STEPHEN WILLIAMSON
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 AT LOS ANGELES 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 MAY TREAT MORRISON 
 
 IN MEMORY OF 
 
 ALEXANDER F MORRISON
 
 . Jt 
 
 
 A
 
 THE MONUMENT OF SHAKSPEARE ERECTED IK THE CHAKCEJL 
 OF THE CHURCH AT STRATFGRB UPON AVON.
 
 FRONT AND PROFILE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 MONUMENTAL BUST OF SHAKSPEARE. 
 
 BEHOLD THIS MARBLE. KNOW YE NOT 
 
 THE FEATURES f HATH NOT OFT HIS FAITHFUL TONGUE 
 TOLD YOU THE FASHION OF YOUR OWN ESTATE, 
 THE SECRETS OF YOt'R BOSOM ? HERE THEN, ROUND 
 THIS MONUMENT WITH REVERENCE WHILE YE STAND, 
 SAY TO EACH OTHER THIS WAS bHAKSPEARE'S FORM ; 
 WHO WALK'D IN EVERY PATH OF HUMAN LIFE, 
 FELT EVERY PASSION ; AND TO ALL MANKIND 
 DOTH NOW, WILL EVER, THAT EXPERIENCE YIELD 
 WHICH HIS OWN GENIUS ONLY COULD ACQUIRE. 
 
 AKENSIDE. 
 
 Kngrmnl 4jr nmjuox, from Drariagt y Jg. Bkrt. 
 
 Wood Cult I >m indebtfd lo Mr. Brittoa.
 
 AN 
 
 HISTORICAL ACCOUNT 
 
 OF 
 
 THE MONUMENTAL BUST 
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE, 
 
 IN THE 
 
 CHANCEL OF THE CHURCH, 
 
 AT 
 
 STRATFORD-UPON-AVON, WARWICKSHIRE ; 
 
 WITH 
 
 Critical Remarks on the Authors who have written on it. 
 
 BY ABRAHAM WIVELL, 
 
 PORTRAIT PAINTER: 
 
 Uontron: 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR, 40, CASTLE STREET EAST, 
 OXFORD STREET, 
 
 AND SOLD BY ALL BOOKSELLERS. 
 1827.
 
 By W. SM.TH 
 
 AM> CO. K.NG STKttT, LONG ACKt.
 
 PREFACE 
 
 MY PAMPHLET OF 1825, 
 
 IN submitting to the public the following few 
 pages on the subject of the Monumental Bust of 
 our great Dramatic Bard, it is not my intention to 
 enter into an account of the various portraits 
 professing to resemble that celebrated man, but 
 briefly to detail the facts relative to the bust ; with 
 such observations on the presumed likeness to 
 Shakspeare, as my recent investigations have 
 determined. 
 
 After a lapse of above two hundred years since 
 the death of the poet, and the erection of the 
 monument in his place of sepulture, so much interest 
 continues to be attached to the spot, that the 
 Church of Stratford-upon-Avon may be said to 
 be almost daily visited by travellers from all parts 
 of the civilized world. 
 
 The remaik having been made to me, by a 
 gentleman, who is an ardent admirer of Shakspeare, 
 and of the arts, that amongst all the numerous 
 engravings purporting to be done from the bust, 
 
 "432303 B 2
 
 iv PREFACE. 
 
 no satisfactory resemblance could be found, and some 
 discussion upon the subject taking place, it was 
 shortly followed by my being liberally commissioned 
 to visit Stratford, for the purpose of making the 
 drawing from which the plate was engraved, and 
 to which these pages refer. Having bestowed 
 much pains, and exerted my best abilities to pro- 
 duce a correct resemblance of the original, and 
 presuming that a few observations to accompany 
 the Print,* might not be found unworthy of at- 
 tention by the purchasers of the work, I have 
 ventured, with all due deference to the many and 
 high-talented writers, who have given to the world 
 their dissertations upon the bust of Shakspeare, to 
 publish my own opinion as to its character, history, 
 and authenticity, up to the present time. 
 
 A. W. 
 
 * The print of tlie bust of Shakspeare, has been engraved 
 by Mr. J.S. Agar, from the original drawing in the possession 
 of John Cordy, Esq. Published by George Lawford, Saville 
 Place. Print, 5s. Proof, 7*. (id.
 
 SHAKSPEARE's MONUMENT. 
 
 THE following remarks on the Monumental Bust 
 of Shakspeare, in the Church of the Holy Trinity, 
 Stratford -upon-A von, in Warwickshire, is printed 
 from my Pamphlet, 1825, with additions. I have 
 also given an interesting account of the Chancel 
 of the above church, which is extracted from an 
 elegant work* now in course of publication. 
 
 " The town of Stratford-upon-Avon, illustrious in 
 British topography as the birth-place of SHAKSPEARE, 
 is situated on the south-western border of the 
 county of Warwick, on a gentle ascent from the 
 banks of the Avon, which rises in a small spring 
 at Naseby, in Northamptonshire; and continuing 
 its meandering course in a south-westerly direction, 
 approaches Stratford in a wide and proudly swelling 
 stream, unequalled in any other part of its course. 
 The town is distant eight miles south-west from 
 Warwick, and ninety-four miles north west from 
 
 * Vide No. 4, "Views of Collegiate and Parochial Churches 
 in Great Britain, from drawings by J. P. Neale." The engravings 
 of which are very suitable to the illustration of the present work, 
 especially the fourth plate, which shows Shakspeare's monument, 
 his grave stone, and those of his family, &c. &c.
 
 6 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 London. The Church stands at the south-eastern 
 extremity, feitt .whushUii is approached by a 
 paved walk, under an avenue of lime trees, 
 which have been made to form a complete 
 arcade." 
 
 " The chancel, the eastern part of which is repre- 
 sented in Plate IV., is the most beautiful as well as 
 the most perfect division of this Church, and was 
 erected between the years 1465 and 1491, by 
 Thomas Balsall, D. D. who then held the office of 
 Dean. It is separated from the transept by an 
 oaken screen, which originally formed a part of the 
 ancient rood-loft; and which was glazed in the year 
 1813. Five large ornamented windows on each 
 side, give light to the chancel ; they were formerly 
 decorated with painted glass, the remains of which 
 were taken out in the year 1790, and transferred to 
 the centre of the great eastern window, where they 
 still remain, though in a very confused state. On 
 each side of the eastern window is a nich, boldly 
 finished in the Florid style of pointed architecture. 
 In the south wall, near the altar, are three simular 
 niches, conjoined, in which are placed the concessus, 
 or seats, for the priests officiating at mass; and 
 immediately adjoining them is the piscina. These 
 objects are all shewn in the Plate. On each side 
 of the chancel is a range of stalls belonging to 
 the ancient choir, remarkable for the grotesque 
 carvings which ornament the lower part of each 
 seat.
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 7 
 
 " Erected against the north wall, within the com- 
 munion rail, is a curious altar-tomb of alabaster, 
 to the memory of Dean Balsall, who died in 1491. 
 The front is divided into five compartments, in each 
 of which is sculptured some remarkable event in the 
 history of Our Saviour: 1st. The Flagellation; 2nd. 
 The leading to the Crucifixion ; 3d. The Crucifixion ; 
 4th. The Entombment ; 5th. The Resurrection. At 
 the west end are two niches, in one of which is the 
 figure of a saint, and in the other are three 
 figures of doubtful appropriation. At the east 
 end are likewise two niches, one containing the 
 figure of a saint, and the other three figures, one 
 of which appears to represent St. James. This 
 tomb, which has formerly been painted, is seven 
 feet six inches in length, by about three feet six 
 inches in height, and is covered by a slab of 
 marble, in which an engraved brass figure of Dean 
 Balsall and an inscription, were originally inlaid, 
 but have been long since torn away. The letters 
 t fc the initials of his name, and (ft U, carved 
 in stone, still remain in several places. Against 
 the eastern wall of the chancel is a monument, 
 in memory of John Combe, Esq. the subject 
 of a well known satirical epitaj h, ascribed 
 to Shakspeare; he died on the 10th of July, 
 1614." 
 
 " The next monument, that claims our attention, 
 is against the north wall, (being elevated about 
 live feet from the floor,) erected above the tomb
 
 8 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 which enshrines the dust of our incomparable 
 poet, WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE, 
 
 "Whose excellent genius 
 " Opened To him the whole art of man 
 
 "All the mines of Fancy, 
 
 "All the stores of Nature, 
 
 ' And gave him power, beyond all other Writers, 
 "To move ! astonish! and delight mankind !" 
 
 Our immortal bard is represented in the attitude 
 of inspiration, with a cushion before him, a pen in 
 his right hand, and bis left rested upon a scroll. 
 This bust is fixed under an arch, between two 
 Corinthian columns of black marble, with gilded 
 bases and capitals, supporting the entablature ; 
 above which, and surmounted by a death's head, 
 are carved his arms; and on each side is a small 
 figure in a sitting posture, one holding in his left 
 hand a spade, and the other, whose eyes are 
 closed, with an inverted torch in his left hand, the 
 right resting upon a scull, as symbols of mortality. 
 This bust was originally coloured to resemble life, 
 conformably to the taste of the times in which the 
 monument was erected ; * the eyes being of a light 
 
 * Sir Henry Wootton, in his Elements of Architecture, calls 
 the fashion of colouring statues an English barbarism: but Sir 
 William Hamilton, in the M. S. accounts which accompanied 
 several valuable drawings of the discoveries made at Pompeii, 
 and presented by him to the Antiquarian Society, proved that it 
 was usual to colour statues among the ancients. In the chapel of 
 Isis, in the place already mentioned, the image of that goddess
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 
 
 hazel, and the hair and beard aubufne. The dress 
 consisted of a scarlet doublet, over which was a 
 loose black gown without sleeves: the lower part of 
 the cushion before him was of a crimson colour, 
 and the upper part green, with gilt tassels, &c. 
 SHAKSPEARE, however, stood in need of no such 
 memorial as this ; his own works have rendered him 
 immortal " to the last syllable of recorded time." 
 
 " Exegit monuraenluni aere perenuius, 
 
 " Regalique situ Paramidutn aitius ; 
 
 " Quod non imber edax, non aquilo impotens, 
 
 " Possit diruere, aut innumerabilis 
 
 " Annorum series, et fuga temporum." 
 
 " A doubt, perhaps, not unworthy of notice, arose 
 about sixty years ago, whether this original monu- 
 mental bust of SHAKSPEARE had any resemblance of 
 the bard ; but this doubt did not take date before the 
 public regard shewn to his memory, by erecting 
 for him the elegant cenotaph in Westminster Abbey. 
 The statue in that magnificent monument is in a 
 noble attitude, and excites an awful admiration in 
 the beholder; the face is venerable and majestic, 
 and well expresses that intenseness of serious thought, 
 
 had been painted, as her robe was of a purple hue ; and Janius, 
 on the painting of the ancients, observed from Pausanias and 
 Herodotus, that sometimes the statues of the ancients were 
 coloured after the manner of pictures. There are numerous in- 
 stances, both before and after SHAKSPE ARE'S time, (not to mention 
 those in Stratford Church,) of the monumental portraits of the 
 great being painted in their proper colours.
 
 10 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 that depth of contemplation, which the poet undoubt- 
 edly, sometimes had. The face on the Stratford 
 monument bears very little if any resemblance to 
 that at Westminster. The air of it is, indeed, some- 
 what thoughtful, but then it arises from a cheer- 
 fulness of thought, which, it must be allowed, 
 SHAK.SPEARE, at proper times, was no stranger to. 
 However this may be, as the faces on the two 
 monuments are unlike each other, the admirers of 
 that at Westminster only, averred, that the country 
 figure differed as much from the likeness of the 
 man, as it did from the face in the Abby ; and so 
 far endeavoured to depreciate its merit. This is a 
 derogation by no means to be allowed of ; and for 
 the following reasons : SHAKSPEARE died before he 
 hadcompleated the age of fifty-three ;* the unanimous 
 tradition of this neighbourhood is, that by the 
 uncommon bounty of the Earl of Southampton, he 
 was enabled to purchase houses and land at Strat- 
 ford; where, after retiring from the public stage, 
 he lived cheerfully among his friends some time 
 before lie died. If these circumstances are con- 
 sidered aright, that SHAKSPEARE'S disposition was 
 cheerful, and that he died before he could be said 
 to be an old man, the Stratford figure is no improper 
 representation of him. Some observers discover a 
 Strong similitude of this bust, to the earliest print 
 of our poet, prefixed to the folio edition of his 
 works, printed in 1623, which Ben Jonson, (who 
 
 * He had just compleated liis fifty-second year.
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 11 
 
 not only personally knew but was familiarly ac- 
 quainted with SHAKSPEARE,) in his verses under it; 
 plainly asserted to have been a great likeness ;-' and 
 Ben was of too austere a disposition to pay un- 
 necessary compliments to the artist.* The exact 
 time of the erection of this monument is now un- 
 known ; but it was probably done by his executor, 
 Dr. John Hall, or relations, at a time when his features 
 were perfectly fresh in every one's memory, or, 
 perhaps, with the assistance of an original picture, 
 if any such one ever existed." It is evident, however, 
 from the following verses made by Leonard Digges, 
 a cotemporary of our poet's, that it was erected 
 before the year 1623: 
 
 Shakespeare, at length thy pious fellowes give 
 The world thy workes: thy worltes by which outlive 
 Thy tombe, thy name must: when that stone is rent 
 And time dissolves thy Stratford monument, 
 Here we alive shall view thee still. This booke 
 When brasse and marble, fade, shall make thee looke 
 Fresh to all ages. 
 
 " In the year 1748, this monument was carefully 
 repaired, and the original colours of the bust, &c, 
 as much as possible preserved, (by Mr. John Hall, 
 a limner of Stratford,) by the receipts arising from 
 the performance of the play of Othello, at the old 
 Town-hall, on Tuesday, the 9th day of September 
 
 * The original article, frotn which the above is extracted, was 
 written by the Reverend Joseph Greene, and inserted by him in 
 the Gentleman's Magazine for 1759. 
 B2
 
 12 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 1746; and generously given by Mr. John Ward, 
 (grand-father of the present Mrs. Siddons,) manager 
 of a company of comedians then performing in 
 the town; * and, in 1793, the bust and figures above 
 
 To give every encouragement to the performance for so 
 laudable a purpose, the following elegant lines were composed by 
 the Reverend Joseph Greene, and spoken in an admirable manner by 
 Mr. Ward, which much contributed to the evening's entertain- 
 ment : 
 
 To rouse the languid breast by strokes of art, 
 When listless indolence had numb'd the heart ; 
 In Virtue's cause her drooping sons t' engage, 
 And with just satire lash a vicious age ; 
 For this first attic theatres were reai'd, 
 When Guilt's great foe in Sophocles appear'd : 
 For this the Roman bards their scenes display'd, 
 And Vice in its own vicious garb array'd ; 
 Taught men afflicted Innocence to prize, 
 And wrested tears from even tyrant's eyes. 
 But, to great Nature to hold up the glass, 
 To shew from her herself what is and was, 
 To reason deeply as the Fates decree -% 
 
 Whether tis best " to be, or not to be," V 
 
 This, wonffrous SHAKSPEARE, was reserv'd for THEE ! J 
 Then, in thy skill extensive, hastreveal'd 
 What from the wisest mortals seem'd conceal'd ; 
 The human breast from ev'ry wile to trace, 
 And pluck the vizard from the treach'rous face; 
 Make the vile wretch disclaim his dark designs, 
 And own conviction from thy nervous lines ; 
 Reform the temper, surly, rough, and rude, 
 And force the half-unwilling to be good : 
 In martial breasts new vigour to excite, 
 And urge the ling'ring warrior still to fight. 
 Or, if a state pacific be his view. 
 Inform'd by thee, just paths he dares pursue, 
 And serves his Maker and his neighbour too. 
 Ask by what magic are these wonders wrought; 
 Know, 'tis by matchless words from matches thought,
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 13 
 
 it, together with the effigies of Mr. Coombe, were 
 painted white, at the request of Mr. Malone,* to 
 
 A ray celestial kindled in the soul, 
 While sentiments unerring fill'd the whole. 
 Hence his expressions with just ardour glow'd, 
 While Nature all her stores on him bestow'd. 
 Hail, happy STRATFORD ! envi'd be thy fame ! 
 What city boasts than thee a greater name ? 
 " Here his first infant lays sweet SHAKSPEARE sung : 
 " Here the last accents faulter*d on his tongue ;" 
 His honors yet, with future time shall grow, 
 Like Avon's streams, enlarging as they flow; 
 Be these thy trophies, Bard, these might alone, 
 Demand thy features on the mimic stone : 
 But numberless perfections still unfold, ~\ 
 
 In every breast thy praises are enroll'd : 
 A richer shrine than if of molten gold ! 3 
 
 * In a book called The Confessions of William Henry Ireland, 
 we have the following interesting account of his visits to Stratford 
 Church : 
 
 " On entering the church, which contains the ashes of our im- 
 mortal hard, it would be impossible to describe the thrill which 
 then took possession of my soul. Mr. Ireland, as usual, began 
 his delineations of the monuments of Shakspeare, Sir Thomas 
 Lucy, and John Coombe, which are in the chancel of Stratford 
 Church, and were afterwards engraved for Mr. Ireland's River 
 Avon. While occupied on these drawings, he greatly reprehended 
 the folly of having coloured the face and dress of the bust of 
 Shakspeare; which was intended to beautify it, whereas it would 
 have been much more preferable to have left the stone of its pro- 
 per colour. Mr. Ireland also made application in order to be 
 permitted to take a plaster east from the bust; which request had 
 been granted, on a previous occasion, to Mr. Malone ; but as it 
 was necessary to petition the corporation, and much time and per- 
 severance being requisite, tlie idea was wholly relinquished.
 
 14 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 suit the present taste, for which act he was severely 
 satirized, in the following stanzas, that were written 
 in the Album, at Stratford Church, by one of the 
 visitors to Shakspeare's tomb : 
 
 " Stranger to whom this monument is shown, 
 ' Invoke the Poet's curses upon Malone ;. 
 " Whose meddling zeal his barbarous taste betrays, 
 And daubs his tomb-stone as he niarr'd his plays." 
 
 Had Mr. Malone, before he destroyed this antient 
 relic, * have had a picture first painted by some able 
 
 ' The Charnel House. As Mr. Ireland was very particular in 
 his delineations of the three monuments, which occupied him for 
 a considerable time, I strolled about the church ; and on returning 
 to the spot where Mr. Ireland was engaged, being just opposite 
 the door of the charnel house, I pushed it open, when the largest 
 collection of human bones I had ever beheld instantly struck my 
 regard. On mentioning this circumstance to Mr. Ireland, he ap- 
 proached the spot, to be an eye witness of the fact ; when he 
 immediately remarked, that, if any such collection of bones was 
 there at the time of Shakspeare, it was by no means improbable 
 that they inspired him with a horror at the idea of so many rem- 
 nants of the dead being huddled together in a vast heap, and 
 that he in consequence caused the following lines to be carved on 
 the stone, which covers his grave, (being to the right of the charnel 
 house door, and directly under his bust,) in order to deter any 
 sacrilegious hand from removing his ashes." 
 
 " Although the practice of painting statues and.busts to imitate 
 nature, is repugnant to good taste, and must be stigmatized as 
 vulgar and hostile to every principle of art, yet when an effigy is 
 thus coloured and transmitted to us, as illustrative of a particular 
 age or people, and as a record of fashion and costume, it becomes 
 an interesting relic, and should be preserved with as much care as
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 15 
 
 artist, I should not so much have regretted the act ; 
 and, as it is possible to restore it again to its original 
 state, I am in hopes, that in a short time it will be 
 done, as the expence would be but small. 
 
 The armorial bearings appropriate to the family 
 of SHAKSPEARE, are, Or, on a bend sable, a lilting 
 spear of the first, point upicards, head argent. Crest, 
 A falcon displayed argent, supporting a spear, in 
 pale or. 
 
 It is remarkable that SHAKSPEARE'S personal arms 
 only, as just described, should be depicted, and 
 that the quartering of Arden, which was expressly 
 allowed him by grant from the Herald's office, 
 should not be emblazoned on the monument, 
 neither the empalement of his wife, as Hathaway, I 
 have never seen noticed in print. 
 
 Inscription on the Mural Tablet under the Bust. 
 
 JVDICIO PYLIVM, GENIO SOCRATEM, ARTE MARONEM, 
 TERRA TEG IT, POPVLVS MyERET, OLYMPVS HABET. 
 
 an Etruscan vase, or an early specimen of Raffael's painting ; and 
 the man who deliberately defaces or destroys either, will ever be 
 regarded as a criminal in the high court of criticism and taste. 
 From an absence of this feeling, many truly curious, and to us 
 important subjects have been destroyed. Among which is to be 
 noticed a vast monument of antiquity on Marlbrough Downs, in 
 Wiltshire; and which, though once the most stupendous work of 
 human labour and skill in Great Britain, is now nearly demolished. 1 ' 
 
 J. BRITTON.
 
 16 MONUMENTAL BTJST OF 
 
 STAY PASSENGER, WHY GOEST THOV BY SO FAST, 
 
 RFAD IFTHOV CA NST , WHOM ENVIOVS DEATH HAST PLAST, 
 
 W'THIN Tms MONVMENT, SHAKSPEARE, WITH WHOME 
 
 QVICK NATVRE D1DE : WHOSE NAME DOTH DECK YS. TOMBE 
 F!R MORE THAN COST; SIEH ALL YT. HE HATH WRITT, 
 LEAVES LIVING ART, BVT PAGE TO SERVE HIS WITT. 
 
 OBIIT ANO. DOI. 1616. ^ETATIS 53. DIE 23. AP. 
 
 Below the monument is the following curious 
 inscription, (mid to have been written by himself,) 
 upon the stone covering his grave : 
 
 ' '' ; ' V V. 
 
 GOOD FREND FOR lESVS SAKE FORBEARE, 
 TO DIGG TIE DVST ENCLOASED FEARE. 
 BLEST, BE Y MAN Y SPARES TIES STONES, 
 AND CVRST BE HE Y MOVES MY BONES. 
 
 I am induced to take some notice of the letters 
 and wording of those lines, in order to do away the 
 assertions of Malone, * Steevens, Ireland, and 
 others, that the characters were partly capitals and 
 partly small, whereas they are all Roman, but two 
 of them in many instances are formed together; 
 from an indistinct examination of the third line, 
 many writers have asserted the first word to be mis- 
 takenly BLESE instead of BLESTE, but the 
 final E is formed with the T together. 
 
 * Mr. Malone died May 25, 1812. He was brother to Lord 
 Sunderlin ; and had he survived his Lordship would have suc- 
 ceeded to the title ; the remainder being in him. Like Mr. Steevens 
 he devoted his life and fortune to the task of making the great 
 Bard better known to his countrymen.
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 17 
 
 The similar conjunction of letters in the mural 
 tablet, und,er the bust, marking that of the grave- 
 stone to be cut at the same period, therefore having 
 more claim of being authentically intended for the 
 poet, according to the tradition, and a third appears 
 to identify the production (as uniformly asserted) to 
 be of the poet's own conception and writing, from 
 the similiarity the following lines bear to them, 
 taken from King John : 
 
 " O me ! my uncle's spirit is in these stones : 
 
 " Heaven take my soul, and England keep my bones." 
 
 The following is part of Mr. Boaden's descrip- 
 tion of this famous relic, which I cannot but con- 
 sider as rather unsatisfactory and incongruous. It 
 is accompanied by an engraving,* after a drawing 
 from Mr. GEORGE BULLOCK'S cast.t 
 
 * This plate is well engraved by E. Scriven. The artist, Mr. 
 John Boaden, has chosen a very disadvantageous view, by drawing 
 the head, when too much raised above his own, which has been 
 the means of making the upper part too squat in proportion to the 
 lower. The shadow of the cheek and temple are too suddenly dark, 
 which gives it a singular appearance. This artist has done him- 
 self much credit very lately, by producing some works of art, that 
 have, with equal ability, been done in lithographic, by Mr. Lane. 
 
 t Mr. GEORGE BULLOCK, in December, 1814, had the bust 
 taken down for the purpose of making a mould for a very limited 
 number of casts. The mould was afterwards destroyed, and the 
 casts soon became scarce. James De Ville, of the Strand, has 
 since had one of these casts moulded, and another without the 
 hands, and also one of the head only. 
 C
 
 18 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 " The first remark that occurs on viewing this 
 bust, is, that it presents our bard in the act of 
 composition, and in his gayest mood. The vis 
 "comtca, so brightens his countenance, that it is 
 hardly a stretch of fancy, to suppose him in the 
 actual creation of Falstaff himself. Very sure, 
 I am, that the figure must long have continued 
 "a source of infinite delight to those who had en- 
 " joyed his convivial qualities. Among this circle, 
 " it is nearly certain the artist himself was to be 
 " reckoned. The performance is not too good for 
 " a native sculptor. The contour of the head is 
 " well given ; the lips are very carefully carved ; 
 " but the eyes appear to me to be of a very poor 
 character ; -the curves of the lids have no grace, 
 " the eyes, themselves, have no protecting pro- 
 " minences of bone, and the whole of this impor- 
 " tant feature is tame and superficial. The nose 
 "is thin and delicate, like that of the Chandos 
 u head ; but I am afraid a little curtailed, to allow 
 " for an enormous interval between the point of it 
 " and the mouth, which is occupied by very solid 
 " mustaches, curved and turned up, as objects of 
 <f some importance in that whiskered age. Yet, 
 "I must acknowledge, that the distance between the 
 
 Mr. WHELER, of Stratford, is in possession of a cast of the 
 head and shoulders only. I do not know by whom it was moulded. 
 
 Mr. BRITTON has had the head and shoulders re-modelled by 
 Secular, half the original size; a mould from which has been 
 made, and is in his possession.
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 19 
 
 " mouth and the nose is rather greater than is cora- 
 " mon, in both the folio head and the Chandos pic- 
 " ture. There was, perhaps, some exaggeration here 
 "in the bust; viewed in front, it consequently 
 " looks irregular and out of drawing in profile, this 
 " disparity is somewhat recovered. However, with 
 " all abatements as to the artist's skill, who was 
 " neither a Nollekens nor a Chantry,* he most pro- 
 bably had so many means of right information, 
 " worked so near the bard's time, and was so 
 " conscious of the importance of his task, that this 
 " must always be regarded as a pleasing and faithful, 
 " if not a flattering resemblance, of the great poet." 
 
 From the above account, I must beg leave to 
 differ. The deficiences remarked in an important 
 feature, i. e. the eyes, which are noted as, poor, 
 tame, and superficial, with the curtailment of the 
 nose, to make room for an enormous disproportion 
 between it and the mouth ; describe a portrait 
 that cannot reasonably be supposed to flatter, 
 in the least degree ; yet, we are told, that this 
 very work must be regarded as a pleasing and 
 faithful, if not a flattering resemblance. Moreover, 
 were it a known master-piece of art, in fidelity of 
 likeness, we ought still to have better reasons af- 
 forded us for conceiving the sculptor to have en- 
 
 * Mr. CHANTRY. It is very gratifying to remark, that this 
 most eminent sculptor, has the greatest faith, as to the bust being 
 like Shakspeare. A. W. 
 
 C2
 
 20 MONUMENTAL BUST OP 
 
 joyed the convivial qualities of the poet, than the 
 bare assumption of pains having been taken to give an 
 expression of humour to the countenance. In justice 
 to myself, and to the public, I am, in plain and 
 simple truth, compelled to say, I have not been able 
 to give more in my drawing, than was visible to 
 my discernment. How far I have, upon this prin- 
 ciple, succeeded in discharging the pleasing task 
 confided to me, will be determined by those of the 
 numerous admirers of Shakspeare, who, from their 
 recollection of the original, can best estimate the 
 merits of the copy. 
 
 Again we are told, that sculptors differ as to the 
 bust having been modelled from a cast after Shak- 
 speare's death. I humbly conceive this was not the 
 case; as, had it been so, we should certainly see 
 more of nature in the work. Indeed, I imagine, 
 there can be but one opinion among sculptors, 
 eminent in their art, upon a point so palpable : but 
 should we . need further proof, Mr. BOADEN'S own 
 remark, that " the eyes have no protecting promi- 
 nences of bone" the os nasi of the nose is also too 
 compressed, which must be deemed conclusive. 
 
 There is evidently sufficient in the style of this 
 remarkable effigy, to manifest that nature was 
 referred to, either living or dead. The nose and 
 forehead are fine ; and were it not for a rather dis- 
 proportionate length from the former to the mouth, 
 the face would be remarkably handsome It has a
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 21 
 
 more fleshy appearance than any of the other por- 
 traits, and has much less of the look of a jew than 
 most of them, as his beard is trimmed to the fashion 
 of the time : and although some of the more minute 
 parts are slighted, yet the expression of the whole is 
 that of the countenance of a good man ; and, as 
 Mr. Northcote has remarked, " it is also the counte- 
 nance of a GREAT man, and such as he should 
 conceive SHAKSPEARE to have possessed." 
 
 That the sculptor has erred, by making the nose 
 too short, is evident, as also a deficiency of the under 
 part of the aliae, below the nostrils, which is so 
 common in nature ; for the distance from the mouth 
 to the eyes is correct, but to the full extent, the eyes 
 have their proper distances and dimensions ac- 
 cording. The septum of the nose is not too far 
 from the mouth, but the deficiency lies in the alia?, 
 and the nostril being too near the eyes; as also is 
 the zygomaticus major, connected with the alia?, 
 the pictures already described, are not so. 
 
 We have another reason, and a very strong one, 
 for regarding the bust as a genuine portrait, at least, 
 in my opinion, viz. the circumstance of its having 
 been originally coloured to nature ; a practice very 
 common at the time; at any rate no one will 
 dispute its being a strong presumption in favour of 
 the originality of the work. Also the latter period 
 of the poet's life may be considered to be strongly 
 expressed by the loss of the hair, of which we
 
 22 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 see much less in the bust than in the print engraved 
 by MARTIN DROESHOUT. 
 
 There is no stone pen in the hand, as represented 
 in some prints taken from the figure. I made 
 inquiries concerning it, and a gentleman resident at 
 Stratford, has been most obligingly communicative 
 on this and many other points connected with the 
 subject, has favoured me with the following par- 
 ticulars in reply : 
 
 " Dr. Davenport, our vicar, who has been connected 
 as such, and curate of our church for fifty years, 
 informs me, that on his first appointment here, the 
 bust had a stone pen, which a young gentleman,* 
 a friend of his, just emerged from Oxford, came to 
 see him, having taken the pen out of the fingers, 
 and fiddling with it, in the exertion, let it through 
 his own, on the flags, which assuredly broke it in 
 pieces, an ordinary pen has been occasionally 
 put between the fingers, for the last fifty years." 
 
 Mr. Britton says " there is neither proof nor inti- 
 mation that Shakspeare ever sat for a picture ; and, 
 it must be admitted, that the whole host of presumed 
 portraits " come in such questionable shapes," 
 and with such equivocal pedigrees, that suspicion, 
 
 * The above information is contrary to what I stated in 1825, 
 the circumstance originated in consequence of Dr. Davenport 
 being then absent from Stratford, who was the only person that 
 could give any account of it. A. W.
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARB. 23 
 
 or disbelief, attach to all. Not so the Monumental 
 Bust at Stratford : this appeals to our eyes, and 
 understandings with all the force of truth. We 
 view it as a family record ; as a memorial raised 
 by the affection and esteem of his relatives, to 
 keep alive contemporary admiration, and to excite 
 the glow of enthusiasm in posterity. This inva- 
 luable " effigy" is attested by tradition, consecrated 
 by time, and preserved in the inviolability of its 
 own simplicity and sacred station. It was evi- 
 dently executed immediately after the poet's decease, 
 and probably under the superintendance of his 
 son-in-law, Dr. Hall." 
 
 Mr. Britton in his statements, lias given us his 
 preference to the bust over all other portraits of the 
 poet; at the same time, partiality will never keep 
 truth in the background, for the Droeshout print in 
 the public estimation, will for ever be considered of 
 the most importance and value, as it bears with it a 
 written character from one of the bard's most inti- 
 mate friends. 
 
 Being anxious to adduce every particular re- 
 lative to the subject of my undertaking, I have 
 made considerable search, with a view to ascertain 
 who was the sculptor of the monument, but without 
 success. Mr. WHELER, in his Guide to Stratford, 
 has. discussed the probability of this bust having 
 been sculptured by THOMAS STANTON, who carved 
 the monumental busts of RICHARD and JUDITH
 
 24 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 COMBE, likewise in the chancel; and who is also 
 conjectured to have executed the monument of 
 Lord TOTNESS, in the same church. The con- 
 clusion drawn, is, that it was probably sculptured 
 by him, a similiarity of style being deemed ob- 
 servable in the two monuments, indicating them 
 to have been the works of the same artist. The 
 strong resemblance also which the figure of Lord 
 TOTNESS bears to the existing portraits of the 
 nobleman, is adverted to by Mr. WHELER, as 
 corroborative evidence of the fidelity of SHAK- 
 SPEARE'S bust as a likeness. I cannot subscribe 
 to this assumed probability of THOMAS STANTON 
 being the sculptor of SHAKSPEARE'S monument, 
 and upon the following grounds ; the only date 
 found recorded upon the monument of RICHARD 
 and JUDITH COMBE, is that of her death, in 1649. 
 The sculptor's name is subjoined, merely thus; 
 
 " THOMAS STANTON, Fecit, Hoi." 
 
 In HORACE WALPOLE'S Anecdotes of Artists, 
 in the Reign of KING WILLIAM III. the following 
 notice appears ; 
 
 THOMAS STANTON.* 
 
 * THOMAS STANTON. It is somewhat singular, so little is said 
 of this artist, and that we should be enabled to trace only so small 
 a portion of bis work, which is of a character that would do credit 
 to our own time. The addition of Hoi." may be supposed to 
 stand for Holborn, which was probably the place of his abode. 
 There is every probability that such an artist was a resident i 
 London, or its immediate vicinity. 
 
 111
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEARE. 25 
 
 " A statuary, made a tomb in the church of 
 Stratford-upon-Avon, which VERTUE says is in 
 good taste." 
 
 This description will, it is presumed, help to 
 bear out the few observations, which I beg leave to 
 offer upon the question. I will first observe, that 
 had STANTON been employed for SHAKSPEARE'S 
 monument, we may reasonably suppose him to 
 have reached, at least, ninety years of age, at the 
 beginning of KING WILLIAM'S reign, and the above 
 mentioned monument of the COMBES, to have been 
 produced by the artist, at a period of not less than 
 thirty-five years after SHAKSPEARE'S death, allowing 
 time for the sculpture and erection of that much 
 admired fabric. That both these monuments are 
 the work of the same hand, is, therefore, an unlucky 
 conjecture in point of time. 
 
 The monument of the EARL of TOTNESS,* I am 
 
 * As we do not hear that the figure on this monument was done 
 from a bust, there is every reason to believe it was taken from one 
 or more of the pictures of the Earl, as is the common practice 
 with sculptors, upon such occasions; but in the case of SHAK- 
 SPEARE'S, we have nothing whatever to warrant a similar supposi- 
 tion. The effigy of the poet cannot be deemed a copy ; there is 
 not the slightest authority for its being so considered ; it must be 
 regarded as perfectly original. There has been several attempts 
 made by various artists to give the whole of the monument, in 
 print, but they have all failed in some degree, the most correct is 
 that which is engraved by F. Eginton, for Mr. Wheler's Antiqui- 
 ties of Stratford.
 
 26 MONUMENTAL BUST OF 
 
 sorry to say, I did not happen to inspect, but should 
 it not bear a stronger resemblance in the style to 
 SHAKSPEARE'S than does that beautiful monument 
 of RICHARD and JUDITH COMBE, I cannot attach 
 any weight to the opinion, for in the latter, lam 
 unable to discover the style of the same artist, in 
 any degree whatever. But in the monument of 
 JOHN COMBE, Esq. it requires no minute exami- 
 nation to observe a strong resemblance, and this, 
 although far inferior, in point of execution, to that 
 of our bard, must have been done at least two years 
 before. 
 
 The above conjecture of mine was published in 
 1825, and I have just heard it is really so. Mr. 
 Britton has received a copy of a memorandum (from 
 Mr. Hampier, of Birmingham,) stating, that in 
 Dugdale's Pocket Book of 1653, the bust of John 
 Combe and William Shakspeare's were made by 
 Jerrard Johnson. I have accordingly had it en- 
 graved under the plate belonging to this work. 
 
 It is very remarkable that such a genius as 
 SHAKSPEARE, should have lived and died one of 
 the greatest men of the age, and yet there should 
 be no portrait or recorded semblance of him in 
 existance, of which it can be said for a certainty, 
 (this is from the life.) that he should be a husband, 
 a father, a friend, and the esteemed associate of 
 so many popular persons of his time, yet die, without 
 seeming to have excited care in any individual,
 
 WILLIAM SHAKSPEABE. 27 
 
 for the acquirement of a memorial, which would 
 haye been so highly venerated by posterity. 
 
 Between his grave and the north wall, lies 
 Mrs. SHAKSPEARE, for whom there is this inscrip- 
 tion, engraved on a brass plate, fixed to the 
 stone : 
 
 HEERE LYETH INTERRED THE BODYE OF ANNE, WIFE 
 OF MR. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, WHO DEPTED. THIS 
 LIFE THE 6TH. DAY OF AVGVST, 1623, BEING OF THE AGE 
 OF 67 YEARES. 
 
 Vbera, tu mater, tu lac vitamq. dedisti, 
 
 Vae mihi, pro tanto munere Saxa dabo ! 
 Quam mallem, amoueat lapidem, bonus Angel' ore' 
 
 Exeat ut Christi Corpus, imago tua 
 Sed nil vota valent, venias cito Christe rcsurgtt, 
 
 Clausa licet tumulo mater, et astra petet. 
 
 On another flat stone: Arms, Tliree talbots 
 heads erased; impaling, SHAKSPEARE. 
 
 HEERE LYETH YE. BODY OF JOHN HALL, GENT. HEE 
 MARR: SVSANNA, YE. DAUGHTER- & COHEIRE OF WILL. 
 SHAKESPEARE, GENT. HEE DECEASED NOVER. 25. AO. 1635, 
 AGED 60. 
 
 Hallius hie situs est medica celeberrimus arte, 
 
 Ex pectans regni gaudia laeta Dei ; 
 Dignus erat mentis qui Nestora vinceret annis, 
 
 In terris omnes, sed rapit aequa dies ; 
 Ne tumulo, quid desit adest tidissima conjux, 
 
 Et vitae com item nunc quoq. mortis habet. 
 
 On others : 
 
 Arms, Per pale, baron and femme: baron; 
 quarterly, first and fourth, on a chevron between
 
 28 MONUMENTAL BUST. 
 
 three ravens' heads erased, a pellet, between four 
 cross crosslets. Second and third, a bucks' head ca- 
 bossed, surmounted by a cross patee, in the mouth 
 an arrow. Femme, Hall ; quartering SHAKSPEARE. 
 
 HEERE RESTETH YE. BODY OF THOMAS NASHE, ESQ. 
 HE MAR. ELIZABETH, THE DAVG. & HEIRE OF JOHN HALLE, 
 GENT. HE DIED APRILL 4. A. 1647, AGED 53. 
 
 Fata manent omnes, hunc non virtute carentem 
 
 Vt neque devitiis, abstulit atra dies ; 
 Abstulit; at referet luxvltima; siste viator, 
 
 Si peritura paras, per male parta peris. 
 
 Arms, On alozenge,Hall ; impaling, SHAKSPEARE 
 
 HEERE LYETH YE. BODY OF SVSANNA, WIFE TO JOHN 
 HALL, GENT. YE. DAVGHTER OF WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, 
 GENT. SHE DECEASED YE. 11TH OF JVLY, AO. 1649, AGED 66. 
 
 Witty above her sexe, but that's not all, 
 Wise to Salvation was good Mistris Hall, 
 Something of Shakespere was in that, but this 
 Wholy of him with whom she's now in blisse. 
 Then, passenger, ha'st ne're a teare, 
 
 To weepe with her that wept with all? 
 That wept, yet set herselfe to chere, 
 
 Them up with comforts cordiall. 
 Her Love shall live, her mercy spread, 
 When thou hast ne're a teare to shed. 
 
 These English verses (preserved by Dugdale,) 
 were many years since purposely obliterated, to 
 make room for another inscription, carved on the 
 same stone, for Richard Watts, of Rhyon Clifford; 
 a person of no relation to the SHAKSPEARE family, 
 
 THE JEND.
 
 OBSERVATIONS 
 
 AUTOGRAPH OF SHAKSPERE,
 
 OBSERVATIONS 
 
 AUTOGRAPH OF SHAKSPERE, 
 
 ORTHOGRAPHY OF HIS NAME. 
 
 COMMUNICATED 
 
 TO THE SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES 
 
 BY 
 
 SIR FREDERIC MADDEN, K.H., F.R.S. AND S.A. 
 
 IN A LETTER TO 
 
 JOHN GAGE, ESQ. F.R.S. DIRECTOR. 
 
 LONDON: 
 THOMAS RODD, GREAT NEWPORT STREET. 
 
 MDCCCXXXVI1I.
 
 Reprinted from the Archeeologia, vol.xxvii. pp. 113123, with some 
 Corrections. 
 
 STEVENS AND PARDON, PRINTERS, BELL YARD, TBMPLE BAR,
 
 OBSERVATIONS, 
 
 &c. &c. 
 
 British Museum, Jan. 11, 1837. 
 
 MY DEAR SIR, 
 
 I TRUST it will not be deemed foreign to the pur- 
 suits of the Society of Antiquaries, to receive some 
 particulars respecting the autograph of an indivi- 
 dual, the magic of whose name must best plead 
 as my apology for abstracting them from their 
 graver subjects of inquiry. The individual I allude 
 to is no less a personage than our immortal dramatic 
 poet, WILLIAM SHAKSPERE, to mention whom, 
 and to excite curiosity and interest, I may, I believe, 
 in any society of educated persons, assume to be 
 inseparable. By the assistance of my friend, Charles 
 Frederick Barnwell, Esq., of the British Museum, 
 I am enabled to lay before the Society an accurate 
 fac-simile of the signature of this great man, written 
 on the fly-leaf of a volume which, there is every 
 reason to believe, once formed a part of his library, 
 and which has hitherto, strange to say, been hidden 
 from the knowledge and indefatigable researches of 
 the whole host of Shaksperian commentators, col- 
 lectors, and illustrators. Already, on the mere 
 announcement of the fact, one might fancy, with no
 
 4 Observations on an Autograph of Shakspere, 
 
 great effort of imagination, the shades of Warburton 
 and Johnson, Tyrwhitt and Steevens, Ritson and 
 Chalmers, Warton and Parr, again crowding round 
 the volume, to view the characters traced by the 
 Bard of Avon ; again might we view the adoration 
 of Bos well's bended knees ; and, on this occasion, no 
 sceptic sneer would distort the lip or depress the 
 brow of the critical Malone. But to the point : 
 
 The precious volume which I have thus introduced 
 to your notice is a copy of the first edition of the 
 English translation of Montaigne's " Essays, "by John 
 Florio, printed in folio, 1603,* and its fortunate owner 
 is the Reverend Edward Patteson, of East Sheen, 
 in Surrey, to whom the Society will be indebted, in 
 common with myself, for any gratification they may 
 receive from the present communication. Of its 
 history nothing more can be stated than this, that 
 it belonged previously to Mr. Patteson's father, 
 
 the Reverend Edward Patteson, minister of Smeth- 
 
 *> 
 
 * " The Essayes, or Morall, Politike, and Millitarie Discourses 
 of Lo. Michaell de Montaigne, Knight. First written by him in 
 French, and now done into English by him that hath inuiolably 
 vowed his labors to the JEternitie of their Honors, whose names 
 he hath seuerally inscribed on these his consecrated Altares. The 
 first booke to the Right Honorable Lucie Co. of Bedford, and 
 Ladie Anne Harrington, her Ho. Mother. The second booke 
 to the Right Honorable Elizabeth Co. of Rutland, and Ladye 
 Penelope Riche. The third booke to the right Honorable Ladie 
 Elizabeth Grey and Ladie Maria Nevile. John Florio." 
 
 " Printed at London by Val. Sims, for Edward Blount, dwel- 
 ling in Paules Churchyard, 1603." From his address " to the 
 courteous readers," we learn that this translation was under- 
 taken at the suggestion of Sir Edward Wotton. It was reprinted 
 m 1613, (Lowndes,) and a third time in 1632. These later 
 editions are dedicated to Queen Anna of Denmark, and pre- 
 fixed are some commendatory verses by Sam. Daniel, to his 
 
 deare brother and friend, Mr. John Florio, one of the gentle- 
 men of her Majestie's most royal Privie Chamber." The ori- 
 ginal work was first published in 1588.
 
 And the Orthography of his Name. 5 
 
 wick, in Staffordshire, about three miles from 
 Birmingham, and thus contiguous to the county 
 which gave Shakspere birth. How or when 
 this gentleman first became possessed of it, is not 
 known ; but it is very certain that, previous to the 
 year 1780, Mr. Patteson used to exhibit the volume 
 to his friends as a curiosity, on account of the auto- 
 graph. No public notice of it, however, was at any 
 time made ; and, contented with this faint notoriety, 
 the autograph of Shakspere continued to slumber 
 in the hands of this gentleman and his son, until by 
 the friendly representations of Mr. Barnwell, the 
 present owner was induced to bring it to the British 
 Museum for inspection. Now, imperfect as this 
 information is, yet it is ample of itself to set at rest 
 all doubts that might at first naturally arise in the 
 minds of those who are acquainted with the forgeries 
 of Ireland, since, at the period when this volume was 
 assuredly in the library at Smethwick, and known 
 to contain Shakspere's autograph, this literary im- 
 postor was scarcely born. This fact must at once 
 obviate any scruples in regard to the autograph 
 now brought forward, having emanated from the 
 same manufactory which produced the " Miscella- 
 neous Papers." For myself, I may be permitted to 
 remark, that the forgeries of Chatterton* and Ireland 
 have always appeared to me thoroughly contempt- 
 
 * The Chatterton forgeries are now preserved in the British 
 Museum, MSS. Add. 5766, A.B.C. and exhibit the most decisive 
 proofs of the impudence of the imposture, and the obstinate igno- 
 rance of those who were to the last its champions. These defenders 
 of Rowley argue that Chatterton was incapable of reading any 
 work of research ; but if so, how is it we find among his fictions 
 the list of romances printed in Madox's Formulare Anglicanum, 
 and a copy of the kneeling figure of one of the Howard family,
 
 6 Observations on an Autograph of Shakspere, 
 
 ible, and utterly unworthy of the controversy they 
 occasioned ; indeed, they can only be justly cha- 
 racterised in the words of Malone, as the genuine 
 offspring of consummate ignorance and unparalleled 
 audacity." * At the present day the study and 
 knowledge of ancient manuscripts, the progress of 
 our language, and the rules of exact criticism in 
 matters of this kind have become too extensively 
 spread to allow us to suppose any similar attempt 
 will ever disgrace our literature ; but for the sake 
 of gratifying curiosity, and of a comparison between 
 the genuine autograph of Shakspere, and the mise- 
 rable imitations of Master William Henry Ireland, 
 I am enabled, by the kindness of Sir Henry Ellis, 
 to exhibit to the Society a paper in the hand-writing 
 of the forger, in which may be seen at one view his 
 copies | of other genuine signatures of the poet, 
 and his own avowal of his fabrications. The pre- 
 sent autograph challenges and defies suspicion, and 
 has already passed the ordeal of numerous compe- 
 tent examiners, all of whom have, without a single 
 doubt, expressed their conviction of its genuineness. 
 
 in Weaver's funeral monuments, p. 847, which the impostor has 
 partly altered, and then had the assurance to write around an 
 inscription to the memory of Sir Gauleroyn de Chatterton ? 
 To those who may have the least lingering wish to advocate the 
 cause of Rowley, I recommend the task of deciphering eighteen 
 lines in the Purple Roll, which for some reason or other have 
 never yet been printed. It is worthy of remark, that one of 
 these contemptible fragments is actually fastened to a portion of a 
 genuine deed of the date of 10 Hen. IV., which in all probability 
 is one of the very parchments that did come out of the celebrated 
 chest, and which is just what we might expect it to be, a quit- 
 claim from one citizen of Bristol to another, of his right in four 
 shops in the suburbs ! See MSS. Add. 5766, a. fol. 28. 
 
