Right Honourable, Whilst we studie to be thankful in our particular, for the many favors we have received from your L. L. we are falne upon the ill fortune, to mingle two the most diverse things that can bee, feare and rashnesse; rashnesse in the enterprize, and feare of the successe. For, when we valew the places your H. H. sustaine, we cannot but know their dignity greater, then to descend to the reading of these trifles: and, while we name them trifles, we have depriv'd ourselves of the defence of our Dedication. But since your L. L. have been pleas'd to thinke these trifles some-thing, heeretofore; and have prosequuted both them, and their Authour living, with so much favour: we hope that (they out-living him, and be not having the fate, common with some, to be exequutor to his owne writings) you will use the same indulgence toward them, you have done unto their parent. There is a great difference, whether any booke choose his Patrones, or finde them: This hath done both. For, so much were your L. L. likings of the severall parts, when they were acted, as before they were published, the Volume ask'd to be yours. We have but collected them, and done an office to the dead, to procure his Orphanes, Guardians; without ambition either of selfe-profit, || or fame: onely to keepe the memory of so worthy a Friend, and Fellow alive, as was our SHAKESPEARE, by humble offer of his playes, to your most noble patronage. Wherein, as we have justly observed, no man to come neere your L. L. but with a kind of religious addresse, it hath bin the height of our care, who are the Presenters, 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 gummes and incense, obtained their requests with a leavened Cake. It was no fault to approch their Gods by what meanes they could: And the most, though meanest, of things are made more 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; 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, The Preface of the Players. Prefixed to the first folio edition, published in 1623. To the great variety of Readers, From the most able, to him that can but spell: there you are number'd. We had rather you were weigh'd. Especially, when the fate of all Bookes depends upon your capacities: and not of your heads alone, but of your purses. Well! it is now publique, and you wil stand for your priviledges wee know: to read, and censure. Do so, but buy it first. That doth best commend a Booke, the Stationer saies. Then, how odde soever your braines be, or your wisdomes, make your licence the same, and spare not. Judge your sixe-pen'orth, your shillings worth, your five shillings worth at a time, or higher, so you rise to the just rates, and welcome. But, whatever you do, Buy. Censure will not drive a Trade, or make the Jacke go. And though you be a Magistrate of wit, and sit on the Stage at BlackFriers, or the Cock-pit, to arraigne Playes dailie, know, these Playes have had their triall alreadie, and stood out all Appeales; and do now come forth quitted rather by a Decree of Court, than any purchas'd Letters of commendation. It had bene a thing, we confesse, worthie to have bene wished, that the Author himselfe had lived to have set forth, and overseen his owne writings; But since it hath bin ordain'd otherwise, and he by death departed from that right, we pray you, doe not envie his Friends, the office of their care and paine, to have collected and publish'd them; and so to have publish'd them, as where (before) you were abus'd with divers stolne, and surreptitious copies, maimed and deformed by the frauds and stealthes of injurious impostors, that expos'd them: even those are now offer'd to your view cur'd, and perfect of their limbes; and all the rest, absolute in their numbers, as he conceived the: Who, as he was a happie imitator of Nature, was a most gentle expresser of it. His mind and hand went together; and what he thought, he uttered with that easinesse, that wee have scarse received from him a blot in his papers. But it is not our province, who onely gather his works, and give them you, to praise him. It is yours that reade him. And there we hope, to your divers capacities, you will finde enough, both to draw, and hold you: for his wit can no more lie hid, then it could be lost. Reade him, therefore; and againe, and againe: And if then you doe not like him, surely you are in some manifest danger, not to understand him. And so we leave you to other of his Friends, whom if you need, can bee your guides: if you neede them not, you can leade yourselves, and others. And such readers we wish him. JOHN HBMINge, HENRIE CONDELL. Steevens, with some degree of probability, supposes these prefaces to be the productions of Ben Jonson. In 1632, the works of Shakspeare were reprinted in folio by Thomas Cotes, for Robert Allot. Of this edition Malone speaks most contemptuously, though many of the errors of the first are corrected in it, tions without acknowledging the debt. The judgand he himself silently adopted 186 of its correcment passed by Steevens on this edition is, "Though "it be more incorrectly printed than the preceding "one, it has likewise the advantage of various read"ings, which are not merely such as reiterature of "copies will naturally produce. The curious ex "aminer of Shakspeare's text, who possesses the "first of these, ought not to be unfurnished with "the second." The third folio was printed in 1664, for P. C. 16) And a fourth, for H. Herringham, E. Brewster, and R. Bentley, in 1682. "As to these impressions," says Steevens, "they "are little better than waste paper, for they differ "only from the preceding ones by a larger accumu"lation of errors." These are all the ancient editions of Shakspeare. MODERN EDITIONS. Octavo, Rowe's, London, 1709, 7 vols. Ditto, second edition, ditto, 1778, 10 ditto. 