for in the case of a man like james the biographical question to be answered is not, as with a man of affairs: how can his actions be explained? but rather: what manner of being was he? what were his background and education? and, above all, what were his temperament and the bias of his mind? what native instincts, preferences, and limitations of view did he bring with him to his business of reading the riddle of the universe? his own informal utterances throw the strongest light on such questions.in these volumes i have attempted to make such a selection.the task has been simplified by the nature of the material, in which the most interesting letters were often found, naturally enough, to include the most vivid elements of which a picture could be composed.i have added such notes as seemed necessary in the interest of clearness; but i have tried to leave the reader to his own conclusions.the work was begun in 1913, but had to be laid aside; and i should regret the delay in completing it even more than i do if it were not that very interesting letters have come to light during the last three years.james was a great reader of biographies himself, and pointed again and again to the folly of judging a mans ideas by minute logical and textual examinations, without apprehending his mental attitude sympathetically.he was well aware that every mans philosophy is biased by his feelings, and is not due to purely rational processes.he was quite incapable himself of the cool kind of abstraction that comes from indifference about the issue.life spoke to him in even more ways than to most men, and he responded to its superabundant confusion with passion and insatiable curiosity.his spiritual development was a matter of intense personal experience.so students of his books may even find that this collection of informal and intimate utterances helps them to understand james as a philosopher and psychologist.i have not included letters that are wholly technical or polemic.such documents belong in a study of jamess philosophy, or in a history of its origin and influence.however interesting they might be to certain readers, their appropriate place is not here.a good deal of biographical information about william james, his brother henry, and their father has already been given to the public; but unfortunately it is scattered, and much of it is cast in a form which calls for interpretation or amendment.the elder henry james left an autobiographical fragment which was published in a volume of his literary remains, but it was composed purely as a religious record.he wrote it in the third person, as if it were the life of one stephen dewhurst, and did not try to give a circumstantial report of his youth or ancestry.later, his son henry wrote two volumes of early reminiscences in his turn.in a small boy and others and notes of a son and brother he reproduced the atmosphere of a household of which he was the last survivor, and adumbrated the figures of henry james, senior, and of certain other members of his family with infinite subtlety at every turn of the page.but he too wrote without much attention to particular facts or the sequence of events, and his two volumes were incomplete and occasionally inaccurate with respect to such details.accordingly i have thought it advisable to restate parts of the family record, even though the restatement involves some repetition.finally, i should explain that the letters have been reproduced _verbatim_, though not _literatim_, except for superscriptions, which have often been simplified.as respects spelling and punctuation, the manuscripts are not consistent.james wrote rapidly, used abbreviations, occasionally simplified his spelling, and was inclined to use capital letters only for emphasis.thus he often followed the french custom of writing adjectives derived from proper names with small letters_e.g._ french literature, european affairs.but when he wrote for publication he was too considerate of his readers attention to distract it with such petty irregularities; therefore unimportant peculiarities of orthography have generally not been reproduced in this book.on the other hand, the phraseology of the manuscripts, even where grammatically incomplete, has been kept.verbal changes have not been made except where it was clear that there had been a slip of the pen, and clear what had been intended.it is obvious that rhetorical laxities are to be expected in letters written as these were.no editor who has attempted to improve away such defects has ever deserved to be thanked.acknowledgments are due, first of all, to the correspondents who have generously supplied letters.several who were most generous and to whom i am most indebted have, alas! passed beyond the reach of thanks.i wish particularly to record my gratitude here to correspondents too numerous to be named who have furnished letters that are not included.such material, though omitted from the book, has been informing and helpful to the editor.one example may be citedthe copious correspondence with mrs.james which covers the period of every briefest separation; but extracts from this have been used only when other letters failed.from dr.dickinson s.miller, from professor r.b.perry, from my mother, from my brother william, and from my wife, all of whom have seen the material at different stages of its preparation, i have received many helpful suggestions, and i gratefully acknowledge my special debt to them.president eliot, dr.miller, and professor g.h.palmer were, each, so kind as to send me memoranda of their impressions and recollections.i have embodied parts of the memoranda of the first two in my notes; and have quoted from professor palmers minuteabout to appear in the harvard graduates magazine.for all information about william jamess barber ancestry i am indebted to the genealogical investigations of mrs.russell hastings