ABSTRACT
Published 1886. Written 1886, recited 27 Oct. (Mem. ii 324, 506). The title in the trial edition of 1886 (British Library) is Locksley Hall 1886. See Locksley Hall and headnote (p. 181). H. Nbks 51, 53 (1885–6) and Lpr 128 contain many drafts; some of the more important variants are given below, but without distinguishing in general between first and final readings. J. H. Buckley (p. 234) points out that T. ‘strove through heavy revision of several early drafts to control the invective … late in the composition of the poem he added several lines’ [151–4] of retreat, as he did in Maud. ‘The nucleus of the poem’ (T.) was ll. 13–15, which had been dropped from Locksley Hall. The idea of a sequel probably owed something to a comment by A. H. Japp in 1865 (Three Great Teachers,p. 132):
‘The poet has here carried the poem to the strict limit of his experience at the time it was written. It closes, but does not cease. It abounds with suggestions as to a higher result in prospect. It points to a region of lofty possibility. In one respect, however, it was unsafe for the poet to leave his hero here; that is, when viewed simply from the formally moral standpoint, which requires that a direct lesson be drawn from everything. If, however, the poet ever again wrote on a kindred theme, it would test at once his insight and fuller experience, — whether he would conduct his hero to a more worthy goal.’