10 ditto. These were all printed as Shakspeare's in the third folio, 1664, without having the slightest claim to such a distinction. Steevens thought that the Yorkshire Tragedy might probably be a hasty sketch of our great Poet; but he afterwards silently abanHenslowe 17) that Sir John Oldcastle was the work doned this opinion. We find from the papers of of four writers - Munday, Drayton, Wilson, and Hathway. It is impossible to discover to whom the rest are to be attributed. Some other plays, with about equal pretensions, have likewise been given to our Author. The Arraignment of Paris, which is known to have been written by George Peele. The Birth of Merlin, the work of Rowley, although in the title-page, 1662, probably by a fraud of the bookseller, it is stated to be the joint production of Rowley and Shakspeare. Edward the Third. This play Capell ascribed to Shakspeare, for no other reason but that he thought it too good to be the work of any of his contemporaries. Fair Emma. There is no other ground for supposing this play to be among our author's productions, than its having been met with in a volume, which formerly belonged to Charles II. which is lettered on the back, SHAKSPEARE, Vol. I. The Merry Devil of Edmonton, entered on the Stationers' books as Shakspeare's about the time of the restoration; but there is a former entry, in 1608, in which it is said to be written by T. B. whom Malone supposes to have been Tony or Antony Brewer. Mucedorus. The real author unknown. Malone conceives that he might be R. Greene. Shakspeare is supposed to have had a share in two other plays, and to have assisted Ben Jonson in Sejanus, and Fletcher in the Two Noble Kinsmen. If he was the person who united with Jonson in the composition of Sejanus, which Mr. Gifford very reasonably doubts, no portion of his work is now remaining. The piece, as originally written, was not successful; and the passages supplied by the nameless friend of Jonson were omitted in publication. The fact of his having co-operated with Fletcher in the Two Noble Kinsmen has been much discussed: Pope favours the supposition that Shakspeare's hand may be discovered in the tragedy: Poet wrote "the first act, but in his worst manner." Dr. Warburton expresses a belief that our great All the rest of the commentators, without exception, agree in rejecting this opinion; and attribute the origin of the tale to the puff of a bookseller, who found his profit in uniting the name of Shakspeare with that of Fletcher on publishing the play. The judgment of the majority appears in this case to be the most correct. HARNESS. No. IV. PLAYS ASCRIBED TO SHAKSPEARE, EITHER BY THE EDITORS OF THE TWO LATER FOLIOS, OR BY THE COMPILERS OF ANCIENT CATALOGUES. Locrine. Sir John Oldcastle. 16) This edition is more scarce than even that of 1623; most of the copies having been destroyed in the fire of London, 1666. - HARNESS. have been engraved for this edition of his works || age of forty-three when this portrait was painted. are those, which we have the best grounds for admitting as resemblances of Shakspeare. 1. The engraving from the monument of Stratford, is deserving of the greatest regard. One of the first artists in this country, has given an opinion, coinciding with the common tradition of Stratford, that the original bust was taken from a cast after death: if this were the case it must afford an exact representation of the features, though it would no longer retain the living expression, of Shakspeare. This monument was raised very soon after his decease, and is alluded to in Digges' verses, prefixed to the first folio of 1623. The bust was originally coloured; and tradition conveys to us the knowledge that the eyes were of a light hazel colour, the hair and beard auburn. The doublet in which he was dressed was of scarlet, over which was thrown a loose black gown without sleeves, such as the students of law wear at dinner in the Middle Temple Hall. This monument was repaired, and the colours faithfully restored, in 1748, by Mr. John Hale, an artist of Stratford. This was done at the suggestion, and by the liberality, of Mr. Ward, the maternal grandfather of Mrs. Siddons, who, to create a fund for the occasion, gave a benefit-play at the Town-Hall of Stratford, on the 9th of September, 1746. The play was Othello, and the Rev. Joseph Greene wrote an address, grounded on the famous prologue of Pope to the tragedy of Cato, which Mr. Ward delivered to an audience properly glorying in their townsman. In 1793, Malone, with an affectation of refined taste, which we cannot but lament and condemn, had the whole figure painted white as it now appears. 