref name="Bate p. 599"/> William Gerard Hamilton joined in and stated, "He has made a chasm, which not only nothing can fill up, but which ''nothing has a tendency to fill up''. -Johnson is dead.- Let us go to the next best: There is nobody; -''no man can be said to put you in mind of Johnson''."<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

He was buried on 20 December 1784 at Westminster Abbey with an inscription that reads:
:Samuel Johnson, LL.D.
:''Obiit XIII die Decembris,''
:''Anno Domini''
:M.DCC.LXXXIV.
:''Ætatis suœ'' LXXV.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=341–342}}</ref>

==Bibliography==
===Works===
* [http://books.google.com/books?id=CxATAAAAYAAJ&ots=V-uf-Ec85P&dq=Samuel%20Johnson%20%22Dictionary%20of%20the%20English%20Language%22&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q=&f=false ''A Dictionary of the English Language''], 1755. (Available online from Google Book Search.)
** ([http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/5430 Preface available separately from Project Gutenberg])
* ''The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia'', 1759.
* ''A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland'', 1775.
* ''Lives of the Poets'', 1799-81.
* ''Samuel Johnson: The Major Works,'' ed. Donald Greene, 2009. ([http://www.amazon.com/Samuel-Johnson-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199538336/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256974594&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search])

===Biographies===

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}

==References==
* {{Citation1|last=Ammerman|first=David|title=In the Common Cause: American Response to the Coercive Acts of 1774|location=New York|publisher=Norton|year=1974|isbn=0-393-00787-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Arnold|first=Matthew|authorlink=Matthew Arnold|editor1-last=Ricks|editor1-first=Christopher|editor1-link=Christopher Ricks|title=Selected Criticism of Matthew Arnold|year=1972|publisher=New American Library|location=New York|oclc=6338231}}
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|authorlink=Walter Jackson Bate|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1977|publisher=Harcourt Brace Jovanovich|location=New York|isbn=0-15-179260-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|title=The Achievement of Samuel Johnson|year=1955|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|oclc=355413}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|contribution=Hester Thrale Piozzi 1741–1821|title=Women Memoirists Vol. II|year=1998|editor-last=Bloom|editor-first=Harold|pages=74–76|publisher=Chelsea House|location=Philadelphia|isbn=0-7910-4655-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|title=The Western Canon|year=1995|publisher=Macmillan|location=London|isbn=0-333-64813-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=Correspondence and Other Papers of James Boswell Relating to the Making of the Life of Johnson|editor-last=Waingrow|editor-first=Marshall|publisher=McGraw-Hill|location=New York|year=1969|oclc=59269}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|year=1986|editor-last=Hibbert|editor-first=Christopher|publisher=Penguin Classics|location=New York|isbn=0-14-043116-0}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clarke|first=Norma|title=Dr Johnson's Women|year=2000|publisher=Hambledon|location=London|isbn=1-85285-254-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clingham|first= Greg|year=1997|contribution= Life and literature in the ''Lives''| title= The Cambridge companion to Samuel Johnson|editor1-last= Clingham|editor1-first= Greg| pages= 161–191|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Davis|first=Bertram|contribution=Introduction|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL. D.|year=1961|editor-last=Davis|editor-first=Bertram|pages=vii–xxx|publisher=Macmillan Company|location=New York|oclc=739445}}.
* {{Citation1|last=DeMaria, Jr.|first=Robert|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|publisher=Blackwell|location=Oxford|year=1994|isbn=1-55786-664-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Fine|first=LG|title=Samuel Johnson's illnesses|journal=J Nephrol|volume=19|issue=Suppl 10|pages=S110–4|date=May–June 2006|pmid=16874722}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|authorlink=Donald Greene|title=Samuel Johnson: Updated Edition|publisher=Twayne Publishers|location= Boston|year=1989|isbn=0-8057-6962-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|contribution=Introduction|title=Political Writings|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first=Donald|publisher=Liberty Fund|location=Indianapolis|isbn=0-86597-275-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Griffin|first=Dustin|title=Patriotism and Poetry in Eighteenth-Century Britain|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|year=2005|isbn=0-521-00959-6}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Grundy|first=Isobel|year=1997|contribution= Jane Austen and literary traditions| title= The Cambridge companion to Jane Austen|editor1-last=Copeland|editor1-first=Edward|editor2-last=McMaster|editor2-first=Juliet| pages= 189–210|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-49867-8}}
* {{Citation1|last=Hawkins|first=John|title=Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D.|publisher=J. Buckland|location=London|year=1787|oclc=173965}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hibbert|first=Christopher|authorlink=Christopher Hibbert|title=The Personal History of Samuel Johnson|location=New York|publisher=Harper & Row|year=1971|isbn=0-06-011879-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hitchings|first=Henry|authorlink=Henry Hitchings|title=Dr Johnson's Dictionary: The Extraordinary Story of the Book that Defined the World|publisher=John Murray|location=London|year=2005|isbn=0-7195-6631-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hill|first=G. Birkbeck, editor|authorlink=George Birkbeck Norman Hill|title=Johnsonian Miscellanies|location=London|publisher=Oxford Clarendon Press|year=1897|oclc=61906024}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hopewell|first=Sydney|title=The Book of Bosworth School, 1320–1920|year=1950|location=Leicester|publisher=W. Thornley & Son|oclc=6808364}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Letters| editor-last = Chapman| editor-first = R. W.|year=1952|location= Oxford|publisher=Clarendon|isbn=0-19-818538-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Johnson's Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and Boswell's Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides|editor-last= Chapman|editor-first= R. W.|location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1970|isbn=0-19-281072-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Major Works|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first= Donald|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=0-19-284042-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Kammer|first=Thomas|year=2007|chapter=Mozart in the Neurological Department: Who has the Tic?|editor1-first= Julien|editor1-last= Bogousslavsky|editor2-first= M|editor2-last= Hennerici|title=Neurological Disorders in Famous Artists, Part 2|pages=184–92|isbn=978-3-8055-8265-0|pmid= 17495512|publisher=Karger|location=Basel|volume=22|journal=Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience|doi=10.1159/0000102880}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Keymer|first=Thomas|year=1999|contribution= Johnson, Madness, and Smart|title=Christopher Smart and the Enlightenment|editor1-last=Hawes|editor1-first= Clement|location=New York, NY|publisher=St. Martin's Press|isbn=0-312-21369-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lane|first=Margaret|title=Samuel Johnson & his World|year=1975|publisher=Harper & Row Publishers|location=New York|isbn=0-06-012496-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Leavis|first=FR|authorlink=F. R. Leavis|title=Johnson as Critic|journal= Scrutiny (journal)|Scrutiny |volume=12|pages=187–204|year=1944}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynch|first=Jack|contribution=Introduction to this Edition|title=Samuel Johnson's Dictionary|year=2003|editor-last=Lynch|editor-first=Jack|pages=1–21|publisher=Walker & Co|location=New York|isbn=0-8027-1421-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynn|first=Steven|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's critical reception|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Martin|first=Peter|title=Samuel Johnson:A Biography|year=2008|publisher=Belknap Press|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts|isbn=978-0-674-03160-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=McHenry|first=LC Jr|title=Samuel Johnson's tics and gesticulations|journal=Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences|volume=22|issue=2|pages=152–68|date=April 1967|pmid=5341871|doi=10.1093/jhmas/XXII.2.152}}
* {{Citation1|last=Murray|first=TJ|date=16 June 1979|pmc=1599158|title=Dr Samuel Johnson's movement disorder|periodical= British Medical Journal |volume=1|issue=6178|pages=1610–14|pmid= 380753|doi=10.1136/bmj.1.6178.1610}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Murray|first= TJ|title= Samuel Johnson: his ills, his pills and his physician friends|journal=Clin Med|volume=3|issue=4|pages=368–72|date=July–August 2003|pmid=12938754}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Needham|first=John|title=The Completest Mode|location=Edinburgh|publisher=Edinburgh University Press|year=1982|isbn=0-85224-387-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pearce|first=JMS|date=July 1994|pmc=1294650|title=Doctor Samuel Johnson: 'the Great Convulsionary' a victim of Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome|journal= Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine |volume=87|pages=396–399|pmid= 8046726|issue=7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Piozzi|first=Hester|title=Thraliana: The Diary of Mrs. Hester Lynch Thrale (Later Mrs. Piozzi) 1776–1809|year=1951|editor1-last=Balderson|editor1-first=Katharine|publisher=Clarendon|place= Oxford|oclc= 359617}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pittock|first=Murray|year=2004|contribution= Johnson, Boswell, and their circle|title=The Cambridge companion to English literature from 1740 to 1830|editor1-last= Keymer|editor1-first= Thomas|editor2-last= Mee|editor2-first= Jon|pages= 157–172|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-00757-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Rogers|first=Pat|title=Johnson and Boswell: The Transit of Caledonia|publisher=Oxford University Press|place= Oxford|year=1995|isbn=0-19-818259-7}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Sacks|first=Oliver|author-link= Oliver Sacks|date=19–26 December 1992|title=Tourette's Syndrome and creativity|journal= British Medical Journal |volume=305|issue= 6868|pages=1515–16|pmc=1884721|pmid=1286364|quote=... the case for Samuel Johnson having the syndrome, though [...] circumstantial, is extremely strong and, to my mind, entirely convincing|doi=10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1515|issue=6868}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Shapiro|first=Arthur K|authorlink=Arthur K. Shapiro|title=Gilles de la Tourette syndrome|year=1978|publisher=Raven Press|location=New York|isbn=0-89004-057-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Skargon|first=Yvonne|title=The Importance of Being Oscar: Lily and Hodge and Dr. Johnson|place= London|publisher=Primrose Academy|year=1999|oclc= 56542613}}.
* {{Citation1|author=Stern JS, Burza S, Robertson MM |title=Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome and its impact in the UK |journal=Postgrad Med J |volume=81 |issue=951 |pages=12–9 |date = January 2005|pmid=15640424 |doi=10.1136/pgmj.2004.023614 |quote=It is now widely accepted that Dr Samuel Johnson had Tourette's syndrome |pmc=1743178 }}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wain|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1974|publisher=Viking Press|place= New York|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Watkins|first=WBC|title=Perilous Balance: The Tragic Genius of Swift, Johnson, and Sterne|year=1960|publisher=Walker-deBerry, Inc.|place= Cambridge, MA|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Weinbrot|first= Howard D.|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's Poetry|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wilson|first=Edmund|year=1950|contribution= Reexamining Dr. Johnson|title=Classics and Commercials|editor1-last=Wilson|editor1-first=Edmund|location=New York|publisher=Farrar, Straus & Giroux|oclc=185571431}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wiltshire|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson in the Medical World|year=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|isbn=0-521-38326-9}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Winchester|first=Simon|title=The Meaning of Everything|year=2003|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-517500-4}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Winters|first=Yvor|authorlink=Yvor Winters|title=The Anatomy of Nonsense|location=Norfolk, Conn.|publisher=New Directions|year=1943|oclc=191540}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Yung|first=Kai Kin|title=Samuel Johnson, 1709–84|publisher=Herbert Press|place= London|year=1984|isbn=0-906969-45-X}}.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Johnson, Samuel}}
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]

Samuel Johnson

2011-09-09T02:48:52Z

Ottava: /* Early career */

'''Samuel Johnson''' (18 September 1709 (O.S.) 7 September – 13 December 1784), often referred to as '''Dr. Johnson''', was an English author who made lasting contributions to English literature as a poet, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and lexicographer . Johnson was a devout Anglican and committed Tory, and has been described as "arguably the most distinguished man of letters in English history".<ref>Rogers, Pat (2006), "Johnson, Samuel (1709–1784)", ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'' (online ed.), Oxford University Press, [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/14918], retrieved 25 August 2008</ref> He is also the subject of "the most famous single work of biographical art in the whole of literature": James Boswell 's '' Life of Samuel Johnson ''.<ref name="Batexix">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=xix}}</ref>

Johnson was born in Lichfield, Staffordshire, and attended Pembroke College, Oxford for just over a year, before his lack of funds forced him to leave. After working as a teacher he moved to London, where he began to write miscellaneous pieces for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''. His early works include the biography ''The Life of Richard Savage'', the poems "London " and "The Vanity of Human Wishes", and the play ''Irene''.

After nine years of work, Johnson's ''Dictionary of the English Language '' was published in 1755; it had a far-reaching effect on Modern English and has been described as "one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship."<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> The ''Dictionary'' brought Johnson popularity and success. Until the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' 150 years later, Johnson's was viewed as the pre-eminent British dictionary.<ref name="Lynch p. 1">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 1}}</ref> His later works included essays, an influential annotated edition of William Shakespeare's plays, and the widely read tale ''Rasselas''. In 1763, he befriended James Boswell, with whom he later travelled to Scotland; Johnson described their travels in '' A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland ''. Towards the end of his life, he produced the massive and influential '' Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets '', a collection of biographies and evaluations of 17th- and 18th-century poets.

Johnson had a tall and robust figure, but his odd gestures and tic s were confusing to some on their first encounter with him. Boswell's ''Life'', along with other biographies, documented Johnson's behaviour and mannerisms in such detail that they have informed the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome (TS),<ref name="ContTSDiagnosis">{{Harvnb|Murray|1979}} and {{Harvnb|Stern|2005}}</ref> a condition not defined or diagnosed in the 18th century. After a series of illnesses he died on the evening of 13 December 1784, and was buried in Westminster Abbey . In the years following his death, Johnson began to be recognised as having had a lasting effect on literary criticism, and even as the only great critic of English literature.<ref name="Winters p. 240">{{Harvnb|Winters|1943|p=240}}</ref>

==Biography==
===Early life and education===
Born on 18 September 1709 (New Style) to Michael Johnson, a bookseller, and his wife, Sarah Ford,<ref name="Bate p. 5">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=5}}</ref> Samuel Johnson often claimed that he grew up in poverty. Since both families had money, it is uncertain what happened between Michael and Sarah's marriage and the birth of Samuel just three years later to provoke such a change in fortune.<ref name="Lane p. 1314">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=13–14}}</ref> Johnson was born in the home above his father's bookshop in Lichfield, Staffordshire and,<ref name="Bate p. 5"/> because his mother Sarah was 40 when she gave birth, a "man-midwife" and surgeon of "great reputation" named George Hector was brought in to assist.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=15–16}}</ref> He did not cry and, with doubts surrounding the newborn's health, his aunt claimed "that she would not have picked such a poor creature up in the street".<ref name = "Watkins p.25"/> As it was feared the baby might die, the vicar of St Mary's was summoned to perform a baptism.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=16}}</ref> Two godfathers were chosen: Samuel Swynfen, a physician and graduate of Pembroke College, Oxford, and Richard Wakefield, a lawyer, coroner, and Lichfield town clerk.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=5–6}}</ref>

Johnson's health improved and he was put to wet-nurse with Joan Marklew. He soon contracted scrofula,<ref name="Lane pp. 16-17">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=16–17}}</ref> known at that time as the "King's Evil" because it was thought royalty could cure it. Sir John Floyer, former physician to Charles II of England|Charles II, recommended that the young Johnson should receive the " scrofula|royal touch ",<ref name="Lane p. 18">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=18}}</ref> which he received from Queen Anne on 30 March 1712. However, the ritual was ineffective, and an operation was performed that left him with permanent scars across his face and body.<ref name="Lane pp. 19-20">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=19–20}}</ref> With the birth of Johnson's brother, Nathaniel, a few months later, Michael was unable to keep on top of the debts he had accumulated over the years, and his family was no longer able to live in the style to which it had been accustomed.<ref name="Lane pp. 20-21">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=20–21}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=When he was a child in petticoats, and had learned to read, Mrs Johnson one morning put the common prayer-book into his hands, pointed to the collect for the day, and said, 'Sam, you must get this by heart.' She went up stairs, leaving him to study it: But by the time she had reached the second floor, she heard him following her. 'What's the matter?' said she. 'I can say it,' he replied; and repeated it distinctly, though he could not have read it over more than twice.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=38}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Johnson demonstrated signs of great intelligence as a child, and his parents, to his later disgust, would show off his "newly acquired accomplishments".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=18–19}}</ref> His education began at the age of three, and came from his mother who had him memorise and recite passages from the Book of Common Prayer .<ref name="Bate p. 21">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=21}}</ref> When Johnson turned four, he was sent to a nearby school, and, when he reached the age of six, he was sent to a retired shoemaker to continue his education.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=25–26}}</ref> A year later, Johnson was sent to Lichfield Grammar School, where he excelled in Latin.<ref name="Lane p. 26">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p= 26}}</ref> During this time, Johnson started to exhibit the tics that would influence how people viewed him in his later years, and which formed the basis for the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome .<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6">{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=5–6}}</ref> He excelled at his studies and was promoted to the upper school at the age of nine.<ref name="Lane p. 26"/> During this time, he befriended Edmund Hector, nephew of his "man-midwife" George Hector, and John Taylor, with whom he remained in contact for the rest of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=23, 31}}</ref>