 * Inquiry, p. 354. 
 
 t Facsimiles of these having already appeared in his " Con- 
 fessions," it was thought unnecessary to repeat them here.
 
 And the Orthography of his Name. 7 
 
 The only possible objection which might arise in 
 the mind of a sceptic is this, whether there might 
 not have been living at the same time other persons 
 of the name of William Shakspere, to one of whom 
 the volume might have belonged ? In reply to this 
 it must be remarked, first, that on comparing the 
 autograph before us with the genuine signatures of 
 the poet, on his will, and on two legal instruments, 
 there is a sufficient resemblance to warrant the con- 
 clusion that they are by the same hand, although 
 enough variation to preclude the idea of imitation ; 
 and, secondly, that the contents of the volume itself 
 come in aid, and afford additional evidence of the 
 genuineness, as well as add to the interest of the 
 autograph ; for it is well known that this book was 
 consulted by Shakspere in the composition of his 
 plays. The Tempest presents us with a proof so 
 undeniable of this fact, that I cannot refuse myself 
 the satisfaction of quoting it here. 
 
 In the second act, sc. 2, p. 64, torn. iv. ed. 8vo. 
 1813, occurs the following dialogue, after the escape 
 of the king's party from the vessel, on the deserted 
 island : 
 
 Gonzalo. Had I plantation of this isle, my lord : 
 
 Antonio. He'd sow it with nettle-seed. 
 
 Sebastian. Or docks, or mallows. 
 
 Gon. and were the king of it, what would I do ? 
 
 Seb. 'Scape being drunk for want of wine. 
 
 Gon. I' the commonwealth I would by contraries 
 Execute all things ; for no kind of traffic 
 Would I admit ; no name of magistrate ; 
 Letters should not be known ; no use of service, 
 Of riches, or of poverty ; no contracts ; 
 Successions; bound of land, tilth, vineyard, none; 
 No use of metal, corn, or wine, or oil ; 
 No occupation ; all men idle, all, 
 And woman too, but innocent and pure ; 
 No sovereignty.
 
 8 Observations on an Autograph of Shakspere, 
 
 Seb. And yet he would be king on't ! 
 Ant. The latter end of his commonwealth forgets the b 
 ginning !" 
 
 The corresponding passage of Montaigne occurs 
 in Book i. chap. 30, p. 102, where he is speaking of 
 a newly discovered country, which he calls Antar- 
 tick France, and thus proceeds : 
 
 " It is a nation, would I answer Plato, that hath no kind 
 of traffike, no knowledge of letters, no intelligence of numbers, 
 no name of 'magistrate , nor of politike superioritie ; no use of 
 service, of riches, or of poverty ; no contracts, no successions, no 
 dividences ;* no occupation, but idle ; no respect of kindred, 
 but common ; no apparell but naturall ; no manuring of lands ; 
 no use of wine, corne, or mettle. The very words that impart 
 lying, falsehood, treason, dissimulations, covetousness, envie, 
 detraction, and pardon, were never heard of amongst them." 
 
 The words marked in italics will sufficiently point 
 out the close imitation ; for, in truth, Shakspere 
 has scarcely done more than copy Florio's transla- 
 tion, with just sufficient alteration to cause the sen- 
 tences to fall into rhythm. Warburton has noted, 
 that throughout the dialogue Shakspere's aim is to 
 convey a satire on the various Utopian treatises of 
 government ; but in the original, Montaigne is 
 speaking seriously of the newly discovered country 
 of Brasil, where Villegaignon first landed in 1555. t 
 Malone infers, with great probability, that it was 
 from the perusal of this chapter that Shakspere was 
 
 * The edition of 1632 reads partitions, and it is rather singu- 
 lar that Malone, in quoting this passage in his notes, should have 
 referred to that, and not to the first edition. The coincidence of 
 the passage had been previously pointed out by Capell ; but he 
 quotes the French text, which he very absurdly supposes was 
 made use of by Shakspere. 
 
 t See "Histoire des Choses Memorables advenues en la 
 terre du Bresil, partre de 1'Amerique Australe, sous le gouverne- 
 ment de N. de Villeg. depuis 1'an 1555, jusques a 1'an 1558." 
 ovo. 1561.
 
 And the Orthography of his Name. 9 
 
 led to make an uninhabited island the scene of his 
 Tempest; and from the title " Of the Canniballes" 
 as it stands in Florio, he has evidently, by transpo- 
 sition, (as remarked by Dr. Farmer,) formed the 
 name of his man- monster, Caliban. 
 
 The copy of Montaigne's work in Mr. Patteson's 
 hands has suffered in some degree from damp, so 
 that the fly-leaves at the beginning and end have 
 become loose, and the edges somewhat worn. On 
 the top of the same page which contains Shakspere's 
 autograph, are written in a smaller, and in my 
 opinion, a more recent hand, two short sentences 
 from theThyestes of Seneca, Act. v. cecidit incassum 
 dolor, and vota nonfaciam improba. The same hand, 
 apparently, has written on the fly-leaf at the end of the 
 volume many similar Latin sentences, with reference 
 to the pages of Montaigne's work, from which they 
 are all borrowed ; such as Faber est su& quisque for- 
 tune. Festinatio tar da est. Calamitosus est animus 
 futuri anjcius, 8$c. Could we believe these to have 
 proceeded from Shakspere's hand, they would ac- 
 quire a high degree of interest ; but after an atten- 
 tive examination of them, I am persuaded they were 
 added by a later pen, and in this opinion I have 
 been confirmed by the judgment of other persons 
 versed in the writings of that period. A very few 
 marginal notes occur in the volume, at pp. 134, 254, 
 513, which are by the same hand, to which also in all 
 probability we must assign the word "Thessayes," 
 written in ink on the back of the volume. The 
 binding is in its original state, and no doubt the 
 same as when the book was read by Shakspere. 
 
 Having thus stated all I can collect relative to the
 
 10 Observations on an Autograph of Shakspere, 
 
 history of this treasure, I must beg leave, before I 
 conclude, to make a few remarks on the orthography 
 of Shakspere's name, as written by himself. 
 
 There are five acknowledged genuine signatures 
 of Shakspere in existence, exclusive of the one 
 which forms the subject of this communication. Of 
 these, three are attached to his will in the Preroga- 
 tive Court, executed 25th March, 1615-16; the 
 fourth is written on a mortgage deed, dated llth 
 March, 1612-13, of a small estate purchased by 
 Shakspere of Henry Walker, in Blackfriars; and 
 the fifth on the counterpart of the deed of bar- 
 gain and sale of the same property, dated 10th 
 March, 1612-13. 
 
 From a comparison of these with each other, and 
 with the autograph now first brought forward, it is 
 most certain, in my opinion, that the poet always 
 wrote his name SHAKSPERE, and consequently, 
 that those who have inserted an e after the k, or 
 an a in the second syllable, do not write the 
 same (as far as we are able to judge) in the same 
 manner as the poet himself uniformly would autho- 
 rise us to do. This I state in opposition to Chal- 
 mers and Drake, who assert that " all the genuine 
 signatures of Shakspeare are dissimilar."* Let us 
 consider them separately, not according to the pri- 
 ority of dates, but in the order they were introduced 
 to the notice of the public. 
 
 In the year 1776, George Steevens traced from 
 the will of Shakspere the three signatures attached 
 
 1* i' Ap !? gy / p - ? 26 ' Drake ' s " Shakspeare and his Times," 
 vol. 1, p . J 7 4U). 817, who servilely copies Chalmers, and 
 never took the trouble to see the original.
 
 And the Orthography of his Name. 11 
 
 to it (one to each sheet), and they were engraved for 
 the first time in the second edition of Shakspere, by 
 Johnson and Steevens, in 1788.* They have since 
 been engraved in nearly all the subsequent editions ; 
 in Malone's " Inquiry," 1796 ; in Chalmers's ''Apo- 
 logy," 1797; in Harding's "Essence of Malone," 
 1801 ; in Ireland's "Confessions," 1805 ; in Drake's 
 "Shakspeare and his Times," 1817; and lastly, 
 in J. G. Nichols's "Autographs," 1829 ; in which 
 work they are, for the second time, traced from the 
 original document. The first of these signatures, 
 subscribed on the first sheet, at the right hand corner 
 of the paper, is decidedly William Shakspere, and 
 no one has ventured to raise a doubt respecting the 
 six last letters. f The second signature is at the 
 left hand corner of the second sheet, and is also 
 clearly Wilfm Shakspere, although from the tail of 
 the letter h of the line above intervening between 
 the e and r, Chalmers would fain raise an idle 
 quibble as to the omission of a letter. The third 
 signature has been the subject of greater controversy, 
 and has usually been read, By me, William Shak- 
 speare. Malone, however, was the first publicly to 
 abjure this reading, and in his " Inquiry," p. 117, 
 owns the error to have been pointed out to him by 
 
 * Mr. J. G. Nichols is therefore in error, when he supposes 
 these signatures were first traced from the will for Malone's 
 " Inquiry," published in 1796. See his " Autographs of Re- 
 markable Personages," fol. Lond. 1829. No. 11, B. 
 
 t From a close examination of the original, it appears that 
 this first signature has been considerably damaged since Steevens's 
 time, and two of the letters are no longer legible, as may also 
 be found in Nichols. It may be remarked, in addition, that 
 Steevens has evidently confounded this signature with the name 
 of Shackspeare written at the top of the same margin by the 
 scrivener, and by doing so, has misled Dr. Drake, although he
 
 12 Observations on an Autograph of Shakspere, 
 
 an anonymous correspondent, who " shewed most 
 clearly , that the superfluous stroke in the letter r was 
 only the tremor of his (Shakspere's) hand, and no a" 
 In this opinion, after the most scrupulous examina- 
 tion, I entirely concur, and can repeat with confidence 
 the words of Mr. Boaden, that " if there be truth in 
 sight, the poet himself inserted no a in the second 
 syllable of his name. "* The only remaining remark 
 I have to make respecting the will (which it is to be 
 regretted, has never yet been printed as it ought to 
 be, with the original orthography and interlinea- 
 tions) is, that the date of execution was written at 
 first Januarii (not Februarii, as Malone states), 
 over which Martii has been written ; and that 
 throughout the body of the document the scrivener 
 has written the testator's name Shackspeare, whereas 
 on the outside it is docketed twice by the Clerk of 
 the Prerogative Court, as the will of Mr. Shackspere. 
 The next document is the mortgage deed, which 
 was discovered in 1768 by Mr. Albany Wallis, a 
 solicitor, among the title deeds of the Rev. Mr. 
 Featherstonehaugh, of Oxted, in Surrey, and was 
 presented to Garrick. From the label of this, the 
 fac-simile in Malone's edition of Shakspere, 1790, 
 was executed, bearing this appearance, Wm. Shak- 
 spe; and on this, in conjunction with the third signa- 
 ture of the will, was founded Malone's mistake in 
 printing the name with an a in the second syllable. 
 
 might have been taught better by Chalmer's " Apology," p. 426, 
 note. As to Chalmers's notion (copied of course by Drake) 
 that there is a c inserted before the k, it is not correct, and he 
 has been misled by a straggling open a. 
 
 * " An Inquiry into the authenticity of the various portraits 
 of Shakspeare," 4to. Lond. 1824, p. 62.
 
 And the Orthography of his Name. 13 
 
 The deed was at that time in the possession of 
 Mrs. Garrick ; but in 1796, when Malone pub- 
 lished his " Inquiry," and had become convinced of 
 his error, and of the fault of his engraver, in sub- 
 stituting what looks like the letter a instead of re 
 (which it ought to be), the original document was 
 missing, and could not be consulted for the purpose 
 of rectifying the mistake.* Malone has been very 
 severely handled by Chalmers and the facetious 
 George Hardinge, for this apparent inconsistency ; 
 but a few words may plead Malone's excuse. 
 Steevens and himself, in 1778, resolved to exclude 
 the e after the k in the poet's name, and accordingly 
 the second edition of that year appeared with the 
 title-pages so corrected, and the third edition of 
 1784 so corrected throughout. It was therefore 
 only in reference to this e that Malone laid down 
 the rule for its exclusion, in his edition of 1790, 
 vol. 1, pt. 1, p. 192; for as to the a, its insertion 
 at that time had not been questioned. In 1796, 
 therefore, when Malone again touched on the sub- 
 ject, and declared against the a in the second 
 syllable also, he by no means contradicts himself, 
 but writes from the fuller evidence he had obtained 
 on the subject. 
 
 This evidence forms the third document bearing 
 Shakspere's signature, viz. the counterpart of the 
 deed of bargain and sale, dated the day before the 
 
 * Ireland states, " Confessions," p. 88, that this document 
 was bequeathed by Garrick to the British Museum, which is not 
 true. How it was lost remains, I believe, a mystery; but its 
 production, I am firmly convinced, would corroborate the 
 reading of Shakspere.
 
 14 Observations on an Autograph of Shakspere, 
 
 mortgage deed. This also was found among Mr. 
 Featherstonehaugh's evidences, and in 1796 was in 
 the hands of Mr. Wallis, who lent it to Malone to 
 print in his often-quoted " Inquiry." Here the 
 signature is, beyond all cavil or suspicion, William 
 Shaksper, where the mark above is the usual abbre- 
 viation of the period for the final e.* 
 
 To these we have now to add the autograph 
 before us, in Florio's volume, which so unquestion- 
 ably decides in favour of Shakspere, that in this 
 manner I shall beg leave in future to write it; 
 since I know no reason why we should not sooner 
 take the poet's own authority in this point, than 
 that of his friends or printers.! 
 
 At the same time it must be admitted, that if we 
 disregard the form traced by the poet's own hand, 
 the whole weight of printed evidence of his time 
 (with few exceptions), is in favour of Shakespeare^ 
 as still adhered to by Mr. Collier; whose recent 
 discoveries and publications on the subject of 
 Shakspere and his writings, entitle him to the 
 hearty thanks of every admirer of our great dra- 
 matic writer, both in England and abroad. 
 
 * See Malone, PI. ii. No. x. Query, what has become of 
 this document? 
 
 t To those deeply interested in the subject, it may be as well 
 to add, that the name of our poet, both at his baptism and 
 burial, in the Stratford Register, is spelt Shakspere, and so are 
 the names of other members of his family, between the years 
 1558 to 1593; and in the marriage licence, recently discovered 
 in the Consistorial Court of Worcester, it is spelt Shagspere, 
 which, in effect, is the same thing. 
 
 J See the evidence summed up, but not without many inac- 
 curacies, in " Another Essence of Malone," 8vo. 1801, pp. 73, 
 96, which was published anonymously by Geo. Hardinge. 
 
 ' New facts regarding the Life of Shakespeare," &c. 12mo. 
 1835 ; and " New Particulars regarding the Works of Shake- 
 speare," 12mo. 1836.
 
 And the Orthography of his Name. 15 
 
 Here I might close my case ; but a few words 
 more may be requisite in regard to some other 
 presumed specimens of Shakspere's handwriting. 
 I would certainly not go so far as Malone, in 
 asserting, that if any other original letter or MS. 
 of his should be discovered, his name would appear 
 as just written ;* but I think any variation would 
 afford reasonable cause for suspicion. Since I 
 commenced this paper, I have discovered that two 
 other volumes claim the honour of containing 
 Shakspere's autograph, not manufactured by Ire_ 
 land. The first of these is a copy of Warner's 
 Albion's England, 4to. 1612, which was bought at 
 Steevens's sale in 1800, by Mr. Heber, and which 
 is now in the British Museum. On the title page 
 is " William Shakspeare his booke;" and it will be 
 evident to any one who takes the trouble of com- 
 paring it with the similar notorious forgeries of 
 Ireland on a copy of Holland's translation of Pliny, 
 folio, 1601, and on Bartholomeus de Proprietatibus 
 Rerum, Thomas Berthelet, [1535], fol. in Sir Joseph 
 Banks's library, that they all three are traced by 
 the same hand. Whether Steevens had any hand 
 in Ireland's fabrications, is a discussion foreign to 
 my purpose : but I do not think it very improbable. 
 The second claimant is a copy of Bacon's Advance- 
 ment of Learning, 1605. In 1829 it was in the 
 possession of Mr. Thomas Fisher, of the East India 
 House, and is described as being " filled with MS. 
 notes." It bears in limine the same signature as in 
 Warner's work, and a fac-simile of it is given by 
 Nichols, in his Autographs. From an inspection of 
 
 * " Inquiry," p. 120.
 
 16 Observations on an Autograph of Shakspere, frc. 
 
 this (for I have not seen the volume itself), I should 
 unhesitatingly say, that the signature is a modern 
 fabrication; and subsequent inquiry has placed 
 the fact beyond all question.* 
 
 Only one document remains to be noticed, the 
 genuineness of which, if established, would make 
 even the autograph of Florio to " vail its bonnet." 
 I allude to the copy of verses existing at Bridge- 
 water House, signed " W. Sh.," and printed by 
 Mr. Collier, in his " New Particulars regarding the 
 Works of Shakespeare." As far as the internal 
 evidence goes, I do not see any reasonable objection 
 against them; but, as no fac-simile has yet ap- 
 peared of the original, it is impossible at present to 
 offer any further remark. Mr. Collier urges their 
 claim very modestly and fairly ; but, as the paper 
 may itself be a transcript of verses composed by 
 Shakspere, some additional evidence is required, in 
 regard to the hand-writing, &c. to enable any critic, 
 in matters of this kind, to form an opinion. 
 
 I remain, my dear Sir, 
 Yours, very truly, 
 
 FREDERIC MADDEN. 
 
 John Gage, Esq., Director, A. S. 
 
 * See Wheler's Guide to Stratford-upon-Avon, 12mo. 1834, 
 p. 143, where mention is made of a forgery of Shakspere's name, 
 executed by John Jordan, author of a local poem called 
 " Welcombe Hills," which has recently been ascertained to be 
 the one referred to in the text.
 
 ADDITIONAL NOTE. 
 
 SINCE the preceding letter was printed as a portion of the 
 ArchcEologia, I have been favored with a letter from the Rev. 
 Joseph Hunter, in which he suggests, that the passage in Mon- 
 taigne was taken by Shakspere from the work while yet circu- 
 lated in MS. some years previous to the first edition of 1603. 
 But admitting the fact, (which will probably be considered more 
 at large in Mr. Hunter's forthcoming work, intitled, " New 
 Illustrations of the Life, Studies, and Writings of Shakspere,") 
 it does not at all affect the proprietorship of the volume, or the 
 authenticity of the signature. In reference also to the poem 
 printed by Mr. Collier, and supposed to be signed " W. Sh." 
 Mr. Hunter clearly proves that we should read " W. Sk.," and 
 that the author is not William Shakspere, but Sir William 
 Skipwith, specimens of whose verses may be found in Nichols's 
 Leicestershire, vol. ii. p. 367, and MS. Lansdowne, 207, F. I 
 have only to add, in conclusion, that the volume which belonged 
 to Mr. Fisher, supposed to contain Shakspere's autograph, was 
 sold at Evans's, 1st June, 1837 ; and as I then had an oppor- 
 tunity of examining it, my previous conviction of its falsity was 
 confirmed by ocular evidence. 
 
 F. M. 
 llth April, 1838.
 
 STEVKNS AND PARDON, PRINTERS, BELI. YARD, TEMPLE BAft.
 
 TRADITIONARY ANECDOTES 
 
 SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 COLLECTED IN WARWICKSHIRE, 
 
 IN THE YEAR MDCXCIII. 
 
 NOW FIRST PUBLISHED FROM THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT. 
 
 LONDON : 
 THOMAS RODD, GREAT NEWPORT STREET, 
 
 MDCCCXXXVIII.
 
 STEVENS AND PARDON, PRINTERS, BELL YARD, TEMPLE BAR.
 
 ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 THE following Letter, which is now for the first time 
 printed, came into the hands of the publisher upon the 
 dispersion of the papers of the family of Lord De Clifford, 
 which were sold by auction in the year 1834. 
 
 It is addressed to Mr. Edward Southwell, and is en- 
 dorsed by him " From Mr. Dowdall, Description of 
 several places in Warwickshire." From the signature at 
 the end, and several legal phrases that occur in the letter, 
 there can be no doubt that the writer was an Inn's-of- 
 Court man ; and a search into the registers of those 
 societies will probably determine to which of them he 
 belonged. 
 
 The mention that is made of Shakespeare in the letter, 
 has led to its being printed for brief as the notice of the 
 poet is, it is nevertheless of great curiosity and impor- 
 tance, since it appears to indicate the source of much of 
 the information which has been handed down to us by 
 Aubrey ; and to point out one of the persons who have 
 invented, or perpetuated, the few anecdotes of his early 
 life that have reached us. 
 
 Aubrey, according to Malone, collected his memorials 
 of Shakespeare about the year 1680 ; and from the coinci- 
 dence of the anecdotes he has given of him, with those 
 recorded by Mr. Dowdall, there can be no doubt that 
 both received them from the same individual, viz. the old 
 clerk who is mentioned in the following letter. To 
 him, therefore, we are indebted for the story of Shakes- 
 peare's being apprenticed to a butcher, and of his running 
 away to London ; and, whatever value may be attached 
 to such evidence by others, the publisher is unwilling to 
 let the present opportunity pass without expressing his 
 conviction that the reports of the vagrant tenor of the 
 early part of the poet's life are no more entitled to credit 
 than the later fables which, in the absence of facts, have 
 been thrust into the biographical accounts of Shakespeare. 
 Indeed it would appear from the practice of some recent 
 writers, that where the great dramatist is the subject, 
 each conceives himself at liberty to add whatever his
 
 4 ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 fancy may dictate to those already apocryphal accounts 
 of him. Every real or supposed allusion to him by his 
 contemporaries, every line in his own works that could 
 by ingenuity be applied to himself, his history, and his 
 creed, have been eagerly caught at, adduced as evidence, 
 and commented on ; and the most monstrous conjectures 
 respecting him have been boldly advanced, many of them 
 at total variance with each other. 
 
 Thus, in addition to the old story of his stealing deer 
 from a park,* which did not exist as such at the time, we 
 
 * Malone has successfully proved that Charlecote, the park of Sir 
 Thomas Lucy, whence Shakespeare is said to have stolen deer, did not 
 exist as a park in the poet's time. The Lucys, determined not to lose 
 the honour of being robbed by the poet, have since shifted the 
 locality. The story is one which has grown upon belief, from having 
 a locality attached to it, as the visiting the scene of an event, whether 
 real or imaginary, by impressing the reality of it on the mind, hallows 
 the deception, till even the most incredulous yield to the delusion. 
 A striking and most amusing illustration of this is afforded in the Life 
 of Sir Walter Scott, recently published. Sir Walter, on his last jour- 
 ney to London, made a detour to Charlecote. On his return to Scot- 
 land, he visited Carlisle Castle, where he was shown the very dungeon 
 where his own imaginary hero, Fergus Mac Ivor, had been confined; 
 We subjoin the extracts for the amusement of the reader : 
 
 "April 8, [1828]. Learning from Washington living's descrip- 
 tion of Stratford, that the hall of Sir Thomas Lucy, the justice who 
 rendered Warwickshire too hot for Shakespeare, was still extant, we 
 went in quest of it. 
 
 " Charlecote is in high preservation, and inhabited by Mr. Lucy, 
 descendant of the worshipful Sir Thomas. The hall is about 300 
 years old, a brick mansion with a gate-house in advance. It is sur- 
 rounded by venerable oaks, realizing the imagery which Shakespeare 
 loved to dwell upon ; rich verdant pastures extend on every side, and 
 numerous herds of deer were reposing in the shade. All showed that 
 the Lucy family had retained their ' land and beeves.' While we were 
 surveying the antlered old hall, with its painted glass and family pic- 
 tures, Mr. Lucy came to welcome us in person, and to show the 
 house, with the collection of paintings, which seems valuable. 
 
 " He told me the park from which Shakespeare stole the buck, was 
 not that which surrounds Charlecote, but belonged to a mansion at 
 some distance, where Sir Thomas Lucy resided at the time of the 
 trespass. The tradition went that they hid the buck in a barn, part of 
 which was standing a few years ago, but now totally decayed. This 
 park no longer belongs to the Lucys. The house bears no marks of 
 decay, but seems the abode of ease and opulence. There were some 
 fine old books, and I was told of many more which were not in order. 
 How odd if a folio Shakespeare should be found amongst them ! Our 
 early breakfast did not permit taking advantage of an excellent repast 
 offered by the kindness of Mr. and Mrs. Lucy, the last a lively Welsh- 
 woman. This visit gave me great pleasure ; it really brought Justice 
 Shallow freshly before my eyes ; the luces ' which do become an old
 
 ADVERTISEMENT. O 
 
 are called on to believe that he who laid the foundation of 
 his fortune by (if he did not owe it entirely to) acting, 
 was an indifferent actor; and from a line in his sonnets it 
 has been surmised that he was lame, which would have 
 incapacitated him from acting at all,* and is contrary to 
 the evidence of Aubrey, who has described him as a well- 
 made and graceful man. In his Macbeth, and Henry the 
 Eighth, he has left us complete evidence of his being 
 a Protestant ; yet, because there are in his Hamlet some 
 allusions to the rites of the Roman church, he has been 
 set down as a Catholic, and this latter surmise has so far 
 gained credit as to lead some writers of that communion 
 to triumph on the subject, and to urge it as a conclusive 
 argument that genius is incompatible with Protestantism. 
 
 coat well/ were not more plainly pourtrayed in his own armorials in the 
 hall window, than was his person in my mind's eye. There is a pic- 
 ture shown as that of the old Sir Thomas, but Mr. Lucy conjectures it 
 represents his son. There were three descents of the same name of 
 Thomas. The portrait hath ' the eye severe and beard of formal cut,' 
 which fill up with judicial austerity the otherwise social physiognomy 
 of the worshipful presence, with his ' fair round belly, with good 
 capon lined.' " Scott's Diary Life, vol. vii., p. 123. 
 
 " After that we went to the Castle [of Carlisle], where a new show- 
 man went through the old trick of pointing out Fergus Mac Ivor's very 
 dungeon. Peveril said, ' Indeed ? Are you quite sure, Sir ?' And on 
 being told there could be no doubt, was troubled with a fit of coughing, 
 which ended in a laugh. The man seemed exceeding indignant : so 
 when papa moved on, I whispered who it was. I wish you had seen 
 the man's start, and how he stared and bowed as he parted from us ; 
 and then rammed his keys into his pocket, and went off' at a hand- 
 gallop to warn the rest of the garrison. But the carriage was ready, 
 and we escaped a row." Letter from Miss Scott to Mrs. Lockhart, 
 n. d. except 1828 Life, vol. vii., p. 144. 
 
 * Mr. Collier's researches prove that Shakespeare was in London, 
 possessed of property in the theatre in 1589, when he was aged twenty- 
 five. As he is not mentioned or alluded to as a writer till 15Q2, it is 
 evident that he must have derived his living from his acting only. The 
 belief of his being an indifferent actor has been propagated from mis- 
 taking what Aubrey has said on the subject, of the top of his perform- 
 ance being the ghost in his own Hamlet. Aubrey, however, by no 
 means states this as disparaging his acting, in which sense it has been 
 taken. The character of the ghost as intended by the poet, is one 
 that requires more particularly an actor of a commanding and noble 
 presence. He is represented as being "majestical" and "like a 
 king," and is also in complete armour. How does this accord with 
 the supposed lameness of his histrionic representative ? The spectators 
 of the play had been used to the sight of Essex, of Raleigh, of Cum- 
 berland, and other of the prime gentlemen soldiers of the age in 
 panoply, and to have introduced to them a lame man as the represen- 
 tive of a king " in fair and warlike form," and with " martial stalk," 
 would have been the height of burlesque.
 
 ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 Perhaps it was in ridicule of his predecessors that another 
 gentleman, determined to outdo all who had gone before 
 him, had the hardihood to question the poet's identity ; 
 having laboured to prove that he was one and the same 
 person with Christopher Marlowe ! 
 
 But of all those who have thus speculated on the per- 
 son, talents, and creed of the poet, there are none who 
 have injured his memory so much as those who, arguing 
 from his seeming neglect of his wife in his will, have con- 
 cluded that he had quarrelled with her, and that he took 
 this method of showing, even in his last moments, his 
 unforgiving spirit. It appears from the will, that the 
 name of his wife had been altogether left out or forgotten 
 in the first instance, and that when she was afterwards 
 mentioned, it was only in compliance with legal forms, 
 which required that she should be in some way noticed ; 
 and it is then (according to the above writers) that he is 
 made to add insult to injustice by bequeathing to her no 
 other provision than his " second best bed," an act of 
 unkindness so contrary to the opinion we form of the poet 
 from his writings, and so totally at variance with the 
 evidence of his contemporaries, which, though slight, is 
 expressly positive as to the amiability of his disposition, 
 that the mind at once revolts from it. In his will, after 
 making provision for his daughters and his nephews, we 
 have bequests to his fellows, the players, to his godson, 
 and to several other persons is it likely that while he 
 was thus careful to preserve his memory green in the 
 hearts of those whom he loved, he should be negligent of 
 her who had the nearest and the tenderest claims upon 
 him ? Is it not more consonant with his character, more 
 charitable to him to believe, that other and ample provi- 
 sion had been made for her ? 
 
 In belief and proof of such being the case, we publish 
 the following Letter ; for we have here the testimony of 
 one who was likely to know better than any other person 
 what he asserts, that " his (the poet's) wife and daughter 
 did earnestly desire to be buried with him." Is such the 
 feeling of a woman towards a husband who had neglected 
 her and left her to linger out the last moments of her 
 life in poverty and distress! The deep feeling of reli- 
 gion apparent throughout his works, his love of his spe- 
 cies, under all its follies and weaknesses, the truest mark 
 of a good and well-regulated mind, forbid us to believe 
 that such was the conduct of the GENTLE SHAKESPEARE.
 
 LETTER, 
 
 &c. &c. 
 
 Butler's Merston, in Warwickshire, 
 
 April the IQth, 1693. 
 DEAR COUSIN, 
 
 THE letter I sent you last post was but short in 
 comparison with my former ; and indeed, if I should 
 follow your example, it ought to be much shorter : 
 but 'tis folly to expect a fee-farm of joys in this 
 world ; we must down on our marrow-bones, and 
 thank heaven for affording us one single glance. 
 This epistle (I suppose) you may justly call Mr. 
 
 D ll's travels into Warwickshire, for herein you 
 
 shall have such particulars as I can at present call 
 to mind, and by this prolix relation I shall partly 
 (tho' not designedly) revenge the brevity of yours. 
 
 On Friday, the 10th of March last, I set out from 
 London, and lay that night at Aylesbury. The next 
 day I came hither to Butler's-Merston, which is 
 eight miles from Warwick, six miles from Stratford- 
 super-Avon, and one mile from Kineton. My 
 friend's mansion house is very pleasantly situated, 
 being on the brow of an hill, and from it down
 
 8 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 
 
 the valley, are regular walks of lime, chesnut, and 
 walnut trees. In the extreme parts of this are two 
 noble fish-ponds, and a very large dove-house, from 
 whence we are, as often as we please, plentifully fur- 
 nished with creatures of both elements, of water and 
 air. The gardens, orchards, meadows, and pasture 
 are suitable : apples and pears are here -still as 
 delicious as in the month of August, of which we 
 have (since the last year) good store remaining. 
 The house is large enough for its demesnes, being 
 an ancient, strong-built piece of architecture, with 
 all the convenience of our modern buildings. To 
 comfort and solace ourselves, we have all those 
 necessaries that beautify and adorn the kitchen and 
 cellar ; and in the stables there be as stately a 
 number of horses as a man can wish or desire to 
 ride on. 
 
 Having come so far, I may now venture to in- 
 form you of our advances abroad ; and in order 
 to that, I must acquaint you first that there is a 
 knott in these parts that meet at Kineton every 
 Saturday in the afternoon, who are one and all, of 
 which number my friend is one ; and they are as 
 true and sincere as they are generous and hospi- 
 table. 
 
 The first I shall name shall be Charles New- 
 sham of Chadshunt, an ancient justice of the 
 peace (tho' but fifty-eight years old), one that is 
 every way a complete gentleman. He is an excel- 
 lent scholar, and as good an historian ; he is a
 
 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 9 
 
 great admirer of your Royal-Society-learning, but 
 not to be infatuated with the itch of experimen- 
 tal discoveries, &c. ; but above all, he has made 
 the reasons of our municipal laws his own, espe- 
 cially that part which relates and appertains to the 
 crown-side ; with whose conversation you may ima- 
 gine I take no small delight. In short he has so 
 clear an insight, so quick an apprehension, and so 
 solid a judgment, that one would have thought he 
 practised never any other thing but law, and [had] 
 been all his life employed in antiquities, &c. This 
 gentleman lives within two miles of us, having a 
 paternal estate of 1,000/. per annum, besides a large 
 addition by his own industry, &c. 
 
 The next is one Mr. Peeres, of an ancient family 
 in this county, whose estate is 800/. per annum. 
 He lives at his manor of Alveston, lying on the banks 
 of the river Avon, within five miles of this place ; 
 he married one of the above Mr. Newsham's daugh- 
 ters. He has a very fine house built lately, &c. 
 
 Another of the fraternity is Justice Bentley, an 
 honest true-hearted gentleman. He is very fat and 
 very rich, having an inheritance of 1,300/. per an- 
 num, besides a vast personal estate, especially in 
 money. He has one wife, one only son, and one 
 maiden daughter of the age of twenty-four. He 
 lives at Kineton, within one mile of us. This is 
 he that told me the story of the Buff Gloves. 
 
 A fourth is Mr. Loggins, a near neighbour of ours. 
 He has a pretty estate of 700/. per annum, all con-
 
 10 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 
 
 tiguous about his house ; he is excellent company, 
 and keeps as excellent cyder. 
 
 To these I may add my friend and his father, 
 whose characters I dare not take upon me to de- 
 scribe, fearing lest I should come short of their 
 merit : but thus much I may say of them, that that 
 which makes even poverty comfortable they enjoy 
 with plenty, and that is, unity and concord at home ; 
 and to add to their happiness, they have two hand- 
 some prattling boys, each as pretty as Phillis, but 
 not quite so old. They are in coats, and yet are in 
 their grammars. And now I think of these children, 
 pray speak to my cousin Betty (who knows the art 
 of pleasing) to do me the favour to buy some little 
 odd thing or other to present them with. She shall 
 be paid as soon as I come to London, with a mil- 
 lion of thanks. 
 
 From all these gentlemen I have had particular 
 invitations, at whose respective houses I have re- 
 ceived so many favours, and so much obliging civi- 
 lity, that are sufficient to bind my gratitude to a 
 perpetual remembrance and acknowledgment ; and 
 as a mark of their kindness and esteem, they have 
 admitted me of their society. And thus you may 
 observe that a man may be excluded from one body 
 politic, and immediately incorporated into another ; 
 and in truth 'tis but justice that a man return with- 
 out complaint what he received gratis, and all that. 
 
 Now I proceed to inform you what antiquities I 
 have observed, and now and then, if I should prove
 
 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 11 
 
 tedious by telling stories relating to these matters, 
 you will, I hope, excuse it, for 'tis what I thought 
 worthy my remembrance, and by consequence my 
 friends.' 
 
 The first remarkable place in this county that I 
 visited, was Stratford-super-Avon, where I saw the 
 effigies of our English tragedian, Mr. Shakspeare : 
 part of his epitaph I sent Mr. Lowther, and desired 
 he would impart it to you, which I find by his last 
 letter he has done ; but here I send you the whole 
 inscription. 
 
 Judicio Pylium, genio Socratem, arte Maronem, 
 Terra tegit, populus mseret, olympus habet. 
 Stay, passenger, why goest thou by so fast ; 
 Read, if thou canst, whom envious death hath plac't 
 Within this monument, Shakespeare, with whome 
 Quick nature dyed, whose name doth deck this tomb 
 Far more than cost, sith all that he hath writt 
 Leaves living art but page to serve his witt. 
 
 Obijt A. Dm* 1616. 
 
 JEtat.53, Die. 23. Apr. 1616. 
 
 Near the wall, where his monument is erected, 
 lieth a plain freestone, underneath which his body 
 is buried with this epitaph made by himself a little 
 before his death : 
 
 Good friend, for Jesus sake forbear 
 To dig the dust enclosed here. 
 Blest be the man that spares these stones, 
 And curst be he that moves my bones. 
 
 The clerk that showed me this church was above 
 eighty years old. He says that this Shakespeare
 
 12 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 
 
 was formerly in this town bound apprentice to a 
 butcher, but that he ran from his master to London, 
 and there was received into the play-house as a 
 servitour, and by this means had an opportunity 
 to be what he afterwards proved. He was the best 
 of his family ; but the male line is extinguished. 
 Not one, for fear of the curse abovesaid, dare touch 
 his grave-stone, tho' his wife and daughters did 
 earnestly desire to be laid in the same grave with 
 him. 
 
 There are other stately monuments in this church, 
 as the monument of George Carew, Earl of Totness, 
 who was a considerable man in Ireland in the time 
 of Queen Elizabeth, and also in the time of King 
 James, both there and in England. He died tempor. 
 Car. I. His brave actions and titles of honour are 
 here upon his monument enumerated, which are 
 too tedious to be here inserted. There is also the 
 monument of the Cloptons here, who are an ancient 
 family : there are some of them still remaining in 
 this town. 
 
 I shan't trouble you any more in this place, but 
 my next stage shall be to the church of Warwicke, 
 which, for its multitude of many fair and stately 
 monuments, will afford matter enough to feed the 
 most hungry pen in Europe for a considerable time. 
 But my curiosity shall terminate in a slender account 
 of a few of them. 
 
 The first I shall begin with shall be the monu- 
 ment of Thomas Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, and
 
 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 13 
 
 the Lady Katherine Mortimer his wife, daughter to 
 Roger Mortimer, first Earl of March, made by King 
 Edward III. Here the statues of him and his 
 countess are excellently cut in white marble. They 
 both died in one year, viz. in the forty-third of Ed- 
 ward III. He dying at Calais in France, and being 
 brought to this church, was enterred with his said 
 lady. This Thomas Beauchamp was as eminent for 
 his public service as any one of his line ; he accom- 
 panied King Edward 3rd in the twentieth of his 
 reign into France, and was one of the principal 
 commanders that, with the Black Prince, led the van 
 of his army in that famous battle of Crescy, where 
 the English gained such immortal honour. In 
 the 29 Ed. 3d, he attended the Prince of Wales 
 into France, where, in a little time, the memo- 
 rable battle of Poictiers happened, in which the 
 King of France was taken prisoner, and in this 
 also the noble earl gained a lasting renown, for he 
 by his own hands took that day Will, de Melleun, 
 Archbishop of Seinz, and many other prisoners of 
 note. This earl was one of the founders of the noble 
 Order of the Garter, instituted by King Edward the 
 Third. These and many other extraordinary things 
 may be related of this nobleman ; but this taste shall 
 suffice, and being subjects of general discourse, I 
 thought not impertinent to send you. 
 
 The next I came to was the monument of Thomas 
 Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, (son to the aforesaid 
 Thomas,) and Margaret his wife, daughter to the
 
 14 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 
 
 Lord Ferrers of Groby : he died anno 1401, anno 
 2 Henry IV. They lie under a fair monument of 
 marble, with this inscription upon it : 
 
 " Hie jacent Dorainus Thomas de Bello Campo quondam 
 Comes Warwici qui obiit octavi die mensis Aprilis Anno Domini, 
 Millessimo. CCCC. primo,etDomina Margeretta quondam Comi- 
 tissa Warwici qui obiit xxii mensis januarii Ano Domini Mil- 
 lessimo CCCC. sexto : quorum animabus propicietur Deus. 
 Amen," 
 
 This Earl, for his great wisdom and prudence, was 
 by the parliament, an 3 R. II, chosen governor to 
 the king, then but young ; but he was ill rewarded 
 by that unhappy prince, for when he got the go- 
 vernment into his own hands, he had him attainted 
 for high treason ; but he granted him his life in 
 exchange of a perpetual banishment to the Isle of 
 Man, &c. But this cloud was presently dissipated 
 by the advancement of Henry the Fourth to the 
 crown, and thereby this noble earl restored to his 
 liberty, honours and possessions. 
 
 I made my next step to the monument of Richard 
 Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, son to the last men- 
 tioned Earl Thomas : he died at Roan, anno 1439, 
 and lies buried in a vault here; in memory of whom 
 stands the noblest monument that ever my eyes 
 beheld ; 'tis in my judgment, much beyond Henry 
 the seventh's. His statue in brass, double gilt, is 
 the most exact and lively representation that hitherto 
 I ere met with. The inscription thereon is thus 
 literally taken:
 
 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 15 
 
 " Preieth devoutly for the sowel whome God assoile of one 
 of the moost worshipfull knights in his days of monhode and 
 conning Richard Beauchamp, late Earl of Warwicke, L d Des- 
 penser of Bergavenny, and of mony greate other Ldships, whose 
 bodie resteth here under this Tumbe in a full faire vout of stone 
 sett on the beare Rooch, the which visited with long sikness in 
 the Castle of Roan thereihne deceased full cristenly the last day 
 of Aprill the yeare of our L d God A. M. cccc.xxxix. he being 
 at the time Lieutenant Generall and Governour of the Roialme of 
 France and of the Dutchy of Normandy by sufficient authority 
 of our soveraign Lord the King Harry the VI. The which body 
 with great deliberation and full worshipfull conduct by see and 
 by lond was brought to Warwick the iiii day of October the 
 year abovesaid, and was leid with full solemne exequies in a 
 feir chest made of stone in this church afore the west dore of 
 this Chappell, according to his last will and testament therin to 
 rest till this Chappell by him devised, in his leife were made, 
 al the whitche Chappell, founded on the Rooch and alle the 
 members thereof, his Executors dede fully make and apparaile 
 by the auctority of his sede last will and testament and thereafter 
 by the same auctoritie they did translate full worshipfully the 
 seide bodie into the vout above saide honored be god therefore." 
 
 Round about this tomb there are fourteen statues 
 in copper, double gilt, standing on the ends and 
 sides of the monumenting, representing his family 
 and near relations. To recount the many noble 
 exploits of this man would require a treatise of 
 itself nay, the stories of him which still continue 
 fresh in this town of Warwick would be very 
 tedious ; but in fine in martial prowess and great 
 employments he exceded all his noble ancestors ; 
 and amongst the many that I have heard, take these 
 few. He fought three severall days at Guignes in
 
 16 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 
 
 France, in the personage of these three knights, viz. 
 1, the Green Kt. 2, the Chevalier vert, 3, the Che- 
 valier attendant. Those that he fought with were, 
 1, le Chevalier Rouge, 2, le Chevalier Blanche, 3, Sir 
 Collard Fines, over whom he had the better, for which 
 he was much respected both at home and abroad. 
 
 He was sent from England with many other noble 
 men to the council of Constance in Germany, at 
 which time he fought a Duke and slew him in justing. 
 King Henry the V. upon his death, appointed this 
 Earl should have the tutelage of his son Henry VI., 
 then an infant, till he were sixteen years of age, which 
 the Parliament approving, he afterwards had, &c. 
 
 There be severall other large and fine monuments 
 belonging to the family of the Nevilles, that after 
 the Beauchamps came to be Earls of Warwick, and 
 also many noble monuments in memory of the 
 family of the Dudleys, who were Earls of Warwick 
 after the extinguishment of the Nevilles. 
 
 Besides this, there is the monument of Sir Foulke 
 Greville, which, as I am informed by the learned in 
 the orders of building, is for its architecture inferior 
 to none in the kingdom. The epitaph on this tomb 
 is in my mind worth your knowing, which is this, 
 viz. : 
 
 Fulke Grevil, servant to Queene 
 Elizabeth, Councellour to King James, and 
 Friend to Sr Phillip Sidney. 
 Trophaeum peccati 
 
 Now I will bid adieu to monuments and cast my
 
 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 17 
 
 eye on Kenilworth, which I was so pleased with the 
 first time, that I made another visit to its ruins as I 
 returned from Coleshill (from whence I writ you 
 my former letter). 
 
 This castle was first built in the time of King 
 Henry I. by one Geoflfery de Clinto ; and a great 
 pool, which was two miles long, was made at the 
 same time. There were additional buildings and 
 fortifications to this in every king's reign. In the 
 49th of Henry III. after the defeat of the Barons at 
 the battle of Evesham, the scattered rebels fled to 
 this place ; and in the 50th of this king, he with a 
 potent army, came in person and besieged it, which 
 was very close, for six months, but at last he was 
 glad to grant them their own terms. 
 
 During this siege, the sword Curtana was deli- 
 vered to the king in the camp. This is allways 
 since carried before the kings at their coronation. 
 
 Here the unfortunate King Edward II. was im- 
 prisoned in the 20th of his reign, and then deposed ; 
 here 'twas that a surrender of his regal dignity was 
 extorted from him, and from hence he was huried 
 to Berkley Castle, and there some time after most 
 barbarously murdered. 
 
 Queen Elizabeth made a grant of this Castle to 
 her beloved the Earl Leicester, who laid out on 
 buildings and repairs upwards of 60,000/. 
 
 'Twas in this castle that the said Earl had the 
 presence of Queen Elizabeth for seventeen days. 
 The entertainment was so noble that as I am in-
 
 18 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 
 
 formed, there was a book then writ, entituled " The 
 Princely Pleasures of Kenilworth Castle. " 
 
 This castle came afterwards to the crown, and in 
 the late usurpation for its good service to the king, 
 was totally demolished, so that now there remains 
 but the ruins (which even still looks noble) of a 
 most stately fabrick. But truly they have done 
 one piece of service, and that is by draining the 
 pond above mentioned, and rendering many hun- 
 dreds of acres to be worth 40s. per acre, which before 
 was purely matter of prospect and curiosity. This 
 place was by King Charles II. granted to the present 
 Earl of Rochester, with whose steward I perambu- 
 lated this place. 
 
 I am afraid I have already trespass'd too long on 
 your patience, else the describing this place, its 
 situation, conveniences, &c. would not be amiss, but 
 I shall conclude this letter with Kenilworth, and as 
 you like this, you shall have more waste-paper, 
 which shall give you my observations on Guy's 
 Cliff, the Castle of Warwick, Caesar's tower, and 
 Guy's tower, cum multis aliis, &c. 
 
 I am afraid that after you have read this over 
 (if there be any thing in it worth your knowledge,) 
 that you will justly say it is laid under so much heavy 
 rubbish that it's the cinder-wenches' trade to find it 
 out. But tho' I am very well assured that it is an 
 elaborate piece of folly, yet I hope you wo'nt expose 
 me in this undress for truly I am in no fit apparel 
 to appear abroad. But, if you please, two or three
 
 LETTER FROM WARWICKSHIRE, 1693. 19 
 
 friends more may be diverted in a chamber with it, 
 if such can affect their humours. 
 
 But to make amends for all, I here inclosed 
 send you a true copy of my friend's speech to the 
 corporation of Warwick, at the opening of their 
 Charter, which I desire you keep for me again I 
 come to town, and let none out of your family hear 
 one word thereof. You may in some time have an 
 account of our entertainment in the garret. 
 
 The assize begins at Warwick to-morrow morn- 
 ing, and in order to be there to hear the charge, &c. 
 from Mr. Justice Clodpate, viz. Justice Ne 1, my 
 friend and I ride thither this afternoon ; we shall 
 stay there till thursday. If there be any thing there 
 worth your knowing, I will trouble you with it. 
 Pray favour me with your receipt of this. 
 
 My service to all the family, and I conclude, dear 
 Cousin, 
 
 Your very faithfull 
 Kinsman and most 
 aff te humble serv* 
 till death 
 
 JOHN AT STILES.
 
