Coleridge explains in the preface that the title to Sib-On refreshing our classic memory we grasp the very essence ylline Leaves, the 1817 volume that includes most of Coler-and soul of this mysterious title. The Sibyl wrote her idge's poetry up to that date, is" in allusion to the prophecies on leaves; so does Mr. Coleridge his verses—the fragmentary and widely scattered state in which [the prophecies of the Sibyl became incomprehensible, if not in poems] have been long suffered to remain,"(p. i). 1 Like stantly gathered; so does the sense of Mr. Coleridge's po Wordsworth's 1815 Poems, this first collective edition of etry; the Sibyl asked the same price from Tarquin for her Coleridge's poetry is arranged not in order of composition books when in 9, 6, and 3 volumes; so does Mr. Coleridge or publication but by genre, subject, and importance—both for his, when scattered over sundry publications, and now as individually and to the collection.^ collected into one—as soon as the Sibyl had concluded her bargain she vanished, and was seen no more in the regions of Cumae; so does Mr. Coleridge assure us he will be seen The title Coleridge chooses is more assertive than no more on Parnassus—the Sibylline books were preserved such comparably inclusive volumes as Wordsworth's Poems by Kings, had a College of Priests to take care of them, and or Scott's 1820 Miscellaneous Poetry (Fraistat, pp. 26ff). It were so esteemed by the people, that they were very seldom evokes Aeneas's plea to the Sibyl of Cumae:" Only trust consulted; even so does Mr. Coleridge look to delight not thy verses to leaves, lest they fly in disorder, the sport Monarchs, his book will be treasured by the Eleven Univer of rushing winds; chant them thyself, I pray"(Aeneid, vi, 74-sities, and we venture to suppose that it will be treated by 76, trans. Fairclough [1974]). The book, then, is meant as the public, quoad frequent perusal, pretty much in the same Coleridge's gathering and codification of his vatic effusions way with the ravings of his Archetypes (Reiman, ed. The Ro into the most coherent, ordered body that these" fragmen-mantics Reviewed [1972], Part A, pp. 590) tary" poems can form." The whole is now presented to the reader collectively, with considerable additions and altera-Several aspects of Sibylline Leaves are worth study—its tions, and as perfect as the author's judgment and powers relation to the book that grew out of its preface, the fit could render them," writes Coleridge (p. ii). Neil Fraistat ographia Literana; contemporary reaction to the collection; comments:" As Coleridge expected his reader to know, to and the influence it had on the received views of Coler piece together the scattered leaves of the Sibyl is to dis-idge's poetry—but the central issue, which receives much of cover the contents of a prophecy. Indeed, the chance to my attention here, is the contrast between, on the one build a poetic whole from disparate'fragments'—to fash-hand, Coleridge's attempt to fix the canon of his works and, ion, to adapt Coleridge's term, a kind of unity from on the other, the fragmentary quality of not only some of multeity—had special significance for the Romantics, who the poems but the collection itself. To some extent Sibylline were themselves exploring the meaning of life within a Leaves, notably with its fragmentary final poem," The whole that seemed increasingly fragmented"(p. 20). The Destiny of Nations," plays up this conflict. The title of the important question, then, is how prophetic, how recovered, book asks the reader to expect prophecy and fragmenta and how unified are these leaves. Probably many of Coler-tion, and what follows does not disappoint: many poems idge's readers …