Skip to main content

Full text of "Shakespeare manual"

See other formats 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


SHAKESPEARE    MANUAL 


F.   G.   FLEAY,   M.A., 

i^th  Wrangler',   \qth  Classic;  wid  Moral  Scientist  I 
$th  Natural  Scientist,  1852-3. 

HEAD    MASTER    OF    SICIPTON    GRAMMAR    SCHOOL, 
FORMERLY   SCHOLAR   OF   TRINITY    COLLEGE,    CAMBRIDGE. 


MAC  MILL  AN     AND     CO. 

1876. 

\The  Right  of  Translation  and  Reproduction  is  Reserved.} 


PR 

'2ns 


LONDON : 

R.    CLAY,    SONS,    AND   TAYLOR,    PRINTERS, 
BREAD    STREET    HILL. 


0 


TO 

ALFRED   TENNYSON, 

WHO,  HAD  HE  NOT  ELECTED  TO  BE  THE  GREATEST  POET 

OF  HIS  TIME, 
MIGHT  EASILY  HAVE  BECOME  ITS  GREATEST  CRITIC, 

Chrs  gook, 

IN   CONFIDENCE   OF   HIS  SYMPATHY 

WITH   ITS   INTENTION, 
HOWEVER  HE  MAY  DIFFER  FROM  SOME  OF  ITS  OPINIONS, 


(WITH   PERMISSION,) 

BY   FREDERICK   GARD   FLEAY. 


CONTENTS. 

i 
PART  I. 

MANUAL   OF  REFERENCE. 
CHAPTER  I. 

PAGE 

Shakespeare's  Life i 

CHAPTER  II. 
Contemporary  Allusions  to  Shakespeare ,     .       12 

CHAPTER  III. 

On  the  Plays  of  Shakespeare 22 

Chronological  Table 22 

Love's  Labour 's  Lost 24 

Comedy  of  Errors 24 

Midsummer  Night's  Dream 25 

Richard  II 26 

Edward  III .  27 

Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona 28 

Richard  III 30 

I  Henry  VI 31 


viii  CONTENTS. 

PAGE  . 

John 31 

Romeo  and  Juliet 32 

Merchant  of  Venice 34 

1  Henry  IV 35 

2  Henry  IV 35 

Merry  Wives  of  Windsor 3^ 

Henry  V 37 

Much  Ado  about  Nothing 37 

Julius  Caesar 3§ 

As  You  Like  It 39 

Twelfth  Night ' .  4° 

Hamlet 41 

Taming  of  the  Shrew 41 

2  and  3  Henry  VI 42 

Titus  Andronicus 44 

Sejanus 45 

Measure  for  Measure 45 

All's  Well  that  Ends  Well 46 

Othello 47 

Lear 47 

Macbeth 48 

Timon  of  Athens 49 

Troylus  and  Cre>sida 49 

Pericles qi 

Anthony  and  Cleopatra ^  I 

Coriolanus r2 

Two  Noble  Kinsmen r2 

Cymbeline C2 

Tempest '  _  54 

Winter's  Tale *  -. 

Henry  VIII 55 

Spurious  Plays .     ,  c6 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

PAGE 

On  various  Questions  connected  with  Shakespeare's  Plays  .  56 

What  Plays  are  Genuine  ? 58 

What  Plays  were  not  Entirely  Written  at  one  Date  ?      .     .     .  60 

Early  Editions 61 

Relative  Values  of  Quartos  and  Folios 61 

Entries  at  Stationers'  Hall 64 


CHAPTER  V. 

Pronunciation  and  Metre 65 

Pronunciation 66 

Metre 69 

Distinguishing  Metrical  Tests 71 


CHAPTER  VI. 
How  Plays  were  Presented 73 

CHAPTER  VII. 

On  the  Early  Theatrical  Companies 76 

Chronological  Table 81 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

On  the  Theatres,  1576— 1642 82 

Chronological  Table §5 


CONTENTS* 


CHAPTER  IX. 

PAGE 

On  Contemporary  Dramatic  Authors 86 

Chronological  Table 87 

Lilly 88 

Peele 83 

Greene 88 

Marlowe 88 

Chapman 89 

Jonson 89 

Dekker 9° 

Heywood 9° 

Middleton 9^ 

Marston 92 

Webster 92 

Beaumont  and  Fletcher 93 

Rowley 94 

Massinger    . 95 

Ford , 95 

Shirley 96 

Randolph , 97 

Brome 97 

Glapthorne 97 

Dodsley's  Plays,  &c 98 

Daniel 109 

Alexander  . 109 

Cartwright '.     .     .    • .  109 

Suckling 109 

Davenant 109 


CHAPTER  X. 
Miscellaneous  Chronological  Table 101 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

PAGE 

List  of  Desirable  Books 104 


CHAPTER  XII. 

Tests  of  Chronology  and  Authorship 106 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

On  Emendation no 

Canons no 

Causes  of  Error in 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

On  the  Actors 113 

Table  of  King's  Company 114 

Prince's 116 

Queen's 117 

Revel's "7 

Other  Companies 118 


PART   II. 

ORIGINAL  INVESTIGA  TIONS. 
CHAPTER   I. 

PAGE 

Metrical  Tests  applied  :—i.   Shakespeare 12 1 

Table  of  Dates,  as  assigned  by  Drake,   Chalmers,   Malone, 

Delius,  and  Fleay 13° 

Metrical  Tables 135 

CHAPTER  II. 

On  the  Quarto  Editions 139 

Tabular  View  of  Quartos 142 

CHAPTER   III. 

Metrical  Tests  applied : — ii.  Beaumont  and  Fletcher,  Massinger     151 

on  ••  Henry  VIII." 171 

On  '-Two  Noble  Kinsmen"    . 172 

CHAPTER   IV. 
On  "The  Taming  of  the  Shrew" 175 

CHAPTER  V. 

On  "Timon  of  Athens"— i,  (1874) jgy 

I97 


CONTENTS.  xiii 

CHAPTER   VI. 

PAGE 

On  "Pericles" 209 

CHAPTER  VII. 
On  "All's  Well  that  Ends  Well" 224 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
On  "Twelfth  Night"    . 227 

CHAPTER  IX. 

On  "  Troylus  and  Cressida " 232 

Canons  on  Metrical  Tests 239 

CHAPTER  X. 

On  "Macbeth" 245 

Table  of  Length  of  Shakespeare's  Plays 259 

Table  of  Rhyme  Tags 260 

CHAPTER  XI. 

On  "  Julius  Caesar  " 262 

Note  on  "Two  Gentlemen  of  Verou a" 270 

CHAPTER  XII. 

Personal  Satire  Common  on  the  Old  English  Stage  ("Wily 

Beguiled.") 272 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

PAf;E 

Annals  of  the  Stage,  1584-95       ..........  280 

"Fair  Emm"       ...............  281 

"  London  Prodigal"  ..............  283 

Greene's  "Mottoes"      .............  285 

Dates  of  Greene's  Plays      ............  286 

Dates  of  Marlowe's  Plays  ............  295 

Story  of  the  Stage     ..............  297 


CHAPTER  XIV 
On  "Ed  ward  III."   . 


CHAPTER  XV. 