 5 a 
 
 UT 
 
 JO UOi;dlJDS9Q 
 
 8691 -HPV *OT
 
 REASONS 
 
 NEW EDITION 
 
 SHAKESPEARE'S WORKS, 
 
 CONTAINING NOTICES OF THE 
 
 DEFECTS OF FORMER IMPRESSIONS, 
 
 AND POINTING OUT 
 
 THE LATELY ACQUIRED MEANS OF ILLUSTRATING THE PLAYS, 
 POEMS, AND BIOGRAPHY OF THE POET. 
 
 J. PAYNE COLLIEK, ESQ. F.S.A. 
 
 AUTHOR OF THE HISTORY OF 
 ENGLISH DRAMATIC POETRY AND THE STAGE, &C. 
 
 SECOND EDITION, WITH ADDITIONS. 
 
 LONDON: 
 WHITTAKER & CO. AVE MARIA LANE. 
 
 1842.
 
 LONDON : 
 
 GILBERT AND R1VINGTON, PRINTERS, 
 ST. JOHN'S SQUARE.
 
 ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 THE want of a Library Edition of Shakespeare's Works, 
 comprising the latest discoveries and elucidations made by 
 the continued efforts of celebrated Antiquaries and Com- 
 mentators, has induced the Publishers to avail themselves 
 of Mr. Collier's knowledge, ability, and zeal on this subject, 
 in order to present the Public with as perfect an Edition, 
 more especially as regards the text of the Plays and 
 Poems, as can be given, and in such a form and size as 
 shall render it at once available to the scholar and the 
 general reader. 
 
 To prove the necessity of such an undertaking, they 
 have requested Mr. Collier to draw up the ensuing state- 
 ment. 
 
 The Work will be comprised in Eight handsome Demy 
 Octavo Volumes, printed in a large type, in the best 
 manner, on a suitable paper, and will be issued in volumes 
 periodically, commencing on the 1st of February, 1842. 
 A Specimen-page is appended 1 . 
 
 The Publishers would feel particularly obliged by pur- 
 chasers notifying, at their earliest convenience, to their 
 respective booksellers their intention to take the work, as 
 the number printed will be regulated accordingly. 
 
 WHITTAKER AND Co. 
 Ave Maria Lane, 
 London, January, 1842. 
 
 1 This Specimen was originally selected by the Publishers before it was 
 corrected by the Editor. 
 
 A 2
 
 afpec'iHteii of Size atui 
 
 SCENE IV.] MEASURE FOR MEASURE. I 
 
 To several subjects : heaven hath my empty words, 
 Whilst my invention, hearing not my tongue, 
 Anchors on Isabel : Heaven in my mouth, 
 As if I did but only chew his name, 
 And in my heart the strong and swelling evil 
 Of my conception. The state, whereon I studied, 
 Is like a good thing, being often read, 
 Grown sear'd and tedious ' ; yea, my gravity, 
 Wherein (let no man hear me) I take pride, 
 Could I, with boot, change for an idle plume, 
 Which the air beats for vain. O place ! O form ! 
 How often dost thou with thy case, thy habit, 
 Wrench awe from fools, and tie the wiser souls 
 To thy false seeming ! Blood, thou art blood : 
 Let's write good angel on the devil's horn, 
 'Tis not the devil's crest. 
 
 Enter Servant. 
 How now, who's there ? 
 
 Serv. One Isabel, a sister, 
 
 Desires access to you. 
 
 Ang. Teach her the way. [Exit Serv. 
 
 heavens ! 
 
 Why does my blood thus muster to my heart ; 
 Making both it unable for itself, 
 And dispossessing all my other parts 
 Of necessary fitness ? 
 
 So play the foolish throngs with one that swoons ; 
 Come all to help him, and so stop the air 
 By which he should revive : and even so 
 The general, subject to a well-wish'd king, 
 Quit their own part, and in obsequious fondness 
 Crowd to his presence, where their untaught love 
 
 1 Grown sear'd and tedious;] Warburton suggested seared for "feared" or 
 " fear'd," as it stands in most copies of the first folio : that belonging to Lord 
 Francis Egerton has it sear'd, as if the letter s had been substituted for / as the 
 sheet was going through the press. We need not, therefore, doubt as to the 
 adoption of sear'd instead of " fear'd."
 
 REASONS, 
 
 THE object of the following pages is to answer the 
 question " Why is it proposed to publish a new 
 edition of the Works of Shakespeare ?" 
 
 In an undertaking of the kind, no point is of so Toxtofthe 
 
 Author. 
 
 much importance as to settle the text of the author ; 
 and notwithstanding the pains bestowed upon the 
 language of Shakespeare, from the days of Rowe to 
 the present time, I shall be able to show that his 
 Editors have done much that they ought not to 
 have attempted, as well as left undone much that 
 they ought to have accomplished. They have been 
 guilty of serious offences of omission as well as of 
 commission ; and this may be said with all due 
 respect for their labours and their learning, for the 
 industry with which they have at times prosecuted 
 their inquiries, and for the acuteness and knowledge 
 many of them have displayed in the investigation 
 of disputed questions. It is of course impossible 
 to bestow too great pains on ascertaining and fixing 
 the true reading of Shakespeare ; and minute and 
 patient accuracy of comparison of the old copies, 
 quarto and folio, printed in his lifetime or soon
 
 8 MANUSCRIPTS. 
 
 afterwards, is indispensable. This is the most sacred 
 part of the duty of an Editor, and the absence of 
 that minute and patient accuracy is unpardonable in 
 any person who undertakes the task of producing an 
 impression of the works of such an Author. 
 Means of Let us examine briefly, in the first place, the means 
 
 settling the , , , 
 
 Text. for settling the text that remain to us, and then, the 
 manner in which those means have been hitherto 
 employed. 
 
 Manu- Dramatic pieces in manuscript by Ben Jonson, 
 
 Beaumont and Fletcher, Massiuger, Middleton, and 
 others, are in existence l ; but it is a remarkable fact, 
 that not a single written fragment of any of the 
 Plays of Shakespeare has come down to us, with the 
 exception of a few passages in some unprinted poeti- 
 cal miscellanies. It was very much the custom with 
 our ancestors, in the reigns of Elizabeth and James L, 
 to keep common-place books, in which they entered 
 anecdotes, observations, or passages from works which 
 fell in their way. Considering the number of such 
 collections, known to be extant, it is singular that so 
 few quotations should have been inserted in them 
 
 1 I refer to the autograph productions of Ben Jonson among the Royal 
 MSS. in the British Museum ; to the copy of the " Humorous Lieutenant" 
 (under the title of " Demetrius and Enanthe") published by my friend the 
 Rev. A. Dyce ; to the " Parliament of Love," printed by Gifford, among the 
 works of Massinger ; to Middleton's "Witch," &c. In addition to these, 
 many anonymous plays of the same era have been preserved, besides frag- 
 ments by celebrated dramatists. In the " Memoirs of Edward Alleyn," 
 printed for the Shakespeare Society, I have inserted a considerable portion of 
 Robert Greene's " Orlando Furioso," and I have in my possession a small 
 part of Marlowe's " Massacre at Paris," possibly in the handwriting of the 
 poet.
 
 MANUSCRIPTS. 9 
 
 from plays, and especially from plays by Shakespeare. 
 One of these, forming rather a rare exception to the 
 general rule, is now before me, and it contains ex- 
 tracts from several of our great dramatist's produc- 
 tions for the stage, anterior to the year 1600, but 
 none afterwards, although the dates interspersed in 
 the volume (of some 500 closely written pages) ex- 
 tend from about 1590 to the breaking out of the 
 civil wars. It rarely happens that the title of the 
 play is given, but " Richard II." and " The Merchant 
 of Venice" are mentioned, and about five other 
 dramas are quoted. Whether the writer of this 
 common-place book (who appears to have been either 
 a barrister or an attorney) employed the printed 
 copies, resorted to manuscript authorities, or only 
 recorded striking passages which he heard at the 
 theatres, it is not easy to decide ; but even these 
 brief extracts, never exceeding five lines, now and 
 then throw light upon difficult and doubtful expres- 
 sions. In general, collections of this kind consist 
 solely of undramatic poems, or citations from them, 
 and of these several have devolved into my hands ; 
 and, as will be seen hereafter, one of them very 
 importantly illustrates the minor productions of 
 Shakespeare. It comprises sonnets by Sir Philip 
 Sidney, poems by Daniel and Drayton, Ben Jonson's 
 ballad " From Oberon in Fairy-land" (with additions), 
 and other pieces ; but more especially, as regards my 
 purpose, some manuscript copies at full length of 
 poems contained in Shakespeare's " Passionate Pil-
 
 10 DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE'S COLLECTION. 
 
 grim," originally published in 1599, and subsequently 
 in 1612. 
 
 These are sources of information, as regards the 
 genuine text of Shakespeare, to which former 
 Editors either did not resort at all, or very sparingly 
 employed; and by availing myself of them, as largely 
 as the nature of the case will allow, it will be seen 
 that something has been accomplished for the illus- 
 tration of the productions of our great dramatist. 
 Printed I shall also with the most plodding diligence go 
 ties. over every line, word, and letter of each play or 
 poem, in order to be sure that the new edition cor- 
 responds with the ancient copies, as far as they are 
 to be followed, and that no syllable is passed over or 
 omitted that can be corrected or recovered. Upon 
 this task I have more or less been employed for many 
 years, as I was able to procure copies of the original 
 editions ; but of late I have enjoyed facilities for 
 the purpose of going through the plays again, and 
 of completing my undertaking, such as, I may confi- 
 dently assert, no other Editor ever possessed. 
 Duke of The moment it was mentioned to the Duke of 
 
 Devon- 
 
 bhire's Col- Devonshire (to whose kindness in other respects 
 
 lection. 
 
 I owe much) that I had engaged to produce so 
 important a work as a new edition of Shakespeare, 
 and that frequent reference to his Grace's match- 
 less dramatic library would be of essential service, 
 the Duke at once insisted that I should take home 
 with me every early edition of Shakespeare in his 
 library, that I might be able to finish my colla-
 
 LORD FRANCIS EGERTON'S LIBRARY. 1 1 
 
 tions at leisure, and under all possible advantages. 
 Such an excess of confidence I was not prepared to 
 expect, even from the Duke of Devonshire ; but of 
 course I was most happy to accept so extraordinary a 
 favour. When I state that his Grace's collection 
 includes all the first editions of Shakespeare's dramas, 
 and most of the later impressions prior to the 
 Restoration, that it embraces the inestimable and 
 unique first "Hamlet," of 1603, the first "Romeo 
 and Juliet," of 1597, the first "Richard II." and 
 " Richard III.," of the same year, the three " Lears," 
 of 1608, "The Merry Wives of Windsor," of 
 1602, the "Othello" of 1622, and many others, 
 which, if brought to the hammer, would produce a 
 sum of money, the amount of which it is difficult in 
 these times to calculate, the reader will be able in 
 some degree to estimate this remarkable act of libe- 
 rality. From his Grace also I have obtained the 
 loan of his folio editions of the Works of Shake- 
 speare in 1623, 1632, 1664, and 1685. 
 
 But the Duke of Devonshire is not the only Lord Fran- 
 nobleman to whom I am indebted in this respect, ton's 
 Lord Francis Egerton would have required no ex- 
 ample of the kind to prompt him to do any thing in 
 his power to aid me in this design ; but it so hap- 
 pened that I had directed my earliest application to 
 the Duke of Devonshire, and I could not refrain 
 from making Lord Francis Egerton acquainted with 
 the fact and its result. When I resorted to the 
 noble possessor of the Bridgewater Library, I was
 
 12 LORD FRANCIS EGERTON'S LIBRARY. 
 
 met with a proposal that I should be furnished from 
 thence with all the plays, poems, or tracts, that 
 would contribute to my purpose. Thus I obtained 
 the unique "Titus Andronicus" of 1600, many of 
 the first and subsequent editions of other pieces by 
 our great poet, the unique drama of " Love and For- 
 tune," 1589, and various other plays, poems, and pam- 
 phlets, intrinsically of great curiosity, and to me of 
 most essential importance. Early impressions of plays, 
 even of the same edition, not unfrequently differ, im- 
 provements having been made, and errors corrected 
 while they were going through the press ] ; and it was 
 
 1 This point has never been at all attended to, and the difficulty in 
 some instances of procuring more than a single copy of a play, has led to 
 the repetition of important mistakes. " Love's Labours Lost " was first 
 printed in 1598, and the copies of the Duke of Devonshire and of Lord 
 Francis Egerton vary in one place singularly. The passage occurs in act iv. 
 sc. 3, where Biron, before he is himself detected, thus reproaches the King, 
 Longaville, and Dumain, with having fallen in love : 
 
 " When shall you see me write a thing in rhyme, 
 Or groan for Joan ?" 
 
 This is as the passage has been uniformly printed, "Joan" in the 4to, 1598, 
 belonging to Lord Francis Egerton, and in others used by former editors, 
 being spelt lone. Nobody seems to have suspected an error, but that there 
 was one cannot be disputed ; for in the copy of the same edition belonging 
 to the Duke of Devonshire, instead of " groan for lone " we have " groan 
 for Love," with a capital, as if to prevent the blunder (detected while the 
 play was going through the press) from being repeated. The fact is, that 
 the compositor misread the I in " love " for a capital /, and the u (then 
 almost invariably employed instead of r) for an n, and printed " lone " 
 instead of " loue." 
 
 Another, even more remarkable, instance occurs in " The Merchant of 
 Venice," of which there are two 4to editions in 1600, one by Heyes and the 
 other by Roberts. The Duke of Devonshire and Lord Francis Egerton have 
 copies of the edition by Heyes, and they vary importantly near the com-
 
 LORD FRANCIS EGERTON'S LIBRARY. 13 
 
 therefore highly useful to me thus to have an oppor- 
 tunity of collating one copy against the other 1 . 
 Lord Francis Egerton was also kind enough to add 
 to the obligation, by lending me his folios of 1623 
 and 1632, the first being more than ordinarily in- 
 teresting on account of certain early manuscript 
 corrections in a few of the plays, which will put an 
 end to doubts on some passages of the original 
 text, and will most satisfactorily illustrate and ex- 
 plain others not hitherto well understood. 
 
 Perhaps, before I proceed farther, it may be well MS - cor - 
 
 rections in 
 
 to adduce a few proofs of the interest and value of a folio of 
 
 1623. 
 
 the folio of 1 623, belonging to Lord Francis Egerton, 
 in this particular. It should be observed prelimi- 
 narily that the volume is not perfect, and that some 
 
 mencement of act iv. In that of the Duke of Devonshire two lines are thus 
 
 given : 
 
 " Well use question with the wolf, 
 
 The ewe bleat for the lamb ;" 
 
 which is unintelligible. The defect must have been discovered while the 
 play was going through the press ; and in the copy of the identical edition, 
 the property of Lord F. Egerton, the passage is made to run correctly as 
 
 follows : 
 
 " You may as well use question with the wolf, 
 
 Why he hath made the ewe bleat for the lamb ;" 
 
 and so the passage stands in the 4 to by Roberts, which the editors of the 
 folio of 1623 evidently never saw. 
 
 1 Of course the dramatic collections in the British Museum, and at Oxford 
 and Cambridge, have been open to me as to others, and whenever occasion 
 has arisen, it will be found that they have been duly consulted ; but the 
 extraordinary aids I have obtained in the two instances above referred to, 
 and the assistance I have derived from the libraries of my friends, have 
 rendered a resort to public establishments less frequently necessary. Many 
 years ago I completed a collation of the text of Shakespeare with such of 
 the original quarto editions of his plays as are preserved in the British 
 Museum.
 
 14 "ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL." 
 
 deficient leaves have been supplied by manuscript. 
 This manuscript is not older than the end of the 
 seventeenth or beginning of the eighteenth century, 
 and as it was made from an impression of the second 
 folio of 1632, it is in itself of no worth; but certain 
 corrections, in the margin of the printed portion of 
 the folio, are probably as old as the reign of Charles I. 
 Whether they were merely conjectural, or were 
 made from original manuscripts of the plays, to 
 which the individual might have had access, it is 
 not perhaps possible to ascertain. As has been 
 stated, these verbal, and sometimes literal, annota- 
 tions are only found in a few of the plays in the 
 commencement of the volume ; and from what fol- 
 lows, it will be a matter of deep regret that the 
 corrector of the text carried his labours no far- 
 ther. 
 
 Our earliest instances shall be taken from " All's 
 W ell that ends Well," and these alone would be 
 sufficient to establish the excellence of the proposed 
 emendations. In the dialogue between the King of 
 France and Helena, (act ii. sc. 1.) where she is 
 endeavouring to persuade him to use her remedy, 
 she concludes one of her speeches, according to the 
 wording of the folio of 1623, with these lines : 
 
 " Oft expectation fails, and most oft there 
 Where most it promises ; and oft it hits 
 Where hope is coldest and despair most shifts." 
 
 Now, it is very clear that "shifts" cannot be 
 right : Pope, and all subsequent editors, conjecturally
 
 " ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL." 15 
 
 substituted sits; but the MS. corrector of Lord 
 Francis Egertoii's folio has written Jits in the 
 margin ; and " 'fits," for befits, was probably the 
 word Shakespeare wrote, the transcriber or printer 
 mistaking the f for a long s, then invariably used 
 at the beginning of words *. 
 
 Another instance of a similar error, arising pre- 
 cisely from the same cause, is pointed out by the MS. 
 corrector near the end of the same play, (act v. sc. 3.) 
 where the King (following the exact reading of the 
 first folio) thus addresses Bertram : 
 
 " I wonder, sir, sir, wives are monsters to you, 
 And that you fly them as you swear them lordship, 
 Yet you desire to marry." 
 
 The repetition of " sir" in the first line must be an 
 error, and modern editors have substituted since, 
 which would answer the purpose, if it were the true 
 word : the true word is " for," which was often used 
 in Shakespeare's time instead of because or since : 
 the compositor mistook they for a long s, and the o, 
 perhaps imperfectly written, for i. The line should 
 stand 
 
 " I wonder, sir, for wives are monsters to you," &c. 
 
 and so it is made to run by the individual who set 
 
 1 In Shakespeare's Sonnets (cxx.) we meet with " fits " for befits in the 
 line, 
 
 "The humble salve which wounded bosoms fits;" 
 
 and the instance is the more apposite, because it rhymes with " hits," as in 
 the quotation from All's Well that Ends Well."
 
 16 "ALL'S WELL THAT ENDS WELL." 
 
 right a few of the mistakes in the first folio belonging 
 to the Bridgewater library. 
 
 But there is a still happier emendation in the 
 same play, which not a single editor ever hit upon ; 
 yet it is so obvious, that the moment it is mentioned, 
 it will seem wonderful how so many learned and 
 ingenious men could have overlooked it. It occurs in 
 the last scene of act ii. after the King has compelled 
 Bertram to marry Helena against his will, and Ber- 
 tram has resolved to fly from her for ever before the 
 consummation. Bertram's speech to Parolles stands 
 in the following manner, as originally printed in the 
 folio of 1623 : 
 
 " I have writ my letters, casketed my treasure, 
 Given order for our horses ; and to-night, 
 When I should take possession of the bride, 
 And ere I do begin." 
 
 Thus the passage passed through the four early 
 folio editions, and all others from Rowe downwards, 
 excepting that in some of the modern impressions, 
 those who superintended them, not understanding the 
 concluding hemistich above inserted, printed it as if 
 Bertram had not finished his sentence, and was inter- 
 rupted by Parolles, 
 
 " And ere I do begin " 
 
 when the whole alteration that is required, to make 
 the sense perfect and intelligible, is a single letter, 
 and that single letter is written in the margin of the
 
 " WINTER'S TALE." 1 7 
 
 folio of 1623, the property of Lord Francis Egerton, 
 If we read 
 
 " .End ere I do begin." 
 
 all that is necessary is accomplished, and the evident 
 meaning is that Bertram, escaping from the wife he 
 has just been compelled to marry, resolves to end the 
 union ere he begins it : 
 
 " I have writ my letters, casketed my treasure, 
 Given order for our horses ; and to-night, 
 When I should take possession of the bride, 
 End ere I do begin." 
 
 It must be acknowledged that this is a very easy 
 and happy emendation, which does not admit of a 
 moment's doubt or dispute. 
 
 Nearly the same may be said of two of the changes " Winter's 
 in " The Winter's Tale" proposed by the same autho- 
 rity. In act i. sc. 2. Hermione tells Leontes, as we 
 find it in all the editions, 
 
 Yet, good deed, Leontes, 
 
 I love thee not ajar o' the clock behind 
 What lady she her lord." 
 
 which reads very like nonsense, although no attempt 
 has been made to correct a decided error. If we 
 read should, instead of " she," in the third line, the 
 whole difficulty is removed ; and probably in the 
 MS. from which the first folio was printed " should" 
 was written with an abbreviation, which might easily 
 be misread by the compositor. The MS. corrector 
 of Lord Francis Egerton's folio has substituted 
 should for " she " in the margin. Another, more than 
 
 B
 
 18 " WINTER'S TALE." 
 
 plausible, alteration was made by the same hand in a 
 later part of the same play, act v. sc. 1. A gentle- 
 man describes the beauty of the Princess whom 
 Florizel has brought with him ; and Paulina, apostro- 
 phising Hermione, exclaims 
 
 " O, Hermione ! 
 
 As every present time doth boast itself 
 Above a better gone, so must thy grave 
 Give way to what 's seen now." 
 
 Edwards (author of the " Canons of Criticism") re- 
 marks on this passage that " thy grave" means tliy 
 beauties ; but the truth seems to be that the printer 
 mistook a letter in the word " grave." In Lord F. 
 Egerton's folio, grace is substituted in MS. for 
 "grave," and "grace" was constantly used by our 
 ancestors as synonymous with " beauty." 
 
 It would be easy to carry this subject farther, and 
 to adduce other instances, all tending to establish 
 what a service would have been rendered to Shake- 
 speare, if the early possessor of this copy of the folio 
 of 1623, instead of confining his corrections to a few 
 of the plays which appeared in that edition for the 
 first time, had gone through the whole collection, 
 including those originally printed in quarto and after- 
 wards reprinted in the folio. Only eighteen out of 
 six-and-thirty plays had appeared in quarto before the 
 publication of the folio in 1623 ; so that precisely the 
 same number were new to the press when Heminge 
 and Condell published their edition. These last the 
 player-editors must have derived from MSS. belong-
 
 CARELESSNESS OF COLLATION. 19 
 
 ing to the company of the King's servants, to which 
 they were still attached. 
 
 Readers in general are not at all aware of the Careless- 
 ness of col- 
 nonsense they have, in many cases, been accustomed lation. 
 
 to receive as the genuine text of Shakespeare ; and 
 from a comparison of some of the plays, as they 
 stand in the first folio, with' modern copies, I shall 
 now proceed to establish, how carelessly former 
 editors have executed the necessary, but mechanical 
 work of collation. I shall not refer to dramas of 
 which there are several old quarto editions, which 
 would have required exact examination, and might 
 possibly have somewhat distracted the attention of 
 the commentators, but to those printed, for the first 
 time, in the folio of 1623 ; where an editor, as far as 
 regards collation, had no more to do than to take 
 care that his text follows that of the single ancient 
 impression under his eye, with only occasional re- 
 ference to the second folio, of 1632. And here I Folio of 
 
 16.H2, its 
 
 may take occasion to remark, that although the folio value. 
 of 1632 is not to be considered a decisive authority, 
 it is by no means to be so slightly treated, as Ma- 
 lone was disposed to do, in opposition to Steevens : 
 Steevens was certainly willing to rely too much upon 
 it ; but, although it is not uniformly well corrected, 
 and although a few of the plays appear to have 
 entirely escaped attention, it is indisputable that it 
 was not a mere reprint, left to the mercy of com- 
 positors, but that some editorial care was exercised 
 in the production of considerable portions of it. 
 s2
 
 20 " TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA." 
 
 Its changes are nevertheless not to be invariably 
 adopted; and although the supervisor of it might 
 possibly have resorted to then existing manuscripts, 
 I do not think it probable that he did so, nor do I 
 perceive sufficient evidence of the fact to warrant 
 the degree of confidence in his emendations they 
 would in that case deserve. 
 
 With this remark I will cite a few passages from 
 Verona. Tne Two Q ent i emen o f Verona," to prove that the 
 madern editors of Shakespeare strangely neglected 
 the duty they undertook, as far as respects furnish- 
 ing an authentic text, supported by the best autho- 
 rity to which they could refer the folio of 1623. 
 The modern text is taken as it is found in the edi- 
 tion in 21 vols. 8vo., which the late Mr. Boswell 
 saw through the press, and which contains Malone's 
 latest corrections and contributions, besides the 
 notes of Pope, Theobald, Warburton, Johnson, Stee- 
 vens, Reed, and other commentators, during consi- 
 derably more than a century. 
 
 In act i. sc. 2, of "The Two Gentlemen of 
 Verona," Julia asks her maid, Lucetta, her opinion 
 of her various suitors ; and first, 
 
 " What think'st thou of the fair Sir Eglamour ?" 
 
 To which Lucetta replies, according to the folio 
 of 1623, 
 
 " As of a knight well-spoken, neat and fine." 
 
 How is this line printed in Malone's Shakespeare 
 by Boswell ? Thus : 

 
 " TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA." 21 
 
 " As our knight, well-spoken, neat and fine." 
 
 In the same scene, on the re-entry of Lucetta, 
 Julia inquires, 
 
 " Is it near dinner time ?" 
 
 and Lucetta's answer completes the line, 
 
 " I would it were." 
 
 In Malone's Shakespeare, by Boswell, the word 
 " near" is omitted in Julia's question, by which the 
 metre is destroyed; and the omission is the more 
 extraordinary, because Boswell added a note of his 
 own, to inform the reader, that " Is it" was printed 
 " Is 't" in the folio ; but he did not carry his atten- 
 tion even to the very next word, or he must have 
 seen that it was wanting, even if his ear did not 
 make him acquainted with the deficiency. 
 
 Passing over mere misprints, of which a formid- 
 able list might be furnished from this very play, the 
 folio wing striking errors of a different kind in a small 
 part of a single page (iv. 102), are not to be forgiven. 
 
 " You would then have them always play but one thing." 
 
 The adverb in italic is an interpolation, without 
 the slightest reason assigned, and as the passage is 
 only prose, no excuse could be found in the require- 
 ments of the metre '. In fact, iq this scene, some 
 
 1 The excuse of the improvement of the metre (though we ought to be 
 far from wishing for any such improvements,} may however be made for 
 the unwarranted insertion of the same adverb in a line of " The Taming 
 of the Shrew," act i. sc. 1. 
 
 " In brief, then, sir, sith it your pleasure is," &c. 
 
 If commentators and verbal critics were to be allowed on all occasions to
 
 22 " TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA." 
 
 passages meant for colloquial verse, just above the 
 level of ordinary speaking, have been printed by 
 Malone as prose ; such, for instance, as Julia's 
 answer to the line above quoted, which ought to be 
 regulated thus : 
 
 " I would always have one play but one thing. 
 But, Host, doth this Sir Proteus, that we talk on, 
 Often resort unto this gentlewoman ?" 
 
 A few lines farther we meet with a careless trans- 
 position, which I should not have noticed, but for 
 the other defects in the same passage : the observa- 
 tion of Proteus, 
 
 " Sir Thurio, fear not you, I will so plead," 
 
 was allowed by Bos well to stand, 
 
 " Sir Thurio, fear you not, I will so plead 1 ." 
 
 Again, on the re-appearance of Silvia "at her 
 
 amend in their own way what they might consider the defective metre of 
 Shakespeare, they would generally make strange work of it. Steevens was 
 the boldest experimenter of this class, although his ear was notoriously 
 most exceptionable. It is not the province of an editor to attempt to 
 improve Shakespeare. 
 
 1 In the following instance of the same kind from " The Taming of the 
 Shrew," the transposition would seem to have been wilful : 
 
 " This will I do, and this will I advise you," 
 
 as if, because " will I" occurred in the first clause of the sentence, it was 
 necessary that it should be repeated in the second. It is printed, "and this 
 / trill advise you" in the folio ; and perhaps the very reason which induced 
 Malone to make the change (without any notice that he had done so,) was 
 the very reason why Shakespeare wrote the contrary. Where no alteration 
 is absolutely necessary, we are apt to consider the poet the best judge of the 
 mode in which he will express himself.
 
 " TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA." 23 
 
 window, Proteus, in the old copy of 1623, addresses 
 her 
 
 " Madam, good even to your ladyship ;" 
 
 which is printed by Malone 
 
 " Madam, good evening to your ladyship," 
 
 avoiding the authorised and refined term Shakes- 
 peare purposely employed, and giving an air of 
 familiarity to the salutation, inconsistent with the 
 relative positions of the parties to the dialogue. 
 These errors (not one of which is countenanced even 
 by the text of the second folio) are all included 
 within a space of nineteen lines ; and on the very 
 next page (103), we meet with a passage which is 
 rendered pure nonsense by the substitution of one 
 word for another. Silvia is reproaching Proteus with 
 injuring his friend by making persevering love to 
 her, and she asks 
 
 and art thou not ashamed 
 
 To wrong him with thy importunacy ?" 
 
 Thus it stands in the first and in all the folio 
 editions ; yet in Malone's Shakespeare, by Boswell, 
 the preposition has been absurdly changed, and the 
 passage is thus given : 
 
 and art thou not ashamed 
 
 To wrong him o/thy importunacy?" 
 
 A form of expression neither authorised by the 
 original text, nor by the customary mode of writing
 
 24 " TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA." 
 
 in the time of Shakespeare. No blunder of the kind 
 can be deemed a trifle, (even if it did not make the 
 passage unintelligible,) where an editor professes 
 to fix the genuine reading of such an author ; and 
 when in a subsequent scene of the same act (act 
 iv. sc. 4), we meet with " all men's judgment," 
 misprinted for " all men's judgments," both sub- 
 stantives having been correctly and consistently 
 written by Shakespeare in the plural, all lovers of 
 our great dramatist ought to be offended. 
 
 This system of blundering (for it may be said to 
 amount almost to a system) is kept up to the very 
 last scene of " The Two Gentlemen of Verona," 
 where Valentine, addressing the Duke, observes, as 
 the lines appear in the folio of 1623, 
 
 " And as we walk along, I dare be bold, 
 With our discourse, to make your grace to smile." 
 
 In the copy of the play in the edition in 21 vols. 
 8vo, revised by Boswell and containing Malone's 
 latest corrections, we find alone substituted for 
 " along," just as if two people could walk alone, 
 and as if the Duke and Valentine would not be 
 surrounded by the other prominent characters in 
 the drama, besides being attended by the ducal 
 train. 
 
 So far with regard to some of the errors in " The 
 Two Gentlemen of Verona ;" but the case of that 
 play is by no means singular, and in others the 
 mistakes are hardly to be accounted for, excepting
 
 " THE TAMING OF THE SHREW." 25 
 
 by supposing culpable carelessness combined with 
 remarkable ignorance (of which of course we do not, 
 in the ordinary sense of the word, accuse the com- 
 mentators), in order to disfigure the text of Shakes- 
 peare 1 . In one drama, " The Taming of the Shrew," a Taming of 
 whole line has been omitted, and Boswell (who has 
 been ostentatious of his collations, pointing them out 
 in separate notes at the foot of the page) did not 
 detect the deficiency. It cannot indeed be said that 
 the sense is absolutely incomplete without this missing 
 line, but still it is necessary to the full meaning of the 
 author, as will be evident when we quote the passage 
 as we find it in the folio of 1623, where the play 
 
 1 Now and then, changes are made which could not be accidental, and 
 for which there is not the slightest warrant by supposing the meaning of 
 the poet to have been misrepresented by the old printers. The alteration 
 in the following lines from " The Winter's Tale," (act. v. sc. 1) seems 
 merely wanton, and it runs through all the modern impressions. Paulina 
 would not have Leontes marry again, and Dion, in reply, urges her to pity 
 the State, and to call to mind the necessity of continuing the succession in 
 the family of Leontes : 
 
 " If you would not so, 
 
 You pity not the State, nor the remembrance 
 
 Of his most sovereign name ; consider little 
 
 What dangers, by his highness' fail of issue, 
 
 May drop upon his kingdom." 
 
 Nothing can be plainer, but all the modern editions substitute daine for 
 " name," (as it stands in the folio) and thus absolutely contradict the 
 poet's meaning. Shakespeare would hardly have made Dion advert to the 
 fate of Hermione, at the moment when he was urging another marriage 
 upon the king. Moreover, in the folio of 1623, and in the three others, as 
 if to prevent the possibility of mistake, " Name " is printed with a capital 
 letter. This was therefore a wilful corruption of the text, without any 
 notice that a variation had been made from the old and authentic reading 
 of the play.
 
 26 " THE TAMING OF THE SHREW." 
 
 (as well as the others we have noticed) was for the 
 first time printed. It is in act iv. sc. 3, (as the 
 divisions are commonly marked, though it is the be- 
 ginning of the fourth act in the original copy,) 
 where Katherine is intreating Grumio to give her 
 something to eat : 
 
 " Beggars that come unto my father's door 
 Upon entreaty have a present alms, 
 If not, elsewhere they meet with charity ; 
 But I, who never knew how to entreat, 
 Nor never needed that I should entreat, 
 Am starv'd for meat, &c." 
 
 The line printed in Italic is the line omitted, and 
 in what way it made its escape from the text we 
 cannot conjecture ; but the fact that it was omitted 
 must put an end to confidence in such an .edition, 
 and proves that Boswell (to say nothing of Malone) 
 performed his duty of collation with almost criminal 
 inattention l . 
 
 1 I do not complain of misprints in plays not assigned to Shakespeare, but 
 included by Boswell in the 21 vols. ; such for instance as " The True 
 Tragedie of Richard the Third." (vol. xix.) Not only are lines left out, 
 but exits and entrances are omitted, and other more or . less important 
 variations from the old copy are innumerable. 
 
 It is but justice to state, that the passage in " The Taming of the Shrew" 
 is correctly printed in Mr. Knight's " Pictorial Shakspere," and I add 
 with pleasure my testimony to the improvements he has made in the text 
 of previous editions, by restoring some of the readings of the first folio. 
 I may take this opportunity, also, of expressing my sense of the obligations 
 Mr. Knight has, in other respects, conferred upon the readers of Shakespeare, 
 both by the originality of some of his views, and by the ingenuity and ability 
 with which he has enforced and illustrated them. He has pointed out a 
 line in " Hamlet," which was left out by Reed in 1803, but it is restored 
 in Malone's Shakespeare by Boswell, vol. vii. p. 241. 
 
 3
 
 PUNCTUATION. 27 
 
 We might produce various instances from the 
 same comedy, where words have been foisted upon 
 Shakespeare without notice, or omitted without rea- 
 son ; but one striking proof of extreme carelessness 
 we cannot refrain from pointing out : it occurs at 
 the close of act iv., where Hortensio says 
 
 " Well, Petruchio, this has put me in heart. 
 Have to my widow ; and if she be froward, 
 Then hast thou taught Hortensio to be untoward." 
 
 The three lines are given as above in the several 
 folio editions, excepting that "be," in the second 
 line, is omitted in the first edition, and supplied 
 by the second; but in Malone's Shakespeare by 
 Boswell, not only " has" is altered to hath, (a matter 
 of comparatively small moment, though still an 
 unjustifiable liberty,) but " froward " is made for- 
 ward, the sense of which is directly opposite to that 
 of Shakespeare, while it destroys the intended rhyme, 
 which, without any other aid, ought to have led to 
 the detection of the error. 
 
 The point of infidelity to the text haying been 
 thus completely made out, by reference only to a 
 few plays of which there are no quarto editions, it 
 would be tedious, as well as useless, to dwell longer 
 on that subject. 
 
 Nor is punctuation, in an undertaking of this Punctua- 
 kind, a matter merely trivial, especially when non- 
 attention to it not only obscures, but sometimes 
 entirely perverts, the sense of a passage. In this 
 respect very flagrant errors have been committed ;
 
 28 PUNCTUATION. 
 
 but it is a topic to which we shall advert very briefly, 
 and only introduce one or two passages from the 
 modern edition, in order to show the nature, rather 
 than the extent of our complaint. Here, of course, 
 we do not object that the ancient authorities have 
 been deserted, because the matter seems usually to 
 have been left to our old printers, and they were 
 notoriously either heedless or incompetent. The 
 consequence has been frequent blunders and confu- 
 sion ; but we must say that in some instances it 
 would have rendered Shakespeare more intelligible, 
 if the pointing in his day, or shortly afterwards, had 
 been adopted. Of the correctness of this statement 
 we may be permitted to bring forward a solitary ex- 
 ample, out of many. It is from "The Winter's 
 Tale," act i. sc. '2, where Polixenes and Camillo are 
 conversing about the evil designs of Leontes, and 
 the former says, as we find it in the first folio, 
 
 -" Camillo, 
 
 As you are certainly a gentleman, thereto 
 Clerk-like, experienc'd, which no less adorns 
 Our gentry," &c. 
 
 This very perspicuous quotation is rendered utter 
 nonsense by the false punctuation employed in 
 Malone's Shakespeare by Boswell, where it reads as 
 follows : 
 
 " Camillo,- 
 
 As you are certainly a gentleman thereto ; 
 Clerk -like, experienc'd, which no less adorns 
 Our gentry," &c.
 
 SHAKESPEARE'S METRE. 29 
 
 In the same way, what can be the meaning of the 
 mark of interrogation, where, in "Twelfth Night" 
 (act i. sc. 5), Viola having asked, " The honourable 
 lady of the house, which is she?" Olivia replies, 
 
 " Speak to me ; I shall answer for her ?" 
 
 This is an answer not a question, though it is imme- 
 diately followed by " Your will ?" The old printers 
 did not commit this error. It is very true that in 
 many cases these mistakes correct themselves ; but 
 even then, they are awkward disfigurements, check- 
 ing the smooth progress of perusal, to say nothing of 
 the manner in which they may destroy the meaning 
 of the author. No difficulty could be found in 
 adducing hundreds of places to which this observa- 
 tion will apply : they are to be pointed out on almost 
 every page. 
 
 A few remarks regarding the metre of Shakes- Shake- 
 speare's 
 peare, and the manner in which it has been pre- Metre. 
 
 served or injured by his later editors, is all that will 
 be necessary on this head. It must be admitted 
 that some of them, especially Steevens, have taken 
 most capricious liberties, and have shown that though 
 they might be very exact counters of syllables, they 
 had very bad ears for the harmony of Shakespeare's 
 rhythm. There is no doubt, that defects of this 
 kind found their way into the old editions, but we 
 are not at liberty to insert or omit words, merely 
 because we may imagine that lines would run better 
 with them or without them. I am firmly persuaded 
 that many passages, now considered defective, were
 
 30 SHAKESPEARE'S METRE. 
 
 purposely left so by the poet, with a view of giving 
 variety, and of avoiding that weighty and tedious 
 monotony observable in the works of all his imme- 
 diate predecessors, with the solitary exception of 
 Marlowe. Hence, not only Shakespeare's lines of 
 eight, but those of twelve or more syllables, of which 
 there are frequent examples : the first some of his 
 commentators would lengthen by needless expletives, 
 and the last they would shorten by cutting out what 
 they are pleased to consider unimportant epithets 
 as if a poet, of whom it has been said that he never 
 used a word for which a better could be substituted, 
 could employ unimportant epithets. Supposing a 
 line to be objectionable in either respect, it is as 
 easy for the reader to amend it, as for the commen- 
 tator : to make such changes at all is highly censura- 
 ble, but to do so without notice is utterly inexcusable. 
 What is often to be complained of is, that the 
 editors of Shakespeare have not availed themselves 
 of the ordinary means in their power for rendering 
 his verse such as we may presume he intended it to 
 be. Thus they have sometimes injuriously deviated 
 from the mode in which the metre is regulated in 
 the old copies of the plays, particularly in the first 
 folio. I take leave to say, after having gone through 
 every line of it, that this volume, notwithstanding 
 the cavils of some of the commentators, is more cor- 
 rectly printed than any other dramatic production of 
 the time, with the exception perhaps of the folio 
 edition of Ben Jonson's Works in 1616, the passage
 
 SHAKESPEARE'S METRE. 31 
 
 of which, through the press, there is good reason to 
 believe he superintended \ Let any body compare 
 the typographical execution of the folio of 1623 with 
 that of any plays printed or reprinted between the 
 years 1600 and 1630, and they will be aware of the 
 laudable pains that must have been bestowed upon 
 it. The present is not the place for entering farther 
 into this point, and I will only take the opportunity 
 of introducing one specimen of the manner in which 
 the beauty of the genuine text of Shakespeare, as 
 given in the folio of 1623, has been disfigured by 
 modern attempts at emendation : this has not been 
 
 1 Some people have expressed surprise, if Ben Jonson were really the 
 editor of the folio of his Works in 1616, that he did not include in it " The 
 Case is altered," which was printed with his name on the title-page hi 1G09. 
 Hence it might be conjectured, against the strongest internal evidence, that 
 the comedy was not in truth his, and the supposition is apparently sup- 
 ported by the fact, that the Duke of Devonshire has in his library a copy 
 of " The Case is altered," without Ben Jonson's name in any part of it. 
 However, it is, I think, quite certain, that Ben Jonson only meant to include 
 in his folio, plays of which he was the sole author, and that he excluded 
 "The Case is altered," because some other dramatist (as may indeed be 
 gathered from diversity of style,) aided him hi its composition. He is 
 known to have written various plays hi partnership with Dekker, Porter, 
 Chettle, and others, at the end of the reign of Elizabeth, and in the be- 
 ginning of that of her successor ; but, as he had not the sole authorship, nor 
 probably the sole property in them, he omitted them when he printed his 
 collected Works. May not the same reason have induced the player-editors 
 of the folio Shakespeare in 1623, to leave out various pieces in which he had 
 been more or less concerned, and which he wrote in conjunction with other 
 poets, according to the constant practice of the time ? It is supposed with 
 considerable plausibility that Shakespeare wrote part of Ben Jonson's 
 "Sejanus," as originally played at the Globe in 1603 ; but, when the latter 
 printed it as his own, he re-wrote the whole of what had been contributed 
 by a " second pen," and apologised for omitting what came from " so happy 
 a genius."
 
 32 SHAKESPEARE'S METRE. 
 
 accomplished by absolutely adding or taking away 
 anything, but by the non-observance of elisions and 
 abbreviations, necessary to the metre, and frequent 
 in the old copy. We take our specimen from " All's 
 well that ends well," act ii. sc. 1 the opening 
 of a speech by Helena to the king of France, respect- 
 ing her father : 
 
 " The rather will I spare my praises towards him ; 
 Knowing him is enough. On's bed of death, 
 Many receipts he gave me ; chiefly one, 
 Which, as the dearest issue of his practice, 
 And of his old experience th' only darling, 
 He bade me store up." 
 
 Here we find no defective line, but all run regu- 
 larly and musically, exactly as they are inserted in 
 the first folio ; but in the modern editions, we find 
 the verse rendered lame and imperfect, by printing 
 words at length which were meant to be elided: 
 thus, " On's bed of death," is given " On his bed of 
 death," and " th' only darling," is lengthened out into 
 " the only darling," to the great offence of an acute 
 and sensitive ear 1 . 
 
 To show how little attention has been paid to 
 
 1 It has been suggested to me that these elisions ought not to be made 
 manifest by the printer, but left to the ear, as in Italian and Spanish : 
 in the first place, however, in English we have fewer vowels, and they do 
 not always melt into each other with facility ; and in the next, a reader, 
 not accustomed to elide words without notice, by means of an apostrophe, 
 would often have to correct his own mistakes of perusal, and to repeat a line 
 in which he had disregarded the metre. If anything were lost by the 
 insertion of apostrophes, employed by our greatest poets in different ages, 
 and especially warranted by Ben Jonson in his " English Grammar," the 
 case might be different.
 
 SHAKESPEARE'S POEMS. 33 
 
 minor points of this description, we may adduce a 
 passage from " The Taming of the Shrew," (act iii. 
 sc. 2,) evidently a quotation of five short lines from 
 a then popular ballad, which has hitherto been given 
 as mere prose, or, at best, as an irregular couplet. It 
 was the frequent custom of Shakespeare to make his 
 low comic characters reply by some snatch of the kind, 
 and the answer of Biondello, after he has been quib- 
 bling with Baptista about the arrival of Petruchio in 
 strange apparel and on horseback, is of this kind : 
 
 " Nay, by Saint Jamy, 
 
 I hold you a penny, 
 
 A horse and a man 
 
 Is more than one, 
 
 And yet not many." 
 
 Some of the rhymes are licentious, but not more 
 so than usual with scraps of ballads ; and many peo- 
 ple, reading the lines as they are here printed, would 
 almost be disposed to think I had made a mistake, 
 and would turn to their Shakespeares to ascertain, if 
 it were possible that such a passage could at any 
 time have been printed as prose. I do not refer to 
 these omissions as matters of much consequence, but 
 to prove the way in which very obvious points have 
 been neglected. 
 
 In order to render the present edition of Shake- Shake- 
 speare's 
 
 speare complete, it is intended to include the whole Poems. 
 of his poems, which, like the plays, will be most 
 accurately collated with the oldest and most authen-
 
 34 MANUSCRIPT AUTHORITIES. 
 
 tic impressions. The " Venus and Adonis" will be 
 printed from the quarto of 1593; the " Lucrece" 
 from the quarto of 1594; the "Sonnets" from the 
 quarto of 1609 1 , and "The Passionate Pilgrim "from 
 the octavo of 1599, compared with the reprint of 
 1612, omitting the poems by other authors, fraudu- 
 lently inserted by the bookseller, to which it is ac- 
 knowledged Shakespeare has no claim. 
 
 I have some new evidence of his right to the 
 rest in a manuscript of the time to which I before 
 referred, where the poems are inserted with Shake- 
 speare's initials at the end; and I may take this 
 opportunity of briefly showing how importantly this 
 manuscript will assist us in understanding and ex- 
 plaining hitherto disputed passages. Take, for ex- 
 ample, the earliest stanza in a very welt-known 
 poem : we will give it first as it stands in the old 
 printed copy, then we will state Malone's proposed 
 amendment, and finally, we will copy it from the 
 manuscript to which W. S. is subscribed. 
 
 " When as thine eye hath chose the dame, 
 
 And stall'd the deer that thou would'st strike, 
 Let reason rule things worthy hlame, 
 
 As well as fancy partial might : 
 Take counsel of some wiser head, 
 Neither too young, nor yet unwed." 
 
 1 Nobody seems to have been aware that there are two different title- 
 pages to the edition of Shakespeare's Sonnets in 1609 ; one with the imprint 
 of William Aspley, as the bookseller who sold them, and the other with the 
 substitution of the name of " John Wright, dwelling at Christ Church gate." 
 We can only guess at the reason for the change in the title-page, for there 
 is no difference in the body of the work.
 
 MANUSCRIPT AUTHORITIES. 35 
 
 Malone discovered, from the defective rhyme, that 
 " might" in the fourth line must be wrong, and find- 
 ing " like" instead of it, in a contemporary manu- 
 script, he altered one letter, and adopted tike, at the 
 suggestion of Steevens, who, one might almost believe, 
 was playing a trick upon his rival commentator ! . 
 Maloiie, therefore, would have the fourth line run, 
 
 " As well as fancy, partial tike." 
 
 and so it stands in the text of the 21 vols. 8vo. Now, 
 the manuscript before me removes the whole diffi- 
 culty, and proves that a very small change indeed 
 was necessary. We give the whole stanza from 
 the manuscript, because there are other noticeable 
 variations in it. 
 
 " When that thine eye hath chose the dame, 
 
 And stall'd the deer that thou wouldst strike, 
 Let reason rule things worthy blame, 
 
 As well as partial fancy like. 
 Ask counsel of some other head, 
 Neither unwise, nor yet unwed." 
 