At the age of 16, Johnson was given the opportunity to stay with his cousins, the Fords, at Pedmore, Worcestershire.<ref name="Lane p. 29">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=29}}</ref> There he became a close friend of Cornelius Ford, who employed his knowledge of the classics to tutor Johnson while he was not attending school.<ref name="Wain p. 32">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=32}}</ref> Ford was a successful, well-connected academic, but was also a notorious alcoholic whose excesses contributed to his death six years after Johnson's visit.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=30}}</ref> Having spent six months with his cousins, Johnson returned to Lichfield, but Mr. Hunter, the headmaster, "angered by the impertinence of this long absence", refused to allow him to continue at the grammar school.<ref name="Lane p. 33">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=33}}</ref> Unable to return to Lichfield Grammar School, Johnson was enrolled into the King Edward VI grammar school at Stourbridge.<ref name="Wain p. 32"/> Because the school was located near Pedmore, Johnson was able to spend more time with the Fords, and he began to write poems and verse translations.<ref name="Lane p. 33"/> However, he spent only six months at Stourbridge before returning once again to his parents' home in Lichfield.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=61}}</ref>

During this time, Johnson's future was uncertain as his father was deeply in debt.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=34}}</ref> To earn money, Johnson began to stitch books for his father, and it is possible that Johnson spent most of his time in his father's bookshop reading various works and building his literary knowledge. They remained in poverty until Sarah Johnson's cousin, Elizabeth Harriotts, died in February 1728 and left enough money to send Johnson to college.<ref name="Bate p. 87"/> On 31 October 1728, a few weeks after he turned 19, Johnson entered Pembroke College, Oxford.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=39}}</ref> The inheritance did not cover all of his expenses at Pembroke, but Andrew Corbet, a friend and fellow student at Pembroke, offered to make up the deficit.<ref name="Bate p. 88">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=88}}</ref>

Johnson made friends at Pembroke and read much. In later life, he told stories of his idleness.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=90–100}}. Bate also comments that Johnson's standard of effort was very high, so high that Johnson said he had never known a man to study hard.</ref> He was later asked by his tutor to produce a Latin translation of Alexander Pope 's ''Messiah'' as a Christmas exercise.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=91–92}}</ref> Johnson completed half of the translation in one afternoon and the rest the following morning. Although the poem brought him praise, it did not bring the material benefit he had hoped for.<ref name="Bate p. 92">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=92}}</ref> The poem later appeared in ''Miscellany of Poems'' (1731), edited by John Husbands, a Pembroke tutor, and is the earliest surviving publication of any of Johnson's writings. Johnson spent the rest of his time studying, even over the Christmas vacation. He drafted a "plan of study" called "Adversaria", which was left unfinished, and used his time to learn French while working on his knowledge of Greek.<ref name="Bate p. 9394">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=93–94}}</ref>

After thirteen months, a shortage of funds forced Johnson to leave Oxford without a degree, and he returned to Lichfield.<ref name="Bate p. 87">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=87}}</ref> Towards the end of Johnson's stay at Oxford his tutor, Jorden, left Pembroke and was replaced by William Adams (master)|William Adams . He enjoyed Adams as a tutor, but by December, Johnson was already a quarter behind in his student fees, and he was forced to return home. He left behind many books that he had borrowed from his father because he could not afford to transport them and as a symbolic gesture in that he hoped to return to his studies soon.<ref name="Bate p. 106107">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=106–107}}</ref>

He eventually received a degree: just before the publication of his ''Dictionary'' in 1755, Oxford University awarded Johnson the degree of Master of Arts (Oxbridge and Dublin)|Master of Arts .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=128–129}}</ref> He was awarded an honorary doctorate in 1765 by Trinity College Dublin and in 1775 by Oxford University.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=36}}</ref> In 1776, he returned to Pembroke with Boswell and toured the college with his previous tutor Adams, who was then its Master. He used that visit to recount his time at the college, his early career, and to express his later fondness for Jorden.<ref name="Bate p. 99">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=99}}</ref>

===Early career===
Little is known about Johnson's life between the end of 1729 and 1731; it is likely that he lived with his parents. He experienced bouts of mental anguish and physical pain during years of illness;<ref name="Bate p. 127">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=127}}</ref> his tics and gesticulations associated with Tourette syndrome became more noticeable and were often commented upon.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=24}}</ref> By 1731 Johnson's father was deeply in debt and had lost much of his standing in Lichfield. Johnson hoped to get an usher's position which became available at Stourbridge Grammar School, but as he did not have a degree his application was passed over on 6 September 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 127"/> At about this time, Johnson's father became ill and developed an "inflammatory fever" which led to his death in December 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 129">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=129}}</ref> Johnson eventually found employment as undermaster at a school in Market Bosworth, run by Sir Wolstan Dixie, 4th Baronet who allowed Johnson to teach without a degree.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=130–131}}</ref> Although Johnson was treated as a servant,<ref>{{Harvnb|Hopewell|1950|p= 53}}</ref> he found pleasure in teaching despite thinking it boring. After an argument with Dixie he quit the school, and by June 1732 he had returned home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=131–132}}</ref>

Johnson continued to look for a position at a Lichfield school. After being turned down for a position in Ashbourne, he spent his time with his friend Edmund Hector, who was living in the home of the publisher Thomas Warren. At the time Warren was starting his '' Birmingham Journal (eighteenth century)|Birmingham Journal '', and he enlisted Johnson's help.<ref name="Bate p. 134">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=134}}</ref> This connection with Warren grew, and Johnson proposed a translation of Jeronimo Lobo 's account of the Ethiopian Empire|Abyssinians .<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=137–138}}</ref> Johnson read Abbé Joachim Le Grand's French translations, and thought that a shorter version might be "useful and profitable".<ref name="Bate p. 138">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=138}}</ref> Instead of writing the whole work himself, he dictated to Hector, who then took the copy to the printer and made any corrections. Johnson's ''A Voyage to Abyssinia'' was published a year later.<ref name="Bate p. 138"/> He returned to Lichfield in February 1734, and began an annotated edition of Poliziano 's Latin poems, along with a history of Latin poetry from Petrarch to Poliziano; a ''Proposal'' was soon printed, but a lack of funds halted the project.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=140–141}}</ref>

Johnson remained with his close friend Harry Porter during a terminal illness,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=144}}</ref> which culminated when Porter died on 3 September 1734, leaving his wife Elizabeth Jervis Porter (otherwise known as "Tetty") widowed at the age of 45, with three children.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=143}}</ref> Some months later, Johnson began to court her. The Reverend William Shaw claims that "the first advances probably proceeded from her, as her attachment to Johnson was in opposition to the advice and desire of all her relations".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1969|p=88}}</ref> Johnson was inexperienced in such relationships, but the well-to-do widow encouraged him and promised to provide for him with her substantial savings.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=145}}</ref> They married on 9 July 1735, at St Werburgh's Church, Derby|St Werburgh's Church in Derby .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=147}}</ref> The Porter family did not approve of the match, partly because Johnson was 25 and Elizabeth was 21 years his elder, and Elizabeth's marriage to Johnson so disgusted her son Jervis that he severed relations with her.<ref name="Wain p. 65">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=65}}</ref> However, her daughter Lucy had accepted Johnson from the start, and her other son, Joseph, accepted the marriage later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=146}}</ref>

In June 1735, while working as a tutor for Thomas Whitby's children, Johnson had applied for the position of headmaster at Solihull School .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=153–154}}</ref> Although Walmesley{{clarify|pre-text=who?|date=November 2010}} gave his support, Johnson was passed over because the school's directors thought he was "a very haughty, ill-natured gent., and that he has such a way of distorting his face (which though he can't help) the gent[s] think it may affect some lads".<ref name="Bate p. 154">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=154}}</ref> With Walmesley's encouragement, Johnson decided that he could be a successful teacher if he ran his own school.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=153}}</ref> In the autumn of 1735, Johnson opened Edial Hall School as a private academy at Edial, near Lichfield. He had only three pupils: Lawrence Offley, George Garrick, and the 18-year-old David Garrick, who later became one of the most famous actors of his day.<ref name="Bate p. 154"/> The venture was unsuccessful and cost Tetty a substantial portion of her fortune. Instead of trying to keep the failing school going, Johnson began to write his first major work, the historical tragedy '' Irene (play)|Irene ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=156}}</ref> Biographer Robert DeMaria believed that Tourette syndrome likely made public occupations like schoolmaster or tutor almost impossible for Johnson to hold; this may have led Johnson to "the invisible occupation of authorship".<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6"/>

Johnson left for London with his former pupil David Garrick on 2 March 1737, the day Johnson's brother had died. He was penniless and pessimistic about their travel, but fortunately for them, Garrick had connections in London, and the two were able to stay with his distant relative, Richard Norris.<ref name="Bate p. 16465">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=164–165}}</ref> Johnson soon moved to Greenwich near the Golden Hart Tavern to finish ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=168–169}}</ref> On 12 July 1737 he wrote to Edward Cave with a proposal for a translation of Paolo Sarpi 's ''The History of the Council of Trent'' (1619), which Cave did not accept until months later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=81}}; {{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=169}}</ref> In October 1737 Johnson brought his wife to London, and he found employment with Cave as a writer for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=169–170}}</ref> His assignments for the magazine and other publishers during this time were "almost unparalleled in range and variety", and "so numerous, so varied and scattered" that "Johnson himself could not make a complete list".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=14}}</ref> The name '' Columbia (name)|Columbia '', a poetic name for America coined by Johnson, first appears in a 1738 weekly publication of the debates of the British Parliament in the Magazine.<ref>[http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ilej/image1.pl?item=page&seq=5&size=1&id=gm.1738.6.x.8.x.x.285a The Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. 8, June 1738, p. 285] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref><ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=_DoJAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Debates in Parliament'', Samuel Johnson.] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref>

Image:Johnson London 01.jpg|thumb|left|upright|Title page of ''London'' second edition

In May 1738 his first major work, the poem '' London (1738 poem)‎|London '', was published anonymously.<ref name="Lynch p. 5">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 5}}</ref> Based on Juvenal's Satires of Juvenal#Satire III: There is no Room in Roma for a Roman|Satire III, it describes the character Thales leaving for Wales to escape the problems of London,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=172}}</ref> which it portrays as a place of crime, corruption, and neglect of the poor. Johnson could not bring himself to regard the poem as earning him any merit as a poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=18}}</ref> Alexander Pope claimed that the author "will soon be déterré" (brought to light, become well known), but this would not happen until 15 years later.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/>

In August, Johnson's lack of an MA degree from Oxford or Cambridge led to his being denied a position as master of the Appleby Grammar School. In an effort to end such rejections, Pope asked Lord Gower to use his influence to have a degree awarded to Johnson.<ref name="Watkins p.25">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=25}}</ref> Gower petitioned Oxford for an honorary degree to be awarded to Johnson, but was told that it was "too much to be asked".<ref name="Bate p. 182">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=182}}</ref> Gower then asked a friend of Jonathan Swift to plead with Swift to use his influence at the University of Dublin to have a Masters degree awarded to Johnson, in the hope that this could then be used to justify an MA from Oxford,<ref name="Bate p. 182"/> but Swift refused to act on Johnson's behalf.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=25–26}}</ref>

Between 1737 and 1739, Johnson befriended Richard Savage .<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=51}}</ref> Feeling guilty about living on Tetty's money, Johnson stopped living with her and spent his time with Savage. They were poor and would stay in taverns or sleep in "night-cellars" except for nights that they would roam the streets because they lacked the necessary funds.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=178–179}}</ref> Savage's friends tried to help him by attempting to persuade him to move to Wales, but Savage ended up in Bristol and again fell into debt. He was committed to debtors' prison and died in 1743. A year later, Johnson wrote '' Life of Mr Richard Savage '' (1744), a "moving" work which, in the words of the biographer and critic Walter Jackson Bate, "remains one of the innovative works in the history of biography".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=180–181}}</ref>

===''A Dictionary of the English Language''===
{{See also|A Dictionary of the English Language|The Rambler|The Vanity of Human Wishes|Irene (play)}}

Image:Johnson Dictionary2.jpg|upright|thumb|Johnson's ''Dictionary'' Vol. 1 (1755) title page

In 1746, a group of publishers approached Johnson about creating an authoritative dictionary of the English language;<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> a contract with William Strahan and associates, worth 1,500 guineas, was signed on the morning of 18 June 1746.<ref name="Hitchings">{{Harvnb|Hitchings|2005|p=54}}</ref> Johnson claimed that he could finish the project in three years. In comparison, the Académie Française had forty scholars spending forty years to complete its dictionary, which prompted Johnson to claim, "This is the proportion. Let me see; forty times forty is sixteen hundred. As three to sixteen hundred, so is the proportion of an Englishman to a Frenchman".<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> Although he did not succeed in completing the work in three years, he did manage to finish it in nine, justifying his boast.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> According to Bate, the ''Dictionary'' "easily ranks as one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship, and probably the greatest ever performed by one individual who laboured under anything like the disadvantages in a comparable length of time".<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> However, others, such as Thomas Babington Macaulay who described Johnson as "a wretched etymologist," have criticised Johnson's dictionary.<ref>Winchester 2003, p.33</ref>

Johnson's dictionary was not the first, nor was it unique. It was, however, the most commonly used and imitated for the 150 years between its first publication and the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' in 1928. Other dictionaries, such as Nathan Bailey 's ''Dictionarium Britannicum'', included more words,<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> and in the 150 years preceding Johnson's dictionary about twenty other general-purpose monolingual "English" dictionaries had been produced.<ref name="Lynch p. 2">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=2}}</ref> However, there was open dissatisfaction with the dictionaries of the period. In 1741, David Hume claimed: "The Elegance and Propriety of Stile have been very much neglected among us. We have no Dictionary of our Language, and scarce a tolerable Grammar".<ref name="Lynch p. 4">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=4}}</ref> Johnson's ''Dictionary'' offers insights into the 18th century and "a faithful record of the language people used".<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> It is more than a reference book; it is a work of literature.<ref name="Lynch p. 2"/>

For a decade, Johnson's constant work on the ''Dictionary'' disrupted his and Tetty's living conditions. He had to employ a number of assistants for the copying and mechanical work, which filled the house with incessant noise and clutter. He was always busy with his work, and kept hundreds of books around.<ref name="Lane p. 109">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=109}}</ref> John Hawkins described the scene: "The books he used for this purpose were what he had in his own collection, a copious but a miserably ragged one, and all such as he could borrow; which latter, if ever they came back to those that lent them, were so defaced as to be scarce worth owning".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hawkins|1787|p=175}}</ref> Johnson was also distracted by Tetty's health, as she started to show signs of a terminal illness.<ref name="Lane p. 109"/> To accommodate both his wife and his work, he moved to 17 Gough Square near his printer, William Strahan.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=110}}</ref>

Image:Johnson Dictionary3.jpg|left|thumb|upright|Johnson's ''Dictionary'' Vol. 2 (1755) title page

