Keats for verdurous glooms and winding mossy ways.

Scott and Coleridge, though like Byron they are less with nature than with romance, share the same communion.
This imaginative sensibility of the romantics not only deepened their communion with nature, it brought them into a truer relation with what had before been created in literature and art.

The romantic revival is the Golden Age of English criticism; all the poets were critics of one sort or another--either formally in essays and prefaces, or in passing and desultory flashes of illumination in their correspondence.
Wordsworth, in his prefaces, in his letter to a friend of Burns which contains such a breadth and clarity of wisdom on things that seem alien to his sympathies, even in some of his poems; Coleridge, in his _Biographia Literaria_, in his notes on Shakespeare, in those rhapsodies at Highgate which were the basis for his recorded table talk; Keats in his letters; Shelley in his _Defence of Poetry_; Byron in his satires and journals; Scott in those lives of the novelists which contain so much truth and insight into the works of fellow craftsmen--they are all to be found turning the new acuteness of impression which was in the air they breathed, to the study of literature, as well as to the study of nature.

Alongside of them were two authors, Lamb and Hazlitt, whose bent was rather critical than creative, and the best part of whose intelligence and sympathy was spent on the sensitive and loving divination of our earlier literature.

With these two men began the criticism of acting and of pictorial art that have developed since into two of the main kinds of modern critical writing.
Romantic criticism, both in its end and its method, differs widely from that of Dr.Johnson and his school.