 There cannot be a doubt that this is the true 
 reading, and the printed copy was probably composed 
 from a bad manuscript : the meaning of the third 
 and fourth lines, of course, is that when a man has 
 fixed upon a wife, he ought to let reason govern 
 
 1 Malone printed it " might" in his " Supplement" 1780, vol. i. p. 726, and 
 suggested that " wight" might possibly be the word : he afterwards adopted 
 tike, in pursuance of the note by Steevens, which Malone had the simplicity 
 to insert. 
 
 c2
 
 36 MANUSCRIPT AUTHORITIES. 
 
 matters worthy reprehension, as well as allow partial 
 fancy to like, or approve, his choice. This manuscript 
 is valuable on another account, as it serves to settle 
 Shakespeare's right to the disputed Sonnet (also to 
 be found in Griffin's " Fidessa," 1596), commencing 
 " Venus with Adonis sitting by her." The initials 
 W. S. are at the end of it, independently of the fact 
 that it is better than any other sonnet in the volume 
 published in Griffin's name l . 
 
 The collation of the Sonnets (many of them un- 
 questionably autobiographical, and others possibly 
 written for third persons, a point of considerable 
 interest which will be duly considered in its place), 
 and of the " Venus and Adonis," and " Lucrece," 
 will correct many defects which have been allowed 
 to remain in the various re-impressions of them : 
 beautiful as the poems are, no editor seems to have 
 
 1 Griffin was a gross plagiary, and nearly all that is good in the 72 sonnets 
 contained hi " Fidessa" may be traced to other authors. It has been said 
 that Shakespeare copied his " balm of hurt minds" (Macbeth, act ii. sc. 2) 
 from the following by Griffin, and there certainly is a resemblance : 
 " Care-charmer sleep, sweet ease in restless misery, 
 
 The captive's liberty, and his freedom's song : 
 Balm of the bruised heart, man's chief felicity, 
 
 Brother of quiet death, when life is too, too long." 
 
 If "Macbeth" had been written sufficiently early, (and we do not know that it 
 was not) we should not have had a moment's hesitation in imputing the 
 theft to Griffin, more particularly when we find, as is capable of distinct 
 proof, that nearly all the rest of the quatrain above quoted is stolen from a 
 sonnet by Daniel printed in 1592, and copied, among others, into the MS. 
 under consideration. The coincidence between the " balm of hurt minds" 
 of Shakespeare, and the " balm of the bruised heart" of Griffin, is worthy 
 of remark.
 
 ERRORS IN " LUCRECE." 37 
 
 thought it necessary to compare the reprints with 
 
 the originals. By way of illustration it may be Errorsin ) 
 
 <4 ' 
 
 worth while to notice two or three errors in 
 " Lucrece." The first occurs in the short dedication 
 to Lord Southampton, where a word is omitted ; a 
 second is in the body of the poem, after Tarquin has 
 quitted Lucrece, and she is left to her own reflec- 
 tions. The original, as it is found in four copies 
 which I have had an opportunity of consulting, is 
 in these words : 
 
 " Her house is sack'd, her quiet interrupted, 
 
 Her mansion batter 'd by the enemy ; 
 Her sacred temple spotted, spoil'd, corrupted, 
 Grossly engirt with daring infamy," &c. 
 
 It may be asserted that the whole beauty of this 
 passage is absolutely ruined by the substitution of 
 one word for another in the third line, which in 
 Malone's Shakespeare by Boswell, vol. xx. p. 173, 
 runs thus : 
 
 " Her sacred table spotted, spoil'd, corrupted," &c. 
 
 To talk of a " table" being . " spotted, spoil'd, cor- 
 rupted," and " grossly engirt with daring infamy'* is 
 merely ridiculous ; and to answer that it is a mis- 
 print is no excuse, since it inevitably leads to the 
 corruption of all subsequent impressions, the text of 
 which may be taken from this supposed authentic 
 edition. A third instance is from nearer the con-
 
 38 ERRORS IN " LUCRECE." 
 
 elusion of the poem, when Collatine and Lucrece 
 meet, after she has sent for him : 
 
 " Both stood, like old acquaintance, in a trance, 
 Met far from home, wondering each other's chance." 
 
 The sense seems so plain that it is impossible to 
 mistake it, yet by the substitution of but for " both" 
 in the first line, the couplet is rendered something 
 like sheer nonsense. The blunder seems to have 
 been first made in 1710 1 , and to have been re- 
 peated since in every reprint. It is impossible to 
 account for some of the perversions of the text of 
 which Malone (and after him Boswell) was guilty. Of 
 this a proof occurs early in the poem, where, in the 
 edition of 1594, we meet with the following couplet 
 at the conclusion of a stanza : 
 
 " And every one to rest themselves betake, 
 Save thieves, and cares, and troubled minds that wake." 
 
 The first line is not strictly grammatical, but Malone, 
 in order to cure a slight defect in the first line, utterly 
 spoiled the second, and printed them thus: 
 
 " And every one to rest himself betakes, 
 Save thieves and cares and troubled minds that wakes," 
 
 gravely telling us, in a note, that this is the reading 
 
 1 In the volume "printed for E. Curll," appended to Rowe's edition of 
 Shakespeare. The errors in this edition are prodigious, and not a few of 
 them found their way into later impressions.
 
 ERRORS IN " LUCRECE." 39 
 
 of the old quarto, and that the 8vo of 1600 has 
 " themselves betake" and " wake," when the fact is 
 directly the reverse. He abandoned the true for a 
 spurious reading, and by a gross mistake passed off 
 the one for the other 1 . I make no apology for this 
 particularity, because in my mind it relates to a point 
 of the greatest moment, and were I disposed to try the 
 patience of the reader I might go a great deal farther 
 on the subject of apparently wilful alterations. 
 
 Steevens had the boldness to think and speak 
 meanly of the minor poems of Shakespeare, and, in 
 spite of this proof of his incompetence, the still 
 greater boldness to comment upon his plays. Malone 
 seems to have looked upon the minor poems rather 
 as a necessary " supplement" to his edition, than as 
 a part of the work on which it was worth while to 
 bestow much labour. On the other hand, I venture 
 to think, that Shakespeare's genius never shone 
 forth with more intense brilliancy, his fancy never 
 
 1 Since this observation was originally printed, I have taken an oppor- 
 tunity of visiting Oxford for the purpose of examining Maloiie's copy of the 
 " Lucrece " of 1594, that I might ascertain whether there was any variation 
 between that and the four other copies I have had the means of inspecting. 
 To my surprise, I found that "Malone's copy supports his reading, while 
 those of the Duke of Devonshire, the late Mr. Caldecott, and two others, 
 contradict it. The same remark will apply to the word " apologies " in the 
 fifth stanza of " Lucrece," which in Malone's copy of 1594 is printed iu the 
 singular ; but no such excuse can be made for errors in other cases. This 
 difference, never hitherto suspected, between copies of the same edition is 
 remarkable, and shows that it is impossible to collate too many of them. 
 The corrections must have been made as the poem passed through the 
 press, and they tend to confirm the opinion that Shakespeare himself super- 
 intended the publication of his earlier works.
 
 40 NOTES TO THE NEW EDITION. 
 
 sported with more playful vigour, and the philosophy 
 of his miud never displayed its depth and power 
 more remarkably than in these productions: if he 
 had left nothing else behind him, he would have 
 merited to be placed among the first and greatest 
 poets of the world. 
 Notes to Having stated all that I consider immediately 
 
 the new 
 
 Edition, necessary regarding the text of the projected edition 
 of the Works of Shakespeare, it remains to say a 
 few words of the notes which will accompany that 
 text. The first care will be to make those notes as 
 few and as concise as possible, so that the atten- 
 tion of the reader is diverted from the author as 
 rarely and as briefly as is consistent with a clear 
 understanding of his words. The multiplication 
 of notes, first committing a blunder, and then en- 
 deavouring to correct it, is a most inconvenient 
 evil attending the perusal of many of the editions 
 of Shakespeare, and has often led the admirers 
 of his writings to wish that they had never sustained 
 the misfortune of comment and illustration. The 
 method an editor ought to pursue is clearly this : 
 to settle the true reading ; then, to form an accurate 
 judgment whether that reading is intelligible; and 
 thirdly, if a note be required, to say no more than 
 is necessary. On these plain principles I have en- 
 deavoured to proceed. Information upon temporary 
 allusions, obsolete customs, and peculiar manners, 
 will at times be wanted, but here also brevity and 
 clearness will be studied.
 
 INTRODUCTION TO THE PLAYS. 4 1 
 
 The insertion of what are called parallel passages 
 (frequently rather at right angles than parallel) will 
 usually be avoided altogether, and will never be 
 resorted to for the display of what Lord Bacon 
 terms " vain learning." If the resemblance be strong 
 and striking, and the meaning of Shakespeare 
 thereby explained and illustrated, they may now and 
 then be useful. I shall never avail myself of the 
 assistance of predecessors without due acknowledg- 
 ment, but the repetition of names at the conclusion 
 of unimportant notes rather tends to confuse than 
 to inform. The great purpose ought to be to permit 
 the author to speak for himself : he usually speaks 
 very intelligibly, and rarely needs any aid, excepting 
 where some corruption of the text may be established 
 or suspected. 
 
 The introductory matter to each play will com- introduc- 
 tions to the 
 monly be entirely new. Much information respect- plays. 
 
 ing the origin of Shakespeare's plots, as well as the 
 performance of his dramas, has been acquired since 
 the publication of Malone's edition by Boswell, and 
 it will be carefully collected, properly arranged, and 
 placed perspicuously, but compendiously, before the 
 reader, in order that he may be deficient in no 
 point of knowledge, and that whenever a doubt arises, 
 he may refer with confidence to our projected edition 
 for the removal of it. 
 
 Of late years a much wider range and more intel- Criticisms 
 lectual system of criticism upon Shakespeare has 8 peare.
 
 42 CRITICISMS ON SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 been introduced ; and at the head of this class of 
 commentators on his spirit and poetry may be 
 placed our countryman Coleridge. To a series of his 
 Lectures on the productions of our great dramatist 
 I first listened more than twenty years ago, taking 
 and preserving notes of all that fell from him. 
 Much depended with him upon the impulse of the 
 moment, and what has been published since his 
 death, sometimes gives but an outline of his thoughts 
 and of the manner in which they were expressed. 
 Of these I shall not omit to avail myself. What 
 may have been well and justly said by German critics, 
 especially by such men as Tieck and Scklegel, will 
 also be brought under the reader's notice, taking 
 care, however, not to obtrude the rhapsodical out- 
 pourings of their extravagant and ignorant imitators, 
 whether abroad or at home. 
 
 Chronoio- This may be said to bring us to the point, in what 
 Order. succession the plays will be printed in our edition. 
 Malone, Chalmers, Drake, and Dyce l , have all offered 
 tables of the " chronological order " in which they 
 suppose Shakespeare wrote his various productions 
 for the stage, but it is singular how rarely they 
 agree; and although I have before me highly im- 
 portant materials for the purpose, with which my 
 predecessors were unacquainted, I confess my in- 
 ability to settle more than a few points satisfac- 
 
 1 See the Aldine edition of Shakespeare's Poems, 12mo, 1832. The 
 " Chronology " is appended to a short but excellent " Memoir " of the Poet.
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. 43 
 
 torily. Let us take an instance, proving the uncer- 
 tainty that attends such speculations. " Twelfth 
 Night." Tyrwhitt was of opinion that this comedy 
 was not written until 1614, and Malone for some 
 years thought so too ; but he afterwards entirely 
 altered his mind, and came to the conclusion, for 
 various reasons which he assigns at large, that 
 " Twelfth Night" was written in 1 607. What is 
 the fact ? That at whatever period it came from 
 the pen of Shakespeare, it was certainly acted at the 
 Middle Temple Feast on the 2nd February, 1602. 
 This is indisputable, (vide History of English Dra- 
 matic Poetry and the Stage, vol. i. p. 327,) and it 
 shows in the strongest light the utter futility of such 
 conjectures. 
 
 There are, it is true, some leading facts upon this Mercs' 
 question, which do not admit of dispute. In 1598, Tamia 
 as most readers of Shakespeare are aware, Francis 
 Meres published his Palladis Tamia 1 , which con- 
 
 1 In the Bibliographical and Critical Catalogue of the Library at Bridge- 
 water House, (privately printed for Lord Francis Egerton, 4to, 1837) I 
 suggested that Meres might possibly be the author of the anonymous col- 
 lection of Epigrams and Satires published in 1598, under the title of 
 " Skialetheia, or a Shadow of Truth," 8vo. I have since discovered that 
 the name of the writer of that work is Edward Guilpin, who is known 
 to bibliographers, by some commendatory verses before Markham's 
 " Devereux," 1597, &c. The fact is, that " England's Parnassus," 8vo, 
 1600, contains a variety of quotations subscribed " Edw. Guilpin," and 
 all these are contained in " Skialetheia." There cannot, therefore, be 
 any doubt that " Skialetheia " was his authorship. It contains much 
 that is illustrative of the opinions, manners, and literature of the latter 
 end of the reign of Elizabeth, and particular notices of Sidney, Spenser, 
 Daniel, Drayton, Marston, Hall, &c. It is a work of extreme rarity as
 
 44 CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. 
 
 tains a list of some of Shakespeare's plays, then 
 known either because they had been printed or 
 acted : we shall insert the titles exactly as we find 
 them in the work of Meres (Sign. O o 2), and in 
 the order in which he places them. 
 
 " Gentlemen of Verona." 
 
 " Errors." 
 
 " Love Labours Lost." 
 
 " Love Labours Won." 
 
 " Midsummer Night Dream." 
 
 " Merchant of Venice." 
 
 " Richard the II." 
 
 " Richard the III." 
 
 " Henry the IV." 
 
 " King John." 
 
 " Titus Andronicus." 
 
 "Romeo and Juliet." 
 
 It is supposed that " Love Labours Won" is not 
 a lost drama, but " All's Well that ends Well" under 
 a different title; the Rev. Joseph Hunter, in his 
 acute and learned "Dissertation on the Tempest," 
 contends that that drama, and not " All's Well that 
 ends Well," is the "Love Labours Won" of Meres; 
 but I do not concur in his view, though supported 
 with ingenuity, among others, for a reason which 
 will appear presently. Including " Love Labours 
 Won," Meres only supplies a list of about a third of 
 the existing dramas of Shakespeare; yet he (who 
 
 well as interest, and it is to be hoped that it may soon be re-printed 
 by one of our Literary Societies. A copy of it is preserved among Malone's 
 books at. Oxford.
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. 45 
 
 was evidently well acquainted with our plays and 
 poetry,) does not speak as if he had omitted any 
 play produced before he published his Palladis 
 Tamia l . He does not furnish us with the slightest 
 means of knowing in what order these twelve (or 
 thirteen, if we suppose that Meres includes both 
 parts of " Henry IV.") dramas appeared, unless we 
 are to take it that he meant to enumerate them in 
 that order. Therefore, although we are thus aware 
 that they were known in 1598 as works by Shake- 
 speare, we are still ignorant of the precise dates when 
 they were produced. 
 
 There is another authority with reference to some "England's 
 of these plays, which has never before been adduced, sul"" 8 
 In 1600 came out "England's Parnassus," an octavo 
 volume of more than 500 pages of extracts from plays 
 and poems by various authors, and among them there 
 are nearly 100 quotations to which the name or 
 initials of Shakespeare are appended. Some blun- 
 ders are certainly committed in these ascriptions, 
 such as attributing a well-remembered passage in 
 
 1 Meres makes no mention of " Henry VI.," although there is good ground 
 for supposing that all the three parts under that title were among the earliest 
 pieces from the pen of Shakespeare. " The Taming of the Shrew" had like- 
 wise, in all probability, been produced either in or soon after 1594, when the 
 older " Taming of a Shrew" was published, perhaps in consequence of the 
 success at the theatre of Shakespeare's improvement upon that story : never- 
 theless, Meres omits it, and hence an inference may possibly be drawn, that 
 he did not include "Henry VI." nor " The Taming of the Shrew" among 
 Shakespeare's plays, because our great dramatist was not aloue concerned 
 in the authorship of them.
 
 46 CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. 
 
 "Richard II." to Drayton 1 , and two lines in the 
 " Fairy Queen" to Shakespeare, but in general they 
 are correct. Most of the extracts are from " Venus 
 and Adonis" and "Lucrece," but others are from 
 plays ; and it is somewhat remarkable that no play 
 is there quoted, that is not to be found in the list 
 given by Meres. The plays are not named in 
 " England's Parnassus," but by tracing the quotations 
 I find them to be these : 
 
 " Love's Labours Lost" (quoted twice). 
 
 " Henry IV. Part I." (quoted twice). 
 
 "Richard II." (quoted five times). 
 
 " Richard III." (quoted five times). 
 
 " Romeo and Juliet" (quoted eleven times). 
 
 So that our list of extant plays in 1598, is not in- 
 creased by the quotations made from them up to 
 the year 1600. Hence we might possibly infer that 
 between the publication of Palladis Tamia, in 
 1598, and of " England's Parnassus," in 1600, Shake- 
 speare had not added to his stock of dramas. Pos- 
 sibly, too, as " Henry IV. Part II." is not cited in 
 " England's Parnassus," it had not been brought out 
 as early in 1600 as " England's Parnassus" came 
 from the press, and Meres, in 1598, might only 
 allude to the first part of that historical drama. 
 
 1 When Mr. T. Park reprinted " England's Parnassus" in " Heliconia," 
 (3 vols. 4to, 1815,) he did not detect, or at all events did not point out, the 
 mistake. He seems to have fancied that, 
 
 " This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle, 
 This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars," &c. 
 were lines by Michael Drayton. 
 
 * 
 

 
 NEW EVIDENCE ON THE CHRONOLOGY. 47 
 
 With respect to two other plays, " Twelfth Night" 
 and " Othello," we have distinct evidence that they 
 were acted in 1602; the first, as already mentioned, 
 at the Middle Temple, in February, and the second 
 at Lord Keeper Egerton's, at Harefield, in August. 
 The latter circumstance is stated in my " New Par- 
 ticulars respecting Shakespeare and his Works," 
 p. 58, on the authority of MS. family accounts pre- 
 served at Bridgewater House. In the same tract 
 the "Note-Book" of Dr. Forman is adduced, to 
 prove that the four following plays were acted at 
 the dates affixed to them. 
 
 "Macbeth" .... 20th April, 1610. 
 
 "Cymbeline" ... in 1610 or 1611. 
 
 "Richard II." 1 . . . 30th April, 1611. 
 
 "Winter's Tale" . . 15th May, 1611. 
 
 We have only spoken of seventeen, or, at most, 
 eighteen plays, and these are all the dates that 
 have hitherto been positively ascertained respecting 
 the writing or acting of any of them ; excepting, of 
 course, as far as the printing of particular dramas 
 affords proof that they had been previously brought 
 upon the stage. I now come to some very interest- Newcvi- 
 ing and decisive evidence with regard to others, thechrono- 
 which has only been brought to light within the last g} ' 
 
 1 In " New Particulars," &c. reasons are given for thinking that this was 
 another play on the events of the reign of Richard II., not the work of 
 Shakespeare. Mr. Amyot suggested, and argued with great ingenuity, that 
 it was possibly a first part of " Richard II.," which Shakespeare may have 
 written, but which has not come down to us. (See his Letter upon this point 
 in New Particulars," &c. p. 16.)
 
 48 NEW EVIDENCE ON THE CHRONOLOGY. 
 
 few months. The precise nature of it, and the de- 
 pository where it was discovered, will be stated in 
 detail in the introductions to the plays themselves, 
 when we come to print them: in the meantime I 
 may mention, that I shall be able to show most 
 indisputably, that the subsequent plays by Shake- 
 speare, his name being given in connection with the 
 titles, were represented at court at the dates here- 
 under specified : 
 
 " Othello," performed on the 1st Nov. 1604. 
 
 "The Merry Wives of Windsor," performed on the Sunday 
 
 after Nov. 1, 1604. 
 
 " Measure for Measure," performed on St. Stephen's Night, 1604. 
 " The Comedy of Errors," performed on Innocents' Night, 1604. 
 " Love's Labours Lost," performed between the 1st and 6th 
 
 January, 1605. 
 
 " Henry the Fifth," performed on the 7th January, 1605. 
 " The Merchant of Venice," performed on Shrove-Sunday, 
 
 and again on Shrove-Tuesday, 1605. 
 
 " The Winter's Tale," performed on the 5th November, 1611. 
 " The Tempest," performed on Hallowmas Night, 1611. 
 
 This evidence, unknown to those who have 
 hitherto written on the works and life of Shake- 
 speare, establishes in the first place that some of his 
 earliest pieces were performed at court as late as 
 1604 and 1605, such as his " Comedy of Errors," 
 " Love's Labours Lost," and " Merchant of Venice," 
 all three of which, as we have seen on the authority 
 of Meres, had been produced before 1598. " The 
 Merchant of Venice" was so much liked by the 
 king in 1605, that having been first played on
 
 NEW EVIDENCE ON THE CHRONOLOGY. 49 
 
 Shrove-Sunday, it was repeated " by command " the 
 next day but one. Othello, we have shown, was in 
 existence more than two years anterior to Nov. 1 604. 
 It is supposed by Malone, that " Henry V." may 
 have been written in 1599, " The Merry Wives of 
 Windsor" in 1601, and " Measure for Measure" in 
 1603 : the last might therefore be nearly a new play 
 on St. Stephen's night, 1604 ; but the two first could 
 hardly have been recommended for performance at 
 court, by the fact that they were enjoying their first 
 run of popularity at a public theatre. It seems pro- 
 bable that " The Winter's Tale," and " The Tempest," 
 were sufficient novelties, and sufficient favourites with 
 the public in 1611, to be selected on this account. 
 Forman had seen " The Winter's Tale" at the Globe 
 Theatre on the 15th May preceding the performance 
 of it at court, and Malone was of opinion that " The 
 Tempest" was a new play in 1611. Under the un- 
 certainty attending this part of the subject, it may 
 however be urged, that not one of the nine plays 
 above enumerated was chosen for representation at 
 court, because it was new and popular. James I. had 
 not been long on the throne in 1605, and had not, 
 therefore, seen many of the older plays which had 
 been acted before Queen Elizabeth : the case was 
 somewhat different in 1611, and then the old custom 
 of selecting plays for performance at court, which 
 were suggested by their success at the public 
 theatres, might be revived, because the king had 
 by that time seen most of the old stock-plays. 
 
 D
 
 50 IIENSLOWE S DIARY. 
 
 What, then, is the conclusion at which I am dis- 
 posed to arrive, founded upon the preceding informa- 
 tion ? that although we have at present many lights 
 upon the question of chronology, which formerly did 
 not exist, yet we cannot even now make more than 
 a plausible conjecture as to the earliest dates of most 
 of Shakespeare's plays. In thirteen instances we 
 know when they were performed, but not whether 
 they were then performed for the first time, so that 
 no criterion as to the period when they were written 
 can well be more uncertain. I once thought that 
 Hensiowe's Henslowe's MS. Diary might afford some clue to 
 guide us. Under the years 1594 and 1595 we 
 there meet with the following names of plays, which 
 resemble the titles of some of Shakespeare's known 
 or imputed works " Hamlet," " The Taming of a 
 Shrew," " Andronicus," " The Venetian Comedy," 
 " Palamon and Arcite," " Csesar and Pompey," 
 "Antony and Vallea," "The second part of Csesar," 
 " Harry the 5th," and " Troy ;" but with respect 
 to some of them, there is good reason to believe that 
 they were old plays upon subjects Shakespeare after- 
 wards adopted, and we may be disposed to presume 
 the same of the rest. Upon this point, nevertheless, 
 we may be entirely mistaken. Under the date of 
 22nd May, 1602, we learn on similar authority, that 
 Webster, Middleton, and other poets were engaged 
 in writing a tragedy called "Caesar's Fall," (not 
 noticed by Malone,) and that in September of the 
 same year Henry Chettle was preparing a comedy
 
 ORDER OF PRINTING THE PLAYS. 51 
 
 under the title of " Robin Good-fellow" (also omitted 
 by Malone) ; and we might infer that Webster and 
 his play-partners, as well as Chettle, were induced 
 to take up these subjects, either by the success of 
 " Julius Caesar," and " Midsummer Night's Dream," 
 or by hearing that Shakespeare was employed upon 
 them ; but with respect to the last, we know that it 
 w r as in existence in 1598. Malone discovered in 
 Henslowe's Diary several entries regarding a " Troilus 
 and Cressida," by Dekker and Chettle, in April 1 599 ; 
 but we do not know that those dramatists were not 
 then composing additions or alterations to Shake- 
 speare's play with the same title, or they might even 
 be writing a rival play, to compete with that by 
 Shakespeare. All these must continue mere mat- 
 ters of speculation, especially when we find that in 
 June 1602 Ben Jonson was preparing a historical 
 drama upon the events of the reign of Richard III., 
 although Shakespeare had written a play upon the 
 same subject, which was printed five years before, 
 and which long continued, as we have every reason 
 to believe, extremely popular. 
 
 As to about half the dramas of our great dramatist, Order of 
 
 printing 
 
 we are totally destitute of anything approaching the plays, 
 distinct information when they were first acted, 
 much more when they were first written. Of 
 six and thirty plays, only seventeen were published 
 during Shakespeare's life : " Othello" came from the 
 press in 1622 ; and the rest (with the exception 
 of "Pericles,") were printed for the first time in 
 D 2
 
 52 ORDER OF PRINTING THE PLAYS. 
 
 the folio of 1623. "Pericles," printed in quarto 
 in 1609, was not inserted in that edition, for rea- 
 sons to be assigned when I come to speak sepa- 
 rately of that drama. The folio of 1623 was 
 arranged, as far as we can now ascertain, by 
 Heminge and Condell, Shakespeare's fellow-actors, 
 who doubtless had performed in most of the plays, 
 which are inserted in the volume under the three 
 heads of " Comedies," " Histories," and " Tragedies." 
 The player-editors were, most likely, generally, if 
 not particularly acquainted with the periods when 
 the pieces were originally produced on the stage, 
 yet they obviously made no arrangement as to dates ; 
 and under the uncertainty which must unavoidably 
 belong to any conjectural classification of the kind, 
 I have thought that we could not do better than 
 adopt the course pursued in 1623, so near to the 
 time when Shakespeare was living, and when the 
 matter must have been fresh in the recollection of 
 many l . Any opinion depending upon a comparison 
 
 1 Each division of " Comedies," " Histories," and " Tragedies," is sepa- 
 rately paged in the folio of 1623. The " Comedies" occupy 303 pages, the 
 back of p. 303 being left blank. The " Histories" fill 232 pages, after which 
 follows " Troilus and Cressida," which is unpaged, excepting that the second 
 leaf is marked 79 and 80. In the " Tragedies," the last page appears to be 
 993, but this is a misprint for 393, and in the course of this portion of the 
 volume an error of 100 pages is committed, 156 being followed by 257, and 
 so on to the end. From the circumstances that " Troilus and Cressida " is 
 unpaged, and that the title is not found in the " Catalogue " at the com- 
 mencement of the volume, it has been supposed that it was originally 
 omitted, and was added to the collection as an after-thought ; but the 
 work obviously went through the hands of more than one printer, and in 
 this way the mistake might have been occasioned, without supposing
 
 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE. 53 
 
 of the earlier with the later style of Shakespeare, 
 the reader will be able to form for himself, and all 
 the ascertained facts, which may serve to aid him in 
 any inquiry of the kind, will be carefully given at the 
 commencement of each play 1 . 
 
 The biography of Shakespeare, and the relations Life of 
 subsisting between him and his contemporaries, will 
 form an important portion of our first volume. In 
 order to render it as complete and perfect as possible, 
 I shall resort to no second-hand authorities, but shall 
 examine the original sources of information, from the 
 register of his baptism to the proof of his will. Of late 
 years, and even within the last few months, many 
 new facts, of great interest with reference to Shake- 
 speare's life and residence in London, have been 
 brought to light; and we shall of course take care 
 that none of them, however minute, are omitted. 
 Some points of the history of our great dramatist 
 
 Heminge and Condell ignorant of the fact, that " Troilus and Cressida," 
 printed in 1609 with Shakespeare's name on the title-page, ought to be 
 included. The name of the author was not printed on any of the early 
 editions of " Romeo and Juliet." I allude to the impressions published hi the 
 years 1597, 1599, and 1609. 
 
 1 Malone sometimes adopted a very loose mode of reasoning when he 
 wanted to establish a point. He wished to show that " Henry V." was pro- 
 duced by the poet in 1598, and he found two lines in Daniel's " Civil Wars," 
 printed in 1595, which strongly resemble a passage in " Henry V. :" hence 
 he concluded that the play was not written before 1596, as Shakespeare 
 could not earlier have borrowed from Daniel. But Daniel was much more 
 likely to borrow from Shakespeare, than Shakespeare from Daniel ; and if 
 Daniel did borrow two lines from Shakespeare's " Henry V." it must have 
 been written before Daniel published his " Civil Wars " in 1595. I only 
 adduce this circumstance as a proof how little reliance is to be placed upon 
 conjectures so supported.
 
 54 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 must still rest upon reasoning and conjecture, but 
 not a few particulars, which in the time of Malone 
 were mere matters of speculation, have since been 
 distinctly ascertained. Although Malone went on, 
 nearly to the day of his death, collecting such 
 materials as he could procure, he never (as far as 
 any printed evidence remains to us) was able to 
 add anything important to his previous stock of in- 
 formation, and expired, leaving the biography of 
 Shakespeare to be completed by Boswell, from the 
 scattered papers which devolved into his hands. 
 
 The " Memoirs of Edward Alleyn," the contempo- 
 rary of our great dramatist, recently printed for the 
 Shakespeare Society, supply evidence that Malone 
 did not make use of much curious information long 
 in his hands, derived from -original papers formerly 
 belonging to the actor-founder of Dulwich College ; 
 and it may be stated with confidence, that more 
 particulars for an accurate biography of Shakespeare 
 have been procured since the death of Malone, than 
 he was able to accumulate. We have now the 
 exact date of the bond given anterior to his marriage 
 in 1582 : and although we cannot positively fix the 
 year of his arrival in London, we can show that he 
 had risen to considerable eminence in his profession 
 as early as 1589. In 1592 we find him exciting the 
 jealousy of rival dramatists, and in 1596 a very pro- 
 minent member of the company acting at the Black- 
 friars Theatre, continuing to advance in rank and 
 importance in connexion with the stage, until, at the
 
 
 ORIGIN OF OUR STAGE AND DRAMA. 55 
 
 accession of James I., he was one of the leaders of 
 the company which the king took into his pay and 
 employment. Thus we are able to trace his progress 
 to the year 1604, the latest date at which his name 
 is any where introduced as an actor, and about which 
 time he no doubt quitted the stage. He occupied a 
 good house in South wark in 1608, and his final re- 
 tirement from London to his native town may now 
 be stated with more certainty than ever to have 
 occurred in 1612. In April of that year Edward 
 Alleyn became the purchaser of considerable pro- 
 perty in the precinct of the Blackfriars, including 
 either the whole or a large share of the theatre, and 
 there is sufficient ground for believing that this had 
 been the property of Shakespeare, and that he dis- 
 posed of it to Alleyn just before he withdrew to 
 Stratford, and ceased to have any connexion with 
 dramatic affairs in the metropolis or elsewhere. We 
 shall also be able to show in satisfactory detail his 
 gradual acquisition of wealth, and the public and 
 private patronage he enjoyed. 
 
 In order that nothing may be wanting to the com- Origin of 
 pleteness of the undertaking, I shall introduce the and drama, 
 biography of our great poet by a succinct history 
 of the origin, rise, and progress of dramatic perform- 
 ances in this country, that every reader may be 
 acquainted with the precise condition of our stage 
 and its poetry, at the time when Shakespeare first 
 became connected with it. This part of the subject 
 will necessarily embrace notices of his immediate
 
 56 THE SHAKESPEARE SOCIETY. 
 
 predecessors and contemporaries, regarding whom I 
 shall have to offer much that will be new and in- 
 teresting to the philologist, the antiquary, and the 
 general reader. The object is to include in eight 
 volumes octavo as faultless a text of Shakespeare's 
 plays and poems as can be established, accompanied 
 by everything necessary to a full understanding of 
 his works, and a just estimate of his character. 
 
 In conclusion I may, perhaps, be permitted to 
 state, that it was the intention of some members of 
 the Council of the Shakespeare Society to recom- 
 mend that an edition of the Works of our great 
 dramatist should be issued under the sanction of that 
 body ; but as soon as they learnt that a proposal of 
 the kind had been made to me, they most hand- 
 somely relinquished their design. They knew during 
 how many years I had been preparing such a publi- 
 cation, and they were willing to believe that to allow 
 me to proceed with it would accomplish, in several 
 important respects, the object they had in view. 
 They, and other literary and antiquarian friends, have 
 likewise promptly tendered such assistance as cannot 
 fail to be most valuable in completing the under- 
 taking. With the individual responsibility attending 
 it, I am, nevertheless, most deeply impressed. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 GILBERT & UIVINGTON, Piiuters, St. John's Square, London.
 
 ON THE 
 
 SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE.
 
 
 LONDON : 
 Printed by Thomas White, 59, Wych-street.
 
 ON THE 
 
 SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE 
 
 IDENTIFYING THE PERSON 
 
 TO WHOM THEY ARE ADDRESSED ; 
 
 AND ELUCIDATING SEVERAL POINTS 
 
 IN THE POET'S HISTORY. 
 
 BY JAMES BOADEN. ESQ. 
 
 LONDON : 
 
 THOMAS RODD, 2, GREAT NEWPORT-STREET. 
 MDCCCXXXVJI.
 
 ON THE 
 
 SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 TO WHAT PERSON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE 
 WERE ACTUALLY ADDRESSED. 
 
 THE Sonnets of Shakespeare were first printed in the 
 year 1609, by Thomas Thorpe, the poet himself being 
 then living, and never disavowing the publication, as he 
 did on at least one other occasion. * They make a thin 
 quarto, neither carelessly nor inelegantly set forth, and 
 are inscribed by the publisher, under initials, to the per- 
 son addressed by the poet. It will be proper to bring 
 this dedication immediately forward, because, prima 
 facie, no one can be a competitor for the eternity pro- 
 
 * Some of Heywood's translations, attributed to him erro- 
 neously in 1612.
 
 2 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 mised in the verses, whose name does not display the 
 initials given to us as a clue by the dedicator. I 
 
 The inscription is arranged monumentally, in short 
 lines, with full points after every word. 
 
 To . The . onlie . begetter . of . 
 
 These . insuing . Sonnets . 
 
 Mr. W. H.all.Happinesse. 
 
 And . that . eternitie . 
 
 Promised . 
 
 By. 
 Our . ever-living . Poet . 
 
 Wisheth . 
 
 The . well-wishing . 
 Adventurer . in . 
 Setting . 
 Forth. T. T. 
 
 That the words " only begetter" mean the person ad- 
 dressed by the poet, cannot, I should think, be reason- 
 ably questioned - they imply him who, as a cause, ex- 
 cited these verses as effects in the grateful mind of 
 Shakespeare. Indeed, for a long time, it seemed to be 
 the only notion that was entertained ; and accordingly 
 WILLIAM HART, the poet's relation, was mentioned,* 
 without examining whether his age was suitable, or him- 
 self, either in person or fortunes, corresponding with 
 
 * William Hart, the son of our poet's sister Joan, was not 
 born till the year 1600, so he was clearly not the person 
 shadowed under the initials W. H.
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 3 
 
 what is stated in the sonnets. A moment's reflection 
 would have rendered it certain, that the child of very 
 humble parents was not the lofty patrician commemo- 
 rated in these compositions: 
 
 " Thou, that art now the world's fresh ornament, 
 And only herauld to the gaudy spring." 
 
 Plainly imitating the sonnet of Spenser to the great 
 courtier Sir Walter Raleigh, published in 1590, with the 
 first three books of the Faerie Queene : 
 
 " To thee that art, the Sommer's nightingale, 
 Thy soveraine Goddesses most deare delight." 
 
 Indeed the parallel is strikingly made out in the course 
 of the poet's addresses to this beloved patron, whom he 
 places in a station of such dignity and gravity, that he 
 might not be able from prudential motives to honour him 
 with kindness in public, unless by suffering in the 
 general estimation for his familiarity with a player : 
 
 " Against that time, if ever that time come, 
 When I shall see thee frown on my defects, 
 Whenas thy love hath cast his utmost sum, 
 Call'd to that audit by advis'd respects ; 
 Against that time, when thou shalt strangely pass, 
 And scarcely greet me with that sun, thine eye ; 
 When love converted from the thing it was, 
 Shall reasons find of settled gravity."
 
 4 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 We may therefore dismiss Mr. William Hart, notwith- 
 standing his initial pretensions, and pass a conge d'elire 
 for some other candidate. 
 
 The initials W. H. do not appear to have formerly 
 suggested one suitable ascription ; and at length it was 
 thought advisable to review the obnoxious Dedication, 
 and try whether the language might not bend a little to 
 the necessity of the case. If the " only begetter,'' for 
 instance, could be interpreted to signify procuring a copy 
 of the sonnets for the Publisher, the field of conjecture 
 as to the Patron was expanded ad libitum. W. H. then 
 got his "promised eternity" for merely bringing out the 
 papers; and the person addressed might be any great 
 amiable patron of poetry, who was a male and even a 
 female in the fantastical conception of one great Shake- 
 spearean. The reasoning was formal whoever begets, 
 they said, obtains something: whoever obtains these 
 papers, therefore, is their sole begetter. Mr. W. H. 
 therefore embarrasses no longer; and the late Mr. 
 George Chalmers settled that the person addressed by 
 Shakespeare was, and could be, no other human being 
 than Queen Elizabeth. Common sense stood aghast, 
 
 o " 
 
 as it had frequently done, at the monstrous absurdity of 
 the critic's speculation ; and respectfully enquired how 
 he could reconcile it to the everlasting allusions to the 
 male sex, which are found throughout these poems?
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 5 
 
 Shakespeare calls him every where the Lord of his love. 
 One instance however shall here suffice : 
 
 " Lord of my love, to whom in vassalage 
 Thy merit hath my duty strongly knit." 
 
 Sonnet 26. 
 
 And in the 3d Sonnet, when he incites him to marry, 
 and leave an image behind him of his own perfections, 
 he thus pointedly marks the sex of the person addressed : 
 
 " For where is she so fair, whose un-eard womb 
 Disdains the tillage of thy husbandry 9" 
 
 But not to burthen the argument with unnecessary 
 quotations, I shall collectively show the matchless absur- 
 dity of such an hypothesis, as that Shakespeare could 
 have addressed them to Queen Elizabeth. The Sonnets 
 being mentioned by Meres in 1598, in company with the 
 Poet's Venus and Adonis, Tarquin and Lucrece, &c. we 
 may suppose them written in 1596 and 1597, at least a 
 great part of them. Mr. Chalmers then asserted that 
 in the 64th year of her age, the " Renowned Empress 
 Queen of England" is addressed by William Shake- 
 speare, a player, as " His sweet Boy" "A man of a hue 
 surpassing that of other men." He invites HIM ( that 
 is Q. Elizabeth) to marry, that he might leave a son like 
 himself. He speaks of the said boy (the Queen) as 
 " calling familiarly at his door and of his watching the
 
 6 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 clock till the expected visitor arrive." Although a little 
 jealous of him, he yet would not put him " into circum- 
 scription and confine for the sea's worth" though he 
 does venture to chide his sweet boy (the Queen) for some 
 youthful irregularities (at SIXTY FOUR); and when HE 
 (still Elizabeth) has committed a treason against friend- 
 ship, won by the wiles of the poet's own mistress, he 
 excuses him, because " when the woman wooes," what 
 woman's sow (clearly the Queen) can be expected " to 
 resist her ?" 
 
 The reader will be apt to exclaim here, with the 
 Comte de Breteuil to Yorick, " Mais vous plaisantez /" 
 I confess the pleasantry, but he may himself verify the 
 fads, for the passages alluded to are here literally given. 
 
 " What's in the brain that ink may character, 
 Which hath not figured to thee my true spirit ? 
 What's new to speak, what new to minister, 
 That may express my love, or thy dear merit ? 
 Nothing, SWEET BOY." SONNET CVII1. 
 
 " A MAN, in hue all hues in his controlling." 
 
 SONNET XX. 
 
 " So thou, thyself out-going in thy noon, 
 Unlocked on diest, unless thou get a SON." 
 
 SONNET VII. 
 " You had & father ; let your son say so." 
 
 SONNET XIII. 
 
 " Being your slave, what should I do but tend 
 Upon the hours and times of your desire ?
 
 
 X>N THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 7 
 
 I have no precious time at all to spend, 
 
 Nor services to do, till you require. 
 
 Nor dare I chide the world-without-end hour, 
 
 While I, my sovereign, icatch the clock for you." 
 
 SONNET LVII. 
 
 " Gentle thou art, and therefore to be won, 
 Beauteous thou art, therefore to be assail'd ; 
 And when a woman wooes, what woman's son 
 Will sourly leave her till she have prevail'd. 
 Ah me ! but yet thou might'st my seat forbear, 
 And chide thy beauty and thy straying youth, 
 Who lead thee in their riot even there 
 Where thou art forc'd to break a two-fold truth, 
 Hers, by thy beauty tempting her to thee, 
 Thine^ by thy beauty being false to me. " 
 
 SONNET XLI. 
 
 " That thou hast HER, it is not all my grief. 
 And yet it may be said I loved her dearly -, 
 Loving offenders, thus I will excuse ye : 
 Thou dost love her, because thou know'st / love her ; 
 And for my sake even so doth she abuse me, 
 Suffering my friend for my sake to approve her. " 
 
 SONNET XLII. 
 
 These passages are, in my opinion, amply destructive 
 of Mr. Chalmers' hypothesis. One of these Sonnets, 
 however, containing a note of lime, always of importance 
 in fixing any assertion, let us examine the inference 
 drawn from it. " Three years have elapsed," says the 
 poet, " since he first saw his young friend " the Queen, 
 if Mr. Chalmers wills it so. This, then, as he thinks 
 the Sonnet written in 1597, gives 1594 for the year when
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 our great bard first beheld the person of Queen Eliza- 
 beth. Now, does any man, woman, or child believe 
 that the mind of Shakespeare could have remained eight 
 years in the capital of her kingdom, and never profes- 
 sionally, or even at distance in a crowd, lead him to 
 behold the object of all wonder and praise the scourge 
 of Spain the idol of her proud and happy people? 
 
 But where is the improbability that Shakespeare in 
 his youth should have ventured under the wing of 
 Green, his townsman, even to Kenilworth itself? It 
 was but fourteen miles distant from Stratford. Nay, 
 that he should at eleven years of age have personally 
 witnessed the reception of the great Queen by the 
 mighty favourite, and perhaps have even discharged 
 some youthful part in the pageant written by Mr. 
 Ferrers, sometime lord of misrule in the Court ? Was 
 there nothing about the spectacle likely to linger in one of 
 " imagination all compact," a youth of singular precocity, 
 with a strong devotion to the Muses, and little inclined, 
 as we know, to " drive on the affair of wool at home with 
 his father?" Nay, is there no part of his immortal 
 works which bears evidence upon the question of his 
 youthful visit ? We should expect to find such graphic 
 record in a composition peculiarly devoted to Fancy, and 
 there, if I do not greatly err, we undoubtedly find it. 
 
 In the Midsummer Night's Dream, Oberon, before he
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 9 
 
 despatches his aery attendant, Puck, for a flower of 
 powerful agency, dilates with peculiar fondness upon an 
 important station that he had himself once occupied, 
 and the wonders which his peculiar nature enabled him 
 to perceive, impervious to grosser optics. The whole 
 passage shall be given ; and it will poetically well repay 
 the critical attention which the reader is now, for the 
 first time, called upon to give it, as a record of the 
 " Princely pleasures of Kenilworth." [t is in the first 
 scene of the second act of the play ; and, abounding as 
 the previous colloquies do in descriptive beauties of sur- 
 passing splendor, pursues the subject with unabated 
 spirit and affluence. 
 
 The speakers are Oberon and Puck. 
 
 Obe. My gentle Puck, come hither ; thou remember'st 
 Since once I sat upon a promontory, 
 And heard a mermaid on a dolphin's back 
 Uttering such dulcet and harmonious breath, 
 That the rude sea grew civil at her song ; 
 And certain stars shot madly from, their spheres 
 To hear the sea-maid's musick. 
 
 Puck. I remember. 
 
 Obe. That very time I saw, but thou could'st not, 
 Flying between the cold moon and the earth, 
 Cupid all arm'd : a certain aim he took 
 At a fair Vestal, throned by the west, 
 And loos'd his love-shaft smartly from his bow, 
 As it should pierce a hundred thousand hearts ; 
 But I might see young Cupid's fiery shaft
 
 10 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 Quench'd in the chaste beams of the wat'ry moon, 
 And the imperial Votress passed on, 
 In maiden meditation, fancy free. 
 Yet mark'd I where the bolt of Cupid fell ; 
 It fell upon a little western flower, 
 Before milk-white, now purple with love's wound ; 
 And maidens call it Love in Idleness. 
 Fetch me that flow'r ; the herb I shew'd thee once 
 The juice of it, on sleeping eyelids laid, 
 Will make or man or woman, madly doat 
 Upon the next live creature that it sees. 
 Fetch me this herb, and be thou here again 
 Ere the leviathan can swim a league. 
 Puck. I'll put a girdle round about the earth 
 In forty minutes. 
 
 In this play we see Theseus, fresh from the war with 
 the Amazons, and full of his recollections of his friend 
 Hercules, is attended by Fairy Oberon, his Queen, and 
 their airy court at Athens, and with his usual contempt 
 of anachronism the poet flies off to eulogize a fair vestal 
 throned by the west, who can be no other sovereign than 
 his virgin mistress Elizabeth, as I am about to prove, 
 paying one of her costly visits to the most powerful of 
 her favourites, the Earl of Leicester : and here he seats 
 Oberon upon a promontory listening to a mermaid on a 
 dolphin's back, uttering such dulcet and harmonious 
 breath that the rude sea grew civil at her song. Now, 
 as the vestal could not but be Elizabeth, to a bold critic
 
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 11 
 
 the mermaid on a dolphin's back could be no other 
 person than her rival Mary, who had married the Dau- 
 phin of France, and whom Bishop Warburton insists 
 upon it " Shakespeare called a mermaid to denote her 
 beauty and intemperate lust." 
 
 " Ut turpiter atrum 
 Desinat in piscem mulier formosa superne." 
 
 " which," says the great detector, Edwards, " those who 
 do not understand Latin will perhaps think is a proof 
 of what our critic asserts, or at least something to his 
 purpose." * 
 
 Mr. Steevens, though he cannot dissemble his doubts 
 of Warburton's inference, rashly pronounces that " every 
 reader may be induced to wish that the foregoing allu- 
 sion pointed out by so acute a critic as Dr. Warburton 
 should remain uncontroverted." 
 
 O, no, Mr. Steevens, indeed and indeed, no man, with 
 the feelings of one, can be induced to wish any thing 
 like this. Another of the Bishop's dreams made Virgil 
 guilty of sacrilege. This imputes a more dastardly 
 crime to the generous Shakespeare. But as Gibbon re- 
 placed the veil upon the Eleusinian mysteries ; so Ritson, 
 if he did not show what our poet really pointed to, for 
 
 * Sec Canons of Criticism, edit. 1765, .p. 220.
 
 12 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 ever devoted to contempt the cruel and unmanly inter- 
 pretation which had been so unblushingly given of a 
 delicate though obscure allusion. I shall therefore, I 
 hope with more success (I am sure with better taste), 
 attempt to show the objects painted from our Poet's 
 actual remembrance. The words " 1 remember," in an- 
 swer to Oberon's inquiry, spoke for ONE more personage 
 than Puck, at least. 
 
 A reader of the present day is in truth inexcusable, if, 
 with the MIGHTY SPIRIT'S romance in his hand, he does 
 not recal to his imagination the splendid pageantries of 
 Kenilworth. Have we forgotten the immense lake on 
 which floated a mermaid and a dolphin, in whose centre 
 was the promontory on which Oberon figured himself 
 to be sitting when the events occurred which he com- 
 memorates. 
 