Extracts  reprinted  from  the  Athen&um — 

Is  Action  Shakespeare?  . -,Oy 

Shakespeare's  Arms -,  l  j 

List  of  Managers  of  Companies  and  Masters   of  Schools, 

in  the  time  of  Elizabeth .I2 


INTRODUCTION. 


THE  object  of  this  little  Treatise  is  to  place  within  the 
reach  of  the  student  of  Shakespeare  such  information  as  is 
essential  for  him  to  possess,  but  is  at  present  unattainable 
unless  he  purchases  many  costly  books.  Hence  arises  its 
peculiar  construction.  The  contents  of  Part  I.  are  strictly 
limited  to  such  matters  as  I  have  found  necessary  in  my 
own  experience  for  a  critical  investigation  of  difficult  or 
disputed  questions  as  to  the  chronological  succession  of 
Shakespeare's  plays  in  order  of  composition,  their  relation 
to  the  contemporary  drama,  his  manner  and  method  of  work, 
and  the  subsequent  higher  problems  which  bear  reference 
to  the  development  of  his  artistic  faculty.  This  is  as  much, 
I  think,  as  ought  to  be  attempted  in  so  small  a  compass, 
as  will  be  more  clearly  seen  on  perusing  the  following 
summary  of  Contents: — 

In  Chapter  I.  I  give  a  condensed,  but  I  hope  not  incom 
plete  life  of  Shakespeare,  incorporating  Mr.  Halliwell's  late 
discoveries,  correcting  the  time-honoured  errors  as  to  the 
shares  in  Blackfriars  Theatre,  the  date  of  Shakespeare's 
first  appearance,  and  the  like,  but  not  entering  into  any 


x  v  i  INTR  OD  UC  TION. 

discussion  as  to  uncertain  or  conjectural  matters.  The 
sources  of  information  for  this  Chapter  are  exhausted  in 
Mr.  Halliwell's  Life  of  Shakespeare,  and  his  later  Illustra 
tions,  Mr.  S.  Neil's  biography  is  also  a  most  useful  com 
pendium. 

In  Chapter  II.,  I  give  collected  the  principal  references 
to  our  author  made  in  contemporary  writings,  and  along 
with  them  a  few  allusions  to  his  work  from  contemporary 
plays  not  hitherto  pointed  out,  which  serve  to  limit  some 
disputed  dates  as  to  the  production  of  Shakespeare's  own 
dramas.  I  need  hardly  say  that  Dr.  Ingleby's  Century  of 
Praise  is  the  storehouse  for  contemporary  references. 

In  Chapter  III.  is  contained  a  summary  of  the  prin 
cipal  grounds  on  which  the  authenticity,  origin,  date,  &c. 
of  each  play  are  to  be  decided.  I  have,  while  incorporating 
the  results  of  my  own  investigations  into  this  summary,  taken 
care  to  state  other  views  however  opposed  to  those  I  think 
the  true  ones.  In  this  part  of  the  book  there  is  much  that 
is  new  :  and,  even  if  the  new  matter  be  not  approved  of,  it 
will  be  of  some  advantage  to  have  a  condensed  summary 
ready  to  hand,  and  arranged  in  approximate  chronological 
order.  The  usual  arrangement  of  printing  such  matter  as 
prefatory  to  each  separate  play,  with  the  plays  themselves 
in  the  order  of  the  First  Folio,  causes  great  difficulty  of 
reference  and  prevents  any  general  survey  of  the  evidence 
as  a  whole.  Hence,  we  find  in  some  well-known  chrono 
logical  arrangements  Shakespeare  described  as  writing  four 
plays  in  some  years,  and  none  in  others — even  for  years 
together.  The  works  I  have  found  most  useful  for  this 
Chapter  are  the  Variorum  Shakspeare  of  1821  ;  the 


1NTR  OD  UC  TION.  x  vii 

writings  of  G.  Chalmers  and  N.  Drake  ;  the  modern  editions 
of  Dyce  and  Staunton  ;  and  separate  works  too  numerous 
to  mention. 

In  Chapter  IV.,  I  have  given  a  summary  of  my  own 
views  on  the  genuineness  of  the  plays  that  pass  under 
Shakespeare's  name,  the  relative  value  of  the  early  Folios 
and  Quartos,  some  tables  (useful  I  hope)  of  the  plays 
divided  into  Acts  and  Scenes,  and  extracts  from  the  books 
at  Stationers'  Hall  giving  the  dates  of  entry  of  Shake 
speare's  works.  My  chief  object  in  this  chapter  has  been 
condensation  and  eaSe  of  reference ;  the  matter  is  of  course 
to  l?e  found  in  many  places  ;  for  the  opinions  expressed, 
however,  I  am  solely  responsible. 

Chapter  V.  gives  summaries  of  results  of  late  inves 
tigation  as  to  pronunciation,  metre,  and  metrical  tests. 
Mr.  Ellis's  Early  English  Pronunciation,  Mr.  Sweet's 
History  of  English  Sounds,  Dr.  Abbott's  Shakespearian 
Grammar,  S.  Walker's  Criticisms,  are  laid  under  con 
tribution  for  the  two  former  of  these  three  topics  ;  but  only 
for  the  sake  of  pointing  out  how  far  my  own  investiga 
tions  agree  or  disagree  with  these  high  authorities.  It 
does  not  enter  into  my  plan  to  discuss  these  matters  in 
this  book. 

Chapter  VI.  embodies  in  a  plain,  though  inartistic  nar 
rative,  details  of  the  manner  in  which  plays  were  pre 
sented  :  had  I  known  before  this  was  in  print  that  Philarete 
Chasles  had  written  a  similar  chapter,  I  would  have 
cancelled  my  own  in  favour  of  a  translation  of  his  more 
elaborate  relation. 

Chapter  VII.  is   one    of  the  most    important    chapters 

b 


xviii  INTRODUCTION. 

in  the  book.  It  gives  for  the  first  time  an  attempt  to 
import  order  and  consistency  into  the  fragmentary  notices  of 
theatrical  history  from  1575  to  1642.  In  it  several  important 
errors  are  corrected  for  the  first  time,  and  by  its  aid  the 
dates  of  many  plays  of  Shakespeare's  contemporaries  can 
be  for  the  first  time  fixed. 

Chapter  VIII.  is  a  continuation  of  the  same  subject ;  but 
with  the  matter  arranged  under  the  head  of  theatrical  build 
ings  instead  of  companies  of  actors.  The  two  chronological 
tables  accompanying  these  chapters  have  cost  me  more 
labour  than  all  the  rest  of  the  work ;  and  I  find  them  of  the 
greatest  usefulness  when  making  chronological  investiga 
tions.  For  Chapters  VII.,  VIII.,  IX.,  Collier's  Annals 
of  the  Stage,  and  Malone's  Variorum  Shakspeare,  are 
the  great  authorities ;  but  I  have  got  at  many  results 
from  a  tabulation  of  the  companies,  theatres,  printers, 
publishers  (with  their  addresses),  mentioned  on  the  title- 
pages  of  published  plays.  Collation  of  these  frequently 
leads  to  unexpected  discoveries  as  to  dates  of  pro 
duction. 

