endeavouring to make him speak better than the old copies

have done.

Where, through all the former editions, a paffage has laboured under flat nonfenfe and invincible darkness, if, by the addition or alteration of a letter or two, or a tranfpofition in the pointing, I have reftored to him both fenfe and fentiment; fuch corrections, I am perfuaded, will need no indulgence.

And whenever I have taken a greater latitude and liberty in amending, I have conftantly endeavoured to fupport my corrections and conjectures by parallel paffages and authorities from himfeif, the fureft means of expounding any author whatfoever. Cette vie d'interpreter un autheur par lui-même eft plus fure que tous les commentaires, fays a very learned French critick.

As to my notes (from which the common and learned readers of our author, I hope, will derive fome fatisfaction) I have endeavoured to give them a variety in fome propertion to their number. Wherever I have ventured at an emendation, a note is conftantly fubjoined to justify and affert the reafon of it. Where I only offer a conjecture, and do not difturb the text, I fairly fet forth my grounds for fuch conjecture, and fubmit it to judgment. Some remarks are spent in explaining paffages, where the wit or fatire depends on an obfcure point of hiftory: others, where allufions are to divinity, philofophy, or other branches of fcience. Some are added to fhew, where there is a fufpicion of our author having borrowed from the ancients: others, to fhew where he is rallying his contemporaries; or where he himself is rallied by them. And fome are neceffarily thrown in, to explain an obfcure and obsolete term, phrafe, or idea. I once intended to have added a complete and copious gloffary; but as I have been importuned, and am prepared to give a correct edition of our author's POEMS, (in which many terms occur that are not to be met with in his plays) I thought a glossary to all Shakespeare's works more proper to attend that volume.

In reforming an infinite number of paffages in the pointing, where the fenfe was before quite loft, I have frequently fubjoined notes to fhew the depraved, and to prove the reformed, pointing: a part of labour in this work which I could very willingly have fpared myfelf. May it not be objected, why then have you burdened us with these notes ? The anfwer is obvious, and, if I mistake not, very ma

terial.

terial. Without fuch notes, these paffages in fubfequent editions would be liable, through the ignorance of printers and correctors, to fall into the old confufion: whereas, a note on every one hinders all poffible return to depravity; and for ever fecures them in a state of purity and integrity not to be loft or forfeited.

Again, as fome notes have been neceffary to point out the detection of the corrupted text, and establish the reftoration of the genuine readings; fome others have been as neceflary for the explanation of paffages obfcure and difficult. To understand the neceffity and ufe of this part of my task, fome particulars of my author's character are previously to be explained. There are obfcurities in him, which are common to him with all poets of the fame fpecies; there are others, the iffue of the times he lived in; and there are others, again, peculiar to himself. The nature of comick poetry being entirely fatirical, it bufies itself more in expofing what we call caprice and humour, than vices cognizable to the laws. The English, from the happiness of a free conftitution, and a turn of mind peculiarly fpeculative and inquifitive, are obferved to produce more humourists, and a greater variety of original characters, than any other people whatsoever and thefe owing their immediate birth to the peculiar genius of each age, an infinite number of things alluded to, glanced at, and expofed, muft needs become obfcure, as the characters themfelves are antiquated and disused. An editor therefore should be well verfed in the hiftory and manners of his author's age, if he aims at doing him a service in this respect.

Befides, wit lying mostly in the affemblage of ideas, and in putting thofe together with quickness and variety, wherein can be found any refemblance, or congruity, to make up pleafant pictures, and agreeable vifions in the fancy; the writer, who aims at wit, muft of course range far and wide for materials. Now the age in which Shakefpeare lived, having, above all others, a wonderful affection to appear learned, they declined vulgar images, fuch as are immediately fetched from nature, and ranged through the circle of the sciences to fetch their ideas from thence. But as the refemblances of fuch ideas to the subject must neceffarily lie very much out of the common way, and every piece of wit appear a riddle to the vulgar; this, that fhould have taught them the forced, quaint, unnatural tract they were in (and induce them to follow a more natural one)

was

was the very thing that kept them attached to it. The oftentatious affectation of abftrufe learning, peculiar to that time, the love that men naturally have to every thing that looks like mystery, fixed them down to the habit of obfcurity. Thus became the poetry of DoNNE (though the wittiest man of that age) nothing but a continued heap of riddles. And our Shakespeare, with all his eafy nature about him, for want of the knowledge of the true rules of art, falls frequently into this vicious manner.