 But we are not bound to the mere text of Shakespeare, 
 which is a loose recollection only of a very orderly and 
 extensive celebration ; we have, fortunately, Gascoigne's 
 Princelie Pleasures at Kenilworth, and Laneham's 
 Letter, and the reader will see what corroboration they 
 supply to our interpretation of the text of Shakespeare. 
 
 A mermaid on a dolphins back. " When," says Gas- 
 coigne, " her Majestic was entred the gate, and come 
 into the base court, there came unto her a LADIE at- 
 tended with two nimphes, who came all over the poole,
 
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 13 
 
 being so conveyed that it seemed she had gone upon 
 the water, who spake to her Highnesse as followeth." I 
 shall omit the seven stanzas of six lines each, which we 
 may be sure were thought dulcet and harmonious breath, 
 for they told the antiquity and the fortunes of the 
 castle. 
 
 The rude sea grew civil refers, I conceive, to the 
 delivery of the Lady of the Lake ; but we must hear this 
 from Gascoigne. " Triton in the likenesse of a MER- 
 MAID came towarde the Queene's Majestic as she passed 
 over the bridge, and spake thus : 
 
 " You windes returne into your caves, 
 
 And silent there remaine ; 
 You waters wilde suppresse your waves, 
 And keepe you calme and plaine." 
 
 " Then Protheus appeared sitting on a dolphin's back," 
 (the identical words of Oberon,) " and the dolphin was 
 conveyed upon a boate, so that the oars seemed to be 
 his fynnes. Within the which dolphyn a consort of 
 musicke was secretly placed." So the reader sees that 
 we are not compelled into any undue compliment to the 
 lord of misrule, Mr. Ferrers's verses here was " dulcet 
 and harmonious breath" in abundance. 
 
 And certain stars shot madly from their spheres
 
 14 ON THE SONNETS'OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 alludes to " The fireworkes shewed upon the water, the 
 which were both strange and well executed : as some- 
 times passing under the water a long space ; when all 
 men thought they had been quenched, they would rise 
 and mount out of the water againe, and burne very 
 furiously untill they were utterlie consumed." * 
 
 Laneham describing the same fireworks, still more for 
 our parallel, calls them a blaze of burning davts flying 
 to and fro beams of STARS corruscant. 
 
 Shakespeare's impression of the scene was strong and 
 general ; he does not write as if the tracts of Gascoigne 
 and Laneham lay upon his table. His description is 
 exactly such as, after seventeen years had elapsed, a 
 reminiscence would suggest to a mind highly poetical. 
 
 Well might he then add that his eye could discern 
 what that of a coarser spirit could not 
 
 " Flying between the cold moon and the earth 
 
 Cupid all arm'd : a certain aim he took 
 
 At a fair Vestal throned by the west, 
 
 And loos'd his love-shaft smartly from his bow, 
 
 As it might pierce a hundred thousand hearts." 
 
 Then or never did the magnificent Leicester expect to 
 carry his romantic prize the fair vestal throned by the 
 
 * Princely Pleasures at Kenilworth.
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 15 
 
 west. We are, however, told with infinite grace, and 
 with the happiest of all compliments to her virgin 
 obduracy: 
 
 " But I might see young Cupid's fiery shaft 
 Quench'd in the chaste beams of the wat'ry moon, 
 And the imperial Votress passed on, 
 In maiden meditation, fancy free." 
 
 But the splendid captivations of Leicester were not 
 disdained by all female minds, and the bolt of Cupid is 
 seldom discharged in vain. Shakespeare has told us 
 where it fell : 
 
 " It fell upon a little western flower, 
 
 Before milk-white, now purple with love's wound, 
 
 And maidens call it Love in Idleness." 
 
 w> 
 
 Why, alas! can we not ask the kindred spirit, Sir 
 Walter Scott, whether he can conceive his own Amy 
 Robsart more beautifully and touchingly figured than 
 she appears to be in this exquisite metaphor ? 
 
 The princely pleasures here commemorated were the 
 barbarous entertainments of the VIRGIN REIGN. They 
 required only invention, poetry, mythological knowledge, 
 powers of representation ! We look at our theatres 
 royal, and may well triumph in our superiority ! 
 
 Mr. Chalmers has been too long quitted for higher
 
 16 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 matter; I return to his hypothesis, which some may 
 think has been sufficiently refuted already. But I 
 feel here tempted to notice a singular artifice in con- 
 test, which the writer alluded to invariably practised. 
 His opponent unexpectedly finds himself involved with 
 GREAT NAMES, about some undisputed and indeed 
 indisputable position. While he ("good easy man") 
 combats only an absurd hypothesis, advanced by Mr. 
 Chalmers, " that the Sonnets were addressed to Queen 
 Elizabeth," he starts to see himself described as one of 
 those who do not agree with Bishop Butler, Chief Baron 
 Gilbert, and Mr. Locke, that PROBABILITY is THE 
 GUIDE OF LIFE ! It may be matter of curiosity to con- 
 sider what Butler, Gilbert, and Locke would say to the 
 collected probabilities that the reader has now before 
 him. They might be of opinion, that the reference to 
 them and their axiom, was but a flight of occasional 
 spleen against persons who in more than one instance 
 had demonstrated the probable of Mr. Chalmers not 
 merely improbable but impossible. 
 
 On the present occasion he was led into his absurdity 
 by another equally great, namely, that SPENSER ad- 
 dressed his Amoretti, a collection of Sonnets, to the 
 great Queen ; and that Shakespeare, from a feeling of 
 jealousy, would needs pay the same compliment to her
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 17 
 
 beauties. This inference was drawn from an expression 
 in his 80th Sonnet. 
 
 " O how I faint when I of you do write, 
 Knowing a BETTER SPIRIT doth use your name, 
 And in the praise thereof spends all his might, 
 To make me tongue-tied, speaking of your fame !'* 
 
 I shall show, in the sequel, who the better spirit really 
 was, and his connection with the subject of Shakespeare's 
 Sonnets. But could our Poet here have really referred 
 to Spenser, no Sonnets would have crossed his mind, 
 and alarmed his jealousy. Shakespeare had too deep a 
 feeling of poetry, and too much modesty, not to know 
 and declare, that the Faery Queene did more to illustrate 
 Elizabeth, than could all the Sonnets in the universe, 
 whoever were the writers. 
 
 Yet as this, however honourable to Shakespeare's 
 taste, is still only my opinion, I shall give " a living 
 reason" that Spenser did not address the Amoretti to the 
 Queen. The 74th Sonnet points distinctly to the real 
 object. 
 
 " Most happy letters ! fram'd by skilful trade, 
 
 With which that happy name was first desynd, 
 
 The which THREE TIMES thrise happy hath me made, 
 
 With guifts of body, fortune, and of mind. 
 
 The FIRST my being to me gave by kind, 
 
 From mother's womb deriv'd by dew descent ; 
 
 The SECOND is my Spvereigne Queene most kind,
 
 18 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 That honour and large richesse to me lent : 
 The THIRD, my love, my live's last ornament, 
 By whom my spirit out of dust was raysed ; 
 To speake her prayse and glory excellent, 
 Of all alive most worthy to be praysed. 
 Ye THREE Elizabeths I for ever live, 
 That three such graces did unto me give." 
 
 If there be meaning in language, here are three dis- 
 tinct persons indicated. Some of the Sonnets are ad- 
 dressed to the Lady previous to her consenting' to be h s, 
 and some, as the preceeding," subsequent ; the 66th 
 marks the exact point at which the fair Elizabeth of the 
 sister kingdom yielded to his delightful suit : 
 
 " And with obsequious majesty approv'd 
 His pleaded reason." P. L. 
 
 But, in one of the Sonnets, his fate was in a state of 
 troublesome jeopardy ; and on the supposition (that is 
 too weak a word), the positive assertion of Mr. Chalmers, 
 that they were all addressed to one female, Queen 
 Elizabeth must have been mightily astonished, when 
 she read the following : 
 
 Great wrong I do, I can it not deny, 
 
 To that most sacred Empresse, my dear dred, 
 
 Not finishing her Queene of Faery, 
 
 That mote enlarge her living prayses, dead : 
 
 But, LODWICK, this of grace to me aread ; 
 
 Do ye not think th* accomplishment of it 
 
 Sufficient worke for one man's simple head,
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 19 
 
 All were it, as the rest, but rudely writ ? 
 How then should I, without another wit, 
 Think ever to endure so tedious toyle ! 
 Sith that this one is tost with troublous Jit 
 Of a proud Love, that doth my spirite spoyle. 
 
 Cease then, till she vouchsafe to grawnt me rest ; 
 
 Or lend YOU me another living brest." 
 
 SONNET XXXIII. 
 
 But the reader may wish to know something of this 
 Lodwick, and I am entirely at his service. 
 
 Lodowick Bryskett, was a particular friend of Spenser's, 
 who, at his cottage near Dublin, frequently enjoyed the 
 society of the great poet, in common with many of the 
 greatest men in the sister kingdom. He has left us, in 
 his Discourse of Chill Life, a most interesting con- 
 versation, in which Spenser is made to bear a part. 
 Lodowick addresses the Poet in language of high but 
 merited encomium, as a man perfect in the Greek tongue, 
 and very well read in Philosophic, both morall and 
 naturall; and entreats him to open to them the great 
 benefits, which men obtain by the knowledge of moral 
 philosophy. Spenser, as may be anticipated, modestly 
 excuses himself; and one reason he assigns is, that he 
 is already advanced in a work upon this subject in 
 heroical verse, under the title of a Faerie Queene, and 
 he therefore trusts that the expectation of that work may 
 free him from the task of speaking unadvisedly and 
 unpremeditated! y upon the present occasion.
 
 20 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 When Arthur Lord Grey of Wilton was Lord Deputy 
 of Ireland, he nominated Lodowick Secretary of State. 
 It is to this friend, who no doubt personally knew the 
 lady, that he speaks of his PROUD LOVE, and to whom 
 he ingenuously declares the difficulty he finds in pro- 
 ceeding with his immortal labour, in consequence of the 
 repulses of his suit, and the torments he endures from 
 her caprice. The lady knew the full value of his verse, 
 and would not, by hasty compliance, abridge her toilet 
 of its daily Sonnet. The whole collection is beautifully 
 bound together by an epithalamion on their marriage. 
 In the 80th Sonnet he discriminates this lady from the 
 Queen in a way not to be mistaken. 
 
 " After so long a race as I have run 
 Through faery land, which those six books compile, 
 Give leave to rest me being half foredone, 
 And gather to myself new breath awhile, 
 Then as a steed, refreshed after toil, 
 Out of my prison I will break anew, 
 And stoutly will that second work assoyle, 
 With strong endeavour and attention due : 
 Till then give leave to me in pleasant mew, 
 To sport my Muse, and sing my Love's sweet praise ; 
 The contemplation of whose heavenly hue 
 My spirit to an higher pitch will raise. 
 But let her praises yet be low and mean, 
 Fit for the handmaid of the FAERY QUEENE." 
 
 In the Faery Queene, he has himself told us, he
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 21 
 
 shadows merely the perfections of his Sovereign. His 
 mistress, howeveryazr and proud, is yet rated infinitely 
 below the towering CYNTHIA, and her praises suited 
 only to the Handmaid of the matchless Elizabeth. Not 
 to admit this inference is to be insensible to the constant 
 import of language : it is, in other words, to live in an 
 ideal world, and imagine that human words convey any- 
 thing but human meaning. 
 
 Enough has now been said, I conceive, to prove that 
 neither Shakespeare nor Spenser addressd their Sonnets 
 to the Virgin Queen. 
 
 NOT ADDRESSED TO LORD SOUTHAMPTON. 
 
 It may be proper to concede to Dr. Drake, that he 
 has shown the absolute certainty that 126 of the Sonnets 
 in question were addressed to a male friend and patron 
 of Shakespeare ; and he thinks that friend was Lord 
 Southampton. The reasons must be strong indeed that 
 overturn so natural an ascription. 
 
 The first which I shall adduce, in my opinion, has 
 force sufficient to set his Lordship aside. It is the De- 
 dication of Thorpe the publisher, which is printed at the 
 outset of this essay, who wishes Mr. W. H., as the only 
 begetter of the Sonnets, " all happiness, and that Eter- 
 nity promised by our ever-living Poet." Now it is
 
 22 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 proper to look at this promised eternity in the Poet's 
 own language, that we may be quite sure of its applica- 
 tion to the person addressed by him, and to no other ; 
 because it will then follow that no friend or patron can 
 be he, whose name is not figured truly by those initials. 
 Thus he writes in the 81st Sonnet: 
 
 " Your name from hence immortal life shall have, 
 Though I once gone to all the world must die 
 The earth can yield me but a common grave, 
 When you entombed in men's eyes shall lie. 
 Your monument shall be my gentle verse, 
 Which eyes not yet created shall o'er read ; 
 And tongues to be, your being shall rehearse, 
 When all the breathers of the world are dead ; 
 You still shall live (such virtue hath my pen,) 
 Where breath most breathes even in the mouths of men." 
 
 Now the initials do not apply to Lord Southampton, 
 who was named Henry Wriothesly ; and who, ten years 
 before Shakespeare became known to him, was Earl of 
 Southampton and Baron of Tichfield. I state this 
 firmly, because in 1593, when the Poet dedicated his 
 Venus and Adonis, it was at a distance that implied no 
 acquaintance ; for the very dedication was without per- 
 mission, and he says, " I know not how I shall offend in 
 dedicating my unpolished lines to your Lordship." 
 Tarquin and Lucrece, in 1594, shows that his former 
 offering had been well received. If we suppose him
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 23 
 
 therefore to have begun these Sonnets as soon as his 
 latter poem had done its work, how did the relative ages 
 stand of the Poet and the Patron? In 1594 Lord 
 Southampton was 21, being born in 1573; and Shake- 
 speare exactly 30, being born in 1564. The disparity is 
 nothing ; yet, in the poems, one of the parties is stated 
 to be in the spring of life, and the other in the autumn. 
 One " the sweet boy" " the world's fresh ornament," 
 the other "crush'd and o'erworn by the injurious hand 
 of Time." See the 63d Sonnet, and many others. 
 Southampton therefore could not be the object ad- 
 dressed in the Sonnets. Take the very last of them, 
 and we find him still saluted " O thou, my lovely boy." 
 Dr. Drake thinks the uniformity of the affection borne 
 may justify the iteration of the term at any part of the 
 intimacy. I think, as to Southampton, it was unjustifi- 
 able in any one year of it. 
 
 But out of respect to an hypothesis advocated by Dr. 
 Drake, let us wave this decorous objection. Yet surely 
 we may reasonably ask, why the Sonnets were restricted 
 to the personal beauty of Southampton, (which he does 
 not seem to have had, if his portrait resembled him), 
 and a devoted attachment on the Poet's side, which 
 never seemed to sympathize with the actual circumstances 
 of that nobleman's life? Did his achievements in 1596 
 and 1597, as a great Captain, at Cadiz and in the Azores,
 
 24 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 yield nothing? In 1598 he went with his friend Essex 
 to Ireland. On his marriage in 1596 with Miss Vernon 
 being known, he was thrown into prison; had Shake- 
 speare alone been indifferent to these occurrences the 
 latter amatorial, and quite in his line of compliment, 
 his success with the fair ? How did the Poet feel upon 
 his rash daring with Essex ? had he no soothing balm 
 to shed upon the agonies of his trial, sentence, and im- 
 prisonment ? and finally, when James had restored him 
 to his liberty and his honours, could his eulogist find no 
 call upon him for secure congratulation? but, amid 
 combats by sea and land, secret attachment and mar- 
 riage, irritation of his Royal Mistress, rebellion against 
 her authority, sentence to an ignominious death, release 
 from a captivity bitter as death, could, I say, this most 
 loving and fertile of all poets " set down in the tables," 
 which his friend had given to him (as the Sonnets inform 
 us), nothing but one cuckoo note upon a theme which 
 that friend, unless he never matured, must have long dis- 
 missed from his attention, I mean his personal beauty ? 
 I answer, I cannot conceive it. If these Sonnets were 
 periodically sent to a man so circumstanced as we find 
 Lord Southampton to have been, he must have nauseated 
 their uniformity. If they were not so dispatched to him, 
 the Poet would chuse his topics out of the passing 
 events, and reserve the series for a time when they
 
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 25 
 
 might be transmitted without danger. But we should 
 expect a Shakespeare to tell him in a masterly tone that 
 calamity was the nurse of great'spirits ; that his afflic- 
 tions had been the sources of his best fame ; that man- 
 kind never could have known the resources of his 
 mighty mind, if he had not been summoned to endure 
 disgrace, and to gaze undaunted upon the menacing 
 preparations of death itself. Nothing of this kind is 
 hinted at, and therefore the Sonnets cannot apply to 
 Lord Southampton. 
 
 This, it may be said, is hypothetical reasoning, and, 
 however plausible, might not have been true. Lord 
 Southampton, admitting the facts, might not find poetry 
 the echo of propriety. Was he by any other poet so 
 addressed ? The answer to this question will leave my 
 inference indisputable. He was addressed precisely in 
 the style which I have above described , and by Daniel, 
 the poet of Wilton House. See the following remarkable 
 extract from his verses to that nobleman : 
 
 " He who hath never warr'd with miserie, 
 Nor ever tugg'd with fortune and distresse, 
 Hath had n* occasion nor no field to trie 
 The strength and forces of his worthinesse : 
 Those partes of judgment which felicitie 
 Keepes as concealed, affliction must expresse ; 
 And only men shew their abilities, 
 And what they are, in their extremities.
 
 26 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 " The world had never taken so full note 
 
 Of what thou arte, hadst thou not been undone, 
 
 And onely thy affliction hath begot 
 
 More fame than thy best fortunes could have done. 
 
 For ever by adversitie are wrought 
 
 The greatest workes of admiration, 
 
 And all the faire examples of renowne 
 
 Out of distresse and miserie are growne. 
 
 " Not to be unhappy is unhappinesse, 
 
 And miserie not to have knowne miserie : 
 
 For the best way unto discretion is 
 
 The way that leads us by adversitie : 
 
 And men are better shew'd what is amisse 
 
 By th' expert finger of calamitie, 
 
 Than they can be with all that Fortune brings, 
 
 Who never shewes them the true face of things. 
 
 " How could we know that thou could'st have indur'd 
 With a reposed cheere wrong and disgrace ; 
 And, with a heart and countenance assur'd, 
 Have lookt sterne Death and Horror in the face ? 
 How should we know thy soule had been secur'd 
 In honest counsels and in wayes unbase ? 
 Hadst thou not stood, to shew us what thou wert, 
 By thy affliction, that descryde thy heart. 
 
 " He that indures for what his conscience knowes 
 No.t to be ill, doth from a patience high 
 Looke onely on the cause whereto he owes 
 Those sufferings, not on his miserie : 
 The more he indures the more his glory growes, 
 Which never growes from imbecilitie ; 
 Onely the best compos'd and worthiest hearts 
 God sets to act the hard'st and constant'st parts."
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEAUE. 27 
 
 Such topics we may be assured saluted the gracious 
 Earl from the pen also of Shakespeare on the occasions 
 here commemorated, probably too in some degree ex- 
 posing the writer from the ardour of his gratitude; and 
 therefore, when once committed to the noble sufferer's 
 memory, consigned to the flames, that the Poet at least 
 might run no risk. We may be sure that Shakespeare 
 who owed so much to the friend of Essex, was in agony 
 during the rash enterprises of that unfortunate favourite. 
 But his reflections are for ever lost in the manner here 
 stated, arid it is with pleasure we have above shewn 
 that his feeling has been at least preserved in the per- 
 haps weaker verse of Daniel. 
 
 The difficulty is, to select a person who, from his 
 youth and station, called for no other topics than the 
 Sonnets afford ; who was beautiful enough to be con- 
 sidered " the world's fresh ornament ;" interesting enough 
 that the Poet should wish his straying youth removed 
 from temptation; great enough to be courted, as willing 
 and able to patronize a condition that could not exist 
 without it, and who actually became the patron of 
 Shakespeare ; one moreover whom, as the Sonnets tell 
 us, rival poets were courting, with all the arts, and more 
 than the charms of verse. Such a person I shall pro- 
 ceed to point out. 
 
 I had proceeded thus far in my disquisition in the
 
 28 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 original publication, when in the magazine for October 
 appeared the two following letters on the subject ad" 
 dressed to Mr. Urban. 
 
 " Bath, Oct. 20. 
 
 " Mr. URBAN, 
 
 " You will confer a favour on a constant reader 
 and occasional correspondent, by allowing a place to the 
 letter which I now inclose. It is quite unnecessary for 
 me to add one word in corroboration of what Mr 
 Bright has stated in it. Most true it is that many years 
 ago he did me the favour to admit me an acquaintance 
 with this long-concealed and most curious truth ; and 
 that I have from time to time taken the liberty of 
 suggesting to him that it was due to his own literary 
 reputation, and due to other inquirers in this department 
 of literary history, not to withhold the public communi- 
 cation of the fact, and of the curious and most recondite 
 researches by which he had first established and then 
 illustrated it. I may add that not only the fact itself, 
 but the evidence was submitted to me, and the many 
 important conclusions also which follow on the estab- 
 lishment of the connexion between Lord Pembroke and 
 the Poet: the whole disquisition being an admirable 
 specimen of inductive reasoning, from the comparison of 
 facts which could be found only by deep research, equally
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 29 
 
 creditable to the diligence and the power of combination 
 of its author. 
 
 " JOSEPH HUNTER." 
 
 " (Copy.) 
 
 " MY DEAR SIR, The communication of J. B. re- 
 specting the person to whom Shakespeare addressed 
 his Sonnets, which occurs in the Gentleman's Magazine 
 of this month, and to which you have so kindly directed 
 my attention, occasions, I am half ashamed to confess, 
 some selfish regrets. 
 
 " It is now more than thirteen years ago, in 1819, I 
 think, since I detailed to you the progress of the dis- 
 covery I had then made, that William Herbert the third 
 Earl of Pembroke was undoubtedly the person to whom 
 Shakespeare addressed the first 126 Sonnets. Another 
 friend, Dr. Holme of Manchester, had been informed of 
 my secret a year earlier ; and from both, as ever since 
 from time to time I have spoken or corresponded on the 
 subject, I have received warnings, that by delaying to 
 give the result of my researches to the public, I was 
 putting to hazard an honourable opportunity of securing 
 to myself some literary reputation. The truth is, I have 
 in the long interval been much and actively engaged in 
 matters more immediately important. I have been oc- 
 cupied too in following out my discovery to its wide and 
 various consequences. I have felt desirous to explore
 
 30 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 deeply, rather than solicitous to appropriate early ; and 
 latterly, my materials have so overwhelmed me, that I 
 have become fastidious and irresolute, as to mode, com- 
 position, and arrangement. 
 
 " Under these circumstances, and before J. B. ac- 
 tually announces his discovery, I thus put in my claim. 
 I readily acknowledge that he who unnecessarily hoards 
 information of any kind, rightly loses the privilege of 
 first communicating it; and I anticipate with my bes' 
 philosophy the interesting conclusion of J. B.'s very 
 excellent and original paper. 
 
 " When I can again apply myself to the subject, I 
 will come before the public as a fellow-labourer, and it 
 shall^be in the spirit of one who/ whilst he feels for 
 human nature somewhat jealously of his own long- 
 treasured discovery, recollects that the claim he is now 
 preferring may be the cause of similar feelings in another, 
 who has much more justly appreciated what is due to 
 himself, and what the interests of literature demand from 
 all its worshippers. 
 
 " I am, my dear Sir, your obliged friend, 
 
 "B. HEYWOOD BRIGHT. 
 
 "Stone-buildings, Lincoln's Lin, 
 Oct. 16, 1832. 
 
 "Rev. Joseph Hunter." 

 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 31 
 
 My essay followed them, of course without reference 
 to what I could not then know to be in existence; what 
 notice I took of the writers will be seen at the conclusion, 
 when I put my name to the enquiry. 
 
 I. It is obvious that the Patron of Shakespeare was a 
 person of rank superior to himself: that he was in the 
 may-morn of life: that his personal beauty was re- 
 markable: that he was much addicted to pleasure, 
 courted by the women, and guilty ot some breaches of 
 friendship in consequence : that his counsellor and poet, 
 fully aware of his tendency to dissipation, exhorted him 
 to marry, and bequeath to the world a copy of himself. 
 It is also clear that, during the time of writing these com- 
 positions, their object had not coveted public business, 
 he was something more than the mere 'child of state,' 
 and by shunning its perilous honours, might be said, 
 almost alone, to be ' hugely politic.' 
 
 He is announced in the first Sonnet in the tone of 
 Spenser's address to Raleigh, as I have before observed, 
 
 " Thou that art now the world's fresh ornament, 
 And only herauld to the gaudy spring." 
 
 This is unquestionably said of a youth of distinction, 
 who had just then offered himself to the public gaze 
 and towards whom every eye was turned, from the cir- 
 cumstances of his descent, and the graces with which 
 he seemed personally accomplished.
 
 32 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAkESPEARE. 
 
 If we were told that the nephew of Sir Philip Sydney, 
 soon after he quitted Oxford in 1594, had been allowed 
 by his father the Earl of Pembroke, to come to London, 
 in \n& fifteenth year ; that with the beauty of his mother 
 the Countess, and the taste for poetry of her and Sir 
 Philip, he had addicted himself to the stage, and 
 among the professors of dramatic art had distinguished 
 Shakespeare, and entertained an ardent affection for so 
 great a master ; we should receive such an anecdote as 
 one at all events highly probable. If we were sub- 
 sequently to learn that persons who well knew the poet 
 and his connections, had left their intimacy upon record, 
 it would excite, it is true, no surprise, though it might 
 lead us to expect that the poet himself had also publicly 
 expressed his sense of so honourable a distinction. 
 
 Now Messieurs Heminges and Condell, when publish- 
 ing the folio edition of Shakespeare's Plays in the year 
 1623, in their dedication lo William then Earl of Pem- 
 broke, and Philip Earl of Montgomery his brother, 
 testify to this friendly connexion, and, as it appears 
 certain that Ben Jonson held the pen for them, the facts 
 stated acquire his full knowledge, in corroboration of 
 the assertion made by the actual dedicators. Jonson 
 himself knew these noblemen well. Thus he writes for 
 the dedicators, as to the plays now collected : 
 
 " But since your Lordshippes have beene pleas'd to
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 33 
 
 thinke these trifles some-thing h eere to-fore ; and have 
 prosequuted both them, and their authour living, with so 
 much favour : we hope that (they out-living him, and he 
 not having the fate, common with some, to be exequutor 
 to his owne writings,) you will use the like indulgence 
 towards them, you have done unto their parent. * 
 
 " It hath been the height of our care, who are the pre- 
 senters, to make the present worthy of your H. H. by 
 the perfection. But there we must also crave our 
 abilities to be considered, my lords. We cannot go 
 beyond our owne powers. Country hands reach foorth 
 milke, creame, fruites, or what they have: and many 
 nations (we have heard) that had not gumrnes and 
 incense, obtained their requests with a leavened cake. 
 It was no fault to approach their gods by what means 
 they could : and the most, though meanest of things are 
 made precious, when they are dedicated to temples. In 
 that name, therefore, we most humbly consecrate to your 
 H. H. these remaines of your servant SHAKESPEARE; 
 
 * It will no doubt appear remarkable to those who have 
 never heard but of Shakespeare's^-^ patron, Lord South- 
 ampton, that HE should not even be alluded to on this occasion- 
 Whether he disputed this homage, or was offended by its alie- 
 nation from him, cannot now be known. He probably sent 
 for the book on its publication, and re-perused the plays. In 
 the following year, 1624, he accepted a command in the Low 
 Countries, and died of a fever at Bergen-op-Zoom, on the 1 Oth 
 of November, aged 52. 
 
 D
 
 34 ON THE SONNETS OJ SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 that what delight is in them, may be ever your L. L. the 
 reputation his, and the faults ours, if any be committed, 
 by a payre so carefull to shew their gratitude both to the 
 living and the dead, as is your Lordshippes most 
 bounden, JOHN HEMINGE, 
 
 HENRY CONDELL." 
 
 It is my opinion, then, that Shakespeare addressed 
 126 of these Sonnets to Mr. WILLIAM HERBERT, subse- 
 quently third Earl of Pembroke, and that a variety of 
 circumstances alluded to in these Sonnets, as well as 
 the initials, apply fully, personally, and unequivocally 
 to the said young nobleman ; and that the other Sonnets, 
 though not addressed, were sent to him, as alluding to 
 matters mentioned in the 126; and that it is probable 
 the Earl sanctioned their publication in 1609 under his 
 untitled initials. There will appear an obvious propriety 
 in thus restricting Thorpe to his designation when they 
 were written, if we consider that the Earl in 1609 had 
 become a statesman, and, as his poet had predicted, 
 attentive to his own dignity and importance at court. 
 To justify me in the hypothesis just laid down, every 
 circumstance in the 126 Sonnets addressed to one 
 person, should apply to an intercourse between Shake- 
 speare and Mr. William Herbert, and apply moreover 
 easily. There should be no straining of words, no 
 wringing of a poor phrase to torture it into a lame sup-
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 35 
 
 porter of an hypothesis. As I have already proved that, 
 without such torture, these productions cannot be 
 applied to other candidates, so I shall now in detail pro- 
 ceed to show, that they do strictly, fairly, and unde- 
 niably apply to the young nobleman I have named. 
 
 II. It will, therefore, in the outset, be necessary to 
 look at his life and character, as they have been de- 
 lineated by the Oxford historian, A. a Wood, and the 
 great Lord Clarendon. And first for the Athenee 
 Oxonienses. 
 
 " William Herbert, son and heir of Henry Earl of 
 Pembroke, was bora at Wilton, in Wilts, the 8th of 
 April, 1580, became a nobleman of New College, 
 Oxford, in Lent term 1592, aged 13, continued there 
 about two years, succeeded his father in his honours 
 1601, made Knight of the Garter 1st of James I. and 
 Governor of Portsmouth six years after. In 1626 he 
 was unanimously elected Chancellor of this University, 
 being a great patron of learning, and about that time 
 was made Lord Chamberlain of the King's Household. 
 He was riot only a great favourer of learned and in- 
 genious men, but was himself learned, and endowed 
 to admiration with a poetical genie, as by those amorous 
 and not inelegant Aires and Poems of his composition 
 doth evidently appear ; some of which had musical 
 notes set to them by Henry Lawes
 
 36 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 He died suddenly in his house called Baynard's Castle, 
 in London, on the 10th of April in 1630, according to 
 the calculation of his nativity, made several years before 
 by Mr. Tho. Allen of Gloucester Hall ; whereupon his 
 body was buried in the Cathedral Church at Salisbury, 
 near to that of his father." 
 
 And also in the Fasti, where he thus speaks of him : 
 
 " William Herbert Earl of Pembroke, the very 
 picture and viva effigies of nobility, a person truly 
 generous, a singular lover of learning and the professors 
 thereof, and therefore by the academicians elected their 
 Chancellor some years after this. [30th of August, 
 1605, when he was created M. A. the King being then 
 at Oxford.] 
 
 " His person was rather majestic than elegant, and 
 his presence, whether quiet or in motion, was full of 
 stately gravity. His mind was purely heroic, often 
 stout, but never disloyal ; and so vehement an opposer 
 of the Spaniard, that when that match fell under con- 
 sideration in the latter end of the reign of K. Jam. 1. he 
 would sometimes rouze, to the trepidation of that King 
 yet kept in favour still; for his Majesty knew plain 
 dealing, as a jewel in all men, so in a Privy Counsellor 
 an ornamental duty; and the same true-heartedness 
 commended him to K. Ch. I." 
 
 My Lord CLARENDON'S character is much fuller, but
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 37 
 
 so exact and eloquent, so fine a model of sincere his- 
 torical painting, that I will not mutilate it, to hurry on 
 the argument founded upon it. 
 
 " William Earl of Pembroke was the most universally 
 beloved and esteemed of any man of that age; and, 
 having a great office in the court, he made the court 
 itself better esteemed, and more reverenced in the 
 country. And as he had a great number of friends of 
 the best men, so no man had ever the confidence to 
 avow himself to be his enemy. He was a man very well 
 bred, and of excellent parts, and a graceful speaker 
 upon any subject, having a good proportion of learning, 
 and a ready wit to apply to it, and enlarge upon it ; of a 
 pleasant and facetious humour, and a disposition affable, 
 generous, and magnificent. He was master of a large 
 fortune from his ancestors, and had a great addition by 
 his wife, a daughter and heir of the Earl of Shrewsbury, 
 which he enjoyed during his life, she out-living him ; 
 but all served not his expence, which was only limited 
 by his great mind, and occasions to use it nobly. 
 
 " He lived many years about the court before in it 
 and never /;j/it; being rather regarded and esteemed by 
 King James, than loved and favoured. After the foul 
 fall of the Earl of Somerset, he was made Lord Cham- 
 berlain of the King's house, more for the court's sake 
 than his own ; and the court appeared with the more
 
 38 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 lustre, because he had the government of that province. 
 As he spent and lived upon his own fortune, so he stood 
 upon his own feet, without any other support than of his 
 proper virtue and merit; and lived towards the favourites 
 with that decency, as would not suffer them to censure 
 or reproach his master's judgment and election, but as 
 with men of his own rank. He was exceedingly be- 
 loved in the court, because he never desired to get that 
 for himself which others laboured for, but was still readie 
 to promote the pretences of worthy men. And he was 
 equally celebrated in the country, for having received 
 no obligations from the court which might corrupt or 
 sway his affections and judgement: so that all who were 
 displeased and unsatisfied in the court, or with the 
 court, were always inclined to put themselves under his 
 banner, if he would have admitted them; and yet he did 
 not so reject them as to make them espouse another 
 shelter; but so far suffered them to depend on him, 
 that he could restrain them from breaking out beyond 
 private resentments and murmurs. 
 
 " He was a great lover of his country, and of the 
 religion and justice which he believed could only 
 support it; and his friendships were only with men of 
 those principles. And as his conversation was most 
 with men of the most pregnant- parts and understanding, 
 so towards any such, who needed support or encourage-
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 39 
 
 ment, though unknown, if fairly recommended to him, 
 he was very liberal. Sure never man was planted in a 
 court that was fitter for that soil, or brought better 
 qualities with him to purify that air. 
 
 " Yet his MEMORY must not be flattered that his 
 virtues and good inclinations may be believed ; he was not 
 without some alloy of vice, nor without being clouded 
 with great infirmities, which he had in too exorbitant 
 a proportion. He indulged to himself the pleasures of 
 all kinds, almost in all excesses^ To WOMEN, whether 
 out of his natural constitution, or for want of his 
 domestic content and delight, (in which he was most 
 unhappy, for he paid much too dear for his wife's 
 fortune, by taking her person into the bargain) he was 
 immoderately given up. But therein he likewise retained 
 such a power and jurisdiction over his very appetite, 
 that he was not so much transported with beauty and 
 outward allurements, as with those advantages of the 
 mind as manifested extraordinary wit and spirit and 
 knowledge, and administered pleasure in the conversation. 
 To these he sacrificed himself, his precious time, and 
 much of his fortune. And some who were nearest his 
 trust and friendship, were not without apprehension, 
 that his natural vivacity and vigour of mind began to 
 lessen and decline by those excessive indulgences. 
 
 " About the time of the death of King James, or pre-
 
 40 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 sently after, he was made Lord Steward of his Majesty's 
 house, that the staff of Chamberlain might be put into 
 the hands of his brother the Earl of Montgomery, upon 
 a new contract of friendship with the Duke of Buck- 
 ingham ; after whose death he had likewise such offices 
 of his as he most affected, of honour and command ; 
 none of profit, which he cared not for; and within two 
 years after, he died himself of an apoplexy, after a full 
 and cheerful supper. 
 
 " A short story may not be unfitly inserted, it being 
 very frequently mentioned by a person of known in- 
 tegrity, who at that time being on his way to London, 
 met at Maidenhead some persons of quality, of relation 
 or dependence upon the Earl of Pembroke. (Sir 
 Charles Morgan, commonly called General Morgan, 
 who had commanded an army in Germany and de- 
 fended Stoad; Dr. Field, then Bishop of St. David's; 
 and Dr. Chafin, the Earl's then chaplain in his house, 
 and much in his favour.) At supper one of them drank 
 a health to the Lord Steward ; upon which another of 
 them said, 'that he believed his Lord was at that time 
 very merry, for he had now outlived the day, which his 
 tutor Sand ford* had prognosticated upon his nativity 
 
 * Sandford may be a mistake of Lord Carendon for Allen 
 of Gloucester Hall ; if not, it will follow that two astrologers 
 calculated Herbert's nativity, and that they concurred in their 
 interpretation of his horoscope.
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 41 
 
 he would not outlive ; but he had done it now, for that 
 was his birth- day, which had completed his age to fifty 
 years.' The next morning, by the time they came to 
 Colebrook, they met with the news of his death. 
 
 " He died exceedingly lamented by men of all 
 qualities, and left many of his servants and dependants 
 good estates, raised out of his employments and bounty. 
 Nor had his heir cause to complain ; for though his 
 expences had been very magnificent (and it may be the 
 less considered, and his improvidence the less, because 
 he had no child to inherit,) insomuch as he left a great 
 debt charged upon the estate; yet considering the 
 wealth he left in jewels, plate, and furniture, and the 
 estate his brother enjoyed in right of his wife (who was 
 not fit to manage it herself) during her long life, he may 
 be justly said to have inherited as good an estate from 
 hi m, as HE had from his father, which was one of the 
 best in England." 
 
 Although the above admirable character conducts the 
 Earl to the close of his life, and I am chiefly concerned 
 in Ihe early part of it, yet, besides the ornamental effect 
 of so complete a production, the anecdote which refers to 
 judicial astrology is necessary, to make out some points 
 of parallel in the Sonnets themselves. 
 
 Greatly to the honour of Clarendon, the above 
 character has one feature, which biographers of the
 
 42 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 present day are careful to omit. It speaks fearlessly of 
 the "exorbitant proportion of his infirmities," and yet 
 shows him to have been one of the most amiable of the 
 race of men. One of these infirmities is pointed at in 
 the Sonnets, and the great poet himself seems impli- 
 cated with him. Dr. Drake wishes that 22 of the 
 Sonnets had never been published " because if we 
 dismiss these confessional Sonnets, not the slightest 
 moral stain can rest on the character of Shakespeare." 
 But why should he be so anxious, in the case of Shake- 
 speare, to exhibit " a faultless monster which the world 
 ne'er saw ?'' a being transcending us so immeasurably 
 in the powers of the mind, and not evincing his kindred 
 by the slightest error in his personal conduct ! Surely, 
 as repented error excites no imitation, it is better to 
 keep down our arrogance, by showing the greatest of us 
 not entirely spotless. It is not for the purpose of 
 common-place morality, that we hear authoritatively 
 from the reading desk " If we say that we have no sin, 
 we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.'' 
 
 I at length proceed with the investigation, having 
 established much relative matter on unquestionable 
 authority. It will be now readily admitted that when 
 Mr. William Herbert came up to town from college, he 
 was in the vernal blossom of existence ; and all that the 
 Sonnets express as to the beauty of his person may be
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 43 
 
 credited upon a sight of Vandyke's picture of him in his 
 maturity. The poet seems to be merely transposed by 
 the biographer in the account of his attentions to the 
 sex, which previous quotations have placed before the 
 reader. Even the particular temper of our youth, who 
 was addicted, says Rowland Wliyte, to melancholy, is 
 marked by Shakespeare in the 8th Sonnet. 
 
 " Musick to hear, why hear'st thou musick sadly? 
 Why lov'st thou that, which thou receiv'st not gladly?" 
 
 III. There are many passages in these Sonnets, which, 
 as they infer the superior condition of his young friend, 
 express also the fear that reasons of rank and state 
 might separate them : that an intimacy with the Player 
 might sully the future Peer, and that it would be 
 incumbent on the latter to " hold his honour at a wary 
 distance.'' This reflection induces the poet to lament 
 his degraded condition, which made him " a motley to 
 the view" of an unworthy crowd. A few such complaints 
 shall follow. 
 
 " Let me confess, that we two must be twain. 
 In our two loves there is but one respect, 
 Though in our lives a separable spight. 
 I may not evermore acknowledge thee, 
 Lest my bewailed guilt should do thee shame ; 
 Nor thou with publick kindness honour me, 
 
 Unless thou take that honour from thy name." 
 
 SONNET xxxvi.
 
 44 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 " Against that time, if ever that time come, 
 When I shall see thee frown on my defects, 
 When as thy love hath cast his utmost sum, 
 Call'd to that audit by advis'd respects ? 
 Against that time, when thou shalt strangely pass, 
 And scarcely greet me with that sun, thine eye ; 
 When love, converted from the thing it was, 
 Shall reasons find of settled gravity" 
 
 I reasoned upon the latter passage in the opening, 
 without pointing to the particular person addressed ; it 
 is here repeated to establish my hypothesis. Even the 
 sage and moral Spenser apologizes for presenting the 
 Faery Queene to the grave Lord Treasurer of England 
 and only hopes acceptance from its deeper sense, which 
 such an eye as Lord Burleigh's might rest upon with 
 approbation. 
 
 " To you, right noble Lord, whose carefull brest 
 
 To menage of most grave affaires is bent, 
 
 Unfitly I these idle rimes present, 
 
 The labour of lost time, and wit unstaid : 
 
 Yet, if their deeper sense be inly waid, 
 
 And the dim veile, with which from common view 
 
 Their fairer parts are hid, aside be laid, 
 
 Perhaps not vaine they may appear to you." 
 
 Spenser's follower, Chapman, thought heavenly 
 poetry the true aliment of great minds ; and proudly, 
 but not vainly, said so. See the Sonnets with his 
 Homer.
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 45 
 
 Burleigh however, it is well known, frowned upon 
 such levities, and considered 
 
 " That poesie was a removed thing 
 From grave administry of publike weales." 
 
 How Shakespeare conceived himself degraded by the 
 profession to which he owes his immortality, it is worth 
 while to show fully. 
 
 " Alas ! 'tis true, I have gone here and there, 
 And made myself a motley to the view." 
 
 SONNET ex. 
 
 " O, for my sake do you with Fortune chide, 
 
 The guilty goddess of my harmful deeds, 
 
 That did not better for my life provide 
 
 Than publick means, which publick manners breeds. 
 
 Thence comes it that my NAME receives a brand ; 
 
 And almost thence my nature is subdu'd 
 
 To what it works in, like the dyer's hand." 
 
 SONNET cxr. 
 
 One more struggle of the Poet to bear himself above 
 the reach of illiberal obloquy, by the shield which his 
 Patron's favour threw before him. 
 
 " Your love and pity doth the impression Jill, 
 
 Which vulgar scandal stamp'd upon my brow ; 
 
 For what care I who calls me well or ill, 
 
 So YOU o'er-green my bad, my good allow ? 
 
 You are my all-the-world, and I must strive 
 
 To know my shames and praises from your tongue. 
 
 In so profound abysm I throw all care 
 
 Of others' voices, that my adder's sense 
 
 To criticJc and to flatterer stopped are."
 
 46 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKF.SPEARE. 
 
 That Shakespeare's sensibility would be shocked by 
 the usual treatment of his profession, may be obvious 
 from the language even of King James's licence to his 
 own company acting at the Globe. That monarch wills 
 and commands all Justices, Mayors, Sheriffs, Constables, 
 Head boroughs, and other officers, to allow them to act 
 throughout his dominions, " without any letts, hindrances, 
 or molestations : and not only so, but to be aiding or 
 assisting to them, if any wrong be to them offered ; and 
 to allow them such former courtesies as hath been given 
 to men of their place and quality." 
 
 As Lord Pembroke received the garter in the first 
 year of the new reign, there is every reason for thinking 
 that his friendship for our Poet procured the above 
 licence from King James. 
 
 IV. The 80th, 82nd, 85th, and 86th -Sonnets contain 
 references to the lietter spirit, who studiously celebrated 
 the same object with Shakespeare, and whom I promised 
 to make distinctly known to the reader. 
 
 " O, how I faint when I of YOU do write, 
 Knowing a better spirit doth use your name, 
 And in the praise thereof spends all his might, 
 To make me tongue-tied, speaking of your fame !" 
 
 SONNET LXXX. 
 
 The modern reader would be apt to think that Shake- 
 speare could only regard Spenser as his superior but
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 47 
 
 this is to be unacquainted with the estimates of poetry 
 in the age of Elizabeth. Acknowledged learning 
 greatly predominated over genius. The modern stage 
 had not drawn aside the veneration for the classic 
 drama, and the scholar stil) indulged his followers with 
 plays upon the ancient model. He thought the best of 
 modern plays but gross and barbarous ; and, in imitation 
 of Sir Philip Sidney, called upon scholars like himself, 
 to resist the barbarian of the north, who threatened with 
 oblivion their more classical productions. Notwith- 
 standing " the divinity that stirr'd within him," I have 
 no doubt that Shakespeare actually vailed his bonnet, 
 not only to Spenser, but to Daniel and Chapman, to 
 Harrington, and to Fairefax. We see them invariably 
 "pass him by," not deigning to consider him of their 
 fraternity ; and a modern worshipper of our Poet, after 
 toiling through names with which he is little acquainted, 
 wonders by what strange blindness that Jupiter was 
 ever unobserved, to whom the rest have become merely 
 satellites, invisible to the common eye, and only known 
 to exist from the telescopic discoveries of the antiquary. 
 But that Spenser was not so absolute a sovereign in 
 the period to which I have referred, is proved by Ben 
 Jonson, who points out that poet's rival and his own, in 
 his delightful comedy of Epicoene, or the Silent 
 Woman. It is one of the topics chosen by Truewit, to
 
 48 ON THE SONNKTS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 deter Morose from marriage ; whose lady, he tells him, 
 will not care how his acres melt, " so as she may bee a 
 stateswoman, know all the news, what was done at 
 Salisbury, what at the Bath, what at Court, what in 
 Progresse ; or, so she may censure Poets, and authors, 
 and stiles, and compare them, DANIEL with SPENSER, 
 Jonson with the tother youth, and so foorth." 
 
 This leads me easily to my decision, that Daniel was 
 the better spirit alluded to. He was in fact brought up 
 at Wilton, the seat of the Pembrokes, and in 1601, in- 
 scribed his Defence of Ryme to William Herbert. In 
 this dedication, he tells him, 
 
 " I was first encourag'd or fram'd thereunto by your 
 most worthy and honourable mother ; receiving the first 
 notion for the formall ordering of those compositions at 
 Wilton, which I must ever acknowledge to have beene 
 my best schoole, and thereof alwayes am to hold a feeling 
 and gratefull memory. Afterward, drawne farther on 
 by the well-liking and approbation of my worthy Lord 
 [your father,] the fosterer of me and my muse." 
 
 Therefore, when Shakespeare wrote the 82nd Sonnet, 
 he hints at the actual ground of his jealousy Daniel 
 had dedicated to William Herbert. 
 
 " I grant thou wert not married to my muse, 
 And therefore may'st without attaint o'erlook 
 The dedicated words, which writers use 
 Of their fair subject, blessing every book."
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 49 
 
 Spenser, let me add, did not live to dedicate to Wil- 
 liam Herbert, though it is admitted he eulogized his 
 parents. This establishes Daniel firmly. 
 
 That Shakespeare had chosen Samuel Daniel, the 
 favourite poet of the Countess of Pembroke, for his 
 model in these Sonnets, addressed according to the 
 present hypothesis to her elder son, is pointed out by 
 Mr. Malone with his usual accuracy. But the imitation 
 of that poet had an earlier commencement. When he 
 had determined upon the " graver labour" which was to 
 follow his Venus and Adonis, published in 1593, he cast 
 the Rape of Lucrece in the Stanza of Daniel's Rosa- 
 mond, consisting of seven lines ; whereas his first pro- 
 duction was limited to six. Shakespeare appears also 
 in his second work, to have been during a considerable 
 portion of it, infected by the almost prosaic plainness of 
 Daniel. The Fair Rosamond, in enjoining her poet* 
 his task, invests herself with the prescience, (or shall I 
 call it historical knowledge?) of times subsequent to her 
 own ; and talks as familiarly of Jane Shore, as if the 
 
 * Perhaps this term for Daniel may be questionable, for 
 Michael Drayton, (not an ordinary Poet, as Warburton styled 
 him, but) an admirable writer with a purer taste than Daniel, 
 has composed a legend of fair Rosamond ; and in his heroical 
 Epistles has also honoured tlie pleasant Mistress Shore and 
 her Royal lover, by framing two letters for them, which it may 
 be no profanation to say exceed infinitely the amatorial 
 effusions of the fifteenth century.
 