2. The second picture of Shakspeare which we have given, is a fac simile of the engraving by Martin Droeshout, which was prefixed to the first edition of our Author's works in 1623. Ben Jonson testifies to the resemblance; and the following verses, from his pen, were printed in the Volume on the page fronting the Portrait: TO THE READER. This figure, that those here see put, 3. Another generally received portrait is the Chandos portrait, now at Stowe, in the possession of the Duke of Buckingham. This was once the property of Sir William Davenant, and was copied for Dryden by Kneller. 18) After the death of Davenant, 1663, it was bought by Betterton the actor: when he died, Mr. Robert Keck, of the Inner Temple, gave Mrs. Barry the actress forty guineas for it. From Mr. Keck it passed to Mr. Nicoll of Southgate, whose only daughter married the Marquis of Carnarvon. Shakspeare was probably about the || Steevens questions its authenticity: but without any sufficient grounds; it resembles both the heads that accompany the present work, in the extreme length of the upper lip, and the high forehead. 4. The Felton head, from which the print prefixed to Reed's Shakspeare is taken, was purchased of Mr. Wilson, a picture dealer in St. James's Square, by Mr. S. Felton, of Drayton, in Shropshire. It is on wood, and Steevens wished to persuade the world that it was the architype of Droeshout's engraving. But there was a very strong suspicion entertained that Steevens knew it to be a modern fabrication; that he was well acquainted with the history of its manufacture; and "that there was a "deeper meaning in his words, when he tells us, he "was instrumental in procuring it, than he would "wish to have generally understood." 19) 5. A miniature by Nicholas Hilliard, in the possession of Sir James Bland Burgess. This is said to have been painted for Mr. Somerville of Edstone, who lived in habits of intimacy with Shakspeare. It descended from father to son, as a relic in the Somerville family, till Lord Somerville gave it to his daughter, the mother of Sir James Bland Burgess. It was missing for several years, and recovered in 1813. It is engraved as the frontispiece to the third volume of Boswell's Shakspeare. 6. A head by Cornelius Jansen, in the collection of the Duke of Somerset. This is a beautiful head; it is dated 1610, æt. forty-six; and in a scroll over the head are the two words UT MAGUS, which very personally apply to Shakspeare. The two words are extracted from the famous Epistle of Horace to Augustus, the first of the second book: the particular passage is this: Ille per extentum funcm mihi posse videtur Ut Magus; et modo me Thebis, modo ponit Athenis. All this is certainly applicable to Shakspeare. Jansen, it appears, was in England about the time the picture is supposed to have been painted; and was employed by Lord Southampton, the friend and patron of Shakspeare. For him also, this picture might have been executed. It originally belonged to Mr. Jennens, of Gopsal, in Leicestershire. By his direction a mezzotinto was taken from it by Earlom. There is no more known of the picture. It represents such a man as we might well imagine Shakspeare to have been; but is not sufficiently like the bust of the Stratford monument, or the head prefixed to the first folio, for us to admit it, without considerable doubt, as a genuine portrait of our Author. It is remarkable that a copy of this picture, which is in the possession of Mr. Croker, was lately discovered behind the pannel of a wainscot, in one of the houses lately pulled down near the site of Old Suffolk-street. In drawing out the above account of the portraits of Shakspeare, I have been much indebted to the work of Mr. Boaden, entitled, An Inquiry into the Authenticity of the Various Pictures and Prints of Shakspeare. HARNESS. IV. PRELIMINARY REMARKS то THE PLAYS AND POEMS. I. TEMPEST. THE Tempest and The Midsummer Night's Dream are racters are Prospero and Stephano. Here Ben Jonson taught him the pronunciation of the latter word, which is always right in The Tempest: "Is not this Stephăno, my drunken butler?" And always wrong in his earlier play, The Merchant of Venice, which had been on the stage at least two or three years before its publication in 1600: "My friend Stephāno, signify I pray you," &c. So little did Mr. Capell know of his author, when he In the noblest efforts of that sublime and amazing imagination peculiar to Shakspeare, which soars above the bounds of nature, without forsaking sense; or, more properly, carries nature along with him beyond her established limits. Fletcher seems particularly to have admired these two plays, and hath wrote two in imitation of them, The Sea Voyage, and The Faithful Shepherdess. || idly supposed his school literature might perhaps have But when he presumes to break a lance with Shakspeare, been lost by the dissipation of youth, or the busy scene and write in emulation of him, as he does in The False of public life! FARMER. This play must have been One, which is the rival of Antony and Cleopatra, he is written before 1614, when Jonson sneers at it in his Barnot so successful. After him, Sir John Suckling and tholomew Fair. In the latter plays of Shakspeare, he Milton catched the brightest fire of their imagination has less of pun and quibble than in his early ones. from these two plays; which shines fantastically indeed The