Page images
[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

subscribe (a circumstance of which we need not be afhamed) to the superior fagacity and judgement of Mr. Malone.

To conclude, though we are far from asserting that this republication, generally considered, is preferable to its original, we must still regard it as a valuable supplement to that work; and no stronger plea in its favour can be advanced, than the frequent use made of it by Mr. Malone. The numerous corrections from it admitted by that gentleman into his text,* and

[merged small][ocr errors]


[ocr errors]



* Aniounting to (as we are informed by a very accurate compositor who undertook to count them) 186. Instances wherein Mr. Malone has admitted the Corrc&ions of the

Second Folio. Tempeft

4 Two Gentlemen of Verona Merry Wives of Windsor

5 Measure for Measure

Comedy of Errors
Much Ado about Nothing
Love's Labour's Loft
Atidsummer Night's Dream

Merchant of Venice
As you like it

15 Taming of the Shrew

16 All's well that ends well

6 T'welfth Night

3 Winter's Tale

8 Macbeth

6 King John

3 King Richard II. King Henry IV. Part 1.

II. King Henry V.



[ocr errors]





pointed out in his notes, will, in our judgement, contribute to its eulogium; at least cannot fail to rescue it from his prefatory imputations of" being of no value whatever," and afterwards of “not being worth three shillings.

See this Vol. p. 398. and Vol. II. p. 30. n. 5.

Our readers, it is hoped, will so far honour us as to observe, that the foregoing opinions were not suggested and defended through an ambitious fpirit of condradiction. Mr. Malone's Preface, indeed, p. 396, will absolve us from that censure; for he ala lows them to be of a date previous to his own edition.

[ocr errors]


King Henry VI. Part 1.


King Richard III.
King Henry VIII.
Julius Caesar
Antory and Cleopatra
Timon of Athens
Troilus and Crefida
King Lear
Romeo and Juliet

[blocks in formation]

PLYNSELL * This do&rine, however, appears to have made few proselytes: at least, some late catalogues of our good friends the booksellers, have expreffed their diffent from it in terms of uncominon forco.


He, therefore, on this subject, is the assailant, and not the conductors of the present republication.

But though, in the course of sucteeding ftridures, several other of Mr. Malone's positions may be likewise controverted, some with seriousness, and some with levity, (for our discussions are not of quite so folemn a turn as those which involve the interests of our country,) 'we feel an undissembled pleasure in avowing that his remarks are at once so numerous and correct, that when criticism“ has done its worst," their merit but in a small degree can be affected. We are confident, however, that he himself will hereafter join with us in considering no small proportion of our contested readings as a mere game at literary pushpin ; and that if Shakspeare looks down upon

our petty squabbles over his mangled scenes, it must : be with feelings similar to those of Lucan's hero,

ridetque fui ludibria trunci. In the Preface of Mr. Malone, indeed, a direct censure has been levelled at incorrectness in the text of the edition 1778. The justice of the imputation is unequivocally allowed; but, átthe same time, might not this acknowledgement be seconded by somewhat like a retort? for is it certain that the collations, &c. of 1790 are wholly secure from similar charges? Are they accompanied by no unauthorized readings, no omillions of words, and transpositions ? Through all the plays, and especially those of which there is only a singlecopy, they have been with some diligence

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

retraced, and the frailties of their collator, such as they are, have been ascertained. They shall not, however, be ostentatiously pointed out, and for this only reason: --- That as they decrease but little, if

· at all, the vigour of Shakspeare, the critick who in general has performed with accuracy one of the heaviest of literary tasks, ought not to be molested by a display of petty faults, which might have eluded the most vigilant faculties of fight and hearing that were ever placed as spies over the labours of each other. They are not even mentioned here as a covert mode of attack, or as a “note of preparation " for future hostilities. The office of "devising brave punishments for faithless editors, is therefore strenuously declined, even though their guilt Should equal that of one of their number (Mr. Steevens) who stands convicted of having given winds instead of wind, stables instead of stable, Sesions instead of Sefon, fins instead of sin and (we shudder while we recite the accusation) my instead of mine. *

- such small deer " Have been our food for many a year;" so long, in truth, that any further pursuit of them is here renounced, together with all triumphs founded on the detection of harmless synonymous particles that accidentally may have deserted their proper places and wandered into others, without injury to Shakspeare. A few chipped or disjointed stones

* See Mr. Malone's Preface, p. 423, doo seq.

will not impair the shape or endanger the stability of a pyramid. We are far from wishing to depreciate exactness, yet cannot persuade ourselves but that a single lucky conjectare or illustration, thould outweigh a thousand spurious haths deposed in favour of legitimate has's, and the like insignificant recoveries, which may not too degradingly be termed - the haberdasheries of criticism ; that stand in number, though in reckoning none;" and are as unimportant to the Poet's, fame,

66 ds is the morn-dew on the myrtle-leaf
" To his grand sea.

We shall venture also to assert, that, on a minute scrutiny, every editor, in his turn, may be charged with omission of some preferable reading; so that he who drags his predecessor to justice on this score, will have good luck if he escapes ungalled by recrimination.

If somewhat, therefore, in the succeeding volumes has been added to the correction and illuftration of our author, the purpose of his present cditors is completely answered. On any thing like perfection in their labours they do not presume, being too well convinced that, in defiance of their best efforts, their own incapacity, and that of the original quarto and folio-mongers, have still left sufficient work for a race of commentators who are yet unborn.

Be it remembered also, that the assistants and

« PreviousContinue »