 50 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 heroines had changed masters, or Edward the 4th had 
 reigned before the second Henry. A few stanzas may 
 not much offend, as a sample of Shakespeare's rival. 
 
 " Out from the horror of infernall deepes, 
 My poore afflicted ghost comes heere to plain it, 
 Attended with my shame that never sleepes, 
 The spot where-with my kinde and youth did staine it. 
 My body found a grave where to containe it. 
 A sheete could hide my face, but not my sin, 
 For Fame findes never tombe t'inclose it in. 
 
 And which is worse, my soule is now denied 
 
 Her transport to the sweet Elysian rest, 
 
 The joyfull blisse for ghosts repurified, 
 
 The ever-springing gardens of the blest ; 
 
 Caron denies me waftage with the rest, 
 And saies, my soule can never passe the river, 
 Till lovers' sighes on earth shall it deliver. 
 
 No muse suggests the pity of my case, 
 Each pen doth overpasse my just complaint, 
 Whilst others are preferd, though far more base ; 
 Shore's wife is grac'd, and passes for a saint ; 
 Her legend * justifies her foule attaint. 
 
 * " Her legend." This unquestionably refers to the " Le- 
 gend of Shore's wife," written by Churchyard. See the Mirror 
 for Magistrates, a work greatly admired and imitated in its day 
 by Drayton and others, though now little more of it is read than 
 the Induction by Sackville ; which Capel selected for a prin- 
 cipal decoration to his " Prolusions," one of the purest volumes 
 of our ancient poetry, most carefully edited, the hopeful pre- 
 cursor to his Shakespeare.
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 51 
 
 Her wel-told tale did such compassion find, 
 That she is pass'd, and I am left behind." 
 
 The Poet is of course too gallant and generous, to 
 leave the delight of Woodstock to the merciless rigour 
 of Charon ; among those who 
 
 Centum errant annos, volitantque hsec littora circum ; 
 Turn demum admissi stagna oxoptata revisunt. 
 
 VIRC. ^Eneid vi. v. 329 30. 
 A hundred years they wander on the shore ; 
 At length, their penance done are wafted o'er. 
 
 Dryden B. vi. v. 451 2. 
 
 Rosamond is lavish enough in the eulogy of her own 
 charms, but her royal lover being " cleane past his 
 youth," is exposed to the derision of his youthful 
 mistress. 
 
 " Whom Fortune made my king, Love made my subject, 
 Who did commaund the land, most humbly pray'd me, 
 HEXRIE the second that so highly weigh'd me, 
 Found well (by proofe) the priviledge of beutie, 
 That it had power to countermaunde all dutie. 
 No armour might be found that could defend, 
 Transpearcing raies of cristal-pointed eyes : 
 No stratagem, no reason could amend, 
 No not his age, (yet olde men should be wise) * 
 But shewes deceive ; outward appearance lies. 
 Let none for seeming so, thinke saints of others, 
 For all are men, and all have sucJct their mothers. 
 
 * The very exclamation, by the way, of Goneril to another 
 King (Lear) : " You, as you are old and reverend, should be 
 wise."
 
 52 ON THE SONNETS OF ?H AK KSP K AR E. 
 
 Her candour, in unfolding "the cause of this defect/' 
 is at all events striking. The close of this poem is the 
 return of Rosamond to attend again the Stygian flood ; 
 armed now in the panoply of her poet's muse, of which 
 she thus gratefully and elegantly speaks : 
 
 " And were it not thy favourable lines 
 Re-edified the wracke of my decayes, 
 And that thy accents willingly assignes, * 
 Some farther date and give me longer dayes, 
 Few in this age had knowne my Beautyes praise. 
 
 But thus renew'd, my fame redeemes some time, 
 
 Till other ages shall neglect, thy rime. 
 Then when Confusion in her course shall bring, 
 Sad desolation on the times to come : 
 When mirthless Thames shall have no Swanne to sin. 
 All musicke silent, and the Muses dombe. 
 And yet, even then it must be knowne to some, 
 
 That once they flourisht, though not cherisht so, 
 
 And Thames had Swannes as well as ever Po." 
 
 As Daniel lived among astrologers, and we shall 
 soon have to say more of Dee, and Allen, and their asso- 
 ciates, one is tempted to think that some political Seer 
 had opened to his view the ruffian scenes of the fol- 
 lowing century, during which all music was really 
 silent, and the muses dumb; and the sweet swan of 
 
 * Assignes, give. This anomalous construction, from a 
 scholar like Daniel, shews that, in his time, nothing was more 
 common, than to make grammar yield to the necessities of 
 rhyme.
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAK'rSPEARK. 53 
 
 Avon, and the Thames, himself, proscribed as profane, 
 immoral and licentious. * 
 
 Having thus introduced to the reader some satis- 
 factory specimens of Daniel, whom Shakespeare imitated 
 palpably in the stanza of his Rape of Lucrece, we come 
 naturally to the Sonnets which were equally founded 
 upon those of Daniel to his Delia. But I am very far from 
 thinking that the collection published by Thorpe in 
 1609, were any of them alluded to by Meres in his 
 Wits Treasury, 1598 for thus that observer expresses 
 himself: " As the soul of Euphorbus was thought to 
 live in Pythagoras, so the sweet soul of Ovid lives in 
 mellifluous and honey tongued Shakespeare. Witness 
 his Venus and Adonis, his Lucrece, his sugred SONNETS 
 among his private friends, &c." that is, he addressed to 
 his private friends a number of these sugred com- 
 positions, which they were proud of receiving from the 
 new poet, and imparted pretty generally, so that Meres 
 had seen many of them. Indeed it could scarce be 
 otherwise: a vein so abundant would throw itself out in 
 the received modes of composition, anxious to prove 
 that, neither Spenser, nor Daniel, solely had strength 
 enough, to bar his way, in whatever walk his muse 
 chose to expatiate. But, as to the collection of Sonnets 
 addressed to W. H., I confess I doubt whether they 
 were ever seen by any eye but his, to whom 126 of them
 
 54 ON THE SONNETS OF SH A K KSPEA RE. 
 
 were addressed ; they are entirely personal, and never 
 intended for the public view, and such as the peculiar 
 connexion between the parties could alone prevent from 
 being even ludicrous. Nay, when at length they are 
 ' set forth,' the person addressed by the writer is ob- 
 scured, rather than revealed by the Initials affixed: 
 he himself would recognise the ascription, but few 
 others would attain very decisive information. 
 
 But, as Daniel himself in the prose Dedication to 
 William Herbert, mentions his mother, Sidney's sister, 
 "the subject of all verse;" tne reader might justly 
 complain, were we entirely to sink that beautiful writer's 
 verses, addressed to herself. They were prefixed to his 
 tragedie of Cleopatra, and this play written upon the 
 classic model, he was enjoined to compose by the 
 Countess, because she had herself dramatised Antony : 
 
 " Who all alone ; having remained long, 
 Required his Cleopatra's company." 
 
 Daniel in his address to the Countess, thus com- 
 memorates her own poetry. She had versified the Psalms 
 of David, and achieved an immortality for her illustrious 
 
 " Those Hymns which thou dost consecrate to heaven, 
 Which Israel's singer to his God did frame, 
 Unto thy voice Eternitie hath given,
 
 OX THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 55 
 
 And makes thee dear to him from whence they came, 
 
 In them must rest thy venerable name, 
 
 So long as Sion's God remaineth honoured ; 
 
 And till confusion hath all zeale bereaven, 
 
 And murthered Faith and Temples ruined. 
 
 By this (great ladie) thou must then be knowne, 
 When Wilton lies low, levell'd with the ground ; 
 And this is that which thou maist call thine owne, 
 Which sacrilegious Time cannot confound ; 
 Heere thou surviv'st thy selfe, heere thou art found 
 Of late succeeding ages, fresh in fame : 
 This monument cannot be overthrowne, 
 Where, in eternall brasse remaines thy name." 
 
 Every reader of feeling and taste would complain, if 
 to the above eulogy, we neglected to add the consum- 
 mation of all human praise, the epitaph upon her 
 remains in Salisbury Cathedral: 
 
 " Underneath this marble hearse 
 Lies the subject of all verse, 
 Sidney's sister, Pembroke's mother : 
 Death, ere thou hast slain another, 
 Wise, and fair, and good as she, 
 Tune shall throw a dart at thee." 
 
 V. But the Sonnets not only allude distinctly to 
 Daniel, but very critically point out some other retainers 
 of the Pembroke family. The poet hardly preserves 
 his temper when describing the combination against 
 him :
 
 56 ON THE SONNETS OF Sll AK KSl'KAH E. 
 
 " Was it his spirit, by spirits taught to write 
 Above a mortal pitch, that struck me dead ? 
 No, neither he, nor his compeers, by night 
 Giving him aid, my verse astonished. 
 He, nor that affable familiar ghost, 
 Which nightly gulls him with intelligence, 
 As victors, of my silence cannot boast." 
 
 "Alluding perhaps," says Mr. Steevens, "to the 
 celebrated Dr. Dee's pretended intercourse with an 
 angel, and other familiar spirits." There can be no 
 doubt about it the fact is upon record. Queen ELIZA- 
 BETH and the PEMBROKE family were Dee's chief 
 patrons. Their exalted minds and various accomplish- 
 ments did not exempt them from the mania of their 
 times though the sounder philosophy of Shakespeare 
 led him thus to denounce the Charlatans, who then 
 infested the great, and upon fantastical science grounded 
 predictions, which hung like a mildew upon a long 
 existence. 
 
 The reader will refer back to Antony a Wood's 
 memoir, where he will find that THOMAS ALLEN, of 
 Gloucester Hall, calculated Pembroke's nativity. He 
 was deemed in those days the father of all learning, and 
 an unfeigned lover of all good arts and sciences. This 
 mathematician was closely associated with JOHN DEE, 
 Tho. Harriot, Walt. Warner, Nath. Torpoi ley, and many 
 others, and Dee pretended to an intercourse with fa- 
 miliar spirits. I have shown that Daniel was domi-
 
 ON TI1K SONNKTS or SI1 A KKSl'KAU E. 57 
 
 ciliated at Wilton, within the very lime-twigs of the 
 Necromancer's spells. Who shall say that " he came 
 off safe ?" The amiable Countess, however learned and 
 virtuous, was herself, alas ! unprovided of 
 
 " That MOLY 
 Which Hermes once to wise Ulysses gave." 
 
 Allen lived to verify his prediction of William 
 Herbert's death : the subject of his calculation, perhaps 
 its victim, died in 1630; and Allen himself followed, 
 two years after, at the great age of 90. What he knew 
 of astronomy, mathematics, and natural philosophy, 
 may be estimated from the praises of Selden and 
 Camden. But judicial astrology was his " favourite 
 and first pursuit," and he left a manuscript commentary 
 upon the 2nd and 3rd books of Ptolemy de astrorum 
 jitdiciis, which fell into the hands of William Lilly. 
 
 Thus, by a most extraordinary concurrence indeed, the 
 Sonnets seem to have only graced with verse the bio- 
 graphical sketches of a Wood and Clarendon; and the 
 character of Lord Pembroke in prose only establishes 
 him to have been the hitherto concealed friend and 
 patron of Shakespeare's muse. 
 
 I have been unwilling to multiply quotations, by 
 which my essay would have been merely dilated ; for 
 when a point is clearly established, enough has been 
 done. The enquiry, now brought to its close, will I 
 think be found to have proved :
 
 58 
 
 1. That in the bookseller's dedication of the Sonnets to 
 Mr. W. H., the object of them, and not their bringer 
 
 forth, is certainly intended. 
 
 2. That the person to whom the initials were first applied, 
 could not be the object of them, either as to age or rank. 
 
 3. That it is impossible Queen Elizabeth could ever have 
 been the object of Shakespeare's Sonnets, even though 
 Spenser had addressed his Amoretti to her. 
 
 4. But that Spenser never did so: but to the lady whom 
 he married; whose name was also Elizabeth. 
 
 5. That Shakespeare's Sonnets do not at all apply to 
 Lord Southampton either as to his age, character, or 
 the bustle arid activity of a life distinguished by 
 distant and hazardous services to some of which 
 they must have alluded, had he been their object. 
 
 6. That they were really addressed to Mr. William Herbert, 
 in his youth, to whom the initials do apply ; and that 
 he was a patron and friend of Shakespeare. 
 
 7. That the two biographers of Mr. William Herbert, 
 afterwards Lord Pembroke, establish his right to the 
 Sonnets, by echoing the contents of them. That they 
 display the same merits, and the same faults in the 
 person, and thus prove the identity in the most re- 
 markable manner. 
 
 8. That the poet Daniel, and not Spenser, was the 
 better spirit, of whom Shakespeare expresses his 
 jealousy in the Sonnets. That Daniel also dedicated
 
 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 59 
 
 to William Herbert, and that Shakespeare literally 
 alludes to such dedications the Sonnets themselves. 
 9. That even the astrologers DEE and others, whom 
 Shakespeare mentions in those Sonnets, were, like 
 Daniel, retainers of the Pembroke family ; and that 
 Allen, who calculated Herbert's nativity, as his bio- 
 grapher informs us, was one of that set of impostors. 
 
 So that it is conceived, from these united proofs, the 
 question to whom Shakespeare's Sonnets were ad- 
 dressed, is now decided, and that in future, W. H. as 
 William Herbert, subsequently Earl of Pembroke, 
 will be deemed, as Mr. Thorpe says, fully entitled to 
 "THE ETERNITY PROMISED BY OUR EVER-LIVING 
 POET." 
 
 " Nov. 1, 1832. 
 " MR. URBAN, 
 
 " I THANK you for the accurate manner in which you 
 have given my Essay on the Sonnets of Shakespeare to 
 the public. 
 
 " For my hypothesis I am willing to answer by name, 
 though you have kept to the initials with which I sub- 
 scribed my inquiry. You, who know me, will not 
 suspect that, at seventy, I should be conceiving theories 
 as to the object of addresses, by a poet even so venerated 
 as Shakespeare. The truth is, that it was more than
 
 60 O N Til f: SO N N KTS OF S H A K KS P F. A I! K< 
 
 twenty years ago, in the life-time of our friend Malone, 
 that the Apology of G. Chalmers, for the believers in 
 Mr. IRELAND, drew me to examine his very wild 
 conceit, that our poet's Sonnets were addressed to 
 Queen Elizabeth. I wrote my Essay, and selected my 
 hero while I was enamoured of the subject; and the 
 same volume contains other enquiries (I was going to 
 say discoveries), which T may copy out, if the public at- 
 tention can be recovered to matters of so slight moment. 
 " It would be a bad compliment, in a case like the 
 present, to suppose that my hypothesis occurred only to 
 myself. It is a great presumption of its truth, that 
 other minds have, by similar evidence, come to the same 
 result; and it was, therefore, without surprise that I 
 read the letter of Mr. B. Heywood Bright, in your last 
 Magazine. But I can safely assure him, that 1 never heard 
 of his concurrence with me, as to William Herbert's 
 having been the object of the Sonnets. From the Rev. 
 Joseph Hunter, and Dr. Holme of Manchester, I could 
 never have heard what he had confided to their secrecy ; 
 for, indeed, I have not the honour (such I should 
 esteem it) to be known to them ; and having done 
 something for Shakespeare in my day, I should have 
 seen without any regret the precedence of Mr. Bright in 
 publication ; and have rejoiced that a gentleman, so 
 modest and liberal, had secured to himself, even by my 
 subject, an opportunity of literary distinction.
 
 OX TUP. SONNKTS OF SHAKESPEARE. 61 
 
 " How far we have trodden the same ground, I shall 
 still be glad to know, and hope that he will not think 
 himself precluded, by my enquiry, from the commu- 
 nication of his own. Unlike the coxcomb ephemera of 
 the press, the Gentleman's Magazine still advocates the 
 interests and the pleasures of sound literature ; the 
 arena afforded is sufficiently ample ; and, though we do 
 not meet as combatants, we may equally arrive at the 
 same'end, our own exercise, and perhaps the public in- 
 formation and amusement. 
 " Yours, &c, 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 A recommendation much too flattering for neglect, 
 obtained my consent to the re-appearance of this essay 
 in its present form ; which was adopted as being that 
 chosen by Mr. J. Payne Collier, for the publication of 
 his interesting New Facts respecting Shakespeare. 
 
 I have done my utmost to render it not only stronger 
 as to the general hypothesis, but more entertaining, by 
 collateral illustrations relative to either the poet or his 
 friends. 
 
 The Sonnets of Shakespeare have been minutely scru- 
 tinized of late for occurences in his life, and treated as a 
 sort of auto-biography . Perhaps the imaginations of 
 the writers have overleaped the bounds of just inference,
 
 62 ON THE SONNETS OF SHAKESPEARE. 
 
 and the love of the mighty Bard has not slightly tres- 
 passed upon the respect due to the great moral duties. 
 Whoever be the defaulter, the irregular passion of no 
 husband should be defended ; nor should a decided 
 wanton and jilt, however accomplished, be treated with 
 admiration and indulgence; because accident, and 
 absence from his home, led the greatest genius in the 
 world to become a dupe to her fascinations. 
 
 Having expressed my obligation to Mr. Collier for 
 suggesting to me the form of my publication, I must be 
 indebted still further to him, by addressing it, as he 
 has done, to some equally ardent admirer of Shake- 
 speare, whose intimacy he has the happiness to enjoy. 
 I therefore beg Sir GEORGE ROSE to accept this mark of 
 my long cherished respect for his family and himself; 
 seated as he is upon the bench, such subjects as I treat 
 cannot be deemed absolutely unsuitable to his attention, 
 when it is remembered, that a most acute series of com- 
 mentaries upon our Poet, under the signature E,* pro- 
 ceeded from the pen of that illustrious lawyer, Mr. 
 Justice Blackstone. 
 
 JAMES BOA DEN. 
 LONDON, Nov. 1836. 
 
 * By this he indicated that it was the last letter of his name, 
 and not ihejirst, which would have been guessed, e. g. (Black- 
 ston) E, and so Malone accordingly printed it E.
 
 ./I. 
 
 A FEW WORDS IN REPLY TO THE ANIMAD- 
 VERSIONS OF THE REVEREND MR. DYCE 
 ON MR. HUNTER'S "DISQUISITION ON 
 THE TEMPEST" (1839); AND HIS "NEW 
 ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE LIFE, STUDIES 
 AND WRITINGS OF SHAKESPEARE" (1845); 
 CONTAINED IN HIS WORK ENTITLED 
 "A FEW NOTES ON SHAKESPEARE: 
 WITH OCCASIONAL REMARKS ON THE 
 EMENDATIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT-COR- 
 RECTOR IN MR. COLLIER'S COPY OF THE 
 FOLIO, 163.2." BY THE AUTHOR OF THE 
 DISQUISITION AND THE ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 JOHN HUSSELL SMITH, 30, SOHO SQUARE. 
 
 MDCCCLIII.
 
 LONDON : E. TUCKER, PRINTEIi, PERRY'S PLACE, OXFORD STEEET.
 
 A FEW WORDS, 
 
 &c. &c. 
 
 CONTROVERSY is seldom a pleasant occupation, and it is not 
 always that it is profitable, either to the persons who engage 
 in it, or to the public. But if there is anything in literature 
 in which conflict may be engaged in without animosity, and 
 some good be expected to arise out of the collision of two 
 independent minds directed on the same subject, it must 
 surely be the settlement of the grossly corrupted text of the 
 old editions of England's most favourite Poet, where to be 
 found mistaken can be no disgrace, so open are innumerable 
 passages to variety of explanation, and which must be left 
 at last in an undetermined state; while firmly to establish 
 a true reading where a wrong one has long had possession of 
 the public ear, is an honourable and useful achievement, 
 since it adds something to the innocent pleasures of the 
 thousands to whom these writings are a perpetual feast, 
 something also to the honour of the Poet. 
 
 I see therefore, not without satisfaction, mind so often 
 pitched against mind in this field, and I do not feel myself 
 quite unwilling to enter into such a controversy when I am 
 called out to do so. Not that every person who" pretends 
 to set himself up as a critic and controversialist on these
 
 writings is entitled to notice. I do not, for instance, think 
 that a Quarterly Reviewer, who tells the public that Shake- 
 speare was an occasional reader in Stith's ' History of 
 Virginia/ and that Meres, when he enumerated the dramas 
 of Shakespeare, meant by Love Labours Lost and Love 
 Labours Won, one and the same play, is entitled to a reply. 
 But when a man like Mr. Dyce, a great part of whose life 
 has been devoted to the study of these writings, who has laid 
 before the world so many proofs of his vast extent of know- 
 ledge, of his fine taste, and his penetrating intellect, comes 
 forth to the attack, if one were less disposed to controversy, 
 or if one saw less advantage likely to result from it, it is not 
 easy to feel that we can afford to be silent, and to leave the 
 question between us to the judgment of the present time, or 
 what is better in this the commercial age of literature, to the 
 judgment of posterity. 
 
 I therefore propose to examine the objections which Mr. 
 Dyce makes to a few of the criticisms in the two works in 
 which I have thrown my mite into the treasury of Shakespeare 
 Illustration ; and I do so with the greater willingness, because 
 I am convinced that he intended nothing unfriendly in the 
 corrections, as he regards them, of my mistakes ; and I am 
 sure that he will not suppose that I am actuated by any 
 unfriendly feeling towards him. 
 
 I shall take the passages in the order in which they occur 
 in Mr. Dyce's volume ; and this leads me to speak first of a 
 criticism on an opinion which I have long entertained, though 
 not before avowed; for, contrary to my expectation, I do 
 not find it either in the 'Disquisition' or in the larger work. 
 When Prospero (Tempest, act iv, sc. 1) says to Ferdinand,
 
 5 
 
 If I have too austerely punished you, 
 Your compensation makes amends ; for I 
 Have given you a third of mine own life, 
 Or that for which I live 
 
 the editors of Shakespeare have taken the great liberty of 
 changing the word " third " into " thread," and they would 
 have us believe that the original printers of this play have 
 given us " third " by a mere misreading of the manuscript 
 placed before them. Mr. Collier's manuscript corrector places 
 in his margin "thrid" as a substitute for "third." He 
 might mean " thread," but that is not quite clear, and it is 
 supposed that this new reading adds support to the conjec- 
 ture of the modern editors. 
 
 Mr. Dyce thinks the conjecture did not need this support, 
 and that this is only one of the many instances in which the 
 supposed corrections of the unknown annotator are of not 
 the slightest value, " In case any future editor should still 
 be inclined to make Prospero term Miranda ' a third of his 
 life/ it may be well to remark here, that in the language of 
 poetry, from the earliest times, a beloved object has always 
 been spoken of, not as a third, but the HALF of another's life 
 or soul. So Meleager, &y^ffv /xeu 4/u%^5 ; and Horace, 
 'Anirnae dimidium mese.' " 
 
 All this is very true : but Shakespeare had a finer and 
 deeper meaning than this, and I cannot but wonder that Mr. 
 Dyce, whose acquaintance with the stores of ancient poetry 
 is perhaps not less complete than his acquaintance with the 
 Elizabethian poetry of his own country, did not recollect the 
 following passage in the Carmen Nuptiale, the Epithalamium, 
 of Catullus :
 
 At tu ne pugna cum tali conjuge, virgo. 
 Non sequum est pngnarc, pater quoi tradidit ipse, 
 Ipse pater cum matre, quibus parere nccesse est : 
 Virginitas non tota tua est : ex parte parentum est : 
 Tertia pars patri data, pars data tertia matri, 
 Tertia sola tua est : noli pugnare duobus, 
 Qui genero sua jura simul cum dote dederunt. 
 Hymen o Hymenfee, Hymen ades, o Hymenfec. 
 
 Carmen, Ixii. 
 
 Father, mother, and daughter, are so bound together, that 
 they form but one soul, one life; so that each was but the 
 third part of one whole. This appears to be the meaning of 
 the ancient poet, and this, as seems to me, is the sense in 
 which we are to regard the expression " the third of mine 
 own life," as used by Shakespeare. The giving a daughter 
 in marriage is the subject of both. 
 
 Catullus had not been translated : perhaps not. But 
 Shakespeare had a much more extensive acquaintance with 
 the language, the opinions, and the men of the times called 
 classical, than his commentators, since the time of Farmer, 
 have thought it safe for themselves to allow him. 
 
 I must now ask the reader to accompany me into the line- 
 grove. Nothing is more vividly pourtrayed, nothing in 
 Shakespeare is more picturesque, than the cell of Prospero, 
 " weather-fended" with line-trees ; something resembling, we 
 may believe, the retired residences of the citizens of London, 
 which, according to old Gerarde, were often overshadowed by 
 the line or linden tree. It will be observed by any diligent 
 reader of this play how carefully the poet keeps in view the 
 particular kind of tree which grew near the cell, so apt at
 
 once as a protection from the blast and as furnishing in its 
 blossoms (favourites, above all other flowers, of the bee) an 
 abode for Ariel, or at least as affording nourishment adapted 
 to his sylph-like character 
 
 Where the bee sucks, there suck I, 
 
 that is, in the line-tree blossoms, which are kept so constantly 
 before us. 
 
 When the glistering apparel is to be placed as a temptation 
 to the clownish marauders who were about to invade the cell, 
 Prospero says to his " airy spirit" 
 
 Come, hang them on this line ; 
 
 meaning, as seems to me quite evident, on the spreading 
 branches of one of the line-trees : but no, say the players no, 
 say all other commentators ; they were to be hung on a certain 
 clothes-line, a hair-line for drying wet linen which happened 
 to be there. 1 submit that there is no poetry in this ; that 
 the passage is greatly debased, if so understood ; that it loses 
 all its beauty; that a most inelegant idea intrudes itself; 
 and that it is necessary for the honour of the Poet himself 
 that the passage should be understood differently. 
 
 I do not so much wonder at the players preferring a clothes- 
 line, because it was so much better adapted to the convenience 
 of a theatre ; I do not so much wonder that the editors and 
 commentators yielded what was perhaps their own judgment 
 to the authority of what they might suppose an ancient tra- 
 ditionary usage of the theatres, though it is not, I believe, 
 known that The Tempest was performed between the time of 
 Shakespeare and its revival with alterations by Davenant and 
 Dryden ; and especially since the " line" of the old copies
 
 became silently altered into " lime/' another name for the 
 same tree. But when once the true meaning of the passage 
 has been suggested, I must take the freedom to say that, with 
 all the respect I have for the fine taste and generally accurate 
 judgment of Mr. Dyce, I do feel surprised that he should lend 
 his authority to a meaning which he must perceive to be a 
 vulgar debasement of a fine position, when there is so much 
 to be said for another meaning which is perfectly in harmony 
 with the whole tenor and ordonnance of the play. 
 
 Mr. Dyce relies upon a joke of Stephano, "Now, jerkin, you 
 are like to lose your hair." What this means I do not quite 
 understand, and I am sure it is not worth searching into. It 
 probably has no positive meaning ; but it certainly does not 
 necessarily imply any connection with a clothes-line, even 
 though it were made of twisted hair. Mr. Dyce says that 
 other objections might be urged to my explanation. 1 wish 
 he had presented us with them. I, of course, on such a new 
 view of the sense, thinking that I have here redeemed the credit 
 of Shakespeare, can admit of no reserve or compromise, though 
 perfectly willing to yield my own convictions on the production 
 of sufficient evidence for the clothes-line. Till then I adhere 
 to what I have ventured to promulgate, and still more should 
 be disposed to maintain that when the clowns are jesting about 
 the word "line," in such phrases as these, "Now is the jerkin 
 under the line," and " We steal by line and level," the passages 
 are better explained, if any sense worth searching for is to be 
 found in them, by referring them not to the clothes-line but to 
 the line trees under which they were furtively creeping to the 
 cell where they thought to surprise Prospero in his sleep. 
 
 Pass we from this beautiful romantic comedy to the play in 
 which Shakespeare has exhibited so many of his countrymen
 
 9 
 
 in their peculiar humours The Merry Wives of Windsor : 
 and in it to the words of Falstaff concerning Mrs, Ford, 
 " She discourses, she carves, she gives the leer of invitation" 
 (act i, sc. 3) . Mr. Collier finds that his manuscript-corrector 
 has anticipated the modern editors, and substituted in the 
 margin " craves" for " carves," and he puts this forward as a 
 proof of the value of those corrections. To me it appears 
 to be a change damaging to the reputation of him who 
 made it ; to be one of the instances in which finding a word 
 that was not familiar to him, he strikes it out and substitutes 
 one of his own, better known, and which seemed to him to 
 suit the passage as well. I hold it certain that any old copy 
 of these writings, such as Mr. Collier would have us suppose 
 his manuscript-corrector had before him, must have presented 
 him with " carves" not with " craves." Mr. Dyce is very 
 strong in his remarks on the substitution, and rightly so : and 
 I have a special obligation to him for defending my restoration 
 of the true word in this place from an animadversion of Mr. 
 Halliwell, who quite misunderstood the meaning of a passage 
 which he quoted. The passage from Herbert's Prophecy of 
 Cadwalladar, which first led me to perceive that the old copies 
 here presented us with the true reading, and that the passage 
 had been much impaired by the weak attempt to improve it, 
 appears to me still to be the best authority we have for carve. 
 
 Then did this queen her wandering coach ascend, 
 Whose wheels were more inconstant than the wind : 
 
 A mighty troop this empress did attend : 
 There might you Caius Marius carving find, 
 And martial Sylla courting Venus kind. 
 
 arid I feel somewhat doubtful, but I speak with diffidence,
 
 10 
 
 whether in one or more of the three passages cited by Mr. 
 Dyce, there may not be an allusion to the familiar action of 
 carving at table. However, c ' crave" is, I think, dismissed from 
 this place to the tomb of the Capulets. 
 
 The Comedy of Errors is a Grecian story. The place at 
 which the Syracusan merchant is to suifer the execution of 
 his sentence is called " The place of depth and sorry execution." 
 This word " depth" has been changed to " death" in all the 
 modern editions, and Mr. Collier finds " death" substituted 
 for " depth" in the manuscript-corrections of his folio. I dare 
 say nine-tenths of the readers of Shakespeare would approve of 
 this change. To me it is a sad weakening of the passage, and 
 the change appears to be made on the same principle which is 
 applied to the word " carve," namely, that when a critic finds 
 a word which he does not remember to have met before, or 
 which in the connection in which it presents itself he does not 
 understand, he is at liberty to substitute one of his own, which 
 he thinks will suit the place. 
 
 Our great writers, and especially our great poets, ought not 
 to be dealt with thus. I can understand critics of the lower 
 form acting thus, but I should not have expected it from 
 Mr. Dyce, who will not accept my restoration of the old and only 
 authoritative lection, but will still have " the place of death." 
 We have no other reason given by Mr. Dyce or by the editor 
 who first made the change, than that " death" is a more in- 
 telligible word in the place than " depth." But I presume 
 that Shakespeare knew perfectly well that where the exe- 
 cutions among the Greeks took place, there was to be found 
 a deep pit, the Bajafijdv, into which criminals were sometimes 
 thrown, and that the place, therefore, where the execution 
 of the Syracusan was to be performed, was where the Bara-
 
 11 
 
 thrum was, and that " Barathrum" might, according to the 
 practice of the time, be rendered " The Place of Depth/' the 
 deep and horrid pit. 
 
 I wonder, therefore, that I have not here the support of such 
 a scholar as Mr. Dyce, and, if we take it as a question of taste 
 only, that he has not perceived that the passage loses something 
 of its force by the substitution of " death" for " depth." As 
 to the mode of thus representing proper names from the 
 ancient languages in English words, I certainly can by no means 
 approve it as on a proper principle of translation ; but I can 
 show that it was a practice of the time, and of Shakespeare in 
 particular, and that, therefore, there is no objection to the 
 reading of the old copies on that account. What is " Old Free 
 Town" in Romeo and Juliet but the name of an Italian city 
 turned into English ; and " Man's Life " in The Tempest is 
 best explained as being an Anglicising of the name of some 
 African city, possibly Zoa, orBiserta or some other place into the 
 name of which B'o? entered. In Maundevile's Travels we 
 have " Evil Town." So also " Mars-hill" in the Acts of the 
 Apostles is a rendering of Areopagus on this same principle. 
 
 I venture, therefore, in opposition to the acknowledged au- 
 thority of Mr. Dyce, to express the hope that " place of depth" 
 will be retained from the old copies, whenever (if ever) we 
 have an edition of these glorious writings which does full 
 justice to the mighty mind which produced them. 
 
 The appositeness of the quotation from the uncastrated copy 
 of Every Man in his Humour lies in the proof that the word 
 "Barathrum" was known about the theatres in the time of 
 Shakespeare, and was known as the exponent of a deep and 
 horrid pit, emphatically "a Place of Depth." 
 
 There is a scene in Love Labours Lost which has always
 
 12 
 
 appeared to me to possess much beauty, and to have been too 
 much neglected by the commentators, and indeed not rightly 
 in one place interpreted by one of the most eminent among 
 them. I mean the scene at the shooting-stand, and the con- 
 versation between the princess and the poor forester whom she 
 draws into so many embarrassments. I took some pains with 
 it, in my New Illustrations ; but I must honestly confess that 
 there was one line in it which I could not introduce into any 
 consecutive exposition of the passage, or in other words, which 
 I did not understand. And I now, having spoken in two 
 instances in disparagement of the corrections, so called, in 
 Mr. Collier's folio, am happy to express my thanks to Mr. 
 Collier and to the unknown corrector for having relieved me 
 from all difficulty and brought this line to conform itself to 
 what now appears evidently to be the scope of the passage. 
 The line is this : " O heresy in fair, fit for these days," fol- 
 lowing upon the line " See, see, my beauty will be saved by 
 merit." The corrector substitutes " faith" for " fair." 
 
 I regard this as one of the most decisive and most valuable 
 of the suggestions of the old corrector. There are several 
 others which are good, very good ; though perhaps not so many 
 as to justify all the clamour with which these corrections have 
 been introduced. But here we have what had escaped all 
 former critics on the text, and a reading which gives out a just 
 and very appropriate sense : 
 
 See, see, ray beauty will be saved by merit : 
 
 heresy in faith, fit for these days ! 
 
 A giving hand, though foul, shall have fair praise. 
 
 The saving by merit rather than by belief being the heresy 
 alluded to j instanced in the praise given by the affrighted
 
 13 
 
 forester to the princess's beauty, when she had slipped the 
 money into his hand, 
 
 Mr. Collier need not have expressed himself with so much 
 reserve ; and I submit to Mr. Dyce, whether on consideration 
 he will pronounce the corrector of the folio of 1632 "altogether 
 wrong." If he retain that opinion, I would gladly know how 
 he would interpret " O, heresy in fair," granting him what he 
 requires, that " fair" shall be read as a substantive. 
 
 The garden scene in The Merchant of Venice is one of such 
 exquisite beauty, that no one can feel at his ease who is 
 conscious that he may have contributed, however unin- 
 tentionally, to the deterioration of any one passage in it. I 
 therefore gladly embrace this as the first fitting opportunity 
 for retracting the choice which I made among the varying 
 lections of the old copies in respect of one word : 
 
 Look how the floor of heaven 
 Is thick inlaid with patterns of bright gold. 
 
 Some of the copies read " patens/' some " pattents." I gladly 
 yield to Mr. Dyce who has here, as I now think, set me right. 
 When I adopted the old reading, " patterns," I thought that 
 Shakespeare was alluding to the stars in their constellations 
 rather than to the stars as single objects of contemplation ; 
 not sufficiently adverting to two circumstances : first, the use of 
 the word " inlaid" which suits better with a single star than a 
 constellation ; and secondly, that the pattern of a mosaic work 
 or of a flowered or spotted damask implies a repetition of the 
 same figure in the same order, which is not found in the con- 
 stellations. I, therefore, submit to the correction of Mr. 
 Dyce, and admit that what is meant is that " The floor of 
 heaven is thickly inlaid with plates or circular ornaments of
 
 14 
 
 bright gold/' expressed by " pattens" or " patents." At the 
 same time I cannot think this among the happiest conceptions 
 of the poet. 
 
 In The Taming of the Shrew we have in the speech which 
 Shakespeare puts into the mouth of Tranio, an unfaithful 
 tutor 
 
 I. 1. 
 
 Or so devote to Aristotle's checks 
 As Ovid be an outcast quite abjured. 
 
 It was certainly matter of some surprise that Mr. Collier, 
 who ought to know something of what has been done in the 
 criticism on these plays, should so exult on finding "ethics" 
 instead of " checks," in his manuscript-corrector, as if it were 
 a suggestion valuable in itself, and now for the first time 
 made. It has not escaped the notice of several persons who 
 have written on this annotated folio, that the same change 
 had been suggested long ago by Sir William Blackstone; and 
 though I do not, because I think there is a sense in which 
 the passage may be understood, keeping the word " checks" 
 of the authoritative copies, and regarding the manuscript- 
 corrector only as one of the conjectural emend ators, pronounce 
 a decided opinion that " ethics" must be the true reading, yet 
 I adhere to what I wrote several years ago on this passage : 
 " Blackstone's suggestion of 'Aristotle's ethics/ for 'Aristotle's 
 checks/ is so plausible and so happy, that it must place an 
 editor in doubt at least concerning the propriety of adhering, 
 when any sense is to be made of it, to the original printed 
 text." 
 
 I have restored in a note on the same passage a far more 
 important word from the old copies, " balk."
 
 15 
 
 Balk logic, with th' acquaintance which you have, 
 
 where all the modern editors have most unceremoniously 
 dismissed "balk" and have introduced "talk;" thus showing 
 that they had no proper conception of the scope and meaning 
 of either " balk" or " acquaintance." 
 
 The " Midnight Bell" in King John (act iii, sc. 3) has long 
 been taken for a clock bell striking the hour of one ; and is 
 so still, if we may judge from the labours of Mr. Dyce on these 
 plays, notwithstanding the explanation of the passage which 
 I gave in 1845. 
 
 If the midnight bell 
 
 Did with his iron tongue and brazen mouth 
 Sound on into the drowsy race of night. 
 
 Is it possible that this can mean the striking of a hammer 
 on the outside of a bell ; is it possible that the poet can have 
 meant anything else but the sound emitted from the inside 
 of a bell when a pendulous clapper strikes against the inner 
 surface; or that "sound on" can denote anything else but 
 continuous sounding; not striking as on a clock bell, which 
 whether twelve times or once, is soon to cease. Mr. Collier's 
 corrected copy has " ear of night," for " race of night ;" which 
 Mr. Dyce joyfully adopts I contend that "race of night" 
 is the true reading, both as having the authority of the 
 original copies, and as being far more poetical ; and therefore 
 what we might rather expect from Shakespeare : as being 
 capable of justification also, from another passage 
 
 V. 1. MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM. 
 
 This palpable gross play hath well beguiled 
 The heavy gait of night.
 
 16 
 
 I have written at large on this passage in the New Illus- 
 trations, vol. ii, p. 8-13. The conclusion at which I arrive is 
 that Shakespeare had not a clock bell in his mind at all, but 
 a funeral bell tolling at midnight, as the corpse of some 
 eminent person was being conveyed to the sepulchre of his 
 ancestors. 
 
 Mr. Dyce objects to the explanation which I have given of 
 the word " quill," which occurs in the second part of King 
 Henry the Sixth " My masters, let's stand close : my Lord 
 Protector will come this way by and by, and then we may 
 deliver our supplications in the quill " (act i, sc. 3) . Finding 
 no assistance from the commentators, and finding the word 
 " quill" used by Sylvester for narrow passages, I thought it 
 probable that this might be its meaning in this place, that 
 there would be a crowd of persons standing close, so as to 
 leave but a narrow alley, along which the protector would 
 have to walk, who would so be easily accessible to any of the 
 crowd who might wish to place their petitions in his hands. 
 Mr. Dyce, however, thinks this a mistake, and would read 
 " quoil" or " coil," meaning bustle or tumult. 1 shall not 
 dispute it with him, because I think both of them a little 
 uncertain : and so thought Mr. Collier's manuscript-corrector, 
 whose reading "sequel" I must honestly confess I think 
 worse than either. 
 
 Before leaving the histories I will beg the reader's atten- 
 tion to a criticism on a passage in the play of King Henry the 
 Eighth, though it is not called for by anything in Mr. 
 Dyce's Few Notes, or by Mr. Collier's Notes and Emendations, 
 or by Mr. Singer's Vindication. 
 
 In the edition usually called Boswell's Malone, we find the 
 character given of Wolsey by the Duke of Norfolk printed 
 thus, as the best that could be made of the old copies :
 
 17 
 
 1. 1. 
 
 Surely, sir, 
 
 There's in him stuff that puts him to these ends ; 
 For being not propp'd by ancestry (whose grace 
 Chalks successors their way), nor call'd upon 
 For high feats done to the crown ; neither allied 
 To eminent assistants, but spider-like, 
 Out of his self-drawing web, he gives us note 
 The force of his own merit makes his way : 
 A gift that heaven gives for him, which buys 
 A place next to the king. 
 
 It is clear that this cannot be what Shakespeare wrote ; it 
 is so unintelligible ; yet the original copies are less intelli- 
 gible still in the part which I restored : 
 
 but spider-like, 
 
 Out of his self-drawing web. O ! gives us note, 
 The force of his own merit makes his way : 
 A gift that heaven gives for him, which buys 
 A place next to the king. 
 
 This in 1845 I restored thus : 
 
 but spider-like, 
 
 Out of himself drawing his web. O ! this gives us note, 
 The force of his own merit makes his way. 
 A gift that heaven has given him buys for him 
 A place next to the king. 
 
 and I have since found a valuable confirmation of this view 
 of the sense of the passage, and at the same time a further 
 proof of the attention which Shakespeare seems to have given 
 to the books of Impresses and Emblems of the time : for it is 
 certain that the spider raising itself by its own web, spun
 
 18 
 
 " out of itself" is to be found in some book of Emblems of a 
 date before the time of Shakespeare, as the representative of 
 the man who rises to eminence, as Wolsey did, by the mere 
 force of his own unaided genius and energy. 
 
 I cannot refer to the particular book of Emblems in which 
 it is found, though I have looked at several ; and I know of 
 it only by the following passage in a writer contemporary 
 with Shakespeare, which is, however, quite sufficient to the 
 purpose, and more than sufficient, as it shows how another 
 Englishman of some note was wrought upon in his youth by 
 the instructive and encouraging Emblem. 
 
 Hugh Sandford wrote a treatise, 'De descensu Domini 
 nostri/ &c. It was printed at Amsterdam, 4to, 1611, being 
 edited by another Englishman, Robert Parker, who in the 
 preface has introduced several particulars of Sandford's life 
 and character, and amongst other things tells us " Delecta- 
 batur ille in juventute sua maximopere, pictura aranece proprio 
 filo scandentis, cum hoc symbolo ' Ego debeo nulli ; ' nee 
 immerito. Id enim maxime mirum quod ad sublime fastigium 
 (loquor cum Salomone) proprio Marte araneee ad instar enisus 
 sit: et quanquam auro^ax-roc esset," &c. It will not, I 
 think, be doubted that Shakespeare owed this figure to the 
 very print which fixed itself in the imagination and affections 
 of Sandford : possibly even that print may have had some 
 effect on the mind and life of Shakespeare himself. 
 
 Few single words have afforded more trouble to the editors 
 and commentators than the word "Runaways," in a well- 
 remembered passage of Romeo and Juliet (act iii, sc. 2), and 
 few words have received so many unhappy substitutions. 
 Mr. Collier finds in his manuscript-corrector that he says 
 the true reading is " enemies ;" " unawares," has met with
 
 19 
 
 several patrons; "sunaway" with some. And now comes 
 Mr. Dyce with " roving," which makes the blank verse halt 
 for it. After all, none of them, it seems to me, are at all to 
 be preferred to the text as we have it, " that runaways' eyes 
 may wink." It is not in Shakespeare's best manner, but 
 then the greatest poet is not always in his finest mood. 
 " Runaways" I understand to be the same as " Runagates," 
 for which we have a kind of authority, a poor one I allow, in 
 Dyche's ' Dictionary,' 1 735, " Runagate or Runaway, a 
 rover or wanderer." This approaches nearly to Mr. Dyce's 
 sense of the passage, without destroying the measure. 
 Juliet wishes that the night may be so pitchy dark, that 
 should Romeo meet with any runagates (runaways) wan- 
 dering about the streets, he may not be recognised, or 
 even observed by them. Till something better is suggested, 
 an editor of Shakespeare would do best to adhere in this 
 passage to the text as the old. copies present it to him. 
 
 In another passage of this play (act iv, sc. 4) the nurse 
 says, " Go, you cotquean, go." And finding " cutquean" in 
 Golding's Ovid used in a sense which could be applied only 
 to a female, it appeared to me that this free expression must 
 be addressed to Lady Capulet, and not to her husband. My 
 idea was that there ought to have been a break at " go ;" 
 that having thus in her unceremonious manner dismissed the 
 lady, she then turned herself to Capulet himself. Mr. Dyce 
 is quite right in saying that the context sufficiently disproves 
 the notion, that the nurse was speaking to the lady, if we 
 take the passage without the break. Mr. Dyce further says, 
 that Golding writes, "cucquean". Not always for in my 
 copy of Golding, 4to, 1593, printed by John Daiiter, Sign, 
 1. iv, we have
 
 20 
 
 But she considering that 
 Queen Progne was a cutquean made by means of her. 
 
 He does, however, write " cucquean" in another place. On 
 the whole, I now agree with Mr. Dyce, and others, in thinking 
 that the " cotquean" of the nurse does mean " a man that 
 busies himself in women's affairs," and that the whole of 
 what the nurse says is addressed to Capulet. The jealous- 
 hood which might appear naturally enough to arise out of the 
 use of such a word as that which the nurse used, seems to 
 have an origin later in the dialogue. 
 
 I am unwilling to enter again on anything like a full expo- 
 sition of the view which I take of the instigation scene in 
 Macbeth, especially with so slight an invitation as the remarks 
 of Mr. Dyce on the substitution of boast " for " beast " by 
 Mr. Collier's manuscript -corrector. I perfectly agree with 
 him that there is no propriety in such a substitution ; on the 
 contrary, it appears to me a material deterioration of a text 
 already sufficiently corrupt. " Beast " is best defended, if it 
 can be defended at all, by Mr. Foster, in the passage quoted 
 from him by Mr. Dyce, as used in opposition to " Man;" but 
 this explanation, though very uncertain, will appear more 
 deserving of acceptance, if we take it in connection with the 
 restoration of the words forming the context, as given by me 
 in 1845. 
 
 It is very much to be regretted that we should find Mr. Collier, 
 an editor of two editions of Shakespeare, recollecting so little 
 of the varieties of text in this much talked of scene, as to 
 state in terms, after giving us the text, 
 
 I dare do all which may become a man, 
 Who dares do more is none
 
 21 
 
 " We give the text as it has appeared in every edition from 
 the earliest in 1623 to our own day." This is strange, passing 
 strange ! and exceedingly mischievous, as it tends to fix in the 
 public mind a delusion respecting this passage of a very im- 
 portant kind. The real state of the case is, that so far from 
 this being the reading of every edition, it is the reading of no 
 edition of any authority. It is the mere substituted reading 
 of some modern editor, probably Howe or Theobald, who 
 could not restore the passage as it ought to have been restored. 
 I wonder that Mr. Dyce did not perceive and remark this ; 
 for he must well know that the first and second folio (there is 
 no quarto of Macbeth), instead of presenting us with the 
 reading which Mr. Collier says they do, with one consent, 
 give us, 
 
 I dare do all which may become a man, 
 Who dares no more is none. 
 
