There exists in the Bodleian an early copy of _Namby Pamby_ (1725?) "By Capt. Gordon, Author of the Apology for Parson Alberony and the Humorist." The joke here is surely in not only letting the Whig Gordon attack the Whig Ambrose Phillips but then, also by association, connecting Gordon's name with the attack on Walpole and Marlborough. There is a parallel to this: Carey's "Lilliputian Ode on Their Majesties Succession" appeared in _Poems_ (1729), separated from the pieces previously mentioned by only one short patriotic stanza. Yet in the Huntington Library there is an almost identical version (1727) which was ostensibly published by Swift. The first six editions of _Dumpling_ appeared in 1726 and both editions of the _Key_ are dated 1727. Apart from the dates on the title page, this can be verified externally by the initial entries in Wilford's _Monthly Catalogue_ (1723-30) of February 1726 and April 1727 respectively. Swift's first return visit to England (in March 1726 after twelve years) was subsequent to the publication of _Dumpling_; his second visit was in the same month as the publication of the _Key_, which assigns him _ex post facto_ the authorship "from Page 1. to Page 25." of _Dumpling_ (_Key_, p. ix). Sir John Pudding and his Dumpling are manipulated throughout these pamphlets to carry a multiplicity of meaning which brings them almost as close to symbolism as they are to the allegory that Carey claims to be writing (_Key_, pp. 18, 24 and 29). Collation of _Dumpling_ with its _Key_ clearly reveals (with due allowance for satiric arabesque) a series of allegories moving backwards and forwards through history. At various stages, Sir John Pudding (ostensibly Brawn [or John Brand], the famous cook of the Rummer in Queen Street who appears in Dr. King's _Art of Cookery_ [1708]), becomes identifiable with King John, Sir John Falstaff, Walpole, Marlborough, and even Queen Anne (for the change in sexes see _Key_, p. 18). All of these enjoyed Dumpling, and their tastes are ostensibly approved while at the same time being heavily undercut with satiric indirection. Naturally enough, Walpole (although a Dumpling Eater) is treated with considerable circumspection. Carey has warned us that he is a bad chronologist (_Key_, p. 21), and the Sir John Pudding (be he Walpole or Marlborough [d. 1722]), who at the end of _Dumpling_ is referred to as "the Hero of this DUMPLEID," is for good reason spoken of in the past tense. The fable of Dumpling, in the true spirit of _lanx satura_, allows Carey to attack by indirection a complete spectrum of traditional eighteenth-century targets. Like the musician and the satirist that he is, he builds up to a magnificent crescendo (pp. 19-24 of his "Dumpleid") which results in one of the finest displays of sustained virtuosity in early eighteenth-century pamphlet writing.