In preparation for the work, Johnson wrote a ''Plan'' for the ''Dictionary''. Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield, was the patron of the ''Plan'', to Johnson's displeasure.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=117–118}}</ref> Seven years after first meeting Johnson to go over the work, Chesterfield wrote two anonymous essays in ''The World'' recommending the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Lane p. 118">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=118}}</ref> He complained that the English language lacked structure and argued in support of the dictionary. Johnson did not like the tone of the essay, and he felt that Chesterfield had not fulfilled his obligations as the work's patron.<ref name="Lane p. 121">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=121}}</ref> Johnson wrote a letter expressing this view and harshly criticising Chesterfield, saying "Is not a patron, my lord, one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help? The notice which you have been pleased to take of my labours, had it been early, had been kind: but it has been delayed till I am indifferent and cannot enjoy it; till I am solitary and cannot impart it; till I am known and do not want it."<ref name="Bate p. 257">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=257}}</ref> Chesterfield, impressed by the language, kept the letter displayed on a table for anyone to read.<ref name="Bate p. 257"/>

The ''Dictionary'' was finally published in April 1755, with the title page acknowledging that Oxford had awarded Johnson a Master of Arts degree in anticipation of the work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=256, 318}}</ref> The published dictionary was a huge book. Its pages were nearly {{convert|18|in|cm|0}} tall, and the book was {{convert|20|in|cm|0}} wide when opened; it contained 42,773 entries, to which only a few more were added in subsequent editions, and sold for the extravagant price of £4 10s, perhaps the rough equivalent of £350 today.<ref name=CC>{{citation|chapter=Currency Converter|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/currency/|title=The National Archives|place= Kew, Richmond, Surrey|accessdate=24 July 2008}}</ref> An important innovation in English lexicography was to illustrate the meanings of his words by literary quotation, of which there are around 114,000. The authors most frequently cited include Shakespeare, Milton and Dryden .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|pp=8–11}}</ref> It was years before "Johnson's Dictionary", as it came to be known, turned a profit. Author's royalties were unknown at that time, and Johnson, once his contract to deliver the book was fulfilled, received no further money from its sale. Years later, many of its quotations would be repeated by various editions of the '' Webster's Dictionary '' and the '' New English Dictionary ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=25}}</ref>

Besides working on the ''Dictionary'', Johnson also wrote various essays, sermons, and poems during these nine years.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=113}}</ref> He decided to produce a series of essays under the title '' The Rambler '' that would run every Tuesday and Saturday for twopence each. Explaining the title years later, he told his friend, the painter Joshua Reynolds : "I was at a loss how to name it. I sat down at night upon my bedside, and resolved that I would not go to sleep till I had fixed its title. ''The Rambler'' seemed the best that occurred, and I took it".<ref name="Lane p. 115">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=115}}</ref> These essays, often on moral topics, tended to be more grave than the title of the series would suggest; his first comments in ''The Rambler'' were to ask "that in this undertaking thy Holy Spirit may not be withheld from me, but that I may promote thy glory, and the salvation of myself and others".<ref name="Lane p. 115"/> The popularity of ''The Rambler'' took off once the issues were collected as a volume; they were reprinted nine times during Johnson's life. Writer and printer Samuel Richardson, enjoying the essays greatly, questioned the publisher as to who wrote the works; only he and a few of Johnson's friends were told of Johnson's authorship.<ref name="Lane p. 116">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=116}}</ref> One friend, the novelist Charlotte Lennox, includes a defence of ''The Rambler'' in her novel ''The Female Quixote'' (1752). In particular, the character Mr. Glanville says, "you may sit in Judgment upon the Productions of a ''Young'', a ''Richardson'', or a ''Johnson''. Rail with premeditated Malice at the ''Rambler''; and for the want of Faults, turn even its inimitable Beauties into Ridicule" (Book VI, Chapter XI). Later, she claims Johnson as "the greatest Genius in the present Age".<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynn|1997|p=241}}</ref>

{{Quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|quote=His necessary attendance while his play was in rehearsal, and during its performance, brought him acquainted with many of the performers of both sexes, which produced a more favourable opinion of their profession than he had harshly expressed in his Life of Savage ... He for considerable time used to frequent the Green Room, and seemed to take delight in dissipating his gloom, by mixing in the sprightly chit-chat of the motley circle then to be found there. Mr David Hume related to me from Mr Garrick, that Johnson at last denied himself this amusement, from considerations of rigid virtue; saying, "I'll come no more behind your scenes, David; for the silk stockings and white bosoms of your actresses excite my amorous propensities".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=67}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

However, not all of his work was confined to ''The Rambler''. His most highly regarded poem, '' The Vanity of Human Wishes '', was written with such "extraordinary speed" that Boswell claimed Johnson "might have been perpetually a poet".<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 22">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=22}}</ref> The poem is an imitation of Juvenal's '' Satires of Juvenal#Satire X: Wrong Desire is the Source of Suffering|Satire X '' and claims that "the antidote to vain human wishes is non-vain spiritual wishes".<ref>{{Harvnb|Weinbrot|1997|p=49}}</ref> In particular, Johnson emphasises "the helpless vulnerability of the individual before the social context" and the "inevitable self-deception by which human beings are led astray".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=281}}</ref> The poem was critically celebrated but it failed to become popular, and sold less than ''London''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=113–114}}</ref> In 1749, Garrick made good on his promise that he would produce ''Irene'', but its title was altered to '' Irene (play)#Stage history|Mahomet and Irene '' to make it "fit for the stage".<ref name="Lane p. 114">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=114}}</ref> The show eventually ran for nine nights.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=17}}</ref>

Tetty Johnson spent most of her time in London ill, and in 1752 she decided to return to the countryside while Johnson was busy working on his ''Dictionary''. She died on 17 March 1752, and, at word of her death, Johnson wrote a letter to his old friend Taylor, which according to Taylor "expressed grief in the strongest manner he had ever read".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=272–273}}</ref> He wrote a sermon in her honour, to be read at her funeral, but Taylor refused to read it, for reasons which are unknown. This only exacerbated Johnson's feelings of being lost, and his despair after the death of his wife, and John Hawkesworth had to take over organising the funeral. Johnson felt guilty about the poverty in which he believed he had forced Tetty to live, and blamed himself for neglecting her. He became outwardly discontent, and his diary was filled with prayers and laments over her death until his own. She was his primary motivation, and her death hindered his ability to complete his work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=273–275}}</ref>

===Later career===
{{See also|The Plays of William Shakespeare|The Idler (1758–1760)|The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia}}

On 16 March 1756, Johnson was arrested for an outstanding debt of £5 18 Shilling|s . Unable to contact anyone else, he wrote to the writer and publisher Samuel Richardson . Richardson, who had previously lent Johnson money, sent him six guineas to show his good will, and the two became friends.<ref name="Bate p. 321">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=321}}</ref> Soon after, Johnson met and befriended the painter Joshua Reynolds, who so impressed Johnson that he declared him "almost the only man whom I call a friend".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=324}}</ref> Reynolds' younger sister Frances observed during their time together "that men, women and children gathered around him [Johnson]", laughing at his gestures and gesticulations.<ref name=Murray1611>{{Harvnb|Murray|1979|p=1611}}</ref> In addition to Reynolds, Johnson was close to Bennet Langton and Arthur Murphy . Langton was a scholar and an admirer of Johnson who persuaded his way into a meeting with Johnson which led to a long friendship. Johnson met Murphy during the summer of 1754 after Murphy came to Johnson about the accidental republishing of the ''Rambler'' No. 190, and the two became friends.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=322–323}}</ref> Around this time, Anna Williams began boarding with Johnson. She was a minor poet who was poor and becoming blind, two conditions that Johnson attempted to change by providing room for her and paying for a failed cataract surgery. Williams, in turn, became Johnson's housekeeper.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|p=319}}</ref>

To occupy himself, Johnson began to work on ''The Literary Magazine, or Universal Review'', the first issue of which was printed on 19 March 1756. Philosophical disagreements erupted over the purpose of the publication when the Seven Years' War began and Johnson started to write polemical essays attacking the war. After the war began, the ''Magazine'' included many reviews, at least 34 of which were written by Johnson.<ref name="Bate p. 328">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=328}}</ref> When not working on the ''Magazine'', Johnson wrote a series of prefaces for other writers, such as Giuseppe Baretti, William Payne and Charlotte Lennox .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=329}}</ref> Johnson's relationship with Lennox and her works was particularly close during these years, and she in turn relied so heavily upon Johnson that he was "the most important single fact in Mrs Lennox's literary life".<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=221–222}}</ref> He later attempted to produce a new edition of her works, but even with his support they were unable to find enough interest to follow through with its publication.<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=223–224}}</ref> To help with domestic duties while Johnson was busy with his various projects, Richard Bathurst, a physician and a member of Johnson's Club, pressured him to take on a free slave, Francis Barber, as his servant.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=325–326}}</ref>

These efforts, however, consumed only a small portion of his time; his work on '' The Plays of William Shakespeare|Edition of Shakespeare '' took up the rest. On 8 June 1756, Johnson published his '' The Plays of William Shakespeare#Proposal|Proposals for Printing, by Subscription, the Dramatick Works of William Shakespeare '', which argued that previous editions of Shakespeare were edited incorrectly and needed to be corrected.<ref name="Bate p. 330">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=330}}</ref> However, Johnson's progress on the work slowed as the months passed, and he told music historian Charles Burney in December 1757 that it would take him until the following March to complete it. Before that could happen, he was arrested again, for a debt of £40, in February 1758. The debt was soon repaid by Jacob Tonson, who had contracted Johnson to publish ''Shakespeare'', and this encouraged Johnson to finish his edition to repay the favour. Although it took him another seven years to finish, Johnson completed a few volumes of his ''Shakespeare'' to prove his commitment to the project.<ref name="Bate p. 332">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=332}}</ref>

In 1758, Johnson began to write a weekly series, ''The Idler'', which ran from 15 April 1758 to 5 April 1760, as a way to avoid finishing his ''Shakespeare''. This series was shorter and lacked many features of ''The Rambler''. Unlike his independent publication of ''The Rambler'', ''The Idler'' was published in a weekly news journal ''The Universal Chronicle'', a publication supported by John Payne, John Newbery, Robert Stevens and William Faden.<ref name="Bate p. 334">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=334}}</ref> Since ''The Idler'' did not occupy all Johnson's time, he was able to publish his philosophical novella '' The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia|Rasselas '' on 19 April 1759. The "little story book", as Johnson described it, describes the life of Prince Rasselas and Nekayah, his sister, who are kept in a place called the Happy Valley in the land of Abyssinia. The Valley is a place free of problems, where any desire is quickly satisfied. The constant pleasure does not, however, lead to satisfaction; and, with the help of a philosopher named Imlac, Rasselas escapes and explores the world to witness how all aspects of society and life in the outside world are filled with suffering. They return to Abyssinia, but do not wish to return to the state of constantly fulfilled pleasures found in the Happy Valley.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=337–338}}</ref> ''Rasselas'' was written in one week to pay for his mother's funeral and settle her debts; it became so popular that there was a new English edition of the work almost every year. References to it appear in many later works of fiction, including '' Jane Eyre '', '' Cranford (novel)|Cranford '' and '' The House of the Seven Gables ''. Its fame was not limited to English-speaking nations: ''Rasselas'' was immediately translated into five languages (French, Dutch, German, Russian and Italian), and later into nine others.<ref name="Bate p. 337">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=337}}</ref>

By 1762, however, Johnson had gained notoriety for his dilatoriness in writing; the contemporary poet Churchill teased Johnson for the delay in producing his long-promised edition of Shakespeare: "He for subscribers baits his hook / and takes your cash, but where's the book?"<ref name="Bate p. 391">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=391}}</ref> The comments soon motivated Johnson to finish his ''Shakespeare'', and, after receiving the first payment from a government pension on 20 July 1762, he was able to dedicate most of his time towards this goal.<ref name="Bate p. 391"/> Earlier that July, the 24-year-old King George III granted Johnson an annual pension of £300 in appreciation for the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36"/> While the pension did not make Johnson wealthy, it did allow him a modest yet comfortable independence for the remaining 22 years of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=356}}</ref> The award came largely through the efforts of Thomas Sheridan (actor)|Sheridan and the John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute|Earl of Bute . When Johnson questioned if the pension would force him to promote a political agenda or support various officials, he was told by Bute that the pension "is not given you for anything you are to do, but for what you have done".<ref name="Bate p. 354-356">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=354–356}}</ref>

On 16 May 1763, Johnson first met 22-year-old James Boswell —who would later become Johnson's first major biographer—in the bookshop of Johnson's friend, Tom Davies. They quickly became friends, although Boswell would return to his home in Scotland or travel abroad for months at a time.<ref name="Bate p. 360">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=360}}</ref> Around the spring of 1763, Johnson formed " The Club (dining club)|The Club ", a social group that included his friends Reynolds, Edmund Burke|Burke, Garrick, Goldsmith and others (the membership later expanded to include Adam Smith and Edward Gibbon ). They decided to meet every Monday at 7:00 pm at the Turk's Head in Gerrard Street, Soho, and these meetings continued until long after the deaths of the original members.<ref name="Bate p. 366">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=366}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=During the whole of the interview, Johnson talked to his Majesty with profound respect, but still in his firm manly manner, with a sonorous voice, and never in that subdued tone which is commonly used at the levee and in the drawing-room. After the King withdrew, Johnson shewed himself highly pleased with his Majesty's conversation and gracious behaviour. He said to Mr Barnard, 'Sir, they may talk of the King as they will; but he is the finest gentleman I have ever seen.'<ref name="Boswell p. 135">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 135}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 9 January 1765, Murphy introduced Johnson to Henry Thrale, a wealthy brewer and Member of Parliament|MP, and his wife Hester Thrale|Hester . They struck up an instant friendship; Johnson was treated as a member of the family, and was once more motivated to continue working on his ''Shakespeare''.<ref name="Bate p. 393">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=393}}</ref> Afterwards, Johnson stayed with the Thrales for 17 years until Henry's death in 1781, sometimes staying in rooms at Thrale's Anchor Brewery in Southwark .<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=262}}</ref> Hester Thrale's documentation of Johnson's life during this time, in her correspondence and her diary ('' Thraliana ''), became an important source of biographical information on Johnson after his death.<ref name="Keymer p. 186">{{Harvnb|Keymer|1999|p=186}}</ref>

Johnson's edition of ''Shakespeare'' was finally published on 10 October 1765 as ''The Plays of William Shakespeare, in Eight Volumes ... To which are added Notes by Sam. Johnson'' in a printing of one thousand copies. The first edition quickly sold out, and a second was soon printed.<ref name="Bate p. 395">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=395}}</ref> The plays themselves were in a version that Johnson felt most true to the original based on his analysis of the manuscript editions. Johnson's revolutionary innovation was to create a set of corresponding notes that allow readers to identify the meaning behind many of Shakespeare's more complicated passages or ones that may have been transcribed incorrectly over time.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=397}}</ref> Included within the notes are occasional attacks upon rival editors of Shakespeare's works and their editions.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=194}}</ref> Years later, Edmond Malone, an important Shakespearean scholar and friend of Johnson's, stated that Johnson's "vigorous and comprehensive understanding threw more light on his authour than all his predecessors had done".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=396}}</ref>

In February 1767 Johnson was granted a special meeting with King George III. This took place at the library of the Queen's house, and it was organised by Frederick Augusta Barnard, the King's librarian.<ref name="Boswell p. 133">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 133}}</ref> The King, hearing that Johnson would visit the library, commanded Barnard to introduce him to Johnson.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 134}}</ref> After a short meeting, Johnson was impressed with both the King himself and their conversation.<ref name="Boswell p. 135"/>

===Final works===
{{See also|A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland|Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets}}

Image:Samuel Johnson by Joshua Reynolds 2.png|thumb|upright|alt=Man staring intently at a book held close to his face|Johnson (1775) showing his intense concentration and the weakness of his eyes; he did not want to be depicted as "Blinking Sam"<ref>{{Harvnb|Yung|1984|p=14}}</ref>