In  Chapter  IX.,  I  have  given  lists  of  nearly  all  the  plays 
likely  to  be  met  with  by  the  student  of  the  Elizabethan 
drama,  with  tabulations  of  companies,  theatres,  and  dates 
of  publication  ;  adding  in  another  column  dates  of  pro 
duction,  as  nearly  as  they  can  be  ascertained.  Of  course, 
this  last  column  must  be  to  some  extent  conjectural,  but 
whenever  I  have  not  placed  a  (?)  it  must  be  understood 
that  I  give  the  date  on  external  evidence,  although  I  am 
not  able  to  adduce  such  evidence  for  so  many  plays  in  a 
handbook  of  this  kind.  As  in  many  of  my  results  I  differ 


INTRODUCTION.  xix 

much  from  previous  investigators — even  from  the  most  care 
ful  of  all  of  them,  Dyce,  I  mention  this  lest  it  should  be 
supposed  that  these  dates  were  assigned  on  internal  evi 
dence.  There  must,  of  course,  be  some  errors  in  so  exten 
sive  a  list — not,  I  trust,  many.  The  principal  authority  for 
this  list  is  Halliwell's  Dictionary  of  Old  Plays,  it  was,  how 
ever  collated  with  the  title-pages  of  the  plays  themselves 
before  going  to  press. 

Chapter  X.  gives  a  chronological  list  of  miscellaneous 
matters  not  incorporable  elsewhere,  derived  from  Collier's 
Annals  of  the  Stage. 

Chapter  XL  gives  a  list  of  books  which  form  a  nucleus 
of  a  Shakespearian  library. 

Chapter  XII.  enumerates  the  tests  which  serve  to  deter 
mine  chronological  order  of  writing. 

Chapter  XIII.  lays  down  some  canons  as  to  emending 
corruptions  of  the  text :  for  these  three  chapters  I  am  solely 
responsible. 

Chapter  XIV.  which  concludes  Part  I.  supplies  to  some 
extent  a  desideratum  pointed  out  by  Mr.  R.  Simpson  by 
giving  lists  of  actors  taken  from  various  sources  for  different 
companies  at  sundry  dates.  The  value  of  these  for  inves 
tigation  may  be  judged  from  the  fact  that  they  have  enabled 
me  to  discover  errors  in  Dyce  and  other  accurate  critics. 
The  whole  of  this  Part  will,  I  trust,  serve  as  a  useful  com 
panion  and  supplement  to  Professor  Ward's  admirable 
History  of  Dramatic  Literature,  as  well  as  a  text-book  for 
younger  students,  and  a  hand-book  of  reference  for  older 
ones.  My  aim  has  been  to  produce  a  useful,  not  a  showy 
book.  I  can  say  it  is  the  outcome  of  years  of  study,  and 


xx  INTRODUCTION. 

has  involved  more  labour  than  I  should  easily  get  credit 

for. 

I  have  one  omission  to  explain.  I  have  been  urged  on 
very  high  authority  to  give  an  aesthetic  estimate  (either  of 
my  own,  or  compiled  from  Schlegel,  Hazlitt,  and  the  host 
of  other  great  critics  who  have  treated  the  Elizabethan 
dramas  generally)  of  the  relative  merits  of  the  minor  authors. 
I  avoid,  however,  all  aesthetic  criticism  in  such  a  work  for 
the  same  reason  as  Mr.  Wright  in  the  best  edited  play 
I  know  {King  Lear,  Clarendon  Press  edition)  avoids  aesthetic 
notes.  "Esthetic  notes,"  he  says,  "have  been  deliberately 
omitted  because  one  main  object  of  these  editions  is  to 
induce  those  for  whose  use  they  are  expressly  designed  to 
read  and  study  Shakespeare  himself,  and  not  to  become 
familiar  with  opinions  about  him.  Perhaps,  too,  it  is  because 
I  cannot  help  experiencing  a  certain  feeling  of  resentment 
when  I  read  such  notes,  that  I  am  unwilling  to  intrude  upon 
others  what  I  should  myself  regard  as  impertinent.  They 
are  in  reality  too  personal  and  subjective,  and  turn  the  com 
mentator  into  a  show-man.  With  such  sign-post  criticisms 
I  have  no  sympathy." 

With  regard  to  Part  II.  of  this  book,  I  have  only  to  say 
that  much  of  it  was  added  at  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  J.  R. 
Green,  who  pointed  out  that  references  abounded  in  Part  I. 
to  papers  inaccessible  to  any  but  the  members  of  the  New 
Shakspere  Society.  These  papers  have,  however,  been  con- 
densed,  corrected,  freed  from  some  mistakes  of  my  own, 
and  some  of  the  printer's,  cleared  of  interpolations  and 


INTRODUCTION.  xxi 

alterations,  and  generally  reduced  to  the  condition  in  which 
they  would  have  been  issued  at  first,  had  I  not  had  to  write 
them  under  great  pressure  from  other  work  (no  paper  having 
had  more  than  two  evenings  occupied  in  writing  it),  or  had 
I  had  the  opportunity  of  correcting  them  before  proofs  of 
them  had  been  circulated  without  being  submitted  to  me 
at  all.  All  additions  of  any  importance  are  inclosed  in 
[brackets].  In  addition  to  these  reprinted  papers  I  have 
given  three  chapters,  which  I  could  not  insert  in  Part  I. 
without  introducing  into  it  an  element  which  I  desired  it 
to  be  free  from  as  far  as  possible, — the  subjective  element. 
Yet  the  interpretation  of  plays  which  contain  historical  facts 
disguised  under  satirical  allegories  is  too  important  to  be 
omitted  even  in  a  small  manual.  That  many  more  such 
plays  exist  than  have  ever  been  suspected  is  the  chief  point 
I  wish  to  show  in  these  chapters ;  hence  my  choice  of  plays 
which  are  not  generally  known  as  my  typical  examples,  in 
preference  to  those  in  which  Jonson,  Dekker,  Marston,  &c. 
displayed  their  mutual  animosity.  This  latter  series,  how 
ever,  has  never  yet  been  rightly  interpreted. 

I  have  said  nothing  on  the  poems  of  Shakespeare ;  what 
I  believe  to  be  the  true  interpretation  of  the  Sonnets  I  have 
given  elsewhere  (Macmillaris  Magazine,  March  1875),  an(i 
this  article  as  well  as  others  written  by  me  in  the  same 
periodical,  are  too  easy  of  access  to  justify  my  reprinting 
them,  even  in  a  condensed  form,  in  this  Treatise. 