Merchant of Venice, he expressly declares against in The Goblins, but much more nobly and serenely in them. This perhaps might be one criterion to discover The Mask at Ludlow Castle. WARBURTON, = No one the dates of his plays. BLACKSTONE. — It was not printed has hitherto been lucky enough to discover the romance till 1623, when it was published with the rest of our on which Shakspeare may be supposed to have founded author's plays in folio. Mr. Malone is of opinion it was this play, the beauties of which could not secure it from written about the year 1611, and considers the circumthe criticism of Ben Jonson, whose malignity appears to stances attending the storm by which Sir George Somers have been more than equal to his wit. In the induction was shipwrecked on the island of Bermuda, in the year to Bartholomew Fair, he says: "If there be never a 1609, as having given rise to the play, and suggested the servant monster in the fair, who can help it, he says, title as well as some of the incidents. Mr. Douce appears nor a nest of antiques? He is loth to make nature afraid to be of the same opinion. See Malone's Shakspeare, in his plays, like those that beget Tales, Tempests, and edit. 1821, and Douce's "Illustrations of Shakspeare." such like drolleries." STEEVENS. = I was informed by CHALMERS. — It is observed of The Tempest, that its plan the late Mr. Collins of Chichester, that Shakspeare's is regular; this the author of The Revisal thinks, what Tempest, for which no origin is yet assigned, was formed I think too, an accidental effect of the story, not intended on a romance called Aurelio and Isabella, printed in Ita- or regarded by our author. But, whatever might be lian, Spanish, French, and English, in 1588. But though Shakspeare's intention in forming or adopting the plot, this information has not proved true on examination, an he has made it instrumental to the production of many useful conclusion may be drawn from it, that Shakspeare's characters, diversified with boundless invention, and prestory is somewhere to be found in an Italian novel, at served with profound skill in nature, extensive knowledge least that the story preceded Shakspeare. Mr. Collins of opinions, and accurate observation of life. In a single had searched this subject with no less fidelity than judg- || drama are here exhibited princes, courtiers, and sailors, ment and industry; but his memory failing in his last all speaking in their real characters. There is the agency calamitous indisposition, he probably gave me the name of airy spirits, and of an earthly goblin. The operations of one novel for another. I remember he added a cir- of magic, the tumults of a storm, the adventures of a cumstance which may lead to a discovery, that the desert island, the native effusion of untaught affection, principal character of the romance, answering to Shak- the punishment of guilt, and the final happiness of the speare's Prospero, was a chemical necromancer, who had pair for whom our passions and reason are equally inter. bound a spirit like Ariel to obey his call, and perform ested. JOHNSON. = his services. Taken at large, the magical part of The Tempest is founded on that sort of philosophy which was practised by John Dee and his associates, and has been called the Rosicrucian. The name Ariel came from the Talmudistic mysteries with which the learned Jews had infected this science. T. WARTON. It was one of our author's last works. In 1598, he played a part in the original Every Man in his Humour. Two of the cha II. TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA. SOME of the incidents in this play may be supposed to have been taken from The Arcadia, book i. chap. vi., where Pyrocles consents to head the Helots. (The Arca dia was entered on the books of the Stationers' Company, || both in the serious and ludicrous scenes, the language Aug. 23, 1588.) The love-adventure of Julia resembles and sentiments of Shakspeare. It is not, indeed, one of that of Viola in Twelfth Night, and is, indeed, common his most powerful effusions; it has neither many diversito many of the ancient novels. STEEVENS. Mrs. Lenox ties of character, nor striking delineations of life; but it observes, and I think not improbably, that the story of abounds in yrouai beyond most of his plays, and few Proteus and Julia might be taken from a similar one in have more lines or passages, which, singly considered, the Diana of George of Montemayor. "This pastoral are eminently beautiful. I am yet inclined to believe romance," says she, "was translated from the Spanish in that it was not very successful, and suspect that it has Shakspeare's time." I have seen no earlier translation escaped corruption, only because, being seldom played, it than that of Bartholomew Yong, who dates his dedication was less exposed to the hazards of transcription. JOHN in November, 1598; and Meres, in his Wit's Treasury,|| SON. = This comedy was written in 1591, according to printed the same year, expressly mentions the Two Gentle- Mr. Malone, who supposes it to have been our author's men of Verona. Indeed, Montemayor was translated two first play; and, viewed as a first production, he thinks or three years before, by one Thomas Wilson; but this it may be pronounced a very elegant and extraordinary