MY DEAR SIR,

In every narrative, whether historical or biographical, authenticity is of the utmost consequence[1].  Of this I have ever been so firmly persuaded, that I inscribed a former work[2] to that person who was the best judge of its truth.  I need not tell you I mean General Paoli; who, after his great, though unsuccessful, efforts to preserve the liberties of his country, has found an honourable asylum in Britain, where he has now lived many years the object of Royal regard and private respect[3]; and whom I cannot name without expressing my very grateful sense of the uniform kindness which he has been pleased to shew me[4].

The friends of Doctor Johnson can best judge, from internal evidence, whether the numerous conversations which form the most valuable part of the ensuing pages are correctly related.  To them, therefore, I wish to appeal, for the accuracy of the portrait here exhibited to the world.

As one of those who were intimately acquainted with him, you have a title to this address.  You have obligingly taken the trouble to peruse the original manuscript of this Tour, and can vouch for the strict fidelity of the present publication[5].  Your literary alliance with our much lamented friend, in consequence of having undertaken to render one of his labours more complete, by your edition of Shakspeare[6], a work which I am confident will not disappoint the expectations of the publick, gives you another claim.  But I have a still more powerful inducement to prefix your name to this volume, as it gives me an opportunity of letting the world know that I enjoy the honour and happiness of your friendship; and of thus publickly testifying the sincere regard with which I am,

My dear Sir,
Your very faithful
And obedient servant,
James Boswell.

London,
20th September, 1785.

ADVERTISEMENT

TO THE

THIRD EDITION.

Animated by the very favourable reception which two large impressions of this work have had[7], it has been my study to make it as perfect as I could in this edition, by correcting some inaccuracies which I discovered myself, and some which the kindness of friends or the scrutiny of adversaries pointed out.  A few notes are added, of which the principal object is, to refute misrepresentation and calumny.

To the animadversions in the periodical Journals of criticism, and in the numerous publications to which my book has given rise, I have made no answer.  Every work must stand or fall by its own merit.  I cannot, however, omit this opportunity of returning thanks to a gentleman who published a Defence of my Journal, and has added to the favour by communicating his name to me in a very obliging letter.