These are merely cases, however, in which notes refuse to be helpful; they are apt to become absolutely oppressive when accompanying older writers. A few years ago I bought a little English edition of the _Religio Medici_, to which are added the _Letter to a Friend_ and _Christian Morals_. The book is one of Macmillan’s Golden Treasury Series, and is edited by Mr. W. A. Greenhill, who opens with an “Editor’s Preface,” eighteen pages long, and fairly bristling with knowledge points. After this come a “Chronological Table of Dates, Connected with Sir Thomas Browne,” two pages long; “Note on the Discovery of the Remains of Sir Thomas Browne in 1840,” two pages; “Brief Notices of Former Editors of the _Religio Medici_,” four pages; “List of Editions of _Religio Medici_,” thirteen pages; “Collations of Some Old Editions of _Religio Medici_,” three pages; “List of Editions of _Letter to a Friend_ and _Christian Morals_,” five pages; “_Addenda et Corrigenda_,” one page. Having thus laboriously cleared the way, we are at last gladdened by a sight of the _Religio Medici_ itself, which, together with the _Letter_ and _Christian Morals_, occupies two hundred and thirty pages. Then, following close, like the mighty luggage of a Persian army, come an array of “Notes Critical and Explanatory,” eighty-eight pages; and an Index just sixty-nine pages long. Thus it will be seen that two hundred and five pages of editorial work are deemed necessary to elucidate two hundred and thirty pages of Sir Thomas Browne, which seems like an intolerable deal of sack for such a quantity of bread. To compress all this into a small volume requires close printing and flimsy paper, and the ungrateful reader thinks in his hardened heart that he would rather a little more space had been given to the author, and a little less to the editor, who is for most of us, after all, a secondary consideration. It is also manifestly impossible, with such a number of notes, even to refer to them at the bottom of the page; yet without this guiding finger they are often practically useless. We are not as a rule aware, when we read, what information we lack, and it becomes a grievous duty to examine every few minutes and see if we ought not to be finding something out. A glance at the notes themselves is very discouraging: “P. 10, l. 14, directed, A to E, G; direct, F, H to L. “P. 10, l. 16, rectified, A to I; rectified, J, K, L. “P. 10, l. 28, consist, A to J; resist, K, L.” Reading with such helps as these becomes a literary nightmare: “P. 8, l. 8, distinguished] Chapman (R) and Gardiner (W) read ‘being distinguished.’ “P. 8, l. 8, distinguished not only] Wilkin (T) read ‘not only distinguished.’” And this is weirder still: “P. 59, l. 4, antimetathesis, C to M; antanaclasis, A, B; transposition of words, N, O.”