On 6 August 1773, eleven years after first meeting Boswell, Johnson set out to visit his friend in Scotland, to begin "a journey to the western islands of Scotland", as Johnson's 1775 account of their travels would put it.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=463}}</ref> The work was intended to discuss the social problems and struggles that affected the Scottish people, but it also praised many of the unique facets of Scottish society, such as a school in Edinburgh for the deaf and mute.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=471}}</ref> Also, Johnson used the work to enter into the dispute over the authenticity of James Macpherson's Ossian poems, claiming they could not have been translations of ancient Scottish literature on the grounds that "in those times nothing had been written in the Earse [i.e. Gaelic] language".<ref>{{Harvnb|Johnson|1970|pp=104–105}}</ref> There were heated exchanges between the two, and according to one of Johnson's letters, MacPherson threatened physical violence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=331}}</ref> Boswell's account, '' The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides '' (1786), was a preliminary attempt at a biography before his '' Life of Johnson ''. Included were various quotes and descriptions of events, including anecdotes such as Johnson swinging around a broadsword while wearing Scottish garb, or dancing a Highland jig.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=468–469}}</ref>

In the 1770s, Johnson, who had tended to be an opponent of the government early in life, published a series of pamphlets in favour of various government policies. In 1770 he produced ''The False Alarm'', a political pamphlet attacking John Wilkes . In 1771, his ''Thoughts on the Late Transactions Respecting Falkland's Islands'' cautioned against war with Spain.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=443–445}}</ref> In 1774 he printed ''The Patriot'', a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1996|p=182}}</ref> This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson opposed "self-professed Patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" patriotism.<ref name="Griffin p. 21">{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=21}}</ref>

The last of these pamphlets, ''Taxation No Tyranny'' (1775), was a defence of the Coercive Acts and a response to the Declaration of Rights of the First Continental Congress of America, which protested against taxation without representation .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=446}}</ref> Johnson argued that in emigrating to America, colonists had "voluntarily resigned the power of voting", but they still had " virtual representation " in Parliament. In a parody of the Declaration of Rights, Johnson suggested that the Americans had no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish people . If the Americans wanted to participate in Parliament, said Johnson, they could move to England and purchase an estate.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ammerman|1974|p=13}}</ref> Johnson denounced English supporters of American separatists as "traitors to this country", and hoped that the matter would be settled without bloodshed, but that it would end with "English superiority and American obedience".<ref>{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=252–256}}</ref> Years before, Johnson had advocated that the English and the French were just "two robbers" who were stealing land from the natives, and that neither deserved to live there.<ref name="Bate p. 328"/> After the signing of the 1783 Peace of Paris treaties, marking the colonists' defeat of the British, Johnson was "deeply disturbed" with the "state of this kingdom".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=15}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=Mr Thrale's death was a very essential loss to Johnson, who, although he did not foresee all that afterwards happened, was sufficiently convinced that the comforts which Mr Thrale's family afforded him, would now in great measure cease.<ref name="Boswell p. 273">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 273}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 3 May 1777, while Johnson was trying to save Reverend William Dodd from execution, he wrote to Boswell that he was busy preparing a "little Lives" and "little Prefaces, to a little edition of the English Poets".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=525}}</ref> Tom Davies, William Strahan and Thomas Cadell had asked Johnson to create this final major work, the '' Lives of the English Poets '', for which he asked 200 guineas, an amount significantly less than the price he could have demanded.<ref name="Bate p. 526">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=526}}</ref> The ''Lives'', which were critical as well as biographical studies, appeared as prefaces to selections of each poet's work, and they were quite larger than originally expected.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=527}}</ref> The work was finished in March 1781 and the whole collection was published in six volumes. As Johnson justified in the advertisement for the work, "my purpose was only to have allotted to every Poet an Advertisement, like those which we find in the French Miscellanies, containing a few dates and a general character."<ref>{{Harvnb|Clingham|1997|p=161}}</ref>

Johnson was unable to enjoy this success because Henry Thrale, the dear friend with whom he lived, died on 4 April 1781.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=546–547}}</ref> Life changed quickly for Johnson, and Hester Thrale became interested in the Italian singing teacher Gabriel Mario Piozzi, which forced Johnson to move on from his previous lifestyle.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=557, 561}}</ref> After returning home and then travelling for a short period, Johnson received word that his friend and tenant Robert Levet, had died on 17 January 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=562}}</ref> Johnson was shocked by the death of Levet, who had resided at Johnson's London home since 1762.<ref>{{citation|url=http://books.google.com/?id=qXHv5EClgZgC&pg=PA231&lpg=PA231&dq=wakefield+levett|title= The Samuel Johnson Encyclopedia|author=Rogers, Pat|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|location= Westport, CT|year=1996|isbn=978-0-313-29411-2}}</ref> Shortly afterwards Johnson caught a cold which turned into bronchitis, lasting for several months, and his health was further complicated by "feeling forlorn and lonely" by Levet's death being accompanied by the deaths of Johnson's friend Thomas Lawrence and his housekeeper Williams.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|pp=501–502}}</ref>

===Final years===
Although he had recovered his health by August, he experienced emotional trauma when he was given word that Hester Thrale would sell the residence that Johnson shared with the family. What hurt Johnson the most was the possibility that he would be left without her constant company.<ref name="Bate p. 566">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=566}}</ref> Months later, on 6 October 1782, Johnson attended church for the final time in his life, to say goodbye to his former residence and life. The walk to the church strained him, but he managed the journey unaccompanied.<ref name="Bate p. 569">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=569}}</ref> While there, he wrote a prayer for the Thrale family:

{{quote|To thy fatherly protection, O Lord, I commend this family. Bless, guide, and defend them, that they may pass through this world, as finally to enjoy in thy presence everlasting happiness, for Jesus Christ's sake. Amen.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=284}}</ref>}}

Hester Thrale did not completely abandon Johnson, and asked him to accompany the family on a trip to Brighton.<ref name="Bate p. 569"/> He agreed, and was with them from 7 October until 20 November 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=570}}</ref> On his return, his health began to fail him, and he was left alone following Boswell's visit on 29 May 1783 until he travelled to Scotland.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=575}}</ref>

On 17 June 1783, Johnson's poor circulation resulted in a stroke<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=51}}</ref> and he wrote to his neighbour, Edmund Allen, that he had lost the ability to speak.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=71}}</ref> Two doctors were brought in to aid Johnson; he regained his ability to speak two days later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=71–72}}</ref> Johnson feared that he was dying, and wrote:

{{quote|The black dog I hope always to resist, and in time to drive, though I am deprived of almost all those that used to help me. The neighbourhood is impoverished. I had once Richardson and Lawrence in my reach. Mrs. Allen is dead. My house has lost Levet, a man who took interest in everything, and therefore ready at conversation. Mrs. Williams is so weak that she can be a companion no longer. When I rise my breakfast is solitary, the black dog waits to share it, from breakfast to dinner he continues barking, except that Dr. Brocklesby for a little keeps him at a distance. Dinner with a sick woman you may venture to suppose not much better than solitary. After dinner, what remains but to count the clock, and hope for that sleep which I can scarce expect. Night comes at last, and some hours of restlessness and confusion bring me again to a day of solitude. What shall exclude the black dog from an habitation like this?<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=72}}</ref>}}
By this time he was sick and gout -ridden. He had surgery for gout, and his remaining friends, including novelist Fanny Burney (the daughter of Charles Burney), came to keep him company.<ref name="Watkins p.73">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=73}}</ref> He was confined to his room from 14 December 1783 to 21 April 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=74}}</ref>

His health had begun to improve by May 1784, and he travelled to Oxford with Boswell on 5 May 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74"/> By July, many of Johnson's friends were either dead or gone; Boswell had left for Scotland and Hester Thrale had become engaged to Piozzi. With nobody to visit, Johnson expressed a desire to die in London and arrived there on 16 November 1784. On 25 November 1784, he allowed Burney to visit him and expressed an interest to her that he should leave London; he soon left for Islington, to George Strahan's home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=76–77}}</ref> His final moments were filled with mental anguish and delusions; when his physician, Thomas Warren, visited and asked him if he were feeling better, Johnson burst out with: "No, Sir; you cannot conceive with what acceleration I advance towards death."<ref name="Watkins p.78">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=78}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=A few days before his death, he had asked Sir John Hawkins, as one of his executors, where he should be buried; and on being answered, "Doubtless, in Westminster Abbey," seemed to feel a satisfaction, very natural to a Poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=341}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Many visitors came to see Johnson as he lay sick in bed, but he preferred only Langton's company.<ref name="Watkins p.78"/> Burney waited for word of Johnson's condition, along with Windham, Strahan, Hoole, Cruikshank, Des Moulins and Barber.<ref name="Watkins p.79">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=79}}</ref> On 13 December 1784, Johnson met with two others: a young woman, Miss Morris, whom Johnson blessed, and Francesco Sastres, an Italian teacher, who was given some of Johnson's final words: "''Iam Moriturus''" ("I who am about to die").<ref name="Bate p. 599">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=599}}</ref> Shortly afterwards he fell into a coma, and died at 7:00 pm.<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

Langton waited until 11:00 pm to tell the others, which led to John Hawkins' becoming pale and overcome with "an agony of mind", along with Seward and Hoole describing Johnson's death as "the most awful sight".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hill|1897|p=160 (Vol. 2)}}</ref> Boswell remarked, "My feeling was just one large expanse of Stupor ... I could not believe it. My imagination was not convinced."<ref name="Bate p. 599"/> William Gerard Hamilton joined in and stated, "He has made a chasm, which not only nothing can fill up, but which ''nothing has a tendency to fill up''. -Johnson is dead.- Let us go to the next best: There is nobody; -''no man can be said to put you in mind of Johnson''."<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

He was buried on 20 December 1784 at Westminster Abbey with an inscription that reads:
:Samuel Johnson, LL.D.
:''Obiit XIII die Decembris,''
:''Anno Domini''
:M.DCC.LXXXIV.
:''Ætatis suœ'' LXXV.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=341–342}}</ref>

==Bibliography==
===Works===
* [http://books.google.com/books?id=CxATAAAAYAAJ&ots=V-uf-Ec85P&dq=Samuel%20Johnson%20%22Dictionary%20of%20the%20English%20Language%22&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q=&f=false ''A Dictionary of the English Language''], 1755. (Available online from Google Book Search.)
** ([http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/5430 Preface available separately from Project Gutenberg])
* ''The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia'', 1759.
* ''A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland'', 1775.
* ''Lives of the Poets'', 1799-81.
* ''Samuel Johnson: The Major Works,'' ed. Donald Greene, 2009. ([http://www.amazon.com/Samuel-Johnson-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199538336/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256974594&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search])

===Biographies===

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}

==References==
* {{Citation1|last=Ammerman|first=David|title=In the Common Cause: American Response to the Coercive Acts of 1774|location=New York|publisher=Norton|year=1974|isbn=0-393-00787-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Arnold|first=Matthew|authorlink=Matthew Arnold|editor1-last=Ricks|editor1-first=Christopher|editor1-link=Christopher Ricks|title=Selected Criticism of Matthew Arnold|year=1972|publisher=New American Library|location=New York|oclc=6338231}}
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|authorlink=Walter Jackson Bate|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1977|publisher=Harcourt Brace Jovanovich|location=New York|isbn=0-15-179260-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|title=The Achievement of Samuel Johnson|year=1955|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|oclc=355413}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|contribution=Hester Thrale Piozzi 1741–1821|title=Women Memoirists Vol. II|year=1998|editor-last=Bloom|editor-first=Harold|pages=74–76|publisher=Chelsea House|location=Philadelphia|isbn=0-7910-4655-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|title=The Western Canon|year=1995|publisher=Macmillan|location=London|isbn=0-333-64813-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=Correspondence and Other Papers of James Boswell Relating to the Making of the Life of Johnson|editor-last=Waingrow|editor-first=Marshall|publisher=McGraw-Hill|location=New York|year=1969|oclc=59269}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|year=1986|editor-last=Hibbert|editor-first=Christopher|publisher=Penguin Classics|location=New York|isbn=0-14-043116-0}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clarke|first=Norma|title=Dr Johnson's Women|year=2000|publisher=Hambledon|location=London|isbn=1-85285-254-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clingham|first= Greg|year=1997|contribution= Life and literature in the ''Lives''| title= The Cambridge companion to Samuel Johnson|editor1-last= Clingham|editor1-first= Greg| pages= 161–191|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Davis|first=Bertram|contribution=Introduction|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL. D.|year=1961|editor-last=Davis|editor-first=Bertram|pages=vii–xxx|publisher=Macmillan Company|location=New York|oclc=739445}}.
* {{Citation1|last=DeMaria, Jr.|first=Robert|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|publisher=Blackwell|location=Oxford|year=1994|isbn=1-55786-664-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Fine|first=LG|title=Samuel Johnson's illnesses|journal=J Nephrol|volume=19|issue=Suppl 10|pages=S110–4|date=May–June 2006|pmid=16874722}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|authorlink=Donald Greene|title=Samuel Johnson: Updated Edition|publisher=Twayne Publishers|location= Boston|year=1989|isbn=0-8057-6962-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|contribution=Introduction|title=Political Writings|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first=Donald|publisher=Liberty Fund|location=Indianapolis|isbn=0-86597-275-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Griffin|first=Dustin|title=Patriotism and Poetry in Eighteenth-Century Britain|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|year=2005|isbn=0-521-00959-6}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Grundy|first=Isobel|year=1997|contribution= Jane Austen and literary traditions| title= The Cambridge companion to Jane Austen|editor1-last=Copeland|editor1-first=Edward|editor2-last=McMaster|editor2-first=Juliet| pages= 189–210|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-49867-8}}
* {{Citation1|last=Hawkins|first=John|title=Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D.|publisher=J. Buckland|location=London|year=1787|oclc=173965}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hibbert|first=Christopher|authorlink=Christopher Hibbert|title=The Personal History of Samuel Johnson|location=New York|publisher=Harper & Row|year=1971|isbn=0-06-011879-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hitchings|first=Henry|authorlink=Henry Hitchings|title=Dr Johnson's Dictionary: The Extraordinary Story of the Book that Defined the World|publisher=John Murray|location=London|year=2005|isbn=0-7195-6631-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hill|first=G. Birkbeck, editor|authorlink=George Birkbeck Norman Hill|title=Johnsonian Miscellanies|location=London|publisher=Oxford Clarendon Press|year=1897|oclc=61906024}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hopewell|first=Sydney|title=The Book of Bosworth School, 1320–1920|year=1950|location=Leicester|publisher=W. Thornley & Son|oclc=6808364}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Letters| editor-last = Chapman| editor-first = R. W.|year=1952|location= Oxford|publisher=Clarendon|isbn=0-19-818538-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Johnson's Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and Boswell's Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides|editor-last= Chapman|editor-first= R. W.|location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1970|isbn=0-19-281072-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Major Works|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first= Donald|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=0-19-284042-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Kammer|first=Thomas|year=2007|chapter=Mozart in the Neurological Department: Who has the Tic?|editor1-first= Julien|editor1-last= Bogousslavsky|editor2-first= M|editor2-last= Hennerici|title=Neurological Disorders in Famous Artists, Part 2|pages=184–92|isbn=978-3-8055-8265-0|pmid= 17495512|publisher=Karger|location=Basel|volume=22|journal=Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience|doi=10.1159/0000102880}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Keymer|first=Thomas|year=1999|contribution= Johnson, Madness, and Smart|title=Christopher Smart and the Enlightenment|editor1-last=Hawes|editor1-first= Clement|location=New York, NY|publisher=St. Martin's Press|isbn=0-312-21369-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lane|first=Margaret|title=Samuel Johnson & his World|year=1975|publisher=Harper & Row Publishers|location=New York|isbn=0-06-012496-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Leavis|first=FR|authorlink=F. R. Leavis|title=Johnson as Critic|journal= Scrutiny (journal)|Scrutiny |volume=12|pages=187–204|year=1944}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynch|first=Jack|contribution=Introduction to this Edition|title=Samuel Johnson's Dictionary|year=2003|editor-last=Lynch|editor-first=Jack|pages=1–21|publisher=Walker & Co|location=New York|isbn=0-8027-1421-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynn|first=Steven|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's critical reception|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Martin|first=Peter|title=Samuel Johnson:A Biography|year=2008|publisher=Belknap Press|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts|isbn=978-0-674-03160-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=McHenry|first=LC Jr|title=Samuel Johnson's tics and gesticulations|journal=Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences|volume=22|issue=2|pages=152–68|date=April 1967|pmid=5341871|doi=10.1093/jhmas/XXII.2.152}}
* {{Citation1|last=Murray|first=TJ|date=16 June 1979|pmc=1599158|title=Dr Samuel Johnson's movement disorder|periodical= British Medical Journal |volume=1|issue=6178|pages=1610–14|pmid= 380753|doi=10.1136/bmj.1.6178.1610}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Murray|first= TJ|title= Samuel Johnson: his ills, his pills and his physician friends|journal=Clin Med|volume=3|issue=4|pages=368–72|date=July–August 2003|pmid=12938754}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Needham|first=John|title=The Completest Mode|location=Edinburgh|publisher=Edinburgh University Press|year=1982|isbn=0-85224-387-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pearce|first=JMS|date=July 1994|pmc=1294650|title=Doctor Samuel Johnson: 'the Great Convulsionary' a victim of Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome|journal= Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine |volume=87|pages=396–399|pmid= 8046726|issue=7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Piozzi|first=Hester|title=Thraliana: The Diary of Mrs. Hester Lynch Thrale (Later Mrs. Piozzi) 1776–1809|year=1951|editor1-last=Balderson|editor1-first=Katharine|publisher=Clarendon|place= Oxford|oclc= 359617}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pittock|first=Murray|year=2004|contribution= Johnson, Boswell, and their circle|title=The Cambridge companion to English literature from 1740 to 1830|editor1-last= Keymer|editor1-first= Thomas|editor2-last= Mee|editor2-first= Jon|pages= 157–172|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-00757-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Rogers|first=Pat|title=Johnson and Boswell: The Transit of Caledonia|publisher=Oxford University Press|place= Oxford|year=1995|isbn=0-19-818259-7}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Sacks|first=Oliver|author-link= Oliver Sacks|date=19–26 December 1992|title=Tourette's Syndrome and creativity|journal= British Medical Journal |volume=305|issue= 6868|pages=1515–16|pmc=1884721|pmid=1286364|quote=... the case for Samuel Johnson having the syndrome, though [...] circumstantial, is extremely strong and, to my mind, entirely convincing|doi=10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1515|issue=6868}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Shapiro|first=Arthur K|authorlink=Arthur K. Shapiro|title=Gilles de la Tourette syndrome|year=1978|publisher=Raven Press|location=New York|isbn=0-89004-057-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Skargon|first=Yvonne|title=The Importance of Being Oscar: Lily and Hodge and Dr. Johnson|place= London|publisher=Primrose Academy|year=1999|oclc= 56542613}}.
* {{Citation1|author=Stern JS, Burza S, Robertson MM |title=Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome and its impact in the UK |journal=Postgrad Med J |volume=81 |issue=951 |pages=12–9 |date = January 2005|pmid=15640424 |doi=10.1136/pgmj.2004.023614 |quote=It is now widely accepted that Dr Samuel Johnson had Tourette's syndrome |pmc=1743178 }}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wain|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1974|publisher=Viking Press|place= New York|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Watkins|first=WBC|title=Perilous Balance: The Tragic Genius of Swift, Johnson, and Sterne|year=1960|publisher=Walker-deBerry, Inc.|place= Cambridge, MA|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Weinbrot|first= Howard D.|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's Poetry|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wilson|first=Edmund|year=1950|contribution= Reexamining Dr. Johnson|title=Classics and Commercials|editor1-last=Wilson|editor1-first=Edmund|location=New York|publisher=Farrar, Straus & Giroux|oclc=185571431}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wiltshire|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson in the Medical World|year=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|isbn=0-521-38326-9}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Winchester|first=Simon|title=The Meaning of Everything|year=2003|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-517500-4}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Winters|first=Yvor|authorlink=Yvor Winters|title=The Anatomy of Nonsense|location=Norfolk, Conn.|publisher=New Directions|year=1943|oclc=191540}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Yung|first=Kai Kin|title=Samuel Johnson, 1709–84|publisher=Herbert Press|place= London|year=1984|isbn=0-906969-45-X}}.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Johnson, Samuel}}
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]