I  have  to  express  my  great  regret  that  Professor  Ward's 
admirable  History  of  Dramatic  Literature  did  not  appear 


xxii  INTRODUCTION. 

in  time  for  me  to  avail  myself  of  its  guidance  in  Part  I. 
Chapter  III.  It  would  have  saved  me  much  trouble.  I 
have  also  to  express  my  grateful  thanks  to  friends  who  have 
assisted  me  by  help  or  encouragement,  in  many  ways; 
especially  to  Mr.  S.  Neil,  Mr.  Halliwell,  Dr.  Abbott,  The 
Poet  Laureate,  and  Professors  Delius,  Dowden,  Ingram,  and 
Ward.  To  Mr.  P.  A.  Daniel  I  am  yet  more  indebted  for 
his  ready  and  kindly  aid  in  referring  for  me  to  books  to 
which,  in  this  small  town,  I  have  no  means  of  access.  By  - 
his  assistance  many  details  have  been  given  which  must 
otherwise  have  been  omitted.  Of  course,  I  am  also  a  con 
siderable  debtor  to  the  published  writings  of  the  above- 
mentioned  gentlemen.  I  shall  feel  very  thankful  for  any 
corrections  or  suggestions,  public  or  private ;  for  errors 
must  exist  in  so  complicated  a  subject,  however  carefully 
treated.  All  assistance  of  any  kind  shall  be  acknowledged 
in  due  course.  I  ought,  however,  to  anticipate  some  cor 
rections  that  will  no  doubt  be  offered  as  to  my  dates,  by 
stating  that,  whenever  possible,  I  have  adopted  the  modern 
epoch  for  the  commencement  of  the  year,  I  January  ;  thus, 
a  date  which  in  Henslow's  diary  appears  as  February,  1591, 
I  have  written  February,  1592.  It  would  have  perhaps  been 
better  to  have  written  1591-2,  but  I  have  used  this  notation 
for  cases  where  it  is  doubtful  in  which  year  an  event  took 
place.  I  should  also  state  that  in  many  instances  I  may 
seem  to  assert  too  positively :  the  fact  is  that  there  are  so 
many  points  on  which  nothing  more  than  strong  probability 
is  attainable,  that  the  constant  iteration  of  possibly,  pro 
bably,  it  seems  to  me,  I  venture  to  think,  and  the  like, 
becomes  so  tiresome,  both  to  writer  and  reader,  that  I  have 


INTRODUCTION.  xxiii 

preferred  to  risk  the  accusation  of  over-confidence  in  my 
own  reasoning,  to  that  of  producing  lassitude  by  perpetual 
repetitions  of  my  inability  to  give  positive  statements  where 
it  is  palpable  that  nothing  more  than  great  likelihood  can 
be  attained. 


F.  G.  FLEAY. 


SKIPTON, 
January ',  1876. 


SHAKESPEARE    MANUAL. 


PART     I. 


CHAPTER  I. 
'SHAKESPEARE'S  LIFE. 

JOHN  SHAKESPEARE  of  Stratford  was  a  resident  in  Henley  Street 
in  that  town  as  early  as  1552.  In  1556  we  find  him  buying  copy 
holds  of  two  houses  and  gardens  (one  in  Greenlnll  Street) ;  suing 
and  being  sued;  dealing  in  gloves  and  barley.  In  1557  he  was  a 
burgess,  a  member  of  the  four-year-old  corporation  of  Stratford, 
chosen  by  the  court-leet  as  borough  ale-taster  ;  and  married,  or  close 
on  being  so,  to  Mary,  youngest  daughter  of  Robert  Arden  of  Willme- 
cote,  in  the  parish  of  Aston  Cauntlow,  where  she  inherited  "land  in 
Willmecote  called  Asbies."  John  Shakespeare  had  also  property  in 
Snitterfield  from  his  father.  Their  first  daughter,  Joan,  was  baptized 
15  September,  1558,  in  which  year  John  was  one  of  the  four  con 
stables  at  Stratford;  in  1559  he  became  an  assessor  or  fixer  of 
fines  under  the  borough  bye-laws.  He  was  in  1561  a  municipal 
chamberlain,  and  in  1564  a  member  of  the  common-hall.  At  this 
time  he  had  lost  not  only  his  daughter  Joan,  but  a  second,  Margaret. 
Next  to  them  succeeded  on  23  (?)  April,  1564,  William,  son  of 
John  Shakespeare,  so  baptized  at  Stratford  on  Ar-"  5. 


2  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Having  escaped  the  danger  of  the  plague  which  was  then  ravaging 
Stratford,  the  then  prosperous  family  in  Henley  Street  was  probably 
looking  forward  to  a  tranquil  future.  The  head  of  it  was  of  conse- 
(juence  in  the  borough  ;  he  could  even  afford  to  allow  the  chamber 
to  be  pretty  largely  in  his  debt,  and  to  pay  considerable  rates  for  the 
relief  of  the  poor.  He  was  in  this  same  year  appointed  to  make  up 
the  chamberlain's  accounts  ;  and  in  the  next,  1565,  was  elected  one 
of  the  fourteen  aldermen.  In  1566  his  second  son,  Gilbert,  was  born ; 
in  1568  he  was  made  high  bailiff;  and  in  1571  chief  alderman,  which 
entitled  him  to  be  henceforth  called  "Magister,"  or  Mr. ;  in  1575  he 
bought  two  freehold  houses  in  Henley  Street.  Up  to  this  date  then, 
to  the  year  in  which  Queen  Elizabeth  visited  Kenilsvorth  Castle, 
which  is  but  thirteen  miles  from  Stratford,  John  Shakespeare  is  a 
prosperous  gentleman.  William  may  have  been  during  this  time  a 
happy  schoolboy  at  Stratford  Grammar  School,  under  Curate  Hunt 
or  Thomas  Jenkins,  enjoying  his  holidays  and  witnessing  the  perfor 
mances  of  the  various  companies  of  "  travelling"  playsrs  who  visited 
Stratford,  and  even  perhaps  the  festivities  provided  by  Leicester  for 
the  reception  of  Majesty  itself. 

15ut«how  things  begin  to  change.  In  1577  Mr.  John  Shakespeare 
becomes  irregular  in  his  attendance  at  corporation  meetings ;  and 
half  his  borough  taxes  are  remitted  him  ;  in  1578  the  land  called 
Asbies  is  mortgaged  to  Edmund  Lambert  for  4O/. ,  on  condition  of 
reversion  if  repaid  before  Michaelmas,  1580.  John  Shakespeare 
is  also  excused  from  a  tax  of  qd.  a  week  for  the  relief  of  the  poor. 
Snittcrfield  may  have  been  sold  ;  certainly  Edmund  Lambert  was 
security  for  a  debt  of  5/.  due  from  Mr.  John  Shakespeare  to  Mr. 
Roger  Sadler  ;  and  in  1579  we  find  a  levy  on  him  for  "pikemen, 
billmen,  and  archers"  unpaid  and  unaccounted  for,  reversing  the 
state  of  accounts  we  have  seen  in  1564.  But  much  remains  unex 
plained  at  this  period,  from  the  fact  that  the  registry  of  the  Court  of 
Record  at  Stratford  is  wanting  from  1569  to  1585.  We  may,  how 
ever,  fairly  take  it  for  granted  that  William  Shakespeare  left  school 
about  1578,  and  then  entered  on  some  occupation,  what,  it  is 
difficult  to  say.  Probably  that  of  a  lawyer's  clerk  is  on  the  whole 
most  likely,  in  spite  of  the  entire  absence  of  his  signature  as  witness 
to  any  known  deeds,  &c.,  of  thai  date. 


SHAKESPEARE  A  T  STRA  TFORD.  3 

It  may  be  well  to  give  here  a  list  of  the  family  of  John  Shake 
speare  : — 

Joan born  1558  died  in  infancy  (?). 

Margaret „  1562  „  1563. 

WILLIAM ,  1564  ,,  1 6 16,  married  1582. 

Gilbert ,,  1566  ,,  before    1612. 

Joan „  1569  „  after     1600. 

Anne ,,  1571  „  1579- 

Richard ,,  1573  „  1612. 

Edmund ,,  1580  „  1607. 

