« AnteriorContinuar »
one up to this task in some future time, by shewing the possibility of it; which he may be further convinc'd of, if he reflects what great things have been done, by criticks amongst ourselves, upon subjects of this fort, and of a more remov'd antiquity than he is concern'd in. A Life thus constructed, interspers'd with such anecdotes of common notoriety as the writer's judgment shall tell him—are worth regard; together with some memorials of this poet that are happily come down to us; such as, an instrument in the Heralds' Office, confirming arms to his father; a Patent preserv’d in Rymer, granted by James the First; his last Will and Testament, extant now at Doctors Commons; his Stratford monument, and a monument of his daughter which is said to be there also ;—such a Life would rise quickly into a volume; especially, with the addition of one proper and even necessary episode-a brief history of our drama, from its origin down to the poet's death: even the stage he appear'd upon, it's form, dressings, actors should be enquir'd into, as every one of those circumstances had some considérable effect upon what he compos'd for it: The subject is certainly a good one, and will fall (we hope) ere it be long into the hands of some good writer ; by whose abilities this great want may at length be made up to us, and the world of letters enrich'd by the happy acquisition of a masterly Life of Shakspeare. CAPELL.
THE want of adherence to the old copies,
1 which has been complained of, in the text of every modern republication of Shakspeare, is fairly deducible from Mr. Rowe's inattention to one of the first duties of an editor. Mr. Rowe did not print from the earliest and most correct, but from the most remote and inaccurate of the four folios. Between the years 1623 and 1685 (the dates of the
: s First printed in 1773. Malone.
6 " I must not (says Mr. Rowe in his dedication to the Duke of Somerset) pretend to have restor'd this work to the exactness of the author's original manuscripts : those, are loft, or, at least, are gone beyond any enquiry I could make ; so that there was nothing left, but to compare the several editions, and give the true reading as well as I could from thence. This I have endeavour'd to do pretty carefully, and render'd very many places intelligible, that were not so before. In some of the editions, efpecially the laft, there were many lines (and in Hamlet one whole scene) left out together; these are now all supply'd. I fear your grace will find some faults, but I hope they are mostly literal, and the errors of the press." Would not any one, from this declaration, suppose that Mr. Rowe (who does not appear to have consulted a single quarto) had at least compared the folios. with each other? STEEVENS.
first and last) the errors in every play, at least, were trebled. Several pages in each of these ancient editions have been examined, that the assertion might come more fully supported. It may be added, that as every fresh editor continued to make the text of his predecessor the ground-work of his own (never collating but where difficulties occurred) fome deviations from the originals had been handed down, the number of which are lef. sened in the impression before us, as it has been constantly compared with the most authentick copies, whether collation was absolutely necessary for the recovery of senso, or not. The person who undertook this task may have failed by inadvertency, as well as those who preceded him ; but the reader may be assured, that he, who thought it his duty to free an author from such modern and unneceffary innovations as had been censured in others, has not ventured to introduce any of his own.
It is not pretended that a complete body of various readings is here collected; or that all the diversities which the copies exhibit, are pointed out; as near two thirds of them are typographical mistakes, or such a change of insignificant particles, as would croud the bottom of the page with an oftentation of materials, from which at last nothing useful could be selected.
The dialogue might indeed sometimes be lengthened by other insertions than have hitherto been made, but without advantage either to its spirit or beauty as in the following instance :
Lear. No. 66 Kent. Yes. - Lear. No, I say. " Kent. I say, yea.
Here the quartos add :
“ Lear. No, no, they would not. . “ Kent. Yes, they have.” By the admission of this negation and affirmationi, has any new idea been gained ?
The labours of preceding editors have not left room for a boast, that many valuable readings have been retrieved; though it may be fairly asserted, that the text of Shakspeare is restored to the condition in which the author, or rather his first publishers, appear to have left it, such emendations as were abfolutely necessary, alone admitted : for where a particle, indispensably necessary to the sense was wanting, such a supply has been filently adopted from other editions ; but where á fyllable, or more, had been added for the fake of the metre only, which at first might have been irregular,? such interpolations are here constantly retrenched, * sometimes with, and fometimes without notice.
Those speeches, which in the elder editions are printed as prose, and from their own construction are incapable of being compressed into verse, without the aid of supplemental syllables, are restored to profe again ; and the measure is divided afresh in others, where the mass of words had been inharmoniously feparated into lines..
The scenery, throughout all the plays, is regulated in conformity to a rule, which the poet, by his general practice seems to have proposed to him self. Several of his pieces are come down to us, divided into scenes as well as acts. These divisions were probably his own, as they are made on settled
? I retract this supposition, which was too hastily formed. note on The Tempeji, Vol. IV. p. 73. STEEVENS.
principles, which would hardly have been the case, had the task been executed by the players. A change of scene, with Shakspeare, most commonly implies a change of place, but always an entire evacuation of the stage. The custom of distinguishing every entrance or exit by a fresh scene, was adopted, perhaps very idly, from the French theatre.
For the length of many notes, and the accumulation of examples in others, some apology may be likewise expected. An attempt at brevity is often found to be the source of an imperfect ex planation. Where a passage has been constantly misunderstood, or where the jest or pleasantry has been suffered to remain long in obscurity, more instances have been brought to clear the one, or elucidate the other, than appear at first sight to have been necessary. For these it can only be said, that when they prove that phraseology or source of merriment to have been once general, which at present seems particular, they are not quite impertinently intruded ; as they may serve to free the author from a suspicion of having employed an affected fingularity of expression, or indulged himself in allusions to transient customs, which were not of sufficient notoriety to deserve ridicule or reprehension. When examples in favour of contradictory opinions are assembled, though no attempt is made to decide on either part, such neutral collections should always be regarded as materials for future criticks, who may hereafter apply them with success. Authorities, whether in respect of words, or things, are not always producible from the most celebrated writers ;8 yet such
8 Mr. T. Warton in his excellent Remarks on the Fairy Queen. of Spenser, offers a similar apology for having introduced illuf