work, I am persuaded, was never published entirely; per- performance. CHALMERS. In this play there is a strange haps some parts of it were, or the tale might have been mixture of knowledge and ignorance, of care and negligence. translated by others. However, Mr. Steevens says, very The versification is often excellent, the allusions are learned truly, that this kind of love-adventure is frequent in the and just; but the author conveys his heroes by sea from old novelists. FARMER. There is no earlier translation one inland town to another in the same country; he places of the Diana entered on the books of the Stationers' the emperor at Milan, and sends his young men to attend Company, than that of B. Younge, Sept. 1598. Many him, but never mentions him more; he makes Proteus, translations, however, after they were licensed, were ca- after an interview with Silvia, say he has only seen her priciously suppressed. Among others, "The Decameron picture; and, if we may credit the old copies, he has, of Mr. Johu Boccace, Florentine," was "recalled by my by mistaking places, left his scenery inextricable. The lord of Canterbury's commands." STEEVENS. It is ob- reason of all this confusion seems to be, that he took servable (I know not for what cause) that the style of his story from a novel, which he sometimes followed, and this comedy is less figurative, and more natural and un- sometimes forsook, sometimes remembered, and sometimes affected, than the greater part of this author's, though forgot. That this play is rightly attributed to Shaksupposed to be one of the first he wrote. POPE. It speare, I have little doubt. If it be taken from him, to may very well be doubted whether Shakspeare had any whom shall it be given? This question may be asked of other hand in this play than the enlivening it with some all the disputed plays, except Titus Andronicus; and it speeches and lines thrown in here and there, which are will be found more credible, that Shakspeare might someeasily distinguished, as being of a different stamp from times sink below his highest flights, than that any other the rest. HANMER.= To this observation of Mr. Pope, should rise up to his lowest. JOHNSON. Johnson's gewhich is very just, Mr. Theobald has added, that this neral remarks on this play are just, except that part in is one of Shakspeare's worst plays, and is less corrupted which he arraigns the conduct of the poet, for making than any other. Mr. Upton peremptorily determines, that Proteus say, that he had only seen the picture of Silvia, if any proof can be drawn from manner and style, this when it appears that he had had a personal interview play must be sent packing, and seek for its parent else- with her. This, however, is not a blunder of Shakspeare's, where. How otherwise, says he, do painters distinguish but a mistake of Johnson's, who considers the passage copies from originals? and have not authors their pecu- alluded to in a more literal sense than the author inliar style and manner, from which a true critic can form tended it. Sir Proteus, it is true, had seen Silvia for as unerring judgment as a painter? I am afraid this a few moments; but though he could form from thence illustration of a critic's science will not prove what is some idea of her person, he was still unacquainted with desired. A painter knows a copy from an original by her temper, manners, and the qualities of her mind. He rules somewhat resembling those by which critics know a therefore considers himself as having seen her picture translation, which, if it be literal, and literal it must be only. The thought is just and elegantly expressed. M. to resemble the copy of a picture, will be easily distin- MASON. = guished. Copies are known from originals, even when the painter copies his own picture; so, if an author should literally translate his work, he would lose the manner of an original. Mr. Upton confounds the copy of a picture with the imitation of a painter's manner. Copies are easily known, but good imitations are not detected with equal certainty, and are, by the best judges, often mistaken. Nor is it true that the writer has always peculiarities equally distinguishable with those of the painter. The peculiar manner of each arises from the desire, natural to every performer, of facilitating his subsequent work by recurrence to his former ideas; this recurrence produces that repetition which is called habit. The painter, whose work is partly intellectual and partly manual, has habits of the mind, the eye, and the hand; the writer has only habits of the mind. Yet, some painters have differed as much from themselves as from any other; and I have been told that there is little resemblance between the first works of Raphael and the last. The same variation may be expected in writers; and if it be true, as it seems, that they are less subject to habit, the differ ence between their works may be yet greater. But by the internal marks of a composition we may discover the author with probability, though seldom with certainty. When I read this play, I cannot but think that I find, III. MERRY WIVES OF WINDSOR. A FEW of the incidents in this comedy might have been taken from an old translation of Il Pecorone by Giovanni "Herne the hunter, quoth you? am I a ghost? |