Anne  Hathaway     .     .  ,,  1556  ,,  1623  William's  wife. 

Family  of  William  Shakespeare  :  — 

Susanna born  1583  died  1649,  married  1607. 

Hamnet ,,     1585     ,,  1596. 

Judith „     1585     ,,  1662,  married  1615. 

Family  of  Richard  Shakespeare  : — 

John born  (?)  1 530  died  1 60 1,  married  1557. 

Henry „  ,,  1596. 

Mary  Arden  ....,,      %  ,,  1608  (John's  wife). 

For  further  information  see  Variorum  Shakespeare,  edition  1821, 
vol.  ii.  p.  610,  &c. 

Premising  that  I  omit  the  mythical  story  of  Shakespeare's  deer- 
stealing,  we  now  come  to  one  of  the  most  important  events  of  his 
life — his  marriage  with  Anne  Hathaway.  The  marriage  bond  in  the 
Worcester  registry  is  of  date  28  Nov.  1582  ;  in  it  Fulk  Sandells  and 
John  Richardson,  farmers,  of  Stratford,  become  bound  in  4O/.  that 
"  William  Shagspere,  one  thone  partie,  and  Anne  Hathwey,  of 
Stratford,  in  the  dioces  of  Worcester,  maiden,  may  lawfully  solem 
nize  marriage  together,  with  once  asking  of  the  bannes."  On  May 
26,  1583  (six  months  after),  Susanna,  their  daughter,  was  baptized. 
As  to  the  interpretation  to  be  given  to  these  dates,  critics  differ.  It 
was  certainly  frequent  at  that  time  to  regard  betrothal  as  morally  the 
same  thing  as  marriage,  and  to  act  accordingly  ;  yet  on  the  whole  I 
incline  to  De  Quincey's  view,  that  Anne  (over  twenty-five  years  old) 

1—2 


4  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

had  entrapped  Shakespeare,  so  much  her  junior  (seven  years),  into  a 
closer  connexion  with  her  than  he  at  first  intended,  and  then  obtained 
from  his  honour  rather  than  his  love  an  expiatory  marriage  to  atone 
for  the  consequences  of  the  connexion.  On  2  Feb.  1585  Hamnet  and 
Judith  were  baptized,  his  twin  children  and  his  last,  which  is  notice 
able  in  regard  of  the  romantic  theories  that  have  been  put  out  as 
to  this  period  of  his  life. 

At  this  time,  1586,  distraint  is  levied  on  John  Shakespeare;  no 
effects.  A  writ  is  then  issued  against  his  person  three  times  ;  he  is 
deprived  of  his  alderman's  gown  for  not  "coming  to  the  halls  of 
long  time  ; "  and  in  1587  he  produced  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  so  that 
he  considered  himself  illegally  imprisoned.  The  imprisonment  may 
have  been  for  debt  to  Nicholas  Lane,  to  whom  he  had  been  surety 
for  his  brother  Henry.  In  all  probability  his  fortunes  were  falling 
rapidly. 

In  this  same  year  come  to  Stratford  Burbage's  company  of 
players,  called  the  Queen's  Company,  and  receive  higher  pay  than  any 
of  the  many  companies  who  preceded  them.  Then  or  earlier  began 
Shakespeare's  London  life  as  a  player  and  dramatist ;  then  certainly 
ceases  his  private  isolation ;  it  is  no  longer  the  life  of  a  citizen  of 
Stratford  that  we  have  to  consider,  but  that  of  the  poet,  the  cosmo 
politan,  everybody's  Shakespeare. 


SHAKESPEARE  IN  LONDON. 

AT  the  time  of  Shakespeare's  early  dramatic  career,  the  principal 
companies  of  players  with  whom  we  are  concerned  were  Lord 
Strange's,  the  Earl  of  Sussex's,  the  Earl  of  Pembroke's,  the  Admiral's 
(Lord  Nottingham's),  the  Lord  Chamberlain's,  the  Children  of  the 
Chapel,  and  the  Children  of  Paul's.  The  dramatic  writers -were 
Greene,  Peele,  Marlowe,  Lilly,  Nash,  Lodge,  Chettle,  Munday,  and 
others.  Some  of  the  works  of  Greene,  Peele,  Lodge,  and  Marlowe, 
were  in  1592  produced  at  the  Rose  Theatre,  where  Lord  Strange's 
company  were  then  playing.  If,  as  I  believe,  Shakespeare  was  at 
tins  time  associated  with  this  company,  he  would,  if  not  before,  then 
become  acquainted  with  the  greatest  of  his  forerunners.  The  allu- 


SHAKESPEARE  IN  LONDON.  5 

sion  made  to  him  in  Greene's  Groatsworth  of  Wit  has  been  conclu 
sively  shown  by  Mr.  Simpson  to  refer  to  him  as  an  actor  only  j  and 
as  it  is  palpable,  that,  if  Greene  had  known  him  as  an  author,  he 
would  have  referred  to  him  also  in  that  capacity,  we  may  fairly  assign 
as  the  date  of  his  beginning  to  write  alone  1591  ;  it  cannot  have 
well  been  later,  and  if  earlier  Greene  would  have  known  it  in  1592. 
John  Shakespeare  we  find  in  1591  still  in  possession  of  a  house  in 
Henley  Street,  Stratford;  in  1591  and  in  the  next  year  as  one  of 
four  "credible  men"  making  inventory  of  goods  of  one  Ralph  Shaw, 
wooldriver,  and  Henry  Field,  tanner.  At  this  time  Shakespeare 
was  writing  his  early  plays  of  the  rhyming  period. 

In  1593  the  theatres  were  closed  on  account  of  the  plague,  and 
Shakespeare  found  leisure  to  publish  the  first  piece  of  his  invention, 
the  Venus  and  Adonis,  which  he  dedicated  to  his  patron  Lord 
Southampton.  This  was  followed  by  a  new  poem,  also  dedicated  to 
him,  the  Rape  of  Lucrece,  in  1594.  Meanwhile,  death  had  been 
busy  with  the  band  of  dramatists  ;  not  only  had  "  Learning  deceast 
in  beggary "  been  exemplified  in  the  end  of  the  repentant  Greene, 
who  was  at  enmity  with  Shakespeare,  but  his  friends  Marlowe  and 
Peele  had  by  1596  also  died,  the  one  in  a  drunken  quarrel,  the  other 
of  a  shameful  disease.  No  wonder  that  he  felt  disgusted  with 
the  theatre.  In  that  year  he  probably  wrote  his  great  poem  to  Lord 
Southampton  (Sonnets  i — 126),  in  which  he  expresses  himself  bitterly 
as  to  the  position  occupied  by  an  actor,  especially  a  travelling  or 
strolling  actor.  During  this  time  he  had  also  been  occupied  in  re 
touching,  adding  to,  re-writing  plays  by  other  men.  Edward  III. 
and  I  Henry  VI.;  and  I  have  no  doubt  Richard  III.  and  Romeo  and 
J-aliet,  are  rifaccimenti  made  by  him  between  1593  and  1596.  These 
plays  in  their  original  form  were  written  by  Marlowe  and  Peele, 
separately  or  conjointly,  except  I  Henry  VI.,  which  seems  to  show 
Lodge's  work  in  part  of  it.  With  them  there  is  no  trace  of  any 
quarrel  on  Shakespeare's  part.  His  enemies  were  Greene  and  Nash 
and  Lilly.  The  last  of  these  belonged  to  rival  theatres,  which  em 
bittered  the  quarrel.  Lilly  wrote  only  for  the  youths  who  went  under 
the  names  of  Children  of  the  Chapel  and  Children  of  St.  Paul's. 
These  "children,"  as  we  may  see  in.  Hamlet,  were  Shakespeare's 
particular  detestation ;  with  Nash  also,  the  bitter  pamphleteer,  he 
had  no  sympathy ;  but  Marlowe  he  refers  to  kindly  in  As  You  Like 