Samuel Johnson

2011-09-09T02:47:03Z

Ottava: /* The Dictionary */ update

'''Samuel Johnson''' (18 September 1709 (O.S.) 7 September – 13 December 1784), often referred to as '''Dr. Johnson''', was an English author who made lasting contributions to English literature as a poet, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and lexicographer . Johnson was a devout Anglican and committed Tory, and has been described as "arguably the most distinguished man of letters in English history".<ref>Rogers, Pat (2006), "Johnson, Samuel (1709–1784)", ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'' (online ed.), Oxford University Press, [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/14918], retrieved 25 August 2008</ref> He is also the subject of "the most famous single work of biographical art in the whole of literature": James Boswell 's '' Life of Samuel Johnson ''.<ref name="Batexix">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=xix}}</ref>

Johnson was born in Lichfield, Staffordshire, and attended Pembroke College, Oxford for just over a year, before his lack of funds forced him to leave. After working as a teacher he moved to London, where he began to write miscellaneous pieces for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''. His early works include the biography ''The Life of Richard Savage'', the poems "London " and "The Vanity of Human Wishes", and the play ''Irene''.

After nine years of work, Johnson's ''Dictionary of the English Language '' was published in 1755; it had a far-reaching effect on Modern English and has been described as "one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship."<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> The ''Dictionary'' brought Johnson popularity and success. Until the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' 150 years later, Johnson's was viewed as the pre-eminent British dictionary.<ref name="Lynch p. 1">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 1}}</ref> His later works included essays, an influential annotated edition of William Shakespeare's plays, and the widely read tale ''Rasselas''. In 1763, he befriended James Boswell, with whom he later travelled to Scotland; Johnson described their travels in '' A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland ''. Towards the end of his life, he produced the massive and influential '' Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets '', a collection of biographies and evaluations of 17th- and 18th-century poets.

Johnson had a tall and robust figure, but his odd gestures and tic s were confusing to some on their first encounter with him. Boswell's ''Life'', along with other biographies, documented Johnson's behaviour and mannerisms in such detail that they have informed the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome (TS),<ref name="ContTSDiagnosis">{{Harvnb|Murray|1979}} and {{Harvnb|Stern|2005}}</ref> a condition not defined or diagnosed in the 18th century. After a series of illnesses he died on the evening of 13 December 1784, and was buried in Westminster Abbey . In the years following his death, Johnson began to be recognised as having had a lasting effect on literary criticism, and even as the only great critic of English literature.<ref name="Winters p. 240">{{Harvnb|Winters|1943|p=240}}</ref>

==Biography==
===Early life and education===
Born on 18 September 1709 (New Style) to Michael Johnson, a bookseller, and his wife, Sarah Ford,<ref name="Bate p. 5">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=5}}</ref> Samuel Johnson often claimed that he grew up in poverty. Since both families had money, it is uncertain what happened between Michael and Sarah's marriage and the birth of Samuel just three years later to provoke such a change in fortune.<ref name="Lane p. 1314">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=13–14}}</ref> Johnson was born in the home above his father's bookshop in Lichfield, Staffordshire and,<ref name="Bate p. 5"/> because his mother Sarah was 40 when she gave birth, a "man-midwife" and surgeon of "great reputation" named George Hector was brought in to assist.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=15–16}}</ref> He did not cry and, with doubts surrounding the newborn's health, his aunt claimed "that she would not have picked such a poor creature up in the street".<ref name = "Watkins p.25"/> As it was feared the baby might die, the vicar of St Mary's was summoned to perform a baptism.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=16}}</ref> Two godfathers were chosen: Samuel Swynfen, a physician and graduate of Pembroke College, Oxford, and Richard Wakefield, a lawyer, coroner, and Lichfield town clerk.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=5–6}}</ref>

Johnson's health improved and he was put to wet-nurse with Joan Marklew. He soon contracted scrofula,<ref name="Lane pp. 16-17">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=16–17}}</ref> known at that time as the "King's Evil" because it was thought royalty could cure it. Sir John Floyer, former physician to Charles II of England|Charles II, recommended that the young Johnson should receive the " scrofula|royal touch ",<ref name="Lane p. 18">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=18}}</ref> which he received from Queen Anne on 30 March 1712. However, the ritual was ineffective, and an operation was performed that left him with permanent scars across his face and body.<ref name="Lane pp. 19-20">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=19–20}}</ref> With the birth of Johnson's brother, Nathaniel, a few months later, Michael was unable to keep on top of the debts he had accumulated over the years, and his family was no longer able to live in the style to which it had been accustomed.<ref name="Lane pp. 20-21">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=20–21}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=When he was a child in petticoats, and had learned to read, Mrs Johnson one morning put the common prayer-book into his hands, pointed to the collect for the day, and said, 'Sam, you must get this by heart.' She went up stairs, leaving him to study it: But by the time she had reached the second floor, she heard him following her. 'What's the matter?' said she. 'I can say it,' he replied; and repeated it distinctly, though he could not have read it over more than twice.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=38}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Johnson demonstrated signs of great intelligence as a child, and his parents, to his later disgust, would show off his "newly acquired accomplishments".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=18–19}}</ref> His education began at the age of three, and came from his mother who had him memorise and recite passages from the Book of Common Prayer .<ref name="Bate p. 21">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=21}}</ref> When Johnson turned four, he was sent to a nearby school, and, when he reached the age of six, he was sent to a retired shoemaker to continue his education.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=25–26}}</ref> A year later, Johnson was sent to Lichfield Grammar School, where he excelled in Latin.<ref name="Lane p. 26">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p= 26}}</ref> During this time, Johnson started to exhibit the tics that would influence how people viewed him in his later years, and which formed the basis for the posthumous diagnosis of Tourette syndrome .<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6">{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=5–6}}</ref> He excelled at his studies and was promoted to the upper school at the age of nine.<ref name="Lane p. 26"/> During this time, he befriended Edmund Hector, nephew of his "man-midwife" George Hector, and John Taylor, with whom he remained in contact for the rest of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=23, 31}}</ref>

At the age of 16, Johnson was given the opportunity to stay with his cousins, the Fords, at Pedmore, Worcestershire.<ref name="Lane p. 29">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=29}}</ref> There he became a close friend of Cornelius Ford, who employed his knowledge of the classics to tutor Johnson while he was not attending school.<ref name="Wain p. 32">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=32}}</ref> Ford was a successful, well-connected academic, but was also a notorious alcoholic whose excesses contributed to his death six years after Johnson's visit.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=30}}</ref> Having spent six months with his cousins, Johnson returned to Lichfield, but Mr. Hunter, the headmaster, "angered by the impertinence of this long absence", refused to allow him to continue at the grammar school.<ref name="Lane p. 33">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=33}}</ref> Unable to return to Lichfield Grammar School, Johnson was enrolled into the King Edward VI grammar school at Stourbridge.<ref name="Wain p. 32"/> Because the school was located near Pedmore, Johnson was able to spend more time with the Fords, and he began to write poems and verse translations.<ref name="Lane p. 33"/> However, he spent only six months at Stourbridge before returning once again to his parents' home in Lichfield.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=61}}</ref>

During this time, Johnson's future was uncertain as his father was deeply in debt.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=34}}</ref> To earn money, Johnson began to stitch books for his father, and it is possible that Johnson spent most of his time in his father's bookshop reading various works and building his literary knowledge. They remained in poverty until Sarah Johnson's cousin, Elizabeth Harriotts, died in February 1728 and left enough money to send Johnson to college.<ref name="Bate p. 87"/> On 31 October 1728, a few weeks after he turned 19, Johnson entered Pembroke College, Oxford.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=39}}</ref> The inheritance did not cover all of his expenses at Pembroke, but Andrew Corbet, a friend and fellow student at Pembroke, offered to make up the deficit.<ref name="Bate p. 88">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=88}}</ref>

Johnson made friends at Pembroke and read much. In later life, he told stories of his idleness.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=90–100}}. Bate also comments that Johnson's standard of effort was very high, so high that Johnson said he had never known a man to study hard.</ref> He was later asked by his tutor to produce a Latin translation of Alexander Pope 's ''Messiah'' as a Christmas exercise.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=91–92}}</ref> Johnson completed half of the translation in one afternoon and the rest the following morning. Although the poem brought him praise, it did not bring the material benefit he had hoped for.<ref name="Bate p. 92">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=92}}</ref> The poem later appeared in ''Miscellany of Poems'' (1731), edited by John Husbands, a Pembroke tutor, and is the earliest surviving publication of any of Johnson's writings. Johnson spent the rest of his time studying, even over the Christmas vacation. He drafted a "plan of study" called "Adversaria", which was left unfinished, and used his time to learn French while working on his knowledge of Greek.<ref name="Bate p. 9394">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=93–94}}</ref>

After thirteen months, a shortage of funds forced Johnson to leave Oxford without a degree, and he returned to Lichfield.<ref name="Bate p. 87">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=87}}</ref> Towards the end of Johnson's stay at Oxford his tutor, Jorden, left Pembroke and was replaced by William Adams (master)|William Adams . He enjoyed Adams as a tutor, but by December, Johnson was already a quarter behind in his student fees, and he was forced to return home. He left behind many books that he had borrowed from his father because he could not afford to transport them and as a symbolic gesture in that he hoped to return to his studies soon.<ref name="Bate p. 106107">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=106–107}}</ref>

He eventually received a degree: just before the publication of his ''Dictionary'' in 1755, Oxford University awarded Johnson the degree of Master of Arts (Oxbridge and Dublin)|Master of Arts .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=128–129}}</ref> He was awarded an honorary doctorate in 1765 by Trinity College Dublin and in 1775 by Oxford University.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=36}}</ref> In 1776, he returned to Pembroke with Boswell and toured the college with his previous tutor Adams, who was then its Master. He used that visit to recount his time at the college, his early career, and to express his later fondness for Jorden.<ref name="Bate p. 99">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=99}}</ref>

===Early career===
Little is known about Johnson's life between the end of 1729 and 1731; it is likely that he lived with his parents. He experienced bouts of mental anguish and physical pain during years of illness;<ref name="Bate p. 127">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=127}}</ref> his tics and gesticulations associated with Tourette syndrome became more noticeable and were often commented upon.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=24}}</ref> By 1731 Johnson's father was deeply in debt and had lost much of his standing in Lichfield. Johnson hoped to get an usher's position which became available at Stourbridge Grammar School, but as he did not have a degree his application was passed over on 6 September 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 127"/> At about this time, Johnson's father became ill and developed an "inflammatory fever" which led to his death in December 1731.<ref name="Bate p. 129">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=129}}</ref> Johnson eventually found employment as undermaster at a school in Market Bosworth, run by Sir Wolstan Dixie, 4th Baronet who allowed Johnson to teach without a degree.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=130–131}}</ref> Although Johnson was treated as a servant,<ref>{{Harvnb|Hopewell|1950|p= 53}}</ref> he found pleasure in teaching despite thinking it boring. After an argument with Dixie he quit the school, and by June 1732 he had returned home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=131–132}}</ref>

Image:Johnson Wife.jpg|thumb|left|upright|Elizabeth "Tetty" Porter, Johnson's wife

