introduced a preface of her own which was later incorporated into the text, which in turn was put forth as Mrs. Eddy's (Mrs. Glover's) own during the period of her work in Lynn. Thus we have before us all the stages which led from entire fidelity to Quimby to the later attitude as expressed in “Science and Health” after the first edition. Then, too, in the New York Times, July 10, 1904, portions of “Questions and Answers” were printed side by side with passages from “Science and Health,” together with a facsimile showing emendations in Mrs. Eddy's copy of the manuscript in her own hand. The article in the Times was conclusive evidence regarding this important transition from “Questions and Answers” to “The Science of Man.” All that was needed to make the textual history complete was the publication in full of “Questions and Answers” in the present volume.
From all the evidence before us it is perfectly clear, that until sometime in 1872, at the close of her intermediate period, Mrs. Eddy maintained her attitude of loyalty to Quimby as expressed in her letters, 1862-65, and her newspaper contributions and lectures of those years. We find her in the Stoughton period still attributing “Questions and Answers” to him without qualification. After that time, as Miss Milmine has clearly shown, changes in terminology were gradually introduced, and Dr. Quimby was no longer mentioned as the writer and discoverer. What followed is not for us to chronicle here.
For our present purposes it is a question of the gradual development of Dr. Quimby's own views, which have reached a certain stage of clearness only in the case of “Questions and Answers.” Dr. Quimby was not at his best when thus answering questions, but rather when giving the silent treatment and conversing with his patients. While Mrs. Eddy was limited to a few manuscripts, in so far as she copied or rewrote them for her own purpose as a teacher, she had also had the benefit of that decisive silent healing and the touch with a quickening personality which gave her the directive impetus for her own work. This is the main consideration. And this ought not to be lost sight of in our interest in tracing the vicissitudes of such a manuscript as “Questions and Answers.”
For better or worse, that manuscript is Quimby's. We may read it as a secondary expression of what Quimby