6  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

It,  ill  5,  "Dead  shepherd!  Now  I  find  thy  saw  of  might,"  and 
Peele  seems  to  have  followed  him  to  the  Lord  Chamberlain's  Com 
pany  For  in  that  company  (whether  he  joined  it  along  with  Lord 
Strange's  company  in  1594  or  belonged  to  it  earlier)  we  find  Shake- 
speare  fixed  in  our  earliest  theatrical  notice  of  him  as  acting  before 
Queen  Elizabeth  at  Greenwich  in  December  of  that  year.  In  1595 
appeared  the  strange  book Locrine,  a  lamentable  tragedy  "newly  set 
forth,  overseen  and  corrected  by  W.  S."  This  clever  play,  which  is 
a  new  edition  of  an  old  work  by  Charles  Tilney  and  George  Peele 
(1586),  contains  many  lines  taken  from  Greene,  and  alludes  in  many 
places  to  those  plays  of  his  which  he  produced  in  1585-6  in  rivalry 
with  Marlowe.  It  was  probably  edited  by  Shakespeare  on  or  just 
before  Peele's  death,  and  one  year  before  the  production  of  Romeo 
and  "jidid. 

In  1596  his  only  son  Hamnet  died.  Shakespeare's  feelings  as  a 
father  can  be  seen  in  King  John,  iii.  4,  which  was  probably  written 
during  his  son's  illness  or  very  shortly  after  his  decease.  In  this 
year  also  Romeo  and  Juliet  was  produced  at  the  Curtain  Theatre  in 
Shoreditch  ;  a  grant  of  arms  to  John  Shakespeare  was  applied  for  at 
the  Heralds'  College  ;  his  uncle  Henry  died  (to  be  followed  in  a  few 
weeks  by  Margaret  his  wife) ;  all  events  which  must  have  in  some 
instances  greatly  affected  the  mind  of  Shakespeare,  in  others  pre 
pared  him  for  a  more  settled  life  with  more  definite  aims  ;  in  all 
made  him  ready  for  the  great  change  in  style  and  purpose  which  is 
shown  in  the  historic  and  comic  plays  of  his  Second  Period. 

Immediately  after  the  commencement  of  this,  in  1597,  begins  the 
publishing  of  Shakespeare's  plays,  without  his  name  on  the  title 
page ;  it  was,  however,  inserted  in  1598,  and  in  no  case  (except  the 
noticeable  one  of  Romeo  and  Juliet}  was  it  omitted  thereafter.  The 
application  for  arms  is  also  granted  in  this  year,  and  William  Shake 
speare,  gentleman,  has  6o/.  to  purchase  of  William  Underbill  one 
messuage,  two  barns,  two  gardens,  two  orchards  with  appurtenances, 
in  Stratford-on-Avon.  This  is  the  celebrated  New  Place  formerly 
called  the  Great  House,  built  by  Sir  Hugh  Clopton,  in  Henry 
VIII. 's  time.  John  Shakespeare  and  wife  also  have  money  (?  from 
son  William)  to  file  a  bill  in  Chancery  in  the  old  Asbies  matter, 
to  recover  that  estate  from  John  Lambert,  son  of  Edmund  Lam 
bert,  the  mortgagee  of  nineteen  years  back.  They  had  tendered, 


SHAKESPEARE  IN  LONDON.  7 

they  allege,  the  money  in   release  duty ;  yet   the   estate   is   with 
held. 

The  year  1598  is  for  the  critic  memorable.     In  that  year  Francis 
Meres  published  his  Palladis   Tamia,   or    Wits    Treasury.      In  it 
M^res   mentions   by  name   twelve    plays,   the    Venus  and  Adonis, 
Lucrece,  and  Sonnets,  and  so  gives  us  a  most  valuable  landmark  for 
our  chronology.   He  also  shows  the  estimation  in  which  Shakespeare 
was  held  as  a  dramatist  before  his  name  had  been  affixed  to  any 
published  play.     Nine  times  is  he  noticed  in  this  work,  oftener  than 
any  other ;  he  is  praised  for  Lyricks,  Elegies,  Comedies,  Tragedies, 
and  Knowledge  of  the  English  Tongue  ;  and  in  influence  in  other 
matters  he  was  advancing  as  rapidly  as  in  favour  with  the  critics. 
Early  in  this  same  year  Abraham  Sturley  wrote  from  Stratford  to 
Richard  Quiney  (father  of  Thomas  Quiney,  the  future  husband  of 
Susanna  Shakespeare)  respecting  a  solicitation  to  Burleigh,  the  Lord 
Treasurer,  on  behalf  of  Stratford  for  exemption  from  subsidies  and 
taxes,  and  a  grant  of  money  out  of  30,0007.  set  aside  by  Parliament 
for  relieving  decayed  towns,  in  consideration  of  great  fires  in  Strat 
ford  in  1594  and  1595.     The  passage  is  worth  quoting :  "  It  seemeth 
that  our  countryman,  Mr.  Shakespeare,  is  willing  to  disburse  some 
money  upon  some  odd  yard  land  or  other  at  Shottery,  or  near  about 
us.     He  thinketh  it  a  very  fit  pattern  to  move  him  to  deal  in  the 
matter  of  our  tithes.     By  the  instructions  you  can  give  him  thereof 
and  by  the  friends  he  can  make  therefore,  we  think  it  a  fair  mark  for 
him  to  shoot   at,   and  not  impossible  to  hit.     It  obtained  would 
advance  him  indeed,  and  would  do  us  much  good."     Other  matters 
indicate  an  advance  in  wealth.     He  is  the  third  largest  holder  of 
corn  and  malt  in  his  ward,  having  ten  quarters ;  he  is  lending  Richard 
Quiney,  or  at  any  rate  deemed  capable  of  lending,  3O/. ;  he  is  selling 
stone  to  the  corporation ;  he  is  making  friends  too ;  he  is  playing 
in  Jonson's  Every  Man  in  His  Humour.     Jonson  has  joined  the 
Chamberlain's  company,   and  altered  into  pure  English  the  semi- 
Italian  plot  of  this  play  as  written  at  first.     Possibly  Shakespeare 
suggested  this.     At   the  end  of  this  year  the  Theatre  was  pulled 
down,  and  in  1599  the  building  of  the  Globe  Theatre  was  commenced 
with  the  old  materials.     At  this  new  house  in  Bankside  the  rest  of 
Shakespeare's  plays  were  produced  ;  that  is  in  all  probability  all  his 
dramas  that  are  not  included  in  Meres'  list.     The  theatre  at  Black- 


8  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

friars,  erected  not  more  than  three  years  earlier,  was  let  out  to  the 
Children  of  the  Chapel,  and  remained  in  their  occupation  till  1601, 
and  in  that  of  other  children's  companies  till  1612,  to  Shakespeare's 
great  annoyance. 