 The change is but in a single letter, but it is a most potent 
 change ; and no one has had any right to change the " no " 
 of Shakespeare himself into "do." 
 
 Still some change is required. The passage is in some way 
 corrupt. But as it has appeared to me, and as I believe it 
 will appear to any person who will take the old copies, and 
 laying aside all the prejudice which the constant perusal of 
 the sophisticated modern editions may have engendered, 
 examine them with close attention, the restoration is not to 
 be effected by altering the poet's text, but by making a change 
 in the person speaking, and there is ample evidence in other 
 parts of this play that the stage directions, as they are called, 
 cannot be depended on. Read it thus :
 
 22 
 
 MACBETH. 
 I dare do all that may become a man. 
 
 LADY MACBETH. 
 Who dares no more is none. 
 
 He who on a great occasion such as this cannot lay aside the 
 ordinary feelings of humanity, and the thought of what weak 
 people may think to be becoming, is unworthy the name of 
 man. Then the idea of a "beast" as a contrast to "man," 
 naturally introduces itself, and she says, " what beast was it 
 then which made you break this enterprise to me ? " 
 
 "Boast," however we read the passage, and however we 
 assign the several members in the dialogue to each of the two 
 speakers, can have nothing to support it. I cannot however but 
 think, as I formerly suggested, that " beast" intrudes, and got 
 in in a way somewhat peculiar ; that " was 'i " was } by mistake 
 of the scribe, written twice, and that some person wishing to 
 adhere as closely as might be to the manuscript before him, 
 took an ill- written "wast" for "beast." I hope I shall not 
 be thought to be endeavouring unduly to bring any work of 
 mine under the notice of the public, if I request from the 
 lovers of Shakespeare, and especially those who are critical 
 readers of him, to peruse what I have written in the Neiv 
 Illustrations on this and some other scenes of this noble 
 Tragedy, vol. ii, pp. 152-201. 
 
 A remark upon a single passage in Hamlet, and I have 
 done. 
 
 Which might deprive your sovereignty of reason. 
 Mr. Dyce very properly disposes of the conjecture of
 
 23 
 
 Mr. Giftbrd ; but it is not quite clear how he would himself 
 read the passage. I submit that the true reading is, 
 
 Which might deprive of sgvereignty your reason. 
 
 Mr. Collier's manuscript-corrector here, as in many other 
 places Avhere his aid is most wanted, affords us no assistance. 
 
 LONDON : E. TUCKER, PRINTER, PERRY'3 PLACE, OXFORD STREET.
 
 
 CURIOSITIES OF MODERN 
 
 SHAKSPERIAN CRITICISM. 
 
 BY 
 
 J. O. HALLIWELL, ESQ. F.R.S. &c. 
 
 LONDON : 
 JOHN KUSSELL SMITH, 36, SOHO SQUAttE. 
 
 MDCCCLIIL
 
 I.OKDON : E. TrCKEIi, riUNTEK, TERM'S PLACE, OXFORD STREET.
 
 CURIOSITIES, ETC. 
 
 THE judgment of contemporary criticism, with respect 
 to the merits of works of learning and research, has scarcely 
 a perceptible influence on the opinions of those for whom 
 they are chiefly designed ; and its effect even on the 
 general reader is of a very ephemeral character, for when- 
 ever a work possesses valuable information peculiar to itself, 
 there is a certainty that it will be appreciated in time, 
 in opposition to all adverse testimonies. To be convinced 
 of the truth of this, it is sufficient to refer to the older 
 reviews, to their angry denunciations of books which have 
 outlived even the names of the critics, or lavish praises of 
 others long since forgotten, and to the well-established fact 
 that scarcely ever, even by accident, does a contempora- 
 neous critic assign to a work the exact place that it 
 occupies in the estimation of posterity. It is hardly 
 requisite to refer to examples, which will occur to almost 
 every reader ; yet there may be selected one as peculiarly 
 bearing on the subject of the present pamphlet Douce's 
 Illustrations a work which now holds so distinguished 
 and standard a place in Shaksperian literature, but which 
 was so unfairly attacked on its first publication, its too 
 sensitive author never subjected himself to a similar assault, 
 and the other results of his vast reading are unfortunately
 
 reserved for the benefit of a future age one of the many 
 lamented consequences arising from the license conven- 
 tionally permitted to the periodical critics. 
 
 Deeply impressed with the slight importance, in regard to 
 the work itself, to be attached to the angry denunciations 
 of the weekly reviewers, I was fully prepared for the opinion 
 of my friends that any reply to a rancorous attack on my 
 folio edition of the Works of Shakespeare, which appeared 
 in the Atkenteum, would be unnecessary for the sake of 
 any readers of the work itself, and would, in fact, be 
 giving the assault a character of greater importance than 
 could reasonably be attached to it. And such an opinion 
 would, under ordinary circumstances, have been most 
 sound. Had the reviewers, for example, merely ridiculed 
 the design of the work, expressed their contempt for its 
 archa3ological commentaries, disagreed with all its criti- 
 cisms, and exercised their severity in any other way that 
 might by possibility have been conscientious, not a word 
 would have been extracted from me in reply. I should 
 have been well contented to have allowed the work to have 
 awaited the opinion of the student. But the Athenceum 
 reviewers have gone further than this, although they have 
 not given expression to so sweeping a condemnation : they 
 have done worse, though the effects of their criticism will 
 certainly be ultimately more innocuous. In despair of 
 injuring the work by fair means, they have descended to 
 misrepresent facts for the sake of establishing a censure 
 against its editor. It is for the public to decide whether 
 they will accept this mode of criticism whether, in short, 
 they will in future give credence to reviewers, who, rather 
 than forego an attack on a work against which they are
 
 5 
 
 prejudiced, will assert circumstances not at all warranted 
 by facts. 
 
 It is not my intention to bandy words with the re- 
 viewers I shall confine myself most exclusively to bare 
 matters of fact, that are capable of proof. I entreat the 
 reader to look into the subject for himself, and decide on 
 facts alone, not allowing his judgment to be influenced by 
 subtle reasoning, which convinces only by words; and 
 I shall not be afraid of the result. The reviewers, having 
 the command of circulation, and addressing chiefly those 
 who will not take the trouble to examine for themselves, 
 may persuade the indifferent to adopt almost any view they 
 may please to support ; but there will still be a few, who 
 will eventually exercise an important influence on the 
 opinions of the many, and will give an impartial judgment 
 derived from the real facts. I will now, without further 
 preface, give the reviewers' own words, and conclusively 
 demonstrate to every unbiassed reader that I have been 
 subjected to the unfairest kind of criticism. 
 
 1. The reviewers, after observing the work "contains a mul- 
 titude of pretty little illustrations by Fairholt and facsimiles 
 by Netherclift, all which have been worked most carefully, 
 and show to great advantage on stout paper manufactured by 
 Dickinson," proceed to say, "The illustrations of Stratford 
 scenery and objects have all been borrowed from other works 
 of Mr. Hattiwett and Mr. Fairholt ; but they tell well in their 
 present places, and enable Mr. Halliwell to make a great 
 display in his first volume. Certainly, if Mr. Halliiuell is able 
 to borrow as many illustrations for his subsequent volumes,
 
 and shall carry out his scheme with anything like the spirit 
 of this beginning, the subscribers will have good reason to con- 
 gratulate themselves on possessing a handsome-looking set of 
 books which can be in the hands of only very few people!' 
 This statement is not correct, there being no fewer than 
 thirty-eight new engravings and facsimiles relating to 
 Stratford, and to the Shakespeares in connection with 
 Stratford ; Mr. Fairholt having accompanied me again over 
 the localities which connect themselves with the history of 
 the poet and his family, and examined anew the entire 
 series of church books and corporation papers that in any 
 way relate thereto, for the purpose of completing facsimiles 
 of the entire series. Even in the account of the birth-place 
 in Henley Street, in respect to which I have necessarily 
 used for the most part previous engravings, and where one 
 would have thought new artistic material impossible of 
 access, there are two interesting objects never previously 
 engraved in any work on the subject, viz. the garret over 
 the room in which Shakespeare was born, and the lower 
 room in John Shakespeare's house, both of which are 
 important as conveying a clear idea of the original state of 
 the house. The reviewers may have been misled in some 
 respect by several of the new woodcuts being necessarily 
 very similar to other engravings of the same objects, but 
 they should have examined them more minutely before 
 they inferred that they had all been borrowed. I can truly 
 say I have not spared, on account of the expense, a single 
 engraving I thought might be interesting or valuable. 
 
 2. " The first part is a reprint, with some few alterations,
 
 of Mr. HalliwelVs ' Life of Shakespeare? published in one 
 volume, octavo, 1848.* This occupies half of the volume, 
 running from p. 1 to p. 2G3." So far from this being the 
 case, the biography has been almost entirely re- written, 
 and nearly one half is additional matter, not to be found 
 in the octavo edition. There are several newly-discovered 
 papers respecting John Shakespeare, and no fewer than six 
 new documents respecting Shakespeare himself, besides the 
 three very curious notices of the poet at p. 223, which con- 
 tain the last mention of him previous to his death. The 
 whole biography has been corrected, added to, and materially 
 altered in every respect, as might be ascertained by any one 
 making even a cursory examination of the two works ; and 
 it is altogether unfair to cah 1 it a " reprint, with some few 
 alterations." Throughout this portion of my work, I did 
 not rely even on what I had previously published, but again 
 examined every document, wherever it was located, and 
 devoted a month at Stratford to the most minute collation 
 of the important papers there. 1 can conscientiously say, 
 that I spared neither labour nor expense in my examina- 
 tions ; and all matters which I had previously taken on 
 
 * A very curious instance of the reviewers' accuracy occurs in their 
 notice of this work, in which they accuse me of omitting an " important 
 portion " of the passage in Dugdale's ' Diary ' respecting the monumental 
 bust at Stratford. Having quoted the whole of the passage with literal 
 accuracy, it was very long before I discovered the probable cause of such 
 a singular mis-statement; but I have since found the account in Dugdale 
 quoted altogether incorrectly, with the interpolation of several words from 
 another document, in Mr. Cunningham's Hand-book of London. Because, 
 therefore, I did not repeat this oversight, I am accused of omitting a 
 passage in Dugdale which no one but Mr. Cunningham has been fortunate 
 enou'jrh to find.
 
 trust, I took great pains to examine for myself: I was 
 rewarded by saving myself from the error of again quoting 
 the Bridge water papers as genuine. 
 
 3. " T/tere are now published two or three facsimiles of 
 formal legal documents relating to the Henley Street house" 
 
 This merely shows how carelessly the reviewers have exa- 
 mined the work, there being only one facsimile of the kind 
 and a very important one it is, being the only early 
 document of the slightest value in showing the probability 
 that Shakespeare was born in the house now shown as the 
 birth-place. It exhibits the slight attention paid by re- 
 viewers to these subjects, to find that with one exception 
 which occurred in an able Shaksperian article in the Times 
 not a single critic has observed the real importance of 
 this deed. One would have thought that the leading 
 members of a Committee that gave so large a sum for the 
 house, would have adopted with avidity the only evidence 
 yet discovered that will justify their zeal. The copy of it 
 was procured by me at the cost of great trouble and 
 expense. 
 
 4. " A gentleman, who is very sharp on the blunders of 
 other people, should be a little more accurate himself. 
 Mistakes which Mr. Halliwett sets down as evidences of the 
 ignorance of the scrivener, are shown by these facsimiles to 
 be mere mis-readings by himself." This is a curious speci- 
 men of the haphazard sort of criticism indulged in by the 
 reviewers. In the first place, 1 am not aware that there is a 
 single instance in my work in which I have been "very sharp" 
 to use the reviewers' phraseology on the blunders of
 
 9 
 
 other people. In the second, it is a positive fact, that the 
 only mistake pointed out by me as an error of the scrivener, 
 cum pertinentiis jacentium, in the documentary evidence 
 alluded to, viz., that respecting the house in Henley Street, 
 is to be found in the facsimile ! What can one say to 
 criticism of this kind ? 
 
 5. " The Essay on the formation of the text is perhaps 
 the best of Mr. HalliweWs additions to Shakespeare criti- 
 cism. It has, however, but slender claims to originality. It 
 is an enlargement of a paper printed in the first volume of 
 the old Variorum, entitled 'Essay on the Phraseology and 
 Metre of Shakespeare and his Contemporaries!" This is an 
 excessive exaggeration, and can only, I fear, be considered 
 as a wilful mis-statement. The Essay alluded to will be 
 found in vol. i, pp. 507-585, of Malone's Shakespeare, ed. 
 Bos well, 8vo, 1821, and I do not think any one will openly 
 say that mine is a mere enlargement of it : there is scarcely 
 indeed, any similarity to be traced between the two. The 
 Essay in Boswell is chiefly on the metre, and the observa- 
 tions on the phraseology are restricted to a few peculiarities 
 of diction ; while the Essay in my work I do not see 
 why I should affect reserve in such a matter chiefly con- 
 sists of an elaborate inquiry into Elizabethan idiom, which, 
 with the exception of a very small proportion of the examples, 
 is entirely original. 
 
 6. The reviewer, after giving a slight note of the prin- 
 cipal features of my introduction to the Tempest, and abso- 
 lutely mentioning the history of the Dead Indian, observes, 
 " In all this and these subjects comprise everything of
 
 10 
 
 importance in the Introduction there is nothing new" 
 Now it is difficult to imagine a greater mis-statement than 
 this. The account of the Dead Indian is almost entirely 
 new I ma y mention especially the curious notices now 
 for the first time collected from records of the time, furnish- 
 ing a connected history of the Indian, and the exceedingly 
 curious drawing from a MS. in Canterbury Cathedral, the 
 examination of which entailed the trouble of a journey to 
 Mr. Fairholt and myself, that we thought was amply repaid 
 by the acquisition of one of the most interesting pictorial 
 illustrations of Shakespeare ever discovered. In addition 
 to these, I may mention the account of the exhibition of a 
 ' strange fish/ from the singular broadside in Mr. Daniel's 
 collection, as quite new ; and the notice of Ayrer's play is 
 given at greater length than in any other publication. In 
 fact, the Introduction to this play is full of new information 
 and original reasoning ; and, as the impression of the work 
 is so limited, it may not be amiss to draw attention to an 
 important supplementary notice at pp. 504-6, which shows 
 clearly who was the historical prototype of Prospero. The 
 conclusion of the Italian extract indicates, for the first time, 
 the real foundation of one of the chief incidents of the 
 
 7. " What Mr. Halliwell has written about Ay rer splay, 
 although he undervalues its importance when excusing him- 
 self for not saying more, is really of sufficient interest to 
 stimulate fresh inquiry on the subject. But where is this 
 play to be seen? Whence did Mr. Halliwell derive his 
 knowledge of it? If from an account by Mr. Thorns, where 
 is that to be found? Information of this kind ought never
 
 11 
 
 to be omitted. Editors should remember that they do not 
 write for those who know, but for those who do not, and 
 that their judgments are valueless unless they give the most 
 distinct opportunity of going to their authorities" But for 
 their own confession, I should have thought it incredible 
 that the reviewers have so little knowledge of the commonest 
 works of dramatic criticism, as not to know that Ayrer's 
 play is to be found in one of Tieck's best known publica- 
 tions ; but the reviewers again misrepresent me, as I have 
 distinctly stated that the play alluded to was reprinted by 
 Tieck, observing that the similarities to be traced between 
 that production and the Tempest are of so insignificant 
 a character, that its repetition in my work was altogether 
 unnecessary. It may well be asked, as the reviewers have 
 never seen Ayrer's play, how is it possible for them to know 
 that I have undervalued its importance? Is not this an 
 evidence of the reviewers' mere guess-work in their opinions 
 on such subjects ? I have given as full an account of those 
 parts of Ayrer's play which are analogous to incidents in 
 the Tempest, as they at all deserve ; an account derived from 
 a perusal of the play itself. 
 
 8. " He (Mr. Halliwell) describes how it was customary 
 to dress ancient magicians on the stage ; and he gives Inigo 
 Jones s representation of an ' aery spirit ;' but without any 
 hint of where he got it from" The reviewers must have 
 examined the work very hastily, because I distinctly state, 
 in the text, that the representation is taken from Inigo's 
 sketches for his masques ; and in the List of Illustrations, 
 the most conspicuous part of the book, I describe it 
 as, "the figure of an 'aery spirit' from the illustrations
 
 to Inigo Jones's Masques, published by the Shakespeare 
 Society." Surely these are sufficient references to a work 
 so exceedingly well known. 
 
 9. "Mr. Halliwell's text of 'the Tempest' differs but 
 little from that of the old Variorum" So far from this 
 being the case, it differs in nearly every page, and, in some 
 respects, very materially. It is, indeed, scarcely credible 
 that the reviewers, having made this sweeping statement, 
 should confess, only a few lines afterwards, " We do not 
 
 pretend to have gone through the play ; but we have dipped 
 into it here and there" If so, how could the reviewers 
 honestly state that my text differs but little from that of 
 the old Variorum ? It would be difficult to imagine a more 
 striking example than this affords of the reviewers' own 
 confession of their absolute unfairness. 
 
 10. "All the difficulties in the text remain entirely un- 
 touched by Mr. Halliwell ; not one of them so far as we 
 have noticed is got rid of, or even lightened" The " diffi- 
 culties" in the text of this play are not numerous, but there 
 is scarcely one on which I have not thrown some new light. 
 The reader will remember that an absolute explanation of 
 the few words in Shakespeare not at all understood, can 
 only be recovered by vast labour and reading : nevertheless, 
 even in this well-known play, the peculiar use of the term 
 Amen perhaps the greatest stumbling-block to the critics 
 is unravelled for the first time by two extracts quoted in 
 my edition. On the other difficulties such as scamels, 
 trash, Butt, decJf'd, busy-least, twilled, the hair line, and rack 
 there is always some novelty to be found in my notes \
 
 13 
 
 and, with respect to the last, I find I have arrived, by a 
 different line of reading, to the opinion given by Mr. Dyce 
 in his excellent Few Notes, which was published after (though 
 written before) the appearance of my edition of the play. 
 In fact, with one trifling exception, Mr. Dyce has adopted 
 the same views as myself in his notes on the readings of 
 this drama. 
 
 11. Mr. Halliwell gives, p. 474, " three extracts to prove 
 that vanity was used for the physical or mental affection desig- 
 nated by liffht-headedness, that, however, being admitted 
 not to be the sense in which Shakespeare uses the word'' 
 This conveys a misrepresentation of my note, which runs 
 thus, " Vanity, delusion, illusion. A person, who was 
 light-headed, was formerly said to have the vanity in his 
 head" where the word vanity of course stands for delusion 
 or illusion. The three extracts show clearly that such was 
 the meaning of the term, not that the word vanity, by itself, 
 was ever used for light-headedness. 
 
 12. Perhaps the reviewers have reached the climax of 
 misrepresentation, when they boldly state that, " much of it 
 (the annotation on the play] is derived from the old Variorum" 
 Any reader, who will take the trouble to compare the two 
 editions, will find how small a portion is derived from the 
 latter work ; and how much is original. Such an accusation 
 is so obviously contrary to fact, that it scarcely deserves con- 
 tradiction ; were it not that there are always persons to be 
 found who will not be at the pains to examine for themselves. 
 For the sake of these, it may be well to observe that out of 
 one hundred and eight folio pages of notes, only sixteen
 
 14 
 
 pages are derived from the Variorum, and even those few 
 chiefly consist of extracts re-collated at the cost of great 
 labour and trouble. 
 
 It is unnecessary to pursue the subject further. If, in 
 a short notice of little more than two pages, the Athe- 
 nceum reviewers can condescend to misrepresentations of 
 so obvious and unfair a nature, their animus towards the 
 Editor of the work they are criticising is too apparent to 
 require further exposure. I am perfectly contented to leave 
 the matter to the judgment of the public, begging them 
 again and again to derive that judgment from " facts/' and 
 not from " opinions." 
 
 It may, however, be worth while to ascertain, how far the 
 Athenceum reviewers, who venture to pronounce so arrogant 
 a judgment on my edition of the Tempest, minutely un- 
 derstand the text of Shakespeare ; and again I will adhere 
 to subjects that are undoubted matters of fact, not men- 
 tioning those that depend for their determination on critical 
 opinions, in respect to which there is naturally so much 
 room for disagreement. In the second scene of the third 
 act, where Ariel creates confusion between Caliban, Ste- 
 phano, and Trinculo, 
 
 Ste. Didst thou not say he lied ? 
 
 An. Thouliest! 
 
 Ste. Do I so ? take thou that {strikes liiin\. As you like this, give me 
 
 the lie another time. 
 Trin. I did not give thee the lie; 
 
 the reviewers, observing that the introduction of tJtee in the 
 last line is " entirely unnecessary and wrong" an opinion
 
 15 
 
 at all events open to question say, " what can be said in 
 defence of this, we cannot conjecture." But this reading, 
 ignored by the reviewers, is positively to be found in one 
 of the folios, "being one of the best of the few emendations 
 made by the editor of 1685 ! How is it possible to argue 
 on these subjects with those who are unprovided with the 
 simple knowledge absolutely necessary to render any discus- 
 sion profitable ? 
 
 In the preparation of the text I have, for reasons given 
 in my essay on Elizabethan phraseology, considered the 
 singulars and plurals, in certain cases, to be interchangeable; 
 and the variations hence introduced are alone very nume- 
 rous, but they are generally too simple and obvious to 
 require in all cases separate notification. Thus, in Ferdi- 
 nand's speech, at the commencement of the third act, 
 
 I forget : 
 
 But these sweet thoughts do even refresh my labours, 
 Most busy-less when I do it. 
 
 According to the principles on which I have worked, we 
 must either alter labours to labour, or it to them ; and I 
 have adopted the former alteration as the most simple and 
 obvious. The amiable reviewers, however, attribute the 
 alteration to " mere carelessness'' not observing the neces- 
 sity of any change a question I shall be well contented to 
 leave to be determined by any reader's common sense. 
 The reviewers misquote me when they make me say that 
 the passage, as above, is " unquestionably corrupt." I 
 regard in that light the reading of the first folio, most busy 
 least, but consider that Theobald has restored the author's 
 true language by his admirable suggestion of
 
 16 
 
 In the reading last mentioned, as in all. instances of the 
 kind where the old text is corrupt, I have selected the best 
 conjectural emendation that has been suggested. The 
 Athenaum reviewers recommend me to " strive to amend 
 obvious corruptions by entering into the author's spirit," a 
 recommendation in itself sufficiently obvious ; but it is easy 
 to see, from their late criticisms, that the taste of these 
 reviewers evidently inclines to violent alterations in the text, 
 in passages that mostly require only a little attention to be 
 perfectly intelligible as they stand in the original. If it 
 were fair to select examples from their criticisms on the 
 whole of the plays, I could indeed produce a singular tes- 
 timony as to their want of knowledge and judgment ; but 
 I will adhere to the single play of the Tempest, and, even 
 from their few notices of that play alone, I shall be enabled 
 to exhibit instances of the incompetency of the reviewers to 
 comprehend some of the simplest passages in the text. I 
 will take, for example, the speech of CERES, in the fourth 
 act, 
 
 Earth's increase, foison plenty, 
 Barns and garners never empty ; 
 Vines, with clust'ring bunches growing ; 
 Plants, with goodly burden bowing : 
 Spring come to you, at the farthest, 
 In the very end of harvest ! 
 Scarcity and want shall shun you ; 
 Ceres' blessing so is on you. 
 
 Where the meaning of the two lines printed in Italics is so 
 exceedingly obvious Let Spring come to you, at latest, at 
 the end of harvest, so that no Winter shall intervene that 
 not even one of the much abused commentators thought they
 
 17 
 
 needed any explanation.* It is, indeed, scarcely credible that 
 any men, professing to understand the spirit of Shakespeare's 
 language, should now propose to read, 
 
 Rain come to you, at the farthest, 
 In the very end of harvest ! 
 
 or that the Athenceum reviewers should select this strange 
 corruption as one of the alterations which "recommend 
 themselves to adoption by that surest of all criticisms, the 
 judgment of common sense !" Surely, if the judgment of 
 common sense is to decide these questions, they should be 
 referred to the common sense of those who understand 
 something more of the author's meanings. 
 
 The reviewers have scarcely committed a less error in 
 recommending the new reading which is based on the 
 incorrect supposition that the term flote was not a genuine 
 English word ; but I will pass to another instance, appre- 
 ciable by every reader, in which the reviewers again are 
 wanting in a knowledge of Shakespeare's common mode 
 of expression. It occurs in the fifth act, in Prospero's 
 speech, where he says, addressing the fairies 
 you demy-puppets, that 
 
 By moonshine do the green-sour ringlets make, 
 
 Whereof the ewe not bites ; 
 
 * The note on the passage in my folio edition was in print before the 
 appearance of the comments of Mr. Knight and Mr. Smibert on the same 
 lines. Both these critics adopt in effect the same interpretation, and, 
 indeed, it is impossible two opinions can be entertained on the subject. 
 " But for the evidence of eyesight," observes Mr. Smibert, " I should 
 scarcely have believed it possible for any one to have proposed the reading 
 of rain for spring. The mere agricultural absurdity is huge, inasmuch as 
 Ceres would be thus absolutely desiring the destruction of all husbandry, 
 and assigning the blessing of rains only when the fields were bared, and 
 showers unneeded." 
 
 2
 
 18 
 
 where the reviewers, not aware that compound adjectives 
 abound in Shakespeare, and losing sight of the second 
 epithet being required by the sense of the following line, 
 approve of the substitution green-sward. The meaning of 
 the original is obvious, the fairy -rings being dark green in 
 colour, and the grass of which they are composed, rank. 
 It may be well to add a few examples of similar compounds 
 for the reviewers' information : 
 
 The white-cold virgin snow upon my heart 
 Abates the ardour of my liver. 
 
 The Tempest, act iv. 
 
 Turns into yellow gold his salt-green streams. 
 
 A Midsummer Night's Dream, act iii. 
 
 If thou didst put this sour-cold habit on, 
 To castigate thy pride, 'twere well. 
 
 Timon of Athens, act iv. 
 
 The above examples of the reviewers' criticisms are 
 selected from their brief notice of one play alone, and I 
 would confidently ask any impartial reader whether critics, 
 who are thus proved to understand so little of Shake- 
 speare's meaning and language, are competent to pass a 
 censure on the labours of others? I have shown indis- 
 putably that they reject readings as worthless and un- 
 authorised, without taking the trouble to refer even to the 
 first four folios ; and that they do not comprehend some of 
 the simplest passages in the poet's works. The public will 
 hardly surrender their judgment to men thus convicted of 
 incompetency, though the latter may be concealed for a 
 time from the unreflecting by the extreme arrogance with 
 which their opinions are promulgated. 
 
 It is still more extraordinary that the reviewers should
 
 19 
 
 inconsiderately accuse me of being severe on the errors of 
 others, because there is not a single passage in the work 
 that can be produced in which I have used any language 
 that can by possibility be contorted into a semblance of dis- 
 courtesy ; and it is unjust on their part in the extreme that 
 they should lead the public to infer I have acted differently. 
 With respect to the new annotations, instead of dismissing 
 them "very contemptuously," as the reviewers assert, 
 I have calmly discussed in the notes every one of the 
 slightest importance ; and on examining my remarks upon 
 them, I cannot find any that are expressed in other than 
 the fairest language. The nearest approach made to cen- 
 sure is calling the new reading "most busy, blest" 
 a very unhappy conjecture, my sincere opinion still, and 
 most certainly given without any intention of being un- 
 courteous. If, indeed, this be language too severe, what 
 must be said of Mr. Dyce's, who, coming after me, styles 
 the emendation "forced and awkward in the very extreme," 
 and a " scarcely intelligible alteration ?" So far from 
 treating any critic " contemptuously," I am one of those 
 who firmly believe that such and so vast is the compass of 
 knowledge comprehended in the works of Shakespeare, 
 there is scarcely an individual to be found who could not, 
 in one way or other, add to our knowledge of his meanings; 
 and, in this spirit, I have despised no sources of informa- 
 tion, but have dispassionately examined all that were 
 accessible, with the sole object of the determination of 
 accuracy and truth. The new folio edition of Shakespeare 
 is, I venture to assert, the first comprehensive edition yet 
 published which aims at the accumulation of useful infor- 
 mation, entirely free from the squabbles and controversies
 
 20 
 
 of opposing critics; and when the reviewers assert my 
 " commentator-like propensity to pick holes in the labours 
 of other men," they have committed themselves to a serious 
 misrepresentation, which I am perfectly satisfied will impair 
 their character for fairness in the estimation of every im- 
 partial reader of the work itself. 
 
 I now pass to one of the most important subjects ani- 
 madverted upon by the reviewers the spuriousness of the 
 celebrated Bridgewater MSS. and here, as it seems to me, 
 the reviewers of i}\Q Atkenaum may well be considered to have 
 revealed one reason of their animosity towards the work. If 
 I am correct in thinking that the whole of the Shakesperian 
 MSS. in the possession of the Earl of Ellesmere are modern 
 forgeries, that an important letter, discovered at Dulwich 
 College, has been misinterpreted, or, that some remark- 
 able ballads are compositions of comparatively recent date 
 it is unnecessary to say that the chief of the far-famed 
 Shakesperian discoveries of Mr. Collier are of small value 
 indeed ; and Mr. Collier is generally understood to be one 
 of the Athenaum reviewers ! On the subject of these MSS. 
 I shall again request the reader's attention to facts, reprint- 
 ing in the first place the following observations on the subject 
 from the first volume of my folio edition : 
 
 " It is much to be regretted that it now seems necessary to pass, for a 
 time, from the consideration of the authentic records on which the account 
 of Shakespeare's personal history is founded. They have not, it is true, 
 furnished as much as could be wished of that description of information 
 which is chiefly of use to the moralist or philosopher ; but what little has 
 been laboriously collected from the ancient manuscripts of Stratford, 
 London, and Worcester, is certainly not to be despised. It has, at least, 
 the merit of perfect authenticity ; for, aware of the lamentable attempts 
 that have been made to deceive the world in all that relates to the great
 
 21 
 
 dramatist, I was determined, at the risk of encountering a vast labour 
 which can only find its reward in the future appreciation of the authority 
 of the work, to make a personal inspection and examination of every 
 document of the slightest importance respecting the history of Shake- 
 speare and his family. It appeared to be more advisable to hazard the 
 possibility of rejecting a genuine paper by an excess of caution, than to 
 impair the value of the biography by the insertion of any that were subject 
 to the expression of the slightest doubt ; and in the prosecution of these 
 enquiries, I have been aided by the judgment of Mr. W. H. Black, an 
 assistant-keeper of Her Majesty's records, and well known as one of the 
 most accomplished palseographists of the day, whose advice has been 
 always most kindly and generously afforded. The reader may, therefore, 
 be assured that every care has heen taken to avoid the possibility of 
 deception ; and that all the evidences here printed have been submitted to 
 the minutest examination, and the most anxious scrutiny. 
 
 " Having adopted these severe regulations for the guidance of my 
 researches, it was inevitably essential that the remarkable papers which 
 were discovered by Mr. Collier in the archives of the Earl of Ellesmere, 
 and published by him in the year 1835, should be carefully examined. 
 There was, in fact, a special necessity for these documents, beyond all 
 others, being critically scrutinized, for they were the only records that of 
 late years have found a place in the biographies of Shakespeare, the 
 genuineness of which has been questioned. There is nothiug in the 
 account of their discovery to suggest a doubt. 'They were derived,' 
 observes Mr. Collier, ( from the manuscripts of Lord Ellesmere, whose 
 name is of course well known to every reader of our history, as Keeper of 
 the Great Seal to Queen Elizabeth, and Lord Chancellor to James I. 
 They are preserved at Bridgewater House ; and Lord Francis Egerton 
 gave me instant and unrestrained access to them, with permission to 
 make use of any literary or historical information I could discover. The 
 Kev. H. J. Todd had been there before me, and had classed some of the 
 documents and correspondence ; but large bundles of papers, ranging in 
 point of date between 1581, when Lord Ellesmere was made Solicitor- 
 General, and 1616, when he retired from the office of Lord CJiancellor, 
 remained unexplored, and it was evident that many of them had never been 
 opened from the time wlien, perhaps, his own hands tied them together.'' It 
 was amongst these latter that the Shakespeare manuscripts were dis-
 
 covered ; and if, as is possible, a fabricator had inserted them in those 
 bundles, a more recent enquirer, investigating the collection under the 
 impression it had not been examined for upwards of two centuries, would 
 be inclined to receive every paper as genuine, and as not requiring any 
 minute investigation for the establishment of its authority. Suspicion 
 would be disarmed, and it is possible that in this way Mr. Collier has 
 been deceived. 
 
 " When I came to make a personal inspection of these interesting 
 papers, facilities for which were kindly granted by their noble owner, 
 grave doubts were at once created as to their authenticity. The most 
 important of aU, the certificate from the players of the Blackfriars' Theatre 
 to the Privy Council in 1589, instead of being either the original or a 
 contemporary copy, is evidently at best merely a late transcript, if it be 
 not altogether a recent fabrication. 
 
 " The question naturally arises, for what purpose could a document of 
 this description have been copied in the seventeenth century, presuming 
 it to belong to so early a period ? It is comparatively of recent times 
 that the slightest literary interest has been taken in the history of our 
 early theatres, or even in the biography of Shakespeare ; and, unless it 
 was apparent that papers of this kind were transcribed for some legal or 
 other special purpose, there should be great hesitation in accepting the 
 evidence on any other but contemporary authority. The suspicious 
 appearance of this certificate is of itself sufficient to justify great diffi- 
 culties in its reception ; but the doubt thus induced as to the integrity of 
 the collection was considerably increased by an examination of a paper 
 in the same volume, purporting to be a warrant appointing Daborne, 
 Shakespeare, Field, and Kirkham, instructors of the Children of the Queen's 
 Bevels, which unquestionably appears to be a modern forgery. This docu- 
 ment is styled by Mr. Collier ' a draft either for a Patent or a Privy Seal.' 
 Tt is not a draft, for the lines are written book-wise, and it is also dated ; 
 neither is it a copy of a patent, as appears from the direction, ' Eight 
 trustie and welbeloved;' but, if genuine, it must be considered an 
 abridged transcript of a warrant, under the sign-manual and signet, for a 
 patent to be issued. Now if it be shown that the letters patent to 
 'Daborne and others' were granted on the same day on which Lord 
 Ellesmere's paper is dated ; and if it be further proved that the contents 
 of the latter are altogether inconsistent with the circumstances detailed
 
 23 
 
 in the real patent, it will, I think, be conceded that no genuine draft 
 or transcript, of the nature of that printed by Mr. Collier, can possibly 
 exist. 
 
 " It appears that the following note occurs in an entry-book of patents 
 that passed the Great Seal while it was in the hands of Lord Ellesmere 
 in 7 James I. : ' A Warrant for Eobert Daborne and others, the Queenes 
 Servants, to bring up and practise Children in Plaies by the name of the 
 Children of the Queen's Eevells, for the pleasure of her Majestic, 4 Januarii, 
 anno septimo Jacobi." This entry may have suggested the fabrication, the 
 date of the questionable MS. corresponding with that here given ; though 
 it is capable of proof that, if it were authentic, it must have been dated 
 previously, for the books of the Signet Office show that the authority for 
 Daborne's warrant was obtained by the influence of Sir Thomas Munson in 
 the previous December, and they also inform us that it was granted ' to 
 Kobert Daborne, and other Servauntes to the Queene, from time to time 
 to provide and bring up a convenient nomber of Children to practize in 
 the quality of playing, by the name of the Children of the Eevells to the 
 Queene, in tlie White Fryers, London, or any other convenient place where 
 he shall thinke fit.' The enrolment of the instrument, which was issued 
 in the form of letters patent under the Great Seal, recites, ' Whereas the 
 Quene, our deerest wyfe, hathe for hir pleasure and recreacion, when shee 
 shall thinke it fitt to have any playes or shewes, appoynted hir servantes 
 Kobert Daborne, Phillippe Kosseter, John Tarbock, Richard Jones, and 
 Eobert Browne, to provide and bring upp a convenient nomber of 
 children, whoe shalbe called Children of hir Eevelles, Know ye that 
 wee have appoynted and authorised, and by theis presentes do autho- 
 rize and appoynte the said Eobert Daborne, &c., from tyme to tyme, 
 to provide, keepe, and bring upp a convenient nomber of children, and 
 them to practice and exercise in the quality of playing, by the name of 
 Children of the Eevells to the Queene, within the White Fryers in the 
 suburbs of our Citty of London, or in any other convenyent place where 
 they shall thinke fitt for that purpose.' This patent is dated January 4th, 
 7 Jac. I., 1609-10, so that any draft, or projected warrant, exhibiting 
 other names than the above, could not possibly have had this exact date. 
 It will be observed that the names, with the exception of that of Daborne, 
 are entirely different in the two documents, and this company of children 
 was to play at the Whitefriars, not at the Blackfriars. Tbfi fabricator
 
 24 
 
 seems to have relied on the supposition that the entry relative to 
 " Daborne and others" referred to the latter theatre ; and consequently 
 inserted the name of Edward Kirkham, who is known to have been one 
 of the instructors to the Children of the Eevels at the Blackfriars in the 
 year 1604. There is, in fact, no reasonable supposition on which the 
 Ellesmere paper can be regarded as authentic. Had no date been attached 
 to it, it might have been said that the whole related merely to some con- 
 templated arrangement which was afterwards altered; although, even in 
 that case, the form of the copy would alone have been a serious reason 
 against its reception. In its present state, it is clearly impossible to 
 reconcile it with the contents of the enrolment just quoted. Fortunately for 
 the interests of truth, indications of forgery are detected in trifling cir- 
 cumstances that are almost invariably neglected by the inventor, however 
 ingeniously the deception be contrived. Were it not for this, the search 
 for historical truth would yield results sufficiently uncertain to deter the 
 most enthusiastic enquirer from pursuing the investigation. 
 
 The remaining Shakesperian MSS. in the possession of the Earl of 
 Ellesmere, consist of a letter of Daniel the poet mentioning the great 
 dramatist as a candidate for the Mastership of the Queen's Eevels ; 
 accounts in which a performance of Othello is stated to have taken place in 
 the year 1602; a remarkable paper detailing the values of the shares held by 
 Shakespeare and others in the Blackfriars' Theatre ; and a presumed early 
 copy of a letter signed " H. S.," supposed to have been written by Lord 
 Southampton, and containing singular notices of Burbage and Shakespeare. 
 The first two of these I have not seen, the volume including only a recent 
 transcript of Daniel's letter ; but the other two, which have been carefully 
 inspected, present an appearance by no means satisfactory. Although the 
 caligraphy is of a highly skilful character, and judging solely from a fac- 
 simile of the letter, I should certainly have accepted it as genuine, yet an 
 examination of the original leads to a different judgment,the paper and ink 
 not appearing to belong to so early a date. It is a suspicious circumstance 
 that both these documents are written in an unusually large character on folio 
 leaves of paper, by the same hand, and are evidently not contemporaneous 
 copies. Again may the question be asked, why should transcripts of 
 such papers have been made after the period to which the originals are 
 supposed to refer? It is also curious that copies only of these important 
 records should be preserved ; and, on the whole, without offering a
 
 25 
 
 decisive opinion as to the spuriousness of the two last mentioned, there 
 is sufficient doubt respecting the whole collection to justify a reasonable 
 hesitation for the present in admitting any of them as genuine. The 
 interests of literature demand that these documents should be submitted 
 to a careful and minute examination by the best record-readers of the day, 
 by those who are continually engaged in the study of ancient manuscripts; 
 such, for example, as are the Deputy and various Assistant-keepers of the 
 Public Records, and the Keeper of the MSS. in the British Museum. 
 Should such an investigation take place, the water-marks in the paper 
 should be observed, and no minutias omitted that are deserving of notice 
 in such an enquiry." 
 
 In the above observations, I have endeavoured to put the 
 matter in the clearest possible light, with the utmost fair- 
 ness to Mr. Collier. I firmly believed in the genuineness 
 of the papers till the day on which I examined the originals 
 and that my own convictions on the subject are sincere may 
 be gathered from the fact that, on the evening of that day, 
 I cancelled at the printer's that portion of the biography 
 in which I had previously inserted copies of the docu- 
 ments, and I also omitted the fac-simile of the Southampton 
 letter, the expense of lithographing which had already been 
 incurred. / am convinced that one paper, at least the 
 Daborne warrant is a modern forgery, and so badly exe- 
 cuted, that it will not even pass muster in a facsimile. But 
 fac-similes will not be sufficient to prove the authenticity of 
 suspected papers. The documents themselves must be 
 submitted to the scrutiny of the most competent judges, 
 before the public can be satisfied on the matter. In the 
 above statement, I have been careful not to express an 
 opinion which is not at the same time an absolute conviction. 
 It is, however, my opinion, gathered from the appearance
 
 of the papers themselves, that all the Bridgewater Shak- 
 sperian MSS. which I have seen are forgeries. 
 
 The reviewers, in drawing the attention of the public to 
 an opinion I had formerly expressed in favour of the 
 authenticity of the documents, somewhat overlook the im- 
 portant distinction between an opinion given merely from 
 internal evidence, and a conclusion derived from an 
 inspection of the papers themselves. In admitting, as I 
 have done, that I confided in their genuineness till the day 
 on which I saw the originals, I have placed the matter in 
 as fair a light as possible ; and as the MSS. will most pro- 
 bably ere long be submitted to the consideration of com- 
 petent judges, it is unnecessary to say I should hardly have 
 incurred the risk of giving an adverse opinion so distinctly, 
 were I not thoroughly convinced there were forcible reasons 
 for entertaining it. I can have but one object in such a 
 discussion the discovery of the real truth, and the satis- 
 faction of endeavouring to place the materials of Shaksperian 
 criticism on a sound basis of authenticity. The paucity of 
 interesting evidences respecting Shakespeare is so great, it 
 would be a real source of congratulation to all of us could 
 the Ellesmere MSS. ultimately be acknowledged to be 
 genuine; but the determination must be obtained from 
 the closest external scrutiny, as well as from internal 
 evidence. 
 
 The reviewers act injudiciously in insinuating that Mr. 
 Collier has been in the slightest degree contemptuously or 
 unfairly treated in my work ; and I will give an ample proof 
 that, so far from this being the case, I have been actuated 
 throughout by the sincerest feelings of kindness. It is, 
 I feel sure, sufficient for me, in this respect, to quote the
 
 27 
 
 observations I have made on the following misreading of 
 the Dulwich College MS. 
 
 " It may here be observed that a notice which first appeared in Mr. 
 Collier's interesting Memoirs of Edward Alleyn, 1841, p. 63, apparently 
 showing that Shakespeare was in London in the month of October, 1603, 
 conveys an inaccurate reading of the original manuscript preserved at 
 Dulwich College, and cannot, therefore, be received as evidence. The 
 following, 
 
 " Aboute a weeke agoe ther e a youthe who said he 
 
 was Mr. Frauncis Chalo . . . s man .... Id have borrow.d 
 
 xs to have bought things for s M r 
 
 t hym cominge without token d 
 
 I would have 
 
 . . I bene sur 
 
 and inquire after the fellow, and said he had lent hym a horse. I feare 
 me he gulled hym, thoughe he gulled not us. The youthe was a prety 
 youthe, and hansom in appayrell : we know not what became of hym. 
 Mr. Bromffeild commendes hym : he was heare yesterdaye. Nicke and 
 Jeames be well, and commend them : so dothe Mr. Cooke and his weife 
 in the kyndest sorte, and so once more in the hardest manner fanvell," 
 
 is all that now remains of a postcript to a letter from Mrs. Alleyn to her 
 husband, the celebrated actor, dated October 20th, 1603. This letter is 
 written on a folio leaf of paper, the commencement of the above postscript 
 being at the end of the first page, the top of the second page, which is 
 perfect, beginning with the words, and inquire. The portion of the letter 
 containing the first lines of our extract is in a very decayed state, the 
 bottom of the leaf being rotten, and the writing not very easily to be 
 understood ; but the accompanying facsimile, ichich was carefully traced 
 from the original by Mr. Fairholt, proves that Mr. Collier's interpretation 
 cannot be correct, inasmuch as it is irreconcileable with the position of 
 words that are clearly to be discovered in the remaining fragment. The 
 surpassing value of fac-simile copies is here apparent. It is so easy, in a 
 laborious work like the one in which the above error occurs, to misread 
 difficult writing, which even at a second glance, unless most carefully 
 examined in a strong light, may be misinterpreted ; the only safe resource,
 
 28 
 
 in all difficult cases, is to substantiate the reading by obtaining the assist- 
 ance of the artist. It would be bold to affirm, in opposition to Mr. Collier, 
 that the whole has been misunderstood, and that the name of Shakespeare 
 has taken the place of some other similar in form ; but even admitting that 
 it was originally to be found in the decayed fragment, a circumstance 
 which appears to be extremely uncertain, it is beyond a doubt that the 
 sentence in which it occurred has been printed erroneously, and that the 
 true information the letter conveyed respecting the dramatist is now pro- 
 bably not to be recovered. The reader will bear in mind that the original 
 investigator of a large collection of documents does not possess the advan- 
 tages that attend those later enquirers, who are concentrating their atten- 
 tion to papers on a particular subject." 
 
 Mr. Fairholt's fac-siinile of the passage, as it now remains, 
 is here given ; and the reader will distinctly observe that 
 Mr. Collier's reading does not correspond with the fac- 
 simile, and that his transcript must unquestionably be 
 incorrect. I annex the copy of the MS., as given by Mr. 
 Collier : 
 
 " Aboute a weeke a goe there came a youthe who said he was M> 
 Frauncis Chaloner who would have borrowed x" to have bought things 
 f or * * * an( j g^ ne was k nown unto you, and M r Shakespeare of 
 the globe, who came * * * said he knewe hym not, onely he herde 
 of hym that he was a roge * * * so he was glade we did not lend 
 him the monney * * * Eichard Johnes [went] to seeke and inquire 
 after the fellow, and said he had lent hym a horse. I feare me he gulled 
 hym, thoughe he gulled not us. The youthe was a prety youthe, and 
 hansom in appayrell : we knowe not what became of hym. M r Benfield 
 commendes hym ; he was heare yesterdaye. Nicke and Jeames be well, 
 and comend them : so doth M r Cooke and his wiefe in the kyndest sorte, 
 and so once more in the hartiest manner farwell." 
 
 Now is it not clear from this, compared with Mr. Fair- 
 holt's facsimile, that Mr. Collier has misinterpreted the
 
 29 
 
 li 
 
 II
 
 30 
 
 original? otherwise we should discover in his copy the 
 words that are to be found in the fac-simile. The fact is, 
 that Mr. Collier probably, in haste, took the words down 
 without sufficient examination. At ah 1 events, the fac- 
 simile is an evidence against the exact reception of the 
 discovery. 
 
 In this, however, as in other questions, I am contented 
 to appeal to facts, and leave the rest to the determination 
 of the public. The reviewers are perfectly justified in not 
 accepting my opinion as to the spuriousness of Lord 
 Ellesmere's MSS. I adhere to the facts that prove one of 
 them not to be genuine, and appeal, as to the whole, to the 
 judgment of those who are best informed in such matters. 
 In the same way, with regard to the Dulwich College MS., 
 instead of entering into an argument on the subject, I give 
 a fac-simile, and scarcely express an opinion. The value of 
 my work depends, and will depend, on the authenticity of 
 its accumulated facts facts, the importance of which are 
 determinable by any one who studied the subject and it is 
 with that conviction I may be excused setting too great a 
 value on the censures of the reviewers. 
 
