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