Johnson continued to look for a position at a Lichfield school. After being turned down for a position in Ashbourne, he spent his time with his friend Edmund Hector, who was living in the home of the publisher Thomas Warren. At the time Warren was starting his '' Birmingham Journal (eighteenth century)|Birmingham Journal '', and he enlisted Johnson's help.<ref name="Bate p. 134">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=134}}</ref> This connection with Warren grew, and Johnson proposed a translation of Jeronimo Lobo 's account of the Ethiopian Empire|Abyssinians .<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=137–138}}</ref> Johnson read Abbé Joachim Le Grand's French translations, and thought that a shorter version might be "useful and profitable".<ref name="Bate p. 138">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=138}}</ref> Instead of writing the whole work himself, he dictated to Hector, who then took the copy to the printer and made any corrections. Johnson's ''A Voyage to Abyssinia'' was published a year later.<ref name="Bate p. 138"/> He returned to Lichfield in February 1734, and began an annotated edition of Poliziano 's Latin poems, along with a history of Latin poetry from Petrarch to Poliziano; a ''Proposal'' was soon printed, but a lack of funds halted the project.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=140–141}}</ref>

Johnson remained with his close friend Harry Porter during a terminal illness,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=144}}</ref> which culminated when Porter died on 3 September 1734, leaving his wife Elizabeth Jervis Porter (otherwise known as "Tetty") widowed at the age of 45, with three children.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=143}}</ref> Some months later, Johnson began to court her. The Reverend William Shaw claims that "the first advances probably proceeded from her, as her attachment to Johnson was in opposition to the advice and desire of all her relations".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1969|p=88}}</ref> Johnson was inexperienced in such relationships, but the well-to-do widow encouraged him and promised to provide for him with her substantial savings.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=145}}</ref> They married on 9 July 1735, at St Werburgh's Church, Derby|St Werburgh's Church in Derby .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=147}}</ref> The Porter family did not approve of the match, partly because Johnson was 25 and Elizabeth was 21 years his elder, and Elizabeth's marriage to Johnson so disgusted her son Jervis that he severed relations with her.<ref name="Wain p. 65">{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=65}}</ref> However, her daughter Lucy had accepted Johnson from the start, and her other son, Joseph, accepted the marriage later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=146}}</ref>

In June 1735, while working as a tutor for Thomas Whitby's{{clarify|pre-text=who?|date=November 2010}} children, Johnson had applied for the position of headmaster at Solihull School .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=153–154}}</ref> Although Walmesley{{clarify|pre-text=who?|date=November 2010}} gave his support, Johnson was passed over because the school's directors thought he was "a very haughty, ill-natured gent., and that he has such a way of distorting his face (which though he can't help) the gent[s] think it may affect some lads".<ref name="Bate p. 154">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=154}}</ref> With Walmesley's encouragement, Johnson decided that he could be a successful teacher if he ran his own school.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=153}}</ref> In the autumn of 1735, Johnson opened Edial Hall School as a private academy at Edial, near Lichfield. He had only three pupils: Lawrence Offley, George Garrick, and the 18-year-old David Garrick, who later became one of the most famous actors of his day.<ref name="Bate p. 154"/> The venture was unsuccessful and cost Tetty a substantial portion of her fortune. Instead of trying to keep the failing school going, Johnson began to write his first major work, the historical tragedy '' Irene (play)|Irene ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=156}}</ref> Biographer Robert DeMaria believed that Tourette syndrome likely made public occupations like schoolmaster or tutor almost impossible for Johnson to hold; this may have led Johnson to "the invisible occupation of authorship".<ref name="Demaria pp. 5-6"/>

Johnson left for London with his former pupil David Garrick on 2 March 1737, the day Johnson's brother had died. He was penniless and pessimistic about their travel, but fortunately for them, Garrick had connections in London, and the two were able to stay with his distant relative, Richard Norris.<ref name="Bate p. 16465">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=164–165}}</ref> Johnson soon moved to Greenwich near the Golden Hart Tavern to finish ''Irene''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=168–169}}</ref> On 12 July 1737 he wrote to Edward Cave with a proposal for a translation of Paolo Sarpi 's ''The History of the Council of Trent'' (1619), which Cave did not accept until months later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=81}}; {{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=169}}</ref> In October 1737 Johnson brought his wife to London, and he found employment with Cave as a writer for '' The Gentleman's Magazine ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=169–170}}</ref> His assignments for the magazine and other publishers during this time were "almost unparalleled in range and variety", and "so numerous, so varied and scattered" that "Johnson himself could not make a complete list".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=14}}</ref> The name '' Columbia (name)|Columbia '', a poetic name for America coined by Johnson, first appears in a 1738 weekly publication of the debates of the British Parliament in the Magazine.<ref>[http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ilej/image1.pl?item=page&seq=5&size=1&id=gm.1738.6.x.8.x.x.285a The Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. 8, June 1738, p. 285] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref><ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=_DoJAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Debates in Parliament'', Samuel Johnson.] Retrieved 22 August 2009</ref>

Image:Johnson London 01.jpg|thumb|left|upright|Title page of ''London'' second edition

In May 1738 his first major work, the poem '' London (1738 poem)‎|London '', was published anonymously.<ref name="Lynch p. 5">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p= 5}}</ref> Based on Juvenal's Satires of Juvenal#Satire III: There is no Room in Roma for a Roman|Satire III, it describes the character Thales leaving for Wales to escape the problems of London,<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=172}}</ref> which it portrays as a place of crime, corruption, and neglect of the poor. Johnson could not bring himself to regard the poem as earning him any merit as a poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=18}}</ref> Alexander Pope claimed that the author "will soon be déterré" (brought to light, become well known), but this would not happen until 15 years later.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/>

In August, Johnson's lack of an MA degree from Oxford or Cambridge led to his being denied a position as master of the Appleby Grammar School. In an effort to end such rejections, Pope asked Lord Gower to use his influence to have a degree awarded to Johnson.<ref name="Watkins p.25">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=25}}</ref> Gower petitioned Oxford for an honorary degree to be awarded to Johnson, but was told that it was "too much to be asked".<ref name="Bate p. 182">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=182}}</ref> Gower then asked a friend of Jonathan Swift to plead with Swift to use his influence at the University of Dublin to have a Masters degree awarded to Johnson, in the hope that this could then be used to justify an MA from Oxford,<ref name="Bate p. 182"/> but Swift refused to act on Johnson's behalf.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=25–26}}</ref>

Between 1737 and 1739, Johnson befriended Richard Savage .<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=51}}</ref> Feeling guilty about living on Tetty's money, Johnson stopped living with her and spent his time with Savage. They were poor and would stay in taverns or sleep in "night-cellars" except for nights that they would roam the streets because they lacked the necessary funds.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=178–179}}</ref> Savage's friends tried to help him by attempting to persuade him to move to Wales, but Savage ended up in Bristol and again fell into debt. He was committed to debtors' prison and died in 1743. A year later, Johnson wrote '' Life of Mr Richard Savage '' (1744), a "moving" work which, in the words of the biographer and critic Walter Jackson Bate, "remains one of the innovative works in the history of biography".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=180–181}}</ref>

===''A Dictionary of the English Language''===
{{See also|A Dictionary of the English Language|The Rambler|The Vanity of Human Wishes|Irene (play)}}

Image:Johnson Dictionary2.jpg|upright|thumb|Johnson's ''Dictionary'' Vol. 1 (1755) title page

In 1746, a group of publishers approached Johnson about creating an authoritative dictionary of the English language;<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> a contract with William Strahan and associates, worth 1,500 guineas, was signed on the morning of 18 June 1746.<ref name="Hitchings">{{Harvnb|Hitchings|2005|p=54}}</ref> Johnson claimed that he could finish the project in three years. In comparison, the Académie Française had forty scholars spending forty years to complete its dictionary, which prompted Johnson to claim, "This is the proportion. Let me see; forty times forty is sixteen hundred. As three to sixteen hundred, so is the proportion of an Englishman to a Frenchman".<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> Although he did not succeed in completing the work in three years, he did manage to finish it in nine, justifying his boast.<ref name="Lynch p. 5"/> According to Bate, the ''Dictionary'' "easily ranks as one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship, and probably the greatest ever performed by one individual who laboured under anything like the disadvantages in a comparable length of time".<ref name="Bate240">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=240}}</ref> However, others, such as Thomas Babington Macaulay who described Johnson as "a wretched etymologist," have criticised Johnson's dictionary.<ref>Winchester 2003, p.33</ref>

Johnson's dictionary was not the first, nor was it unique. It was, however, the most commonly used and imitated for the 150 years between its first publication and the completion of the '' Oxford English Dictionary '' in 1928. Other dictionaries, such as Nathan Bailey 's ''Dictionarium Britannicum'', included more words,<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> and in the 150 years preceding Johnson's dictionary about twenty other general-purpose monolingual "English" dictionaries had been produced.<ref name="Lynch p. 2">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=2}}</ref> However, there was open dissatisfaction with the dictionaries of the period. In 1741, David Hume claimed: "The Elegance and Propriety of Stile have been very much neglected among us. We have no Dictionary of our Language, and scarce a tolerable Grammar".<ref name="Lynch p. 4">{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|p=4}}</ref> Johnson's ''Dictionary'' offers insights into the 18th century and "a faithful record of the language people used".<ref name="Lynch p. 1"/> It is more than a reference book; it is a work of literature.<ref name="Lynch p. 2"/>

For a decade, Johnson's constant work on the ''Dictionary'' disrupted his and Tetty's living conditions. He had to employ a number of assistants for the copying and mechanical work, which filled the house with incessant noise and clutter. He was always busy with his work, and kept hundreds of books around.<ref name="Lane p. 109">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=109}}</ref> John Hawkins described the scene: "The books he used for this purpose were what he had in his own collection, a copious but a miserably ragged one, and all such as he could borrow; which latter, if ever they came back to those that lent them, were so defaced as to be scarce worth owning".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hawkins|1787|p=175}}</ref> Johnson was also distracted by Tetty's health, as she started to show signs of a terminal illness.<ref name="Lane p. 109"/> To accommodate both his wife and his work, he moved to 17 Gough Square near his printer, William Strahan.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=110}}</ref>

Image:Johnson Dictionary3.jpg|left|thumb|upright|Johnson's ''Dictionary'' Vol. 2 (1755) title page

In preparation for the work, Johnson wrote a ''Plan'' for the ''Dictionary''. Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield, was the patron of the ''Plan'', to Johnson's displeasure.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=117–118}}</ref> Seven years after first meeting Johnson to go over the work, Chesterfield wrote two anonymous essays in ''The World'' recommending the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Lane p. 118">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=118}}</ref> He complained that the English language lacked structure and argued in support of the dictionary. Johnson did not like the tone of the essay, and he felt that Chesterfield had not fulfilled his obligations as the work's patron.<ref name="Lane p. 121">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=121}}</ref> Johnson wrote a letter expressing this view and harshly criticising Chesterfield, saying "Is not a patron, my lord, one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help? The notice which you have been pleased to take of my labours, had it been early, had been kind: but it has been delayed till I am indifferent and cannot enjoy it; till I am solitary and cannot impart it; till I am known and do not want it."<ref name="Bate p. 257">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=257}}</ref> Chesterfield, impressed by the language, kept the letter displayed on a table for anyone to read.<ref name="Bate p. 257"/>

The ''Dictionary'' was finally published in April 1755, with the title page acknowledging that Oxford had awarded Johnson a Master of Arts degree in anticipation of the work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=256, 318}}</ref> The published dictionary was a huge book. Its pages were nearly {{convert|18|in|cm|0}} tall, and the book was {{convert|20|in|cm|0}} wide when opened; it contained 42,773 entries, to which only a few more were added in subsequent editions, and sold for the extravagant price of £4 10s, perhaps the rough equivalent of £350 today.<ref name=CC>{{citation|chapter=Currency Converter|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/currency/|title=The National Archives|place= Kew, Richmond, Surrey|accessdate=24 July 2008}}</ref> An important innovation in English lexicography was to illustrate the meanings of his words by literary quotation, of which there are around 114,000. The authors most frequently cited include Shakespeare, Milton and Dryden .<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynch|2003|pp=8–11}}</ref> It was years before "Johnson's Dictionary", as it came to be known, turned a profit. Author's royalties were unknown at that time, and Johnson, once his contract to deliver the book was fulfilled, received no further money from its sale. Years later, many of its quotations would be repeated by various editions of the '' Webster's Dictionary '' and the '' New English Dictionary ''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=25}}</ref>

Besides working on the ''Dictionary'', Johnson also wrote various essays, sermons, and poems during these nine years.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=113}}</ref> He decided to produce a series of essays under the title '' The Rambler '' that would run every Tuesday and Saturday for twopence each. Explaining the title years later, he told his friend, the painter Joshua Reynolds : "I was at a loss how to name it. I sat down at night upon my bedside, and resolved that I would not go to sleep till I had fixed its title. ''The Rambler'' seemed the best that occurred, and I took it".<ref name="Lane p. 115">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=115}}</ref> These essays, often on moral topics, tended to be more grave than the title of the series would suggest; his first comments in ''The Rambler'' were to ask "that in this undertaking thy Holy Spirit may not be withheld from me, but that I may promote thy glory, and the salvation of myself and others".<ref name="Lane p. 115"/> The popularity of ''The Rambler'' took off once the issues were collected as a volume; they were reprinted nine times during Johnson's life. Writer and printer Samuel Richardson, enjoying the essays greatly, questioned the publisher as to who wrote the works; only he and a few of Johnson's friends were told of Johnson's authorship.<ref name="Lane p. 116">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=116}}</ref> One friend, the novelist Charlotte Lennox, includes a defence of ''The Rambler'' in her novel ''The Female Quixote'' (1752). In particular, the character Mr. Glanville says, "you may sit in Judgment upon the Productions of a ''Young'', a ''Richardson'', or a ''Johnson''. Rail with premeditated Malice at the ''Rambler''; and for the want of Faults, turn even its inimitable Beauties into Ridicule" (Book VI, Chapter XI). Later, she claims Johnson as "the greatest Genius in the present Age".<ref>{{Harvnb|Lynn|1997|p=241}}</ref>

{{Quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|quote=His necessary attendance while his play was in rehearsal, and during its performance, brought him acquainted with many of the performers of both sexes, which produced a more favourable opinion of their profession than he had harshly expressed in his Life of Savage ... He for considerable time used to frequent the Green Room, and seemed to take delight in dissipating his gloom, by mixing in the sprightly chit-chat of the motley circle then to be found there. Mr David Hume related to me from Mr Garrick, that Johnson at last denied himself this amusement, from considerations of rigid virtue; saying, "I'll come no more behind your scenes, David; for the silk stockings and white bosoms of your actresses excite my amorous propensities".<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=67}}</ref>
|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

However, not all of his work was confined to ''The Rambler''. His most highly regarded poem, '' The Vanity of Human Wishes '', was written with such "extraordinary speed" that Boswell claimed Johnson "might have been perpetually a poet".<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 22">{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=22}}</ref> The poem is an imitation of Juvenal's '' Satires of Juvenal#Satire X: Wrong Desire is the Source of Suffering|Satire X '' and claims that "the antidote to vain human wishes is non-vain spiritual wishes".<ref>{{Harvnb|Weinbrot|1997|p=49}}</ref> In particular, Johnson emphasises "the helpless vulnerability of the individual before the social context" and the "inevitable self-deception by which human beings are led astray".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=281}}</ref> The poem was critically celebrated but it failed to become popular, and sold less than ''London''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|pp=113–114}}</ref> In 1749, Garrick made good on his promise that he would produce ''Irene'', but its title was altered to '' Irene (play)#Stage history|Mahomet and Irene '' to make it "fit for the stage".<ref name="Lane p. 114">{{Harvnb|Lane|1975|p=114}}</ref> The show eventually ran for nine nights.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1955|p=17}}</ref>

Tetty Johnson spent most of her time in London ill, and in 1752 she decided to return to the countryside while Johnson was busy working on his ''Dictionary''. She died on 17 March 1752, and, at word of her death, Johnson wrote a letter to his old friend Taylor, which according to Taylor "expressed grief in the strongest manner he had ever read".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=272–273}}</ref> He wrote a sermon in her honour, to be read at her funeral, but Taylor refused to read it, for reasons which are unknown. This only exacerbated Johnson's feelings of being lost, and his despair after the death of his wife, and John Hawkesworth had to take over organising the funeral. Johnson felt guilty about the poverty in which he believed he had forced Tetty to live, and blamed himself for neglecting her. He became outwardly discontent, and his diary was filled with prayers and laments over her death until his own. She was his primary motivation, and her death hindered his ability to complete his work.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=273–275}}</ref>