 It is, indeed, far from being exclusively on my own account 
 that I publish these few controversial pages. That I am 
 personally nearly indifferent to the mere external acknow- 
 ledgments of criticism, may be well gathered from the cir- 
 cumstance of my consenting to entomb the results of so 
 many years' labour in so small an impression ; a fact which 
 also renders the greatest censure almost innocuous. But 
 I have a far higher motive than any that could result in the 
 hope of accomplishing a successful refutation of an adverse 
 critic. I cannot but think a public service will be rendered
 
 31 
 
 by the exposure of the incompetency and unfairness of a 
 Journal, which, by its arrogance and subtlety, is calculated 
 to impose on all but those who have paid peculiar attention 
 
 j to the subjects on which it ventures to decide. That I shall 
 
 i incur the well-known undying rancour entertained by its 
 reviewers towards all who enter into conflict with them, is 
 certain ; but the effect of their animosity will be lessened 
 
 iby the exposition now given of their animus towards the 
 writer. An adversary need not be greatly feared, when 
 
 ihis malevolence is generally known. 
 
 BRIXTON HILL, NEAR LONDON, 
 July, 1853.
 
 NOTE. 
 
 THE Bridge water MSS. being in private archives, and 
 only used for literary purposes by the liberality of their 
 noble and distinguished possessor, it may be well to observe, 
 lest the strong opinions here expressed as to their want of 
 authenticity be possibly thought to be in any way uncour- 
 teous, that the Earl of Ellesmere most generously gave the 
 writer the amplest permission to express any doubts that 
 may be entertained on the subject. 
 
 Printed by E. Tucker, Perry's Place, Oxford Street.
 
 OBSERVATIONS ON SOME OF THE MANUSCRIPT 
 
 EMENDATIONS OF THE TEXT OF 
 
 SHAKESPEARE, 
 
 , AND 
 
 ARE THEY COPYRIGHT? 
 
 J. O. HALLIWELL, ESQ. F.R.S. &c. 
 
 LONDON : 
 JOHN RUSSELL SMITH, 36, SOHO SQUARE. 
 
 MDCCCLIII.
 
 LONDON : E. TTTCKEE, PRINTER, PERRY S PLACE, OXFORD STREET.
 
 OBSERVATIONS, &c. 
 
 IN the folio edition of the Works of Shakespeare I am now 
 passing through the press, I have been most careful not to 
 introduce a single harsh observation on the labours of any 
 of the critics, not even on the labours of those who have 
 long been unaffected by praise or censure ; but I have 
 respected in all cases the memory of the dead, and spoken 
 in every way the language of courtesy and kindness towards 
 those who are living. It is, therefore, with the greatest 
 astonishment I discover that I am not only accused of 
 being severe on the errors of others, but also of speaking 
 contemptuously of Mr. Collier's new work an accusation 
 which is so exceedingly unfair, I am tempted to challenge 
 any reader to produce a single instance in my work in 
 which I have mentioned an error with asperity, or quoted 
 Mr. Collier in any but the fairest and most courteous 
 language. Mr. Collier himself, however, has thrown out 
 one of the most uncourteous implications ever suggested in 
 literary controversy, by plainly intimating that every one 
 who rejects the new readings can only do so from interested 
 motives, an implication to the consideration of which it 
 may be worth while to devote a few pages. I am the rather 
 induced to take this course, as I have not at present dis- 
 covered a single new reading in Mr. Collier's volume that 
 will bear the test of examination.
 
 In support of the assertion above made, that interested 
 motives are attributed by Mr. Collier to opponents, it 
 appears only requisite to notice the Editor's observations in 
 the threshold of his book, on the well-known passage re- 
 specting the " woollen bagpipe" in the Merchant of Venice. 
 Mr. Collier, who would read dollen, on the authority of his 
 MS. annotator, makes the following singular observation : 
 " We may be confident that we shall never again see woollen 
 bagpipe in any edition of the text of Shakespeare, unless it 
 be reproduced by some one, who, having no right to use the 
 emendation of our folio, 1632, adheres of necessity to the 
 antiquated blunder, and pertinaciously attempts to justify it" 
 In other words, no one can sincerely and conscientiously 
 refuse to accept the new reading dollen. Let us ascertain 
 more minutely the probabilities of the success of this 
 challenge, by referring to the notes of two of the critics ; 
 merely observing, for my own part, that if any alteration 
 were necessary, I am heretic enough to consider swollen a 
 far more natural and likely emendation than dollen : 
 
 " Why he a swollen bagpipe. We have here one of the 
 too frequent instances of conjectural readings ; but it is to 
 be hoped that all future editors will restore the original 
 woollen, after weighing not only what has been already urged 
 in its support, but the additional and accurate testimony of 
 Dr. Leyden, who, in his edition of the Complaynt of Scotland, 
 p. 149, informs us that the Lowland bagpipe commonly had 
 the bag or sack covered with woollen cloth of a green colour, 
 a practice which, he adds, prevailed in the northern counties 
 of England." (DoucE.) 
 
 "A woollen bag-pipe. This is the reading of every ancient 
 copy ; and as we know that at this day the bag is usually
 
 covered with woollen, the epithet is perfectly appropriate, 
 without adopting the alteration of Steevens to swollen" 
 (COLLIER, 1842.) 
 
 Thus the reading that was "perfectly appropriate" in 
 1842 is not only to be set aside in 1853, in favour of a 
 word of precisely similar meaning to the emendation sug- 
 gested by Steevens, but it is affirmed that every one who 
 objects to receive the new term can only do so from interested 
 motives. The attribution of motives, as all the world knows, 
 is not only the most easy but the most mischievous and un- 
 certain of all "conjectural criticism ;" and the English public 
 cannot be long blinded by the arrogant assumption that 
 every opponent of these new readings must necessarily be 
 acting with insincerity. Mr. Collier may rest assured that, 
 if he is really and truly restoring the words of Shakespeare, 
 not all the carpings of all the critics may long retard their 
 universal adoption; while, on the other hand, .if they are 
 merely alterations and fancied improvements, the researches 
 of every day will tend to decrease the number of the accepted 
 novelties. Surely, those students who have devoted years 
 to this branch of literature have more regard to their repu- 
 tations than to join in rejecting what their real feeling would 
 approve to risk all their claims to the consideration of 
 the public by denouncing that which, if Mr. Collier be 
 correct, a few years must infallibly for ever confirm. 
 
 Taking as examples the whole of the annotations in the 
 Tempest, mentioned in Mr. Collier's Notes and Emenda- 
 tions, I annex, in very brief terms, the reasons for reject- 
 ing those readings which are not to be met with in 
 Shakespearian works of common occurrence ; without by 
 any means giving entire assent even to the latter :
 
 
 
 1. Have a care. Givenasnewby Mr. Collier, but occurring 
 in the alteration of the play by Dryden and Davenant. 
 
 2. Welkins heat. New, but characterised by Mr. 
 Collier as "one of those alterations which, though supported 
 by some probability, it might be inexpedient to insert in 
 the text." Mr. Dyce terms it " an alteration equally taste- 
 less and absurd." 
 
 3. Noble creatures. Theobald's reading, as noticed by 
 Mr. Collier. The old reading is adopted by Mr. Knight, 
 with an ingenious explanation that appears to be unneces- 
 sarily refined. 
 
 4. Prevision in mine art. Given as new by Mr. 
 Collier, but it was suggested by Mr. Hunter, in his 
 Disquisition on the Scene, 8fc., of Shakespeare's Tempest, 
 8vo, 1839, p. 135, and repeated in the New Illustrations, 
 1845, i. 186. 
 
 5. Thou his only heir. 'Given as new by Mr. Collier, 
 but suggested in Kenrick's Review of Dr. Johnsons New 
 Edition of Shakespeare, 8vo, 1765, p. 3, and printed in the 
 text of Rann's edition, 8vo, 1786, with another alteration 
 in the next line. 
 
 6. He being thus loaded. " Perhaps," as Mr. Collier 
 observes, " a questionable change." 
 
 7. To untruth. This new reading seems to be entirely 
 inconsistent with the context, for this reason, that a person 
 who tells a falsehood makes a sinner of his memory to 
 Truth, not to Untruth. 
 
 8. Fated to the practise. The old edition reads purpose, 
 the new reading removing what Mr. Collier thinks is an
 
 awkward and needless repetition ; but see Dyce's Few 
 Notes, pp. 128-132. It is rather dangerous to pronounce 
 the original text corrupt, on the mere occurrence of verbal 
 repetitions. Dryden and Davenant read design. 
 
 9. Carcass of a boat. Rowe's alteration, as noticed by 
 Mr. Collier. The same emendation had been previously 
 made by Dryden and Davenant. 
 
 10. Had quit it. Same as the last. 
 
 11. And all upon the Mediterranean float. The repe- 
 tition of all greatly militates against the new reading, as 
 Mr. Singer has observed. Mr. Collier adopts it on the 
 incorrect supposition that flote, a wave, is not a genuine 
 archaism. It is, however, found in that most common of 
 all dictionaries of the Shakesperian period, that of Minsheu, 
 and it also occurs in Middleton. 
 
 12. Speech assigned to Prospero. The same alteration 
 was made by Dryden and Davenant, as noticed by Mr. 
 Collier. 
 
 13. A line misprinted. Adopted by all recent editors, 
 as noticed by Mr. Collier. 
 
 14. As ivhich end o the beam should bow. " This inter- 
 pretation," observes Mr. Smibert, " is decidedly of the cast 
 of Mr. Puff's, harder than the original." The new reading 
 seems to me to be an awkward one, and not felicitous, but 
 it is one of those rather to be decided by judgment than 
 by evidence. 
 
 15. She for whom. Considered by Mr. Collier as of 
 doubtful character. See his Supplemental Notes.
 
 16. Measure it back. This new reading is given by 
 Mr. Collier, with the observation that the old one " seems 
 preferable." 
 
 17. Wlierefore thus ghastly looking. "The change is 
 minute," observes Mr. Collier, " and may be said to be not 
 absolutely necessary." 
 
 18. That's verity. This reading has long been adopted. 
 Mr. Collier, in his edition of Shakespeare, vol. i, p. 43, 
 says, " Modern editors, all without necessity, and some 
 without notice, change verily of all the old copies into 
 
 19. The drench of the storm. The term drench, in the 
 sense here used, appears to be more modern than Shake- 
 speare's time ; but, independently of this probability, the 
 variation is no improvement of the original text. 
 
 20. Nor scrape trencher, nor wash dish. Given as new 
 'by Mr. Collier, but corrected by Dryden and Davenant in 
 the seventeenth century, and, more recently, by Mr. Dyce. 
 
 21. Most busy, blest, when I do it. An emendation 
 characterised by Mr. Dyce as " forced and awkward in the 
 very extreme." The old text is corrupt, but the new read- 
 ing appears far more improbable than the ordinary one of 
 Theobald, most busyless. 
 
 22. A thr id of mine own life. Theobald's alteration, and 
 most likely the correct reading is thread. The passage from 
 Catullus, recently adduced by Mr. Hunter in favour of the 
 old text, does not seem to me to be at all applicable.
 
 9 
 
 23. Tilled brims. Given as new by Mr. Collier, but 
 suggested in Holt's tract on the play, 8vo, 1749, p. 69. 
 
 24. Brown groves. Given as new by Mr. Collier, but 
 long since suggested by Hanmer. 
 
 25. Rain come to you. Founded on a misinterpretation 
 of the original, the meaning of which unquestionably is, 
 Let Spring come to you as soon as the harvest is over, so 
 that no Winter shall intervene. 
 
 26. And a wife. A reading adopted by Malone and 
 others, as observed by Mr. Collier, who, selecting the old 
 word wise in his edition of Shakespeare, observes, " It needs 
 no proof that, ' So rare a wonder'd father and a wise,' was 
 the phraseology of Shakespeare's time." 
 
 27. Winding. This reading is the one recommended by 
 Mr. Dyce (Remarks, 8fc., 8vo, 1844, p. 7). 
 
 28. Sedge-crowns. Surely the old reading, sedg'd crowns, 
 is more grammatical and appropriate. 
 
 29. The green-sward ringlets. Given as new by Mr. 
 Collier, but many years ago suggested by Douce. The 
 original compound epithet, green-sour, is not only perfectly 
 intelligible, but exactly in Shakespeare's manner. In the 
 previous act, we have, " the white-cold virgin snow," an 
 epithet of similar formation ; and, in fact, compound adjec- 
 tives are most common, salt-green, secret-false, &c. 
 
 30. Noble Gonzalo. The original epithet holy appears 
 to be a most appropriate one as applied to Gonzalo, whose 
 goodness of character is so well exhibited in the play, arid 
 has been specially noticed by Dr. Johnson.
 
 10 
 
 31. To the flow of mine. The old reading show seems 
 to be amply supported by the following passage in Julius 
 Casar, 
 
 Passion, I see, is catching ; for mine eyes, 
 Seeing those beads of sorrow stand in thine, 
 Began to water. 
 
 32. And a loyal servant. The original reads, and a loyal 
 sir, a phraseology again used by Prospero, who shortly 
 afterwards calls Antonio, "most wicked sir." Compare 
 also Cymbeline, " a lady to the worthiest sir." 
 
 33. Some enchanted devil. This new reading is per- 
 fectly inconsistent with the spirit of Alonso's address to 
 Prospero. 
 
 34. With all her power. The meaning of the original 
 text, without her power, is, independently, or without the 
 aid of her power. The explanation given by Mr. Harness 
 is very neat and to the purpose, " exercises the command 
 of the moon, without being empowered by her so to do ; 
 or, commands the ebbs and flows of the sea with an 
 usurped authority." 
 
 It may be well to observe, in reference to the above 
 notes, that the instances of " coincident suggestions," there 
 mentioned, are purposely restricted to the most obvious 
 sources ; there being a vast collection of printed conjectural 
 criticism, scattered amongst obscure sources, that will no 
 doubt yield a large number of independent examples of 
 a similar character. It will be sufficient to remark, in 
 reference to this subject, that one volume alone of the mis-
 
 11 
 
 cellaneous collections, published by Messrs. Nichols, con- 
 tains at least forty (I believe many more) of the so-called 
 new readings ; and such a circumstance is clearly sufficient 
 in itself to show the utter impossibility of any person 
 receiving these as entirely " new lights," inasmuch as the 
 question resolves itself into a simple matter of fact resting 
 on proofs alone, and entirely irrespective either of "opinion" 
 or "prejudice." It shows indisputably that Mr. Collier 
 must have been deceived as to the composition of his 
 annotated volume ; for no one would otherwise have been 
 rash enough to have presented it to the public as bearing 
 a character so open to contradiction. In the observations 
 given above, it is not to be inferred that Mr. Collier was 
 aware of those which had been previously suggested ; but 
 merely that he has not referred to the conjectural readings 
 of his predecessors. 
 
 The extent to which the MS. annotator has been pub- 
 licly anticipated by the suggestions of the critics of the 
 last century, has not at present been fully noticed, and 
 the sources of conjectural Shakespearian criticism are so 
 various, and so widely scattered, it will be long before 
 it can be definitively pronounced that any of the readings 
 in Mr. Collier's volume are unquestionably new. Thus, 
 the writer of a fair article on the subject in Chambers 
 Edinburgh Journal, June 4th, 1853, commences by giving 
 seven examples of real emendations ; but out of these seven 
 no fewer than four have been many years before the public 
 in other works. The writer alluded to commences by 
 observing, 
 
 " In the last act of the Merry Wives of Windsor, and in the fifth scene, 
 when the fairies approach Falstaff, Anne Page acting the Fairy Queen,
 
 12 
 
 Dame Quickly accompanies them ; and in the common editions we find 
 that the very authoritative speech addressed to the fairies, and which we 
 would expect from none but their queen, is put into the mouth of Mrs. 
 Quickly. The ground for so doing is, that ' Qui.' is prefixed to it. In 
 Mr. Collier's volume, however, the ' Qui.' is changed to ' Que.,' as a mis- 
 print ; and thus a speech most inappropriate for poor Dame Quickly, is 
 given to its rightful owner, the Fairy Queen, Anne Page. This is one of 
 the most valuable emendations of Us kind. On the whole, however, the 
 stage-directions which we find in this volume are not of much import- 
 ance." 
 
 There can be, indeed, little doubt, not only that this 
 emendation is correct, but that it is one of "the most 
 valuable of its kind" to be met with in Mr. Collier's 
 volume; yet the reader of the latter work may well be 
 surprised on finding not only that it was proposed by Mr. 
 Harness, in 1825, with the observation that Qui is an 
 error in the first folio for Que, but that it has actually been 
 adopted both by Mr. Knight and Mr. Collier. Mr. Collier 
 refers to the very page of his own edition, where he has 
 adopted the suggestion of Mr. Harness, but so far from 
 making the slightest remark, that the MS. annotator is 
 only confirming an established correction, leads the reader 
 to infer, in the following terms, that it is an original emen- 
 dation : 
 
 "P. 267. In several preceding scenes we are informed that Anne Page 
 was to represent the Fairy Queen in the attack upon Falstaff in Windsor 
 Park. Nevertheless, Malone and others assigned all her speeches to Mrs. 
 Quickly, the only excuse being that the first of the prefixes is Qui. The 
 manuscript-corrector of the folio, 1632, changed it to Que, and made it 
 Que (for Queen) in all other places ; and after the printed stage-direction, 
 ' Enter Fairies,' he added, with the Queen, Anne. It does not, indeed, 
 appear that Mrs. Quickly took any part at all in the scene, although she 
 most likely in some way lent her assistance, in order that she might be 
 on the stage at the conclusion of the performance."
 
 13 
 
 Surely this mode of introducing older suggestions, how- 
 ever useful the emendations are in themselves, is seriously 
 calculated to mislead the reader ; and this is by no means 
 a solitary instance where corrections, mentioned by Mr. 
 Collier in his eight volume edition, are introduced into his 
 supplementary work, without the remark that they have 
 been previously noticed. It is readily to be understood that 
 Mr. Collier, compiling his volume of Notes with unusual 
 rapidity, and under circumstances which rendered access to 
 many books exceedingly inconvenient, should have over- 
 looked numerous early parallel conjectures ; but the reason 
 he should have ignored coincident suggestions on the very 
 page of his own edition to which he was referring does not 
 appear to be so obvious. The fact, however, is sufficient to 
 increase very greatly the improbability of his being enabled 
 to establish any copyright in the annotations. 
 
 It can fairly be stated, without any discourtesy, that Mr. 
 Collier, who so long and in many respects so judiciously 
 adhered to the early editions, has not paid much attention 
 to the vast range of conjectural emendation which appeared 
 during the last century. The very first example in the 
 preface to his 'Notes and Emendations/ the substitution of 
 Aristotle s ethics for Aristotle's checks in the 'Taming of the 
 Shrew' is introduced with the observation that, "many of 
 the most valuable corrections of Shakespeare's text are, in 
 truth, self-evident ; and so apparent, when once suggested, 
 that it seems wonderful how the plays could have passed 
 through the hands of men of such learning and critical 
 acumen, during the last century and a half, without the de- 
 tection of such indisputable blunders ;" and, in the work 
 itself, Mr. Collier observes respecting this emendation,
 
 14 
 
 " Recollecting how many learned hands our great dramatist's 
 works have passed through, it is wonderful that such a 
 blunder as that we are now enabled to point out, should 
 not have been detected and mentioned in print at 
 least a century ago." The oversight here committed as 
 to this reading being a novelty has been necessarily de- 
 tected,* it being a positive fact that the " new emendation" 
 has not only been mentioned in a great variety of editions, 
 but has been introduced into the text by no fewer than Jive 
 editors, the first, I believe, in point of time, being the Rev. 
 J. Rann, who substituted Ethics into the text as early as 
 1787. I mention this particularly, not in censure, but 
 merely as a decisive proof of the obvious fact that Mr. 
 CoDier prepared his book without considering it necessary 
 to consult very closely the emendations suggested and in- 
 troduced by previous editors. It would also appear from 
 the list already given from the Tempest, that even the com- 
 monest Shakespearian works have not been duly referred to; 
 and I think it will be found that the list of coincidences 
 will by and by be most materially increased. The early 
 discovery of so many instances of suggestions that have 
 been previously made lead to the inference that any attempt 
 at establishing a copyright in the MS. emendations them- 
 selves (Mr. Collier's Notes on them are of course copyright) 
 would signally fail ; and this circumstance will no doubt 
 tend to shield the " disbelievers " from the imputations of 
 interested motives which have been so freely, and, I cannot 
 
 * But even so late as June of the present summer, the writer of an 
 article in Mr. Parker's National Miscellany mentions it as " one of the 
 quietest and most important of all his notations," and several other 
 reviewers have quoted it in similar terms.
 
 15 
 
 help thinking, so injudiciously attributed to them. There 
 are many of the alterations that are apparently so good, it 
 is not a subject for surprise that they should have been 
 accepted by the general reader, especially when we find so 
 eminent a critic as Mr. Dyce confessing he had at first 
 received several as happy corrections which proved to be 
 questionable on examination : but does not all this lead to 
 the conviction that a hasty assent will probably not be 
 lasting ? In the same way, on the first publication of a 
 portion of the annotations, the suggestion of bisson multi- 
 tude appeared to be so peculiarly happy and incontro- 
 vertible, I could not resist the conclusion it was not only 
 truthful, but that it indicated the MS. annotator had derived 
 his alterations from pure sources ; a conviction which was 
 greatly disturbed by an interesting article on the passage 
 by 'A. E. B.' (in the Notes and Queries), and further read- 
 ing has furnished reasons that justify the gravest doubts 
 as to the propriety of its reception. 
 
 The question of copyright would of course be decided by 
 several other considerations beyond the mere occurrence of 
 the coincident suggestions ; and it may well be doubted 
 whether it could be maintained in any corrections of 
 Shakespeare text derived from early MS. sources. But 
 enough has been said to convince the reader that a critic 
 may reject many of the new readings, without incurring 
 the risk of being fairly included in Mr. Collier's clause of 
 censure. For my own part, not having otherwise written 
 directly or indirectly against the emendations, and having 
 discussed them fairly as far as I have had occasion to do so 
 in my new work, I can only account for the accusation of 
 having treated them with contempt by the circumstance of
 
 16 
 
 my considering most of them worthless, being attributed to 
 "necessity" and "pertinacity." My reasons for rejecting the 
 whole of those which occur in the first play in the volume 
 are before the public ; and I hope the value of all the new 
 readings will be attempted to be decided in this way by 
 fair argument, not by mere expressions of opinion. 
 
 BEIXTON HILL, NEAR LONDON, 
 July, 1853. 
 
 Printed ty E. Tucker, Perry's Place, Oxford Street,
 
 (ictmatot 
 
 NOTES AND EMENDATIONS 
 
 ON THE PLAYS OF 
 
 SHAKSPERE, 
 
 FEOM 
 
 A RECENTLY-DISCOVERED ANNOTATED COPY 
 
 BY THE 
 
 Late JOSEPH GRIMALDI, Esq., 
 
 COMEDIAN. 
 
 * Eftese 0otes anti (IHmmtiations are 
 antJ must not be set fog ang ^Ijttor in 
 future (JHtiition ot' ^Jaltsere* 
 
 Shakspere's and Nature's words lay hid in night, 
 Anon Grimaldi comes, and " all is right /" 
 
 LONDON. 
 Published by J. RUSSELL SMITH, 36, Soho Square. 
 
 M.DCCC.LIII.
 
 K TUCKER, PRINTER, PERRY'S PLACE, OXFORD STREET.
 
 H E discovery of the important volume which, 
 I believe, is destined to give its name as a prefix 
 to all future editions of Shakspere, was the re- 
 sult of a happy accident. It has peculiar value 
 at the present time, inasmuch as it exhibits new 
 and original readings of the poet, which have never been 
 hinted at before readings which are so singularly correct, 
 emendations displaying such great judgment, and corrections 
 so obviously proper, that they have only to be promulgated 
 to be received and welcomed by all but prejudiced scribblers, 
 who dare not use them. The new lines, which appear as 
 manuscript insertions here only, must be accepted with un- 
 feigned joy and deep gratitude as the heaven-born inspirations 
 of the greatest genius the world ever saw. No future edition 
 of Shakspere can ever dare to appear without all these ad- 
 ditions and corrections ; and as they are all copyright, and 
 may not be used by any one but me, it follows that the Bard 
 is in future my private property, and all other editors are 
 hereby " warned off";" but it is not very likely such misguided 
 labourers will appear after this warning ; if they do, they will 
 be stigmatized as all such "trespassers," deserve. 
 
 I feel that I have but one rival, and that one is Mr. Thomas 
 Perkins, who lived about 1660, "there or thereabouts;" and 
 who must have been a Scotsman, as he evidently possessed the 
 power of " second sight," looking into futurity so wondrously
 
 that he wrote with his own hand emendations in the text of 
 his folio which were first invented by the scholars of the suc- 
 ceeding century. I have no enmity towards this clever man ; 
 on the contrary, I believe I shall be found a staunch supporter 
 of his new readings and general views ; and I only hope I shall 
 obtain the same support from his admirers that I so willingly 
 accord this gentleman. 
 
 Taking a leaf from the book of the learned man who has 
 consented to act as his dry-nurse in the world of letters, I 
 first announced my discovery in the pages of an eminent 
 literary journal.* It is like Mrs. Inchbald's, "a simple 
 story," and may be thus repeated. 
 
 The plays of our immortal Bard, banished from the fashion- 
 able part of our metropolis, had found a home among " the 
 wise men of the east," and I had determined to see what sort 
 of lodging Mr. Phelps had given them at Sadlers Wells. My 
 zeal " outran the pauser reason," and I reached the theatre 
 much too early; I therefore strolled towards Islington to 
 occupy the hour which must elapse before the doors would 
 open. Pausing at a book-stall, my eye fell upon a grim old 
 folio, a mere bundle of dirty leaves, without a beginning or 
 end. I took it up could it be ? my heart leaped at the 
 hope ! yes, it was the players' edition of Shakspere. I 
 asked the price. "Two and sixpence," replied the book- 
 seller, " as it's a biggish book." It was plain he could not 
 read, and knew not its value. That, however, was not my 
 business ; giving him no time for reflection I paid the money, 
 seized the book, rushed into the first cab unhired, and got 
 safe off with my prize. Sadlers Wells was forgotten the 
 Globe on the Bankside filled my imagination. I blundered 
 to my study in the darkness, lit my lamp, and then for the 
 first time discovered that the book had been the property of 
 the late Joseph Grimaldi, for many years resident in Spa 
 
 * See the 'Literary Gazette,' July, 1853, not the ' Fourpenny Exterminator,' 
 which is rabid in defence of my rival, and regularly burkes opponents.
 
 Fields, where he died. There, in the original handwriting of the 
 great clown was the inscription which I here copy in facsimile. 
 
 Dear reader, are not the letters positively riant ! do they 
 not bear impress of the joy with which the volume has been 
 owned of the pleasure taken in the labour bestowed upon 
 it ! Turning over the leaves, what sunbeams seemed to shine 
 from them ! Grimaldi, with true sympathetic genius, had 
 corrected the typographical blunders left and made by the 
 players. Here, in the writing of old Joe, were ten thousand 
 emendations that had puzzled all previous commentators. I 
 commence my specimens with the two I have already pub- 
 lished. Mercutio describes the chariot of Queen Mab, as 
 
 " Drawn by a team of little atomies." 
 The corrupt text is thus corrected in the Grimaldi folio : 
 
 " Drawn by a team of little attornies." 
 
 And when we remember how attornies can and will draw, the 
 correction flashes on us with the light of conviction. 
 Again, in Macbeth, one of the witches says 
 
 " The rump-fed ronyon cries." 
 
 But who can doubt the integrity of Grimaldi's pen ? 
 " The rump and onion fries." 
 
 There is a very curious variation in our copy of the same 
 play, the propriety of which cannot possibly be doubted. The 
 first line, instead of being 
 
 " When shall we three meet again ?" 
 is printed thus : 
 
 " When shall we tJiee meet again ?" 
 
 or, in other words, when shall we meet again with thee?
 
 6 
 
 This seems better grammar than the old reading ; though, on 
 the other hand, it may be said that the letter r has dropped 
 out at the press. It is easy to account for it in this way, but 
 who is to prove the fact ? We repeat that our copy reads thee* 
 As a specimen of the strong common-sense of the com- 
 ments by immortal Joe, and of the elisions which he has 
 made in the text with an amount of taste and judgment only 
 equalled by " Perkins " himself, I give the dialogue between 
 Malcolm and the Doctor in Macbeth (act. iv, sc. 3), which 
 alludes to the mysterious royal gift of healing diseases by touch. 
 " Malcolm. Comes the king forth, I pray you ? 
 
 Doctor. Ay, sir ; there are a crew of wretched souls, 
 That stay his cure : their malady convinces 
 The great assay of art ; but at his touch, 
 Such sanctity hath heaven given his hand, 
 They presently amend. 
 Malcolm. I thank you, Doctor. [Exit Doctor." 
 
 This passage is altered in our amended copy by the sub- 
 stitution of gulls for souls. 
 
 " There are a crew of wretched gulls 
 That stay his cure." 
 
 The blundering confusion in the next sentence is at once 
 got rid of, as well as the rest of the speech, by drawing the 
 pen vigorously through the whole ; and so ending the scene 
 with Malcolm's polite acknowledgment to the medical prac- 
 titioner of Macbeth's household. The long speech which 
 follows his exit, and in which is contained a tiresome descant 
 on this foolish and exploded belief, is treated in the same 
 summary manner ; the pen-marks across the lines are remark- 
 ably strong and vigorous, and can only be properly under- 
 stood by a facsimile of the entire page, which I had at one 
 time an intention of giving. I content, myself, however, with 
 the marginal remark appended to these important castrations, 
 
 * It is highly important to note these kinds of variations. A similar 
 curious instance is pointed out by Mr. Collier on the word lands in the 
 Comedy of Errors, where he observes : " In Lord Francis Egerton's copy of 
 the first folio the word is printed lans, as if the letter d had dropped out ; 
 but it is inserted in the Duke of Devonshire's first folio, having been cor- 
 rected in the press." Collier's Shakespeare, vol. ii, p. 153.
 
 which conveys with singular terseness and force the corrector's 
 estimate of the passage. 
 
 * 
 
 Macbeth has received much attention from Grimaldi. He 
 has not only corrected the text but has added minute stage 
 directions, of the most important and elucidatory nature. 
 Thus in the famous scene where the Thane exclaims 
 " is this a dagger which I see before me ? " 
 
 Grimaldi has written in the margin, opposite that line, 
 "Dagger hanging, O. P.;" which, for the benefit of non- 
 professional readers, I may say means that a dagger must be 
 suspended above Macbeth and opposite the side where the 
 prompter is stationed, and where the actor stands, in order 
 that the meaning of his alarm may be at once apparent. I 
 trust our eyes will never more be offended by staring at 
 vacancy when this scene is acted at the theatres ; for why are 
 we not to see the dagger as well as Banquo's Ghost, both 
 being equally the result of the Thane's " evil conscience ; " 
 and common-sense requires that the audience should see what 
 Macbeth sees, to fully comprehend and appreciate histerrors. 
 In Hamlet "we have another valuable instance of the atten- 
 tion paid to stage effect, and again feel the great value of the 
 commentator's practical mind. In act iii, sc. 4, where the 
 Prince is surprised by the sudden appearance of his father's 
 spirit, the following piece of what is technically called " stage 
 business " is noted for his use, 
 
 i.e., throw the chair down upon which Hamlet has been seated, 
 which will add to his apparent consternation, and produce a 
 startling effect upon the audience. It is remarkable that this 
 is an antique stage-tradition, and the frontispiece to Hamlet,
 
 8 
 
 in Howe's Shakespeare, 1709, exhibits the practice, so that 
 we have no doubt it was handed down from the time of the 
 dramatist himself, who may also have taught the grave-digger 
 to " make the groundlings laugh," by pulling off twenty waist- 
 coats, a practice which has improperly ceased of late years, but 
 which we hope our indignant remonstrance may again revive. 
 We have noted many other alterations in Hamlet of a very 
 important and voluminous kind; but their nature requires 
 that they be given in extenso, inasmuch as they tend entirely to 
 remodel the character. One line may be a clue to the whole : 
 in the fencing scene, the Queen exclaims, 
 
 " Our son is fat and scant of breath ; " 
 
 it is therefore evident, says Grimaldi, that the part should be 
 played like that of Falstaff with " stuffing," or else what be- 
 comes of the sense of these words the mere common-sense! 
 There is little doubt that the great success which attended 
 the Dramatist's creation of the part of Falstaff, induced him 
 to repeat the character in a new light, and the many and judi- 
 cious alterations made by Mr. Grimaldi in the play, as well 
 as some few private notes in the margin, go to prove, that he 
 had been carefully studying the part, hoping one day to give 
 his version to the public. This would indeed have been a 
 novelty une grande solemnite tkedtrale as our French 
 neighbours say of such events ; nor, would it be without a 
 precedent; Lord Lansdowne altered the Merchant of Venice 
 in the reign of William the Third, and gave the part of 
 Shylock to the famous comedian Dogget, who was always 
 received in it with shouts of joyous laughter. We hope to 
 see a similar restoration of Hamlet to Thalia, " a consumma- 
 tion devoutly to be wished ; " and we can imagine the rich 
 treat that awaits an audience who will have the chance of 
 seeing a first-rate comedian like Paul Bedford rolling about the 
 stage in this absurd fencing-match, puffing like a grampus as 
 Laertes pursues him, pricking his fat-sides with a rapier. Then 
 the grimaces over the poisoning, and the general death of all 
 the characters a la Bombastes will be the acme of comicality.
 
 9 
 
 Indeed, the only fault, if it be fault, in these emendations, 
 results from the naturally cheerful temper of Mr. Grimaldi : the 
 vis comica peeps out ever and anon throughout the volume. 
 Thus, when Ophelia is singing her snatches of song, 
 
 " How should I your true love know, 
 
 From another one ? 
 By his cockle hat and staff, 
 And his sandal shoon," 
 
 he has altered the verse thus, 
 
 " How should I your true love know, 
 From another lady's beau ? 
 Oh, by his cockle hat and staff, 
 Which when you see will make you laugh" 
 
 Ophelia, probably, in her distracted state of mind, has 
 mixed up in her imagination a real pilgrim, with some absurd 
 representation of the said genus in a bal masque, at which she 
 may have heartily laughed in happier hours. We should, 
 however, have had some objection to receiving this emendation 
 as final had it not been singularly elucidated in the "Perkins" 
 Shakspere as edited by Collier, a volume that singularly cor- 
 roborates Grimaldi, as the great pantomimist sometimes 
 corroborates it. There, in the midst of a tragic scene of the 
 utmost solemnity occurs a grotesque line, spoken by the 
 Duke of Gloucester to King Henry, (King Henry VI, 
 Part 2, act ii, sc. 3) 
 
 " K. Henry. Stay, Humphrey, duke of Glo'ster : ere thou go, 
 Give up thy staff; Henry will to himself 
 Protector be : and God shall be my hope, 
 My stay, my guide, and lantern to my feet ; 
 And go in peace, Humphrey ; no less beloved, 
 Than when thou wert protector to thy king. 
 
 Qu. Margaret. I see no reason, why a king of years 
 Should be to be protected like a child. 
 God and king Henry govern England's helm : 
 Give up your staff, sir, and the king his realm. 
 
 Glo. My staff? here, noble Henry, is my staff: 
 As willingly do I the same resign, 
 As e'er thy father Heniy made it mine : 
 And even as willingly at thy feet I leave it, 
 As others would ambitiously receive it."
 
 10 
 
 The two latter speeches Mr. Perkins imagines, and Mr. 
 Collier declares, ought to be arranged as rhyme by a series 
 of what he terms "judicious changes," including an "im- 
 portant addition," and so we get the passage thus : 
 
 " Qu. Mar. I see no reason why a king of years 
 Should be protected, like a child, by peers, 
 God and king Henry govern England's helm : 
 Give up your staff, sir, and the king his realm. 
 
 Glo. My staff? here, noble Henry, is my staff: 
 To think I fain would keep it makes me laugh. 
 As willingly I do the same resign, 
 As e'er thy father Henry made it mine." 
 
 This noble line, which we print in italics, we ought, in Mr. 
 Collier's words, " to welcome with thankfulness, as a fortunate 
 recovery and a valuable restoration !" of a line written by 
 Shakspere himself ! ! 
 
 Fortunately the Grimaldi Shakspere gives another instance 
 of the use of this line, which has hitherto unaccountably been 
 omitted in every edition of the Poet's works, but which must 
 have been a favorite with him. In Prospero's speech, Tempest, 
 act v, sc. 1, in which he determines to give up his "rough 
 magic," he says - 
 
 " I'll break my staff ; 
 
 Bury it certain fathoms in the earth. 
 And deeper than did ever plummet sound 
 I'll drown my book." 
 
 The whole of this passage is properly a stage " tag," and 
 ends the simple action of the early part of the scene with four 
 lines of rhyme, thus : 
 
 " I'll break my staff; 
 
 To think I fain would keep it makes me laugh. 
 Bury it certain fathoms in the ground, 
 Much deeper than did ever plummet sound." 
 
 We recommend with confidence and pleasure this important 
 restoration of a lost line of England's greatest bard ; and so 
 opposed are we to any desire to keep it to ourselves, that we 
 cheerfully offer it to Mr. C. or any other editor of Shakspere, 
 hoping that no future edition may appear without it, and no 
 editor be rash enough to omit the line wherever it occurs
 
 11 
 
 either from prejudice or fear. We give this up cheerfully, 
 though, unlike Lear, we cannot " give up all." 
 
 We hope, however, it is distinctly understood that Mr. 
 Grimaldi had no desire to improperly make Shakspere's 
 characters " amusing." Ear from it ! Like Mr. Perkins, the 
 great annotator of 1660, he frequently tried the contrary. 
 Any violation of sense was painful to the distinguished 
 pantomimist who gave meaning to "Tippety Witchet." 
 Mr. Perkins (Collier, p. 44), very properly objects to Froth's 
 nonsense (Measure for Measure, act ii, sc. 1), about " an open 
 room being good for winter,"* but he does not attempt to 
 correct Elbow's absurd parlance deficient alike in grammar and 
 common sense. This Mr. Grimaldi does, with much judicious 
 labour, and with singular propriety, when we consider the 
 solemn nature of the drama which is totally unfitted for 
 buffoonery of this kind. As we have the noble play now 
 " emended," it goes on in stately monotony to the end, and 
 is a very strong proof of the good taste of the corrector, who, 
 though so fond of his joke, that his name was felicitously 
 punned upon as " Mr. Grin-all-day," was evidently prepared 
 at any time to sacrifice his leading propensity at the altar of 
 propriety. 
 
 The famous curds-and-cream emendation of Mr. Perkins 
 (Collier, p. 35), which has excited some stupid ridicule from 
 the thoughtless, is corroborated also by Mr. Grimaldi, who 
 has restored a lost line in another play of the Bard's. In the 
 Merry Wives of Windsor, act ii, sc. 3, the Host says to 
 Dr. Caius : 
 
 " I will bring thee where Mistress Anne Page is at a farm-house a feasting, 
 and thou shalt woo her. Cried I aim, said I well?" 
 
 This passage has been thoughtlessly taken as a common 
 conversational phrase well understood by Shaksperian critics. 
 
 * He proposes to read " good for icindows, " that is, having plenty of such 
 articles. But does this not suggest another reading ? Might not such a 
 room be considered "good h\- glaziers." Shakspere is often fond of verbal 
 jingles.
 
 12 
 
 Not so. Mr. Collier has discovered that the error "is at 
 once set right by the manuscript-corrector;" and he remarks : 
 
 " The truth seems to be, that the Host, having said that Anne Page was 
 feasting at a farm-house, in order still more to incite Dr. Caius to go there, 
 mentioned the most ordinary objects of feasting at farm-houses at that time, 
 viz., curds and cream,- 'curds and cream' in the hands of the old com- 
 positor, became strangely metamorphosed into cried game at least this is 
 the marginal explanation in the corrected folio, 1632. The Host, therefore, 
 ends his speech about Ann Page's feasting at the farm-house, by the ex- 
 clamation, ' Curds and cream ! said I well ?' " 
 
 In the Winters Tale, singularly enough, the great Joe 
 furnishes us with an important line where one is wanted to 
 complete the sense, and in which this rural delicacy is 
 named. The Old Shepherd (act iv, sc. 3) blames Perdita 
 for not playing the hostess at the feast as his " old wife " 
 used to do, who 
 
 " welcom'd all ; serv'd all : 
 
 Would sing her song, and dance her turn : now here 
 At upper end o' the table, now i' the middle ; 
 On his shoulder and his ; her face o' fire 
 With labor ; and the thing she took to quench it, 
 She would to each one sip." 
 
 But "the thing " itself is never mentioned, and the charac- 
 teristic prolixity and perspicuity of the speech destroyed by 
 the omission. Happily this can never occur again, unless the 
 copyright act deter poachers from the Shakspere preserve 
 which our annotated copy makes our own private property. 
 This is the way we have the passage, and we may again hint 
 that it is our own copyright : 
 
 " the thing she took to quench it 
 
 Was curds and cream, which in a flowing bowl 
 She would to each one sip." 
 
 This noble line is unquestionably Shakspere's, and is 
 another proof added to the many of his simple tastes, and 
 ardent relish for country life and farm-house pleasures, which 
 he always possessed throughout his career ; getting money in 
 London merely to spend it in Stratford, and gladly exchang- 
 ing the metropolitan sky-blue for the curds and cream of the 
 Warwickshire farm-houses, where the last news from London
 
 13 
 
 conveyed by his lips would be a welcome return for the 
 primitive delicacies he loved so well. 
 
 We think it will now be clear that such readings as these 
 must in future appear in all editions of Shakspere, except 
 those edited by such persons as have " no right" to use them, 
 and thus " adhere of necessity to the antiquated blunder, and 
 pertinaciously attempt to justify it" 
 
 There is a passage in Richard III. which has hitherto 
 been received as the genuine reading. The "First Gent." says 
 to Gloucester when he stops the funeral cortege of Henry VI, 
 
 " My lord, stand back, and let the coffin pass." 
 
 A few moments consideration will show that this cannot be 
 a correctly expressed line. Coffins are denied volition, and 
 he must have used other words to make his meaning clear 
 such as "let the bearers pass" but we are fortunately saved 
 all conjecture, by the true reading appearing in our Grimaldi 
 folio of 1816, by which it appears the entire line as it gene- 
 rally stands is a printer's error. The line of type has dropped 
 out in moving the form (no uncommon occurrence in a printing 
 office) and the ignorant mechanic in trying to repair his fault 
 has made it what it is. This is what it should be : 
 " My lord, stand back and let the parson cough." 
 
 This new reading fortunately requires no defensive argu- 
 ments when we remember that the clergyman had been 
 walking bareheaded and slowly through the streets of London ; 
 and that common politeness required the " First Gent." to save 
 Gloucester, also a gentleman, from an unguarded approxima- 
 tion to his explosive lungs. 
 
 There is another passage in this play, which by the simple 
 omission of a comma has been much altered in its significance. 
 It occurs in the speech of Ratcliff (act v, sc. 3), when he 
 abruptly enters the tent of Richard and answers his query 
 " who 's there " by 
 
 'tis I. The early village cock 
 
 Hath twice done salutation to the morn."
 
 14 
 
 The query, when once put by Kemble, was answered thus : 
 My lord 'tis I the early village cock. 
 
 The actor who thus replied has been subjected to much 
 absurd odium. Like many a thinking man, he was in advance 
 of his time. Grimaldi restores the passage, and points it as 
 we print it, omitting the next line, and making all easy. It 
 is in fact an appropriate and beautiful bit, quite in character 
 with the alternation from grave to gay, so characteristic of the 
 great bard, and which was never better displayed than in this 
 instance. Richard has started full of the horrible remem- 
 brance of the ghosts, and with looks of utmost alarm has 
 interrogated the abrupt intruder ; who at once, with amiable 
 presence of mind, reassures the King that " all is serene " by 
 the cheerful jocularity of his response. We put it to the 
 theatrical world whether the effect of this undoubtedly correct 
 reading might not be considerably heightened if Ratcliff's 
 face was whitened, but that is a point for managers to settle. 
 I have just said that this is the "undoubtedly correct 
 reading." I should not have used so strong a term had I not 
 taken much pains, in every way, to confirm my view. I have 
 not depended on books alone, or on the fact of this reading 
 having once appeared upon the stage ; but have inquired 
 through a living channel of stage tradition, which puts it past 
 a doubt. Mrs. Mary Ann Smith, an aged " dresser " at the 
 Victoria Theatre, has been introduced to me as one of " the 
 oldest inhabitants " of any modern playhouse. She is the 
 relict of a minor actor, who was celebrated for a long life 
 devoted to little parts. He once played Ratcliff, but was 
 deterred from speaking the speech as we propose in future 
 that it should be spoken, by the managers. Mrs. S. distinctly 
 recollects that he would have done so, because his grand- 
 mother knew that his grandfather, who remembered Betterton, 
 always said it was fit and proper. I mentioned to her the fact 
 of a full stop appearing after " 'tis I," but she at once in- 
 geniously and convincingly replied, " there could be no such
 
 15 
 
 thing, because the speech was not ended ;" adding that she 
 "never heard of stops, except to stop when somebody else 
 was talking." 
 
 It is astonishing, recollecting, as Mr. Collier observes, how 
 many learned hands the works of the great dramatist have 
 passed through, that the important topographical allusions in 
 his plays should have escaped notice. One play alone, Twelfth 
 Night, is replete with important references to London topo- 
 graphy; witness the allusions to the "bells of St. Bennet 
 one, two, three," and to that remarkable passage in the 
 third act, 
 
 " In the south, suburbs, at the Elephant, 
 Is best to lodge ;" 
 
 where the newly discovered MS. reads, with unquestionable 
 authority, 
 
 " In the south suburbs, at the Elephant and Castle, 
 Is best to lodge." 
 
 It is unnecessary to say that the hostelry known as the 
 Elephant and Castle, is in the south suburbs ; a fact which 
 proves the correctness of the reading beyond a doubt. 
 The line in Henry the Fifth, act i, sc. 1, 
 
 " The strawberry grows underneath the nettle," 
 a line which is botanically wrong, is admirably corrected into 
 
 "The strawberry grows to fill the market pottle," 
 the ear doing for us what the eye would fail to correct. In 
 the same speech we have another important amendment : the 
 Bishop of Ely declares that 
 
 " the prince obscur'd his contemplation 
 
 Under the veil of wildness ; which no doubt 
 Grew like the summer grass, fastest by night." 
 
 The new reading is 
 
 " Grew like a modern gent, ' fastest ' by night ;" 
 
 a much more appropriate line ; this abbreviation of the word 
 gentleman being a genuine characteristic of the Shaksperian 
 era.
 
 ^1 Q 
 
 H 
 
 16 
 
 In concluding my series of specimens, I may be pardoned 
 for offering one correction of my own in the poet's text, inas- 
 much as it proves that the word "ache" should be pro- 
 nounced aitch. There is a play upon the word in the excla- 
 mation of Scarus, in Anthony and Cleopatra, act iv, sc. 7 : 
 
 " I had a wound here that was like a T ; 
 But now 'tis made a H." 
 
 The accompanying diagram will explain this clearly. He 
 had received in battle a sword cut, as at H M, and had after- 
 wards another at right angles with it, vv; 
 with unconquered energy he still continued 
 y fighting, till another downward cut, G B, had 
 formed the great H, "aitch," or ache, that the 
 a dramatist makes the brave fellow joke upon, 
 and exclaim that he has still 
 " Boom for six scotches more ! " 
 
 This obscure and difficult passage is, by the aid of this 
 note and diagram, made entirely clear by following the line I 
 point out, which is H - v M B v G. 
 
 I have now said enough to establish my claim to attention, 
 and to ensure the world an edition totally unlike all previous 
 ones. I shall work diligently at it, and give the reading 
 public the benefit of the whole three thousand corrections, 
 for there are as many, and all nearly as valuable as any I have 
 given, or are given in " the Perkins Shakspere." I have no 
 ill-feeling to that humourous work, nor do I wish to rival it : 
 I only hope that " Grimaldi " and " Perkins " may go hand in 
 hand to posterity, as the two ablest of the modern lights 
 which have clarified the darkness of the Swan of Avon. 
 
 Printed by E. TUCKER, Perry's Place, Oxford Street.
 
 UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA 
 
 AT 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 LIBRARY
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 MAY 1 1 
 
 FormL9-25m-8,'46(9852)444
 
 V 
 
 I