In  the  year  1600  the  Fortune  Theatre  was  built  by  Alleyn  for  the 
Admiral's  company.  In  this  year  ninety  extracts  from  Shakespeare 
appear  in  England's  Parnassus  ;  quotations  from  him  also  occur  in 
tinzlind's  Helicon  and  in  Bel-vederet  or  the  Garden  of  the  Muses. 
Piratical  publishers  also  begin  to  prefix  his  name  to  plays  not  his. 
All  this  shows  his  rapidly  increasing  fame. 

In  1601  his  name  is  attached  to  a  poem  in  Lovers  Martyr  or  Rosa 
linds  Complaint,  by  Robert  Chester  :  and,  which  is  much  more  im 
portant,  his  father  dies  :  he  was  buried  on  the  8th  September. 
Again  we  find  a  division  in  his  works,  as  shown  in  style,  metre,  and 
dramatic  power,  coincident  with  the  death  of  those  related  to  him. 
He  ceases  now  to  write  Histories,  and  almost  abandons  Comedy. 
Tragedy  of  the  deepest  kind  is  the  subject  of  his  culminating  art. 

In  his  Third  Period,  Shakespeare  advances  in  worldly  prosperity 
as  well  as  in  art  and  reputation.  In  May  1602  he  purchases,  for 
32O/.,  107  acres  of  arable  land  in  Old  Stratford  parish  from  William 
Combe  of  Warwick,  and  John  Combe  of  Old  Stratford  :  the  inden 
ture,  in  his  brother's  absence,  is  sealed  and  delivered  to  Gilbert 
Shakespeare ;  in  the  same  year  in  September,  Walter  Getley,  by 
his  attorney  Thomas  Tibbottes,  at  a  Court  Baron  of  the  Manor  of 
Rowington,  surrenders  to  him  and  his  heirs  a  house  in  Walker's 
Street  or  Dead  Lane  near  New  Place,  possession  being  reserved  to 
the  Lady  of  the  Manor,  till  suit  and  service  had  been  done  by  him 
for  the  same.  At  Michaelmas  in  the  same  year  he  bought  from 
Hercules  Underhill  for  6o/.  one  messuage,  two  orchards,  two  gardens, 
two  barns,  £c.  The  document  of  this  purchase  is  in  the  Chapter 
House,  Westminster.  He  evidently  is  looking  forward  to  settling 
at  Stratford,  and  perhaps  to  founding  a  family  there. 

In  1603,  the  year  of  the  Queen's  death,  Sir  John  Davies  compli 
ments  him  in  his  Microcosnics.  We  find  him  also  acting  in  Ben 
Jonson's  Sejanus,  of  which  he  probably  shared  the  authorship  (in  its 
firs',  form).  The  play,  however,  was  condemned.  It  is  not  likely 
that  any  play  jointly  composed  by  men  of  such  entirely  different 
manners  could  amalgamate  sufficiently  to  succeed.  It  did  succeed 


SHAKESPEARE  IN  LONDON.  9 

afterwards  when  Jonson  recast  the  whole.  At  the  end  of  the  same 
year  (December)  James  I.  was  entertained  at  the  seat  of  William 
Earl  of  Pembroke,  a  patron  of  Shakespeare's,  at  Walton  near 
Salisbury,  by  the  company  to  which  Shakespeare  belonged.  It  is 
supposed  that  Massinger,  whose  father  was  a  retainer  of  Pembroke's, 
on  that  occasion  chose  the  dramatic  career  as  his  business  for  life. 

In  1604  Shakespeare  brought  an  action  against  Philip  Rogers  in 
the  Court  at  Stratford  for  i/.  15^.  6J.  for  malt.  A  sharp  man  of 
business  this  poet  of  ours,  and  looks  after  details  himself ;  he  is  by 
no  means  the  ideal  artist  of  the  vulgar.  In  1605  he  bought  of 
Ralph  Hubande  a  thirty-one  years'  remainder  of  a  ninety-two  years' 
lease  of  the  tithes  of  Stratford,  Old  Stratford,  Bishopton,  and 
Welcombe  for  44O/.  Prosperity  thickens  ;  and  the  gentle  poet  is 
loved  as  well  as  prosperous.  Augustine  Phillips,  his  co-partner  in 
the  profits  of  the  house  and  fellow-actor,  leaves  him  a  30^.  gold 
piece  as  token  of  esteem  ;  nay,  there  is  a  credible  tradition  that 
James  I.  wrote  him  an  autograph  letter  at  this  time. 

In  1606  we  find  he  is  still  in  possession  of  the  house  in  Walker 
Street,  but  as  he  did  not  fill  up  the  form  for  the  Survey  of  Rowingtou 
Manor  (i  Aug.),  he  was  probably  absent  from  Stratford. 

In  1607  John  Davies  of  Hereford  compliments  him  in  the  Scourge 
of  Folly ;  and  his  daughter  Susanna  marries  Dr.  John  Hall,  a 
Stratford  leech  (June  5)  ;  but  his  good  fortune  is  once  more  inter 
rupted  by  that  which  cannot  be  evaded,  Death.  On  31  December, 
1607,  his  youngest  brother,  Edmund,  a  player,  is  buried  at  St. 
Saviour's,  Southwark,  aged  twenty-seven  ;  on  9  September,  1608, 
his  mother,  Mary,  is  buried  at  Stratford.  Again  bereavement,  but  if 
we  can  judge  from  his  works,  a  softening  one  ;  from  this  time  he 
writes  no  more  cynical  tragedies  ;  he  takes  a  healthier  if  not  so 
grand  a  view  of  human  life  ;  he  returns  to  history  and  comedy ;  but 
it  is  Roman  and  not  Chronicle  history  ;  and  the  comedy  turns  entirely 
on  the  rejoining  of  parents  and  children  after  long  separation.  His 
last  period  shows  the  most  human  feeling,  if  not  the  most  perfect 
art. 

In  the  beginning  of  his  Fourth  Period,  on  October  16,  1608, 
Shakespeare  was  sponsor  for  William  Walker,  to  whom  in  his  will 
he  leaves  2OJ.  In  1609  we  find  him  again  looking  after  his  business 
carefully.  On  15  March  he  instituted  a  process  for  61.  debt  and 


io  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

24*.  costs  against  John  Addenbrooke,  and  as  he  could  not  be  found 
he  pursued  his  surety,  Thomas  Horneby,  on  7  June.  In  1611  his 
name  appears  as  a  donor  towards  costs  of  a  bill  in  Parliament  tor 
better  repair  of  highways  and  amending  defects  in  the  former 
statutes  ;  in  the  same  year  a  fine  was  levied  on  the  property  he 
purchased  in  May  1602  and  on  twenty  acres  additional;  in  1612, 
February  4,  Richard  Shakespeare,  his  only  surviving  brother,  was 
buried  ;  and  now,  having  no  surviving  male  relative,  all  hope  of  con 
tinuing  the  name  and  family  is  gone,  and  he  finally  quits  his  work 
after  twenty  years'  hard  exertion,  having  produced  an  average  of  two 
plays  each  year  :  about  ten  in  each  of  his  four  periods,  which  curiously 
enough  are  each  of  about  five  years'  duration. 