===Later career===
{{See also|The Plays of William Shakespeare|The Idler (1758–1760)|The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia}}

On 16 March 1756, Johnson was arrested for an outstanding debt of £5 18 Shilling|s . Unable to contact anyone else, he wrote to the writer and publisher Samuel Richardson . Richardson, who had previously lent Johnson money, sent him six guineas to show his good will, and the two became friends.<ref name="Bate p. 321">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=321}}</ref> Soon after, Johnson met and befriended the painter Joshua Reynolds, who so impressed Johnson that he declared him "almost the only man whom I call a friend".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=324}}</ref> Reynolds' younger sister Frances observed during their time together "that men, women and children gathered around him [Johnson]", laughing at his gestures and gesticulations.<ref name=Murray1611>{{Harvnb|Murray|1979|p=1611}}</ref> In addition to Reynolds, Johnson was close to Bennet Langton and Arthur Murphy . Langton was a scholar and an admirer of Johnson who persuaded his way into a meeting with Johnson which led to a long friendship. Johnson met Murphy during the summer of 1754 after Murphy came to Johnson about the accidental republishing of the ''Rambler'' No. 190, and the two became friends.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=322–323}}</ref> Around this time, Anna Williams began boarding with Johnson. She was a minor poet who was poor and becoming blind, two conditions that Johnson attempted to change by providing room for her and paying for a failed cataract surgery. Williams, in turn, became Johnson's housekeeper.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|p=319}}</ref>

To occupy himself, Johnson began to work on ''The Literary Magazine, or Universal Review'', the first issue of which was printed on 19 March 1756. Philosophical disagreements erupted over the purpose of the publication when the Seven Years' War began and Johnson started to write polemical essays attacking the war. After the war began, the ''Magazine'' included many reviews, at least 34 of which were written by Johnson.<ref name="Bate p. 328">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=328}}</ref> When not working on the ''Magazine'', Johnson wrote a series of prefaces for other writers, such as Giuseppe Baretti, William Payne and Charlotte Lennox .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=329}}</ref> Johnson's relationship with Lennox and her works was particularly close during these years, and she in turn relied so heavily upon Johnson that he was "the most important single fact in Mrs Lennox's literary life".<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=221–222}}</ref> He later attempted to produce a new edition of her works, but even with his support they were unable to find enough interest to follow through with its publication.<ref>{{Harvnb|Clarke|2000|pp=223–224}}</ref> To help with domestic duties while Johnson was busy with his various projects, Richard Bathurst, a physician and a member of Johnson's Club, pressured him to take on a free slave, Francis Barber, as his servant.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=325–326}}</ref>

These efforts, however, consumed only a small portion of his time; his work on '' The Plays of William Shakespeare|Edition of Shakespeare '' took up the rest. On 8 June 1756, Johnson published his '' The Plays of William Shakespeare#Proposal|Proposals for Printing, by Subscription, the Dramatick Works of William Shakespeare '', which argued that previous editions of Shakespeare were edited incorrectly and needed to be corrected.<ref name="Bate p. 330">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=330}}</ref> However, Johnson's progress on the work slowed as the months passed, and he told music historian Charles Burney in December 1757 that it would take him until the following March to complete it. Before that could happen, he was arrested again, for a debt of £40, in February 1758. The debt was soon repaid by Jacob Tonson, who had contracted Johnson to publish ''Shakespeare'', and this encouraged Johnson to finish his edition to repay the favour. Although it took him another seven years to finish, Johnson completed a few volumes of his ''Shakespeare'' to prove his commitment to the project.<ref name="Bate p. 332">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=332}}</ref>

In 1758, Johnson began to write a weekly series, ''The Idler'', which ran from 15 April 1758 to 5 April 1760, as a way to avoid finishing his ''Shakespeare''. This series was shorter and lacked many features of ''The Rambler''. Unlike his independent publication of ''The Rambler'', ''The Idler'' was published in a weekly news journal ''The Universal Chronicle'', a publication supported by John Payne, John Newbery, Robert Stevens and William Faden.<ref name="Bate p. 334">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=334}}</ref> Since ''The Idler'' did not occupy all Johnson's time, he was able to publish his philosophical novella '' The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia|Rasselas '' on 19 April 1759. The "little story book", as Johnson described it, describes the life of Prince Rasselas and Nekayah, his sister, who are kept in a place called the Happy Valley in the land of Abyssinia. The Valley is a place free of problems, where any desire is quickly satisfied. The constant pleasure does not, however, lead to satisfaction; and, with the help of a philosopher named Imlac, Rasselas escapes and explores the world to witness how all aspects of society and life in the outside world are filled with suffering. They return to Abyssinia, but do not wish to return to the state of constantly fulfilled pleasures found in the Happy Valley.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=337–338}}</ref> ''Rasselas'' was written in one week to pay for his mother's funeral and settle her debts; it became so popular that there was a new English edition of the work almost every year. References to it appear in many later works of fiction, including '' Jane Eyre '', '' Cranford (novel)|Cranford '' and '' The House of the Seven Gables ''. Its fame was not limited to English-speaking nations: ''Rasselas'' was immediately translated into five languages (French, Dutch, German, Russian and Italian), and later into nine others.<ref name="Bate p. 337">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=337}}</ref>

By 1762, however, Johnson had gained notoriety for his dilatoriness in writing; the contemporary poet Churchill teased Johnson for the delay in producing his long-promised edition of Shakespeare: "He for subscribers baits his hook / and takes your cash, but where's the book?"<ref name="Bate p. 391">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=391}}</ref> The comments soon motivated Johnson to finish his ''Shakespeare'', and, after receiving the first payment from a government pension on 20 July 1762, he was able to dedicate most of his time towards this goal.<ref name="Bate p. 391"/> Earlier that July, the 24-year-old King George III granted Johnson an annual pension of £300 in appreciation for the ''Dictionary''.<ref name="Bate Achievement p. 36"/> While the pension did not make Johnson wealthy, it did allow him a modest yet comfortable independence for the remaining 22 years of his life.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=356}}</ref> The award came largely through the efforts of Thomas Sheridan (actor)|Sheridan and the John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute|Earl of Bute . When Johnson questioned if the pension would force him to promote a political agenda or support various officials, he was told by Bute that the pension "is not given you for anything you are to do, but for what you have done".<ref name="Bate p. 354-356">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=354–356}}</ref>

On 16 May 1763, Johnson first met 22-year-old James Boswell —who would later become Johnson's first major biographer—in the bookshop of Johnson's friend, Tom Davies. They quickly became friends, although Boswell would return to his home in Scotland or travel abroad for months at a time.<ref name="Bate p. 360">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=360}}</ref> Around the spring of 1763, Johnson formed " The Club (dining club)|The Club ", a social group that included his friends Reynolds, Edmund Burke|Burke, Garrick, Goldsmith and others (the membership later expanded to include Adam Smith and Edward Gibbon ). They decided to meet every Monday at 7:00 pm at the Turk's Head in Gerrard Street, Soho, and these meetings continued until long after the deaths of the original members.<ref name="Bate p. 366">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=366}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=During the whole of the interview, Johnson talked to his Majesty with profound respect, but still in his firm manly manner, with a sonorous voice, and never in that subdued tone which is commonly used at the levee and in the drawing-room. After the King withdrew, Johnson shewed himself highly pleased with his Majesty's conversation and gracious behaviour. He said to Mr Barnard, 'Sir, they may talk of the King as they will; but he is the finest gentleman I have ever seen.'<ref name="Boswell p. 135">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 135}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 9 January 1765, Murphy introduced Johnson to Henry Thrale, a wealthy brewer and Member of Parliament|MP, and his wife Hester Thrale|Hester . They struck up an instant friendship; Johnson was treated as a member of the family, and was once more motivated to continue working on his ''Shakespeare''.<ref name="Bate p. 393">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=393}}</ref> Afterwards, Johnson stayed with the Thrales for 17 years until Henry's death in 1781, sometimes staying in rooms at Thrale's Anchor Brewery in Southwark .<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=262}}</ref> Hester Thrale's documentation of Johnson's life during this time, in her correspondence and her diary ('' Thraliana ''), became an important source of biographical information on Johnson after his death.<ref name="Keymer p. 186">{{Harvnb|Keymer|1999|p=186}}</ref>

Johnson's edition of ''Shakespeare'' was finally published on 10 October 1765 as ''The Plays of William Shakespeare, in Eight Volumes ... To which are added Notes by Sam. Johnson'' in a printing of one thousand copies. The first edition quickly sold out, and a second was soon printed.<ref name="Bate p. 395">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=395}}</ref> The plays themselves were in a version that Johnson felt most true to the original based on his analysis of the manuscript editions. Johnson's revolutionary innovation was to create a set of corresponding notes that allow readers to identify the meaning behind many of Shakespeare's more complicated passages or ones that may have been transcribed incorrectly over time.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=397}}</ref> Included within the notes are occasional attacks upon rival editors of Shakespeare's works and their editions.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=194}}</ref> Years later, Edmond Malone, an important Shakespearean scholar and friend of Johnson's, stated that Johnson's "vigorous and comprehensive understanding threw more light on his authour than all his predecessors had done".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=396}}</ref>

In February 1767 Johnson was granted a special meeting with King George III. This took place at the library of the Queen's house, and it was organised by Frederick Augusta Barnard, the King's librarian.<ref name="Boswell p. 133">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 133}}</ref> The King, hearing that Johnson would visit the library, commanded Barnard to introduce him to Johnson.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 134}}</ref> After a short meeting, Johnson was impressed with both the King himself and their conversation.<ref name="Boswell p. 135"/>

===Final works===
{{See also|A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland|Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets}}

Image:Samuel Johnson by Joshua Reynolds 2.png|thumb|upright|alt=Man staring intently at a book held close to his face|Johnson (1775) showing his intense concentration and the weakness of his eyes; he did not want to be depicted as "Blinking Sam"<ref>{{Harvnb|Yung|1984|p=14}}</ref>

On 6 August 1773, eleven years after first meeting Boswell, Johnson set out to visit his friend in Scotland, to begin "a journey to the western islands of Scotland", as Johnson's 1775 account of their travels would put it.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=463}}</ref> The work was intended to discuss the social problems and struggles that affected the Scottish people, but it also praised many of the unique facets of Scottish society, such as a school in Edinburgh for the deaf and mute.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=471}}</ref> Also, Johnson used the work to enter into the dispute over the authenticity of James Macpherson's Ossian poems, claiming they could not have been translations of ancient Scottish literature on the grounds that "in those times nothing had been written in the Earse [i.e. Gaelic] language".<ref>{{Harvnb|Johnson|1970|pp=104–105}}</ref> There were heated exchanges between the two, and according to one of Johnson's letters, MacPherson threatened physical violence.<ref>{{Harvnb|Wain|1974|p=331}}</ref> Boswell's account, '' The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides '' (1786), was a preliminary attempt at a biography before his '' Life of Johnson ''. Included were various quotes and descriptions of events, including anecdotes such as Johnson swinging around a broadsword while wearing Scottish garb, or dancing a Highland jig.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=468–469}}</ref>

In the 1770s, Johnson, who had tended to be an opponent of the government early in life, published a series of pamphlets in favour of various government policies. In 1770 he produced ''The False Alarm'', a political pamphlet attacking John Wilkes . In 1771, his ''Thoughts on the Late Transactions Respecting Falkland's Islands'' cautioned against war with Spain.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=443–445}}</ref> In 1774 he printed ''The Patriot'', a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1996|p=182}}</ref> This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term "patriotism" by John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson opposed "self-professed Patriots" in general, but valued what he considered "true" patriotism.<ref name="Griffin p. 21">{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=21}}</ref>

The last of these pamphlets, ''Taxation No Tyranny'' (1775), was a defence of the Coercive Acts and a response to the Declaration of Rights of the First Continental Congress of America, which protested against taxation without representation .<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=446}}</ref> Johnson argued that in emigrating to America, colonists had "voluntarily resigned the power of voting", but they still had " virtual representation " in Parliament. In a parody of the Declaration of Rights, Johnson suggested that the Americans had no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish people . If the Americans wanted to participate in Parliament, said Johnson, they could move to England and purchase an estate.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ammerman|1974|p=13}}</ref> Johnson denounced English supporters of American separatists as "traitors to this country", and hoped that the matter would be settled without bloodshed, but that it would end with "English superiority and American obedience".<ref>{{Harvnb|DeMaria|1994|pp=252–256}}</ref> Years before, Johnson had advocated that the English and the French were just "two robbers" who were stealing land from the natives, and that neither deserved to live there.<ref name="Bate p. 328"/> After the signing of the 1783 Peace of Paris treaties, marking the colonists' defeat of the British, Johnson was "deeply disturbed" with the "state of this kingdom".<ref>{{Harvnb|Griffin|2005|p=15}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=Mr Thrale's death was a very essential loss to Johnson, who, although he did not foresee all that afterwards happened, was sufficiently convinced that the comforts which Mr Thrale's family afforded him, would now in great measure cease.<ref name="Boswell p. 273">{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p= 273}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

On 3 May 1777, while Johnson was trying to save Reverend William Dodd from execution, he wrote to Boswell that he was busy preparing a "little Lives" and "little Prefaces, to a little edition of the English Poets".<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=525}}</ref> Tom Davies, William Strahan and Thomas Cadell had asked Johnson to create this final major work, the '' Lives of the English Poets '', for which he asked 200 guineas, an amount significantly less than the price he could have demanded.<ref name="Bate p. 526">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=526}}</ref> The ''Lives'', which were critical as well as biographical studies, appeared as prefaces to selections of each poet's work, and they were quite larger than originally expected.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=527}}</ref> The work was finished in March 1781 and the whole collection was published in six volumes. As Johnson justified in the advertisement for the work, "my purpose was only to have allotted to every Poet an Advertisement, like those which we find in the French Miscellanies, containing a few dates and a general character."<ref>{{Harvnb|Clingham|1997|p=161}}</ref>

Johnson was unable to enjoy this success because Henry Thrale, the dear friend with whom he lived, died on 4 April 1781.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=546–547}}</ref> Life changed quickly for Johnson, and Hester Thrale became interested in the Italian singing teacher Gabriel Mario Piozzi, which forced Johnson to move on from his previous lifestyle.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|pp=557, 561}}</ref> After returning home and then travelling for a short period, Johnson received word that his friend and tenant Robert Levet, had died on 17 January 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=562}}</ref> Johnson was shocked by the death of Levet, who had resided at Johnson's London home since 1762.<ref>{{citation|url=http://books.google.com/?id=qXHv5EClgZgC&pg=PA231&lpg=PA231&dq=wakefield+levett|title= The Samuel Johnson Encyclopedia|author=Rogers, Pat|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|location= Westport, CT|year=1996|isbn=978-0-313-29411-2}}</ref> Shortly afterwards Johnson caught a cold which turned into bronchitis, lasting for several months, and his health was further complicated by "feeling forlorn and lonely" by Levet's death being accompanied by the deaths of Johnson's friend Thomas Lawrence and his housekeeper Williams.<ref>{{Harvnb|Martin|2008|pp=501–502}}</ref>

===Final years===
Although he had recovered his health by August, he experienced emotional trauma when he was given word that Hester Thrale would sell the residence that Johnson shared with the family. What hurt Johnson the most was the possibility that he would be left without her constant company.<ref name="Bate p. 566">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=566}}</ref> Months later, on 6 October 1782, Johnson attended church for the final time in his life, to say goodbye to his former residence and life. The walk to the church strained him, but he managed the journey unaccompanied.<ref name="Bate p. 569">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=569}}</ref> While there, he wrote a prayer for the Thrale family:

{{quote|To thy fatherly protection, O Lord, I commend this family. Bless, guide, and defend them, that they may pass through this world, as finally to enjoy in thy presence everlasting happiness, for Jesus Christ's sake. Amen.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=284}}</ref>}}

Hester Thrale did not completely abandon Johnson, and asked him to accompany the family on a trip to Brighton.<ref name="Bate p. 569"/> He agreed, and was with them from 7 October until 20 November 1782.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=570}}</ref> On his return, his health began to fail him, and he was left alone following Boswell's visit on 29 May 1783 until he travelled to Scotland.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=575}}</ref>

On 17 June 1783, Johnson's poor circulation resulted in a stroke<ref>{{Harvnb|Wiltshire|1991|p=51}}</ref> and he wrote to his neighbour, Edmund Allen, that he had lost the ability to speak.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=71}}</ref> Two doctors were brought in to aid Johnson; he regained his ability to speak two days later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=71–72}}</ref> Johnson feared that he was dying, and wrote:

{{quote|The black dog I hope always to resist, and in time to drive, though I am deprived of almost all those that used to help me. The neighbourhood is impoverished. I had once Richardson and Lawrence in my reach. Mrs. Allen is dead. My house has lost Levet, a man who took interest in everything, and therefore ready at conversation. Mrs. Williams is so weak that she can be a companion no longer. When I rise my breakfast is solitary, the black dog waits to share it, from breakfast to dinner he continues barking, except that Dr. Brocklesby for a little keeps him at a distance. Dinner with a sick woman you may venture to suppose not much better than solitary. After dinner, what remains but to count the clock, and hope for that sleep which I can scarce expect. Night comes at last, and some hours of restlessness and confusion bring me again to a day of solitude. What shall exclude the black dog from an habitation like this?<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=72}}</ref>}}
By this time he was sick and gout -ridden. He had surgery for gout, and his remaining friends, including novelist Fanny Burney (the daughter of Charles Burney), came to keep him company.<ref name="Watkins p.73">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=73}}</ref> He was confined to his room from 14 December 1783 to 21 April 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=74}}</ref>

His health had begun to improve by May 1784, and he travelled to Oxford with Boswell on 5 May 1784.<ref name="Watkins p.74"/> By July, many of Johnson's friends were either dead or gone; Boswell had left for Scotland and Hester Thrale had become engaged to Piozzi. With nobody to visit, Johnson expressed a desire to die in London and arrived there on 16 November 1784. On 25 November 1784, he allowed Burney to visit him and expressed an interest to her that he should leave London; he soon left for Islington, to George Strahan's home.<ref>{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|pp=76–77}}</ref> His final moments were filled with mental anguish and delusions; when his physician, Thomas Warren, visited and asked him if he were feeling better, Johnson burst out with: "No, Sir; you cannot conceive with what acceleration I advance towards death."<ref name="Watkins p.78">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=78}}</ref>

{{quote box|quoted=yes|width=25em|align=left|quote=A few days before his death, he had asked Sir John Hawkins, as one of his executors, where he should be buried; and on being answered, "Doubtless, in Westminster Abbey," seemed to feel a satisfaction, very natural to a Poet.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=341}}</ref>|source=Boswell's ''Life of Samuel Johnson''}}

Many visitors came to see Johnson as he lay sick in bed, but he preferred only Langton's company.<ref name="Watkins p.78"/> Burney waited for word of Johnson's condition, along with Windham, Strahan, Hoole, Cruikshank, Des Moulins and Barber.<ref name="Watkins p.79">{{Harvnb|Watkins|1960|p=79}}</ref> On 13 December 1784, Johnson met with two others: a young woman, Miss Morris, whom Johnson blessed, and Francesco Sastres, an Italian teacher, who was given some of Johnson's final words: "''Iam Moriturus''" ("I who am about to die").<ref name="Bate p. 599">{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=599}}</ref> Shortly afterwards he fell into a coma, and died at 7:00 pm.<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

Langton waited until 11:00 pm to tell the others, which led to John Hawkins' becoming pale and overcome with "an agony of mind", along with Seward and Hoole describing Johnson's death as "the most awful sight".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hill|1897|p=160 (Vol. 2)}}</ref> Boswell remarked, "My feeling was just one large expanse of Stupor ... I could not believe it. My imagination was not convinced."<ref name="Bate p. 599"/> William Gerard Hamilton joined in and stated, "He has made a chasm, which not only nothing can fill up, but which ''nothing has a tendency to fill up''. -Johnson is dead.- Let us go to the next best: There is nobody; -''no man can be said to put you in mind of Johnson''."<ref name="Watkins p.79"/>

He was buried on 20 December 1784 at Westminster Abbey with an inscription that reads:
:Samuel Johnson, LL.D.
:''Obiit XIII die Decembris,''
:''Anno Domini''
:M.DCC.LXXXIV.
:''Ætatis suœ'' LXXV.<ref>{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|pp=341–342}}</ref>

==Bibliography==
===Works===
* [http://books.google.com/books?id=CxATAAAAYAAJ&ots=V-uf-Ec85P&dq=Samuel%20Johnson%20%22Dictionary%20of%20the%20English%20Language%22&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q=&f=false ''A Dictionary of the English Language''], 1755. (Available online from Google Book Search.)
** ([http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/5430 Preface available separately from Project Gutenberg])
* ''The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia'', 1759.
* ''A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland'', 1775.
* ''Lives of the Poets'', 1799-81.
* ''Samuel Johnson: The Major Works,'' ed. Donald Greene, 2009. ([http://www.amazon.com/Samuel-Johnson-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199538336/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256974594&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search])

===Biographies===

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}

==References==
* {{Citation1|last=Ammerman|first=David|title=In the Common Cause: American Response to the Coercive Acts of 1774|location=New York|publisher=Norton|year=1974|isbn=0-393-00787-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Arnold|first=Matthew|authorlink=Matthew Arnold|editor1-last=Ricks|editor1-first=Christopher|editor1-link=Christopher Ricks|title=Selected Criticism of Matthew Arnold|year=1972|publisher=New American Library|location=New York|oclc=6338231}}
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|authorlink=Walter Jackson Bate|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1977|publisher=Harcourt Brace Jovanovich|location=New York|isbn=0-15-179260-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bate|first=Walter Jackson|title=The Achievement of Samuel Johnson|year=1955|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|oclc=355413}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|contribution=Hester Thrale Piozzi 1741–1821|title=Women Memoirists Vol. II|year=1998|editor-last=Bloom|editor-first=Harold|pages=74–76|publisher=Chelsea House|location=Philadelphia|isbn=0-7910-4655-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Bloom|first=Harold|authorlink=Harold Bloom|title=The Western Canon|year=1995|publisher=Macmillan|location=London|isbn=0-333-64813-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=Correspondence and Other Papers of James Boswell Relating to the Making of the Life of Johnson|editor-last=Waingrow|editor-first=Marshall|publisher=McGraw-Hill|location=New York|year=1969|oclc=59269}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Boswell|first=James|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|year=1986|editor-last=Hibbert|editor-first=Christopher|publisher=Penguin Classics|location=New York|isbn=0-14-043116-0}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clarke|first=Norma|title=Dr Johnson's Women|year=2000|publisher=Hambledon|location=London|isbn=1-85285-254-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Clingham|first= Greg|year=1997|contribution= Life and literature in the ''Lives''| title= The Cambridge companion to Samuel Johnson|editor1-last= Clingham|editor1-first= Greg| pages= 161–191|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Davis|first=Bertram|contribution=Introduction|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL. D.|year=1961|editor-last=Davis|editor-first=Bertram|pages=vii–xxx|publisher=Macmillan Company|location=New York|oclc=739445}}.
* {{Citation1|last=DeMaria, Jr.|first=Robert|title=The Life of Samuel Johnson|publisher=Blackwell|location=Oxford|year=1994|isbn=1-55786-664-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Fine|first=LG|title=Samuel Johnson's illnesses|journal=J Nephrol|volume=19|issue=Suppl 10|pages=S110–4|date=May–June 2006|pmid=16874722}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|authorlink=Donald Greene|title=Samuel Johnson: Updated Edition|publisher=Twayne Publishers|location= Boston|year=1989|isbn=0-8057-6962-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Greene|first=Donald|contribution=Introduction|title=Political Writings|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first=Donald|publisher=Liberty Fund|location=Indianapolis|isbn=0-86597-275-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Griffin|first=Dustin|title=Patriotism and Poetry in Eighteenth-Century Britain|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|year=2005|isbn=0-521-00959-6}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Grundy|first=Isobel|year=1997|contribution= Jane Austen and literary traditions| title= The Cambridge companion to Jane Austen|editor1-last=Copeland|editor1-first=Edward|editor2-last=McMaster|editor2-first=Juliet| pages= 189–210|location= Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-49867-8}}
* {{Citation1|last=Hawkins|first=John|title=Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D.|publisher=J. Buckland|location=London|year=1787|oclc=173965}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hibbert|first=Christopher|authorlink=Christopher Hibbert|title=The Personal History of Samuel Johnson|location=New York|publisher=Harper & Row|year=1971|isbn=0-06-011879-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hitchings|first=Henry|authorlink=Henry Hitchings|title=Dr Johnson's Dictionary: The Extraordinary Story of the Book that Defined the World|publisher=John Murray|location=London|year=2005|isbn=0-7195-6631-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hill|first=G. Birkbeck, editor|authorlink=George Birkbeck Norman Hill|title=Johnsonian Miscellanies|location=London|publisher=Oxford Clarendon Press|year=1897|oclc=61906024}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Hopewell|first=Sydney|title=The Book of Bosworth School, 1320–1920|year=1950|location=Leicester|publisher=W. Thornley & Son|oclc=6808364}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Letters| editor-last = Chapman| editor-first = R. W.|year=1952|location= Oxford|publisher=Clarendon|isbn=0-19-818538-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Johnson's Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and Boswell's Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides|editor-last= Chapman|editor-first= R. W.|location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1970|isbn=0-19-281072-3}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Johnson|first=Samuel|title=Major Works|year=2000|editor-last=Greene|editor-first= Donald|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=0-19-284042-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Kammer|first=Thomas|year=2007|chapter=Mozart in the Neurological Department: Who has the Tic?|editor1-first= Julien|editor1-last= Bogousslavsky|editor2-first= M|editor2-last= Hennerici|title=Neurological Disorders in Famous Artists, Part 2|pages=184–92|isbn=978-3-8055-8265-0|pmid= 17495512|publisher=Karger|location=Basel|volume=22|journal=Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience|doi=10.1159/0000102880}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Keymer|first=Thomas|year=1999|contribution= Johnson, Madness, and Smart|title=Christopher Smart and the Enlightenment|editor1-last=Hawes|editor1-first= Clement|location=New York, NY|publisher=St. Martin's Press|isbn=0-312-21369-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lane|first=Margaret|title=Samuel Johnson & his World|year=1975|publisher=Harper & Row Publishers|location=New York|isbn=0-06-012496-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Leavis|first=FR|authorlink=F. R. Leavis|title=Johnson as Critic|journal= Scrutiny (journal)|Scrutiny |volume=12|pages=187–204|year=1944}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynch|first=Jack|contribution=Introduction to this Edition|title=Samuel Johnson's Dictionary|year=2003|editor-last=Lynch|editor-first=Jack|pages=1–21|publisher=Walker & Co|location=New York|isbn=0-8027-1421-8}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Lynn|first=Steven|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's critical reception|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}
* {{Citation1|last=Martin|first=Peter|title=Samuel Johnson:A Biography|year=2008|publisher=Belknap Press|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts|isbn=978-0-674-03160-9}}.
* {{Citation1|last=McHenry|first=LC Jr|title=Samuel Johnson's tics and gesticulations|journal=Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences|volume=22|issue=2|pages=152–68|date=April 1967|pmid=5341871|doi=10.1093/jhmas/XXII.2.152}}
* {{Citation1|last=Murray|first=TJ|date=16 June 1979|pmc=1599158|title=Dr Samuel Johnson's movement disorder|periodical= British Medical Journal |volume=1|issue=6178|pages=1610–14|pmid= 380753|doi=10.1136/bmj.1.6178.1610}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Murray|first= TJ|title= Samuel Johnson: his ills, his pills and his physician friends|journal=Clin Med|volume=3|issue=4|pages=368–72|date=July–August 2003|pmid=12938754}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Needham|first=John|title=The Completest Mode|location=Edinburgh|publisher=Edinburgh University Press|year=1982|isbn=0-85224-387-1}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pearce|first=JMS|date=July 1994|pmc=1294650|title=Doctor Samuel Johnson: 'the Great Convulsionary' a victim of Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome|journal= Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine |volume=87|pages=396–399|pmid= 8046726|issue=7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Piozzi|first=Hester|title=Thraliana: The Diary of Mrs. Hester Lynch Thrale (Later Mrs. Piozzi) 1776–1809|year=1951|editor1-last=Balderson|editor1-first=Katharine|publisher=Clarendon|place= Oxford|oclc= 359617}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Pittock|first=Murray|year=2004|contribution= Johnson, Boswell, and their circle|title=The Cambridge companion to English literature from 1740 to 1830|editor1-last= Keymer|editor1-first= Thomas|editor2-last= Mee|editor2-first= Jon|pages= 157–172|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-00757-7}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Rogers|first=Pat|title=Johnson and Boswell: The Transit of Caledonia|publisher=Oxford University Press|place= Oxford|year=1995|isbn=0-19-818259-7}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Sacks|first=Oliver|author-link= Oliver Sacks|date=19–26 December 1992|title=Tourette's Syndrome and creativity|journal= British Medical Journal |volume=305|issue= 6868|pages=1515–16|pmc=1884721|pmid=1286364|quote=... the case for Samuel Johnson having the syndrome, though [...] circumstantial, is extremely strong and, to my mind, entirely convincing|doi=10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1515|issue=6868}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Shapiro|first=Arthur K|authorlink=Arthur K. Shapiro|title=Gilles de la Tourette syndrome|year=1978|publisher=Raven Press|location=New York|isbn=0-89004-057-5}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Skargon|first=Yvonne|title=The Importance of Being Oscar: Lily and Hodge and Dr. Johnson|place= London|publisher=Primrose Academy|year=1999|oclc= 56542613}}.
* {{Citation1|author=Stern JS, Burza S, Robertson MM |title=Gilles de la Tourette's syndrome and its impact in the UK |journal=Postgrad Med J |volume=81 |issue=951 |pages=12–9 |date = January 2005|pmid=15640424 |doi=10.1136/pgmj.2004.023614 |quote=It is now widely accepted that Dr Samuel Johnson had Tourette's syndrome |pmc=1743178 }}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wain|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson|year=1974|publisher=Viking Press|place= New York|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Watkins|first=WBC|title=Perilous Balance: The Tragic Genius of Swift, Johnson, and Sterne|year=1960|publisher=Walker-deBerry, Inc.|place= Cambridge, MA|oclc=40318001}}.
* {{Citation1|last= Weinbrot|first= Howard D.|editor-last=Clingham|editor-first=Greg|contribution=Johnson's Poetry|title=Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson|year=1997|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-55625-2}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wilson|first=Edmund|year=1950|contribution= Reexamining Dr. Johnson|title=Classics and Commercials|editor1-last=Wilson|editor1-first=Edmund|location=New York|publisher=Farrar, Straus & Giroux|oclc=185571431}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Wiltshire|first=John|title=Samuel Johnson in the Medical World|year=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|isbn=0-521-38326-9}}.
*{{Citation1|last=Winchester|first=Simon|title=The Meaning of Everything|year=2003|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-517500-4}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Winters|first=Yvor|authorlink=Yvor Winters|title=The Anatomy of Nonsense|location=Norfolk, Conn.|publisher=New Directions|year=1943|oclc=191540}}.
* {{Citation1|last=Yung|first=Kai Kin|title=Samuel Johnson, 1709–84|publisher=Herbert Press|place= London|year=1984|isbn=0-906969-45-X}}.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Johnson, Samuel}}
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]