The editing of correspondence has had a long if somewhat repetitive history. From the earliest editions published in the eighteenth century to the most recent, editors have been struggling with issues of how best to present the text to a contemporary readership. Edited editions seek to add value beyond that which can be realized by publishing an image or facsimile of the original witness. The added value of these editions typically comes in the form of a critical introduction and annotation. Added value, more contentiously, comes in the form of editorial interventions to the text. These interventions are made for a variety of reasons. Sometimes they are carried out when portions of the text are excised at the behest of the family, executors, or the judgment of the editor. Interventions are also made to “improve” readability, for example by modernizing a text, by correcting obvious mistakes (of spelling for example), or to add or alter punctuation. Still other interventions come in the form of adjudication: if that mark above a letter in a word in French is an accent, although the correspondence typically does not add accents when handwriting text; or whether in print editions line breaks, spaces between section breaks, or font choice is meaningful. “In making explicit what in the physical text was implicit, the editor is inevitably providing a subjective interpretation of the meaning-bearing aspects of text. A later editor, or the same editor returning with new information, may disagree with an earlier interpretation.”1