The third fpecies of obfcurities which deform our author, as the effects of his own genius and character, are those that proceed from his peculiar manner of thinking, and as peculiar a manner of cloathing thofe thoughts. With regard to his thinking, it is certain, that he had a general knowledge of all the fciences: but his acqnaintance was rather that of a traveller than a native. Nothing in philofophy was unknown to him; but every thing in it had the grace and force of novelty. And as novelty is one main fource of admiration, we are not to wonder that he has perpetual allufions to the moft recondite parts of the fciences and this, was done not fo much out of affectation, as the effect of admiration begot by novelty. Then, as to his stile and diction, we may much more justly apply to SHAKESPEARE, what a celebrated writer faid of MILTON: Our language funk under him, and was unequal to that greatness of foul which furnished him with fuch glorious conceptions. He therefore fre quently ufes old words, to give his diction an air of fo lemnity; as he coins others, to exprefs the novelty and variety of his ideas,

Upon every diftinct fpecies of thefe obfcurities, I have thought it my province to employ a note for the fervice of my author, and the entertainment of my readers. A few tranfient remarks too I have not fcrupled to intermix, upon the poet's negligences and omiffions in point of art; but I have done it always in fuch a manner, as will teftify my deference and veneration for the immortal author. Some cenfurers of Shakespeare, and particularly Mr. Rymer, have taught me to diftinguish betwixt the railer and critick. The outrage of his quotations is fo remarkably violent, fo pushed beyond all bounds of decency and fober reafoning, that it quite carries over the mark at which it was levelled. Extravagant abufe throws off the edge of the intended dif paragement, and turns the madman's weapon into his own bofom. In fhort, as to Rymer, this is my opinion

of

of him, from his criticisms on the tragedies of the last age. He writes with great vivacity, and appears to have been a fcholar: but as for his knowledge of the art of poetry, I cannot perceive it was any deeper than his acquaintance with Boffu and Dacier, from whom he has tranfcribed many of his beft reflexions. The late Mr. Gildon was one attached to Rymer by a fimilar way of thinking and studies. They were both of that fpecies of critics who are defirous of difplaying their powers rather in finding faults, than in confulting the improvement of the world: the hyper-critical part of the fcience of criticifm.

I had not mentioned the modeft liberty I have here and there taken of animadverting on my author, but that I was willing to obviate in time the fplenetick exaggerations of my adverfaries on this head. From paft experiments I have reafon to be confcious, in what light this attempt may be placed and that what I call a moleft liberty, will, by a little of their dexterity, be inverted into downright impudence. From a hundred mean and dishonest artifices employed to difcredit this edition, and to cry down its editor, I have all the grounds in nature to beware of attacks. But though the malice of wit, joined to the fmoothnefs of verfification, may furnish fome ridicule; fact, I hope, will be able to ftand its ground against banter and gaiety.

It has been my fate, it feems, as I thought it my duty, to difcover fome anachronisms in our author; which might have flept in obfcurity but for this Reftorer, as Mr. Pope is pleafed affectionately to file me; as for inftance, where Ariftotle is mentioned by Hector in Troilus and Creffida: and Galen, Cato, and Alexander the Great, in Coriolanus. Thefe, in Mr. Pope's opinion, are blunders, which the illiteracy of the first publishers of his works has fathered upon the poet's memory: it not being at all credible, that thefe could be the errors of any man who had the leaft tinƐlure of a fchool, or the leaft converfation with fuch as bad. But I have fufliciently proved, in the courfe of my notes, that fuch anachronisms were the effect of poetick licence, rather than of ignorance in our poet. And if I may be permitted to afk a modeft queftion by the way, why may not I reftore an anachronism really made by our author, as well as Mr. Pope take the privilege to fix others upon him, which he never had it in his head to make: as I may venture to affirm he had not, in the inftance of Sir Francis Drake, to which I have fpoke in the proper place?

But

But who shall dare make any words about this freedom of Mr. Pope's towards Shakespeare, if it can be proved, that, in his fits of criticism, he makes no more ceremony with good Homer himself? To try, then, a criticifm of his own advancing; in the 8th book of the Odysey, where Demodocus fings the episode of the loves of Mars and Venus; and that, upon their being taken in the net by Vulcan,

"The god of arms

Muft pay the penalty for lawless charms ;”

Mr. Pope is fo kind gravely to inform us, "That Homer "in this, as in many other places, feems to allude to the "laws of Athens, where death was the punishment of "adultery." But how is this fignificant obfervation made out? Why, who can poffibly object any thing to the contrary?Does not Paufanias relate, that Draco, the lawgiver to the Athenians, granted impunity to any person that took revenge upon an adulterer? And was it not alfo the inftitution of Solon, that if any one took an adulterer in the fact, he might use him as he pleafed? Thefe things are very true: and to fee what a good memory, and found judgment in conjunction can atchieve! Though Homer's date is not determined down to a single year, yet it is pretty generally agreed that he lived above 300 years before Draco and Solon: and that, it feems, has made him feem to allude to the very laws, which these two legiflators propounded above 300 years after. If this inference be not fomething like an anachronism or prolepfis, I will look once more into my lexicons for the true meaning of the words. It appears to me, that fomebody befides Mars and Venus has been caught in a net by this epifode: and I could call in other inftances to confirm what treacherous tackle this net-work is, if not cautiously handled.

How juft, notwithstanding, I have been in detecting the anachronisms of my author, and in defending him for the use of them, our late editor feems to think, they fhould rather have flept in obfcurity: and the having difcovered them is fneered at, as a fort of wrong-headed fagacity.

The numerous corrections which I have made of the poet's text in my SHAKESPEARE Reftored, and which the publick have been fo kind to think well of, arc, in the appendix of Mr. Pope's last edition, flightingly called various reasonings, gueffes, &c. He confeffes to have inferted as many of them as he judged of any the leaft advantage to the poet; but fays,

VOL. I.

[K]

that