For my analysis of this edition has thrown light upon what of itself is evident--that of some poems or groups of poems _1633_ provides a more accurate text than of others, viz. of those for which its source was a manuscript resembling _D_, _H49_, _Lec_, but possibly more correct than any one of these, or revised by an editor who knew the poems. But in printing some of the poems, e.g. _The Progresse of the Soule_, a number of the letters to noble ladies and others,[44] the _Epithalamion made at Lincolns Inne_, _The Prohibition_, and a few others, for which _D_, _H49_, _Lec_ was not available, _1633_ seems to have followed an inferior manuscript, _A18_, _N_, _TC_ or one resembling it. In these cases it is possible to correct _1633_ by comparing it with a better single manuscript, as _G_ or _W_, or group of manuscripts, as _D_, _H49_, _Lec_. Sometimes even a generally inferior manuscript like _O'F_ seems to offer a better text of an individual poem, at least in parts, for occasionally the correct reading has been preserved in only one or two manuscripts. Only _W_ among eleven manuscripts which I have recorded (and I have examined others) preserves the reading in the _Epithalamion made at Lincolns Inne_, p. 143, l. 57: His steeds nill be restrain'd --which is quite certainly right. Only three manuscripts have the, to my mind, most probably correct reading in _Satyre I_, l. 58, p. 147: The Infanta of London; and only two, _Q_ and the _Dyce MS._ which is its duplicate, the tempting and, I think, correct reading in _Satyre IV_, l. 38, p. 160: He speaks no language. Lastly, there are poems for which _1633_ is not available. The authenticity of these will be discussed later. Their text is generally very corrupt, especially of those added in _1650_ and _1669_. Here the manuscripts help us enormously. With their aid I have been able to give an infinitely more readable text of the fine _Elegie XII_, 'Since she must go'; the brilliant though not very edifying _Elegies XVII_, _XVIII_, and _XIX_; as well as of most of the poems in the Appendixes. The work of correcting some of these had been begun by Dr. Grosart and Mr. Chambers, but much was still left to do by a wider collation. Dr. Grosart was content with one or two generally inferior manuscripts, and Mr. Chambers mentions manuscripts which time or other reasons did not allow him to examine, or he could not have been content to leave the text of these poems as it stands in his edition.