nk verse, the
latter in rhyme. The sonnets which appear for the
first time in the _Visions_ are those describing the
Wolf, the River, the Vessel, the City. There are four
pieces of the older series which are not reproduced in
the later. It would seem probable that they too may
have been written by Spenser in the days of his youth,
though at a later period of his life he cancelled and
superseded them. They are therefore reprinted in this
volume. (See pp. 699-701.)

Vander Noodt, it must be said, makes no mention of
Spenser in his volume. It would seem that he did not
know English, and that he wrote his _Declaration_--a
sort of commentary in prose on the _Visions_--in
French. At least we are told that this _Declaration_
is translated out of French into English by Theodore
Roest. All that is stated of the origin of his
_Visions_ is: 'The learned poete M. Francisce
Petrarche, gentleman of Florence, did invent and write
in Tuscan the six firste . . . . which because they
serve wel to our purpose, I have out of the Brabants
speache turned them into the English tongue;' and 'The
other ten visions next ensuing ar described of one
Ioachim du Bellay, gentleman of France, the whiche
also, because they serve to our purpose I have
translated them out of Dutch into English.' The fact
of the _Visions_ being subsequently ascribed to Spenser
would not by itself carry much weight. But, as Prof.
Craik pertinently asks, 'if this English version was
not the work of Spenser, where did Ponsonby [the
printer who issued that subsequent publication which
has been mentioned] procure the corrections which are
not mere typographical errata, and the additions and
other variations{3} that are found in his edition?'

In a work called _Tragical Tales_, published in
1587, there is a letter in verse, dated 1569, addressed
to 'Spencer' by George Turberville, then resident in
Russia as secretary to the English ambassador, Sir
Thomas Randolph. Anthony {a\} Wood says this Spencer was
the poet; but it can scarcely have been so.
'Turberville himself,' remarks Prof. Craik, 'is
supposed to have been at this time in his twenty-ninth
or thirtieth year, which is not the age at which men
choose boys of sixteen for their friends. Besides, the
verses seem to imply a friendship of some standing, and
also in the person addressed the habits and social
position of manhood. . . . It has not been commonly
noticed that this epistle from Rus