In  March  1613  he  bought  a  house  near  Blackfriars  Theatre,  abutting 
on  a  street  leading  to  Puddle  Wharf  against  the  King's  Majesty's 
Wardrobe,  for  I2O/.,  paying  So/,  and  mortgaging  the  house  for  the 
balance.  This  house  he  let  to  John  Robinson  for  ten  years.  In  the 
same  year  the  draft  of  a  bill  in  Chancery,  endorsed  Lane,  Greene, 
and  Shakespeare  complainants,  intended  to  be  presented  to  Lord 
Chancellor  Ellesmere,  shows  that  on  the  moiety  of  tithes  purchased 
by  Shakespeare  in  1605  too  large  a  proportion  of  the  reserved  rent 
fell  on  the  share  of  the  complainants.  His  annual  income  from  these 
tithes  was  I2O/. 

In  1613  the  Globe  Theatre,  and  probably  many  of  his  MSS.,  was 
burnt  down.  This  theatre  was  rebuilt  the  same  year.  In  1614 
fifty-four  houses  were  burnt  in  Stratford,  and  the  town  was  agitated 
respecting  the  inclosure  of  certain  common  lands,  which  was  opposed 
by  the  corporation.  On  5  September  his  name  occurs  as  one  of  the 
ancient  freeholders  to  be  compensated.  On  8  October  he  and 
Thomas  Greene,  gent.,  enter  into  covenant  regarding  compensation 
for  inclosure  intended  by  William  Replingham.  Thomas  Greene  was- 
clerk  to  the  corporation,  and  being  sent  to  London  on  this  business, 
says,  on  17  November:— "My  cousin  Shakespeare  coming  yesterday 
to  town  I  went  to  see  him,  and  he  and  Mr.  Hall  say  they  think  there 
will  be  nothing  done  at  all."  On  23  December  a  hall  of  the  corpora 
tion  was  held,  and  letters  with  nearly  all  the  corporation's  signatures 
were  written  to  Mr.  Manyring  and  Mr.  Shakespeare,  and  Greene 
subjoins  that  he  also  writ  to  his  cousin  Shakespeare  copies  of  all 
ihe  acts  and  a  note  of  the  inconveniences  that  would  happen. 


SHAKESPEA  R&S  DEA  Tff.  1 1 

He  holds  the  confidence  of  the  public  and  of  his  relatives  to  the 
last. 

In  1614  his  name  is  on  the  jury  list  in  a  copy  of  the  customs  of 
the  manor  of  Rowington  ;  he  had  property  in  fee  from  that  manor. 
In  the  same  year  John  Combe  leaves  him  5/.  in  his  will.  There  is 
also  a  notice  in  the  Stratford  Chamberlain's  accounts  of  a  quart 
of  sack  and  a  quart  of  claret  given  to  a  preacher  at  New  Place, 
cost  2od. 

In  1616  Judith,  his  daughter,  was  married  to  Thomas  Quiney, 
vintner,  Stratford  (February  10)  ;  on  25  March  he  made  his  will ; 
on  his  fifty-third  birthday  he  died,  and  was  buried  two  days  after  in 
Trinity  Church,  Stratford,  where  the  bust,  made  from  a  cast  taken 
after  death  still  exists,  though,  through  Malone's  want  of  taste,  the 
hazel  eyes,  the  auburn  hair  and  beard,  the  scarlet  doublet,  black 
tabard,  green  and  crimson  cushion,  and  gilt  tassels  were  all  white 
washed.1  His  wife  survived  him  seven  years. 

Five  years'  poverty,  twenty  years'  hard  work,  three  years'  rest  in 
bereavement,  then  the  final  rest  in  the  grave.  Such  was  Shake 
speare's  life  after  leaving  his  home  in  1585-6 ;  such  is  the  life  of 
most  true  men.  La  vie  c'est  le  travail,  said  Poisson.  Without  the 
work  he  may  have  been  happier  ;  but  who  would  not  accept  his  lot 
with  all  its  troubles  ?  Loved  by  his  fellows,  his  relatives,  and  friends, 
respected  by  his  citizens,  favoured  by  two  sovereigns,  he  sank  into 
an  honoured  grave  to  become  the  favourite  of  his  countrymen,  and 
the  idol  of  all  that  care  for  literature  or  art.  A  myriad- minded  man, 
as  all  great  men  are,  more  or  less :  but  more  than  this,  a  true-hearted, 
loving,  catholic  soul,  one  to  whom  nothing  in  God's  universe  is 
strange,  nothing  despicable ;  the  nearest  approach  to  perfect  of  all 
the  mighty  geniuses  our  little  island  has  produced. 

I  append  in  illustration  of  the  preceding  statements  extracts  from 
contemporaries  alluding  to  Shakespeare  personally,  or  to  passages  in 
his  plays  chronologically  important.  These  will  form  the  subject  of 
the  next  chapter. 

1  The  whitewash  is  now  removed  and  the  colours  restored. 


CHAPTER  II. 

PASSAGES  SUPPOSED  TO  ALLUDE  TO  SHAKESPEARE, 
EXTRACTED  FROM  CONTEMPORARY  WRITINGS. 

"It  is  a  common  practice  nowadays  among  a  sort  of  shifting 
companions  that  run  through  every  art  and  thrive  by  none,  to  leave 
the  trade  of  noverint  whereto  they  were  born,  and  busy  themselves 
•with  the  endeavours  of  art,  that  could  scarce  Latinise  their  neck- 
verse  if  they  should  have  need."— NASH,  Preface  to  Greenes 
Menaphon,  1589. 

"New  found  songs  and  sonnets  which  every  red-nose  fiddler  hath 
at  his  finger's  end  ;  .  .  .  .  make  poetry  an  occupation,  lying  is  their 
living,  and  fables  are  their  movables  ....  think  knowledge  a 
burden,  tapping  it  before  they  have  half  tunned  it,  venting  it  before 
they  have  filled  it,  in  whom  the  saying  of  the  orator  is  verified  : 
Ante  ad  dicendum  quam  ad  cognoscendum  veniunt.  They  come  to 
speak  before  they  come  to  know.  They  contemn  arts  as  unprofit 
able,  contenting  themselves  with  a  little  country-grammar  know 
ledge." — NASH,  Anatomy  of  Absurdity,  1590. 

"  With  the  first  and  second  leaf  he  plays  very  prettily,  and  in 
ordinary  terms  of  extenuating  verdits  Piers  Penniless  for  a  grammar- 
school  wit ;  says  his  margin  is  as  deeply  learned  as  Fauste  precor 
gelida." — NASH,  Piers  Penniless,  1592. 

"Alas,   poor   Latinless  authors For  my  part  I  do 

challenge  no  praise  of  learning  to  myself,  yet  have  I  worn  a  gown 
in  the  University,  and  so  hath  caret  tempus  non  habet  moribus  ;  but 
this  I  dare  presume,  that  if  any  Mecenas  bind  me  to  him  by  his 


SUPPOSED  ALLUSIONS  TO  SHAKESPEARE.       13 

bounty,  or  extend  some  sound  liberality  to  me  worth  the  speaking 
of,  I  will  do  him  as  much  honor  as  any  poet  of  my  beardless  years 
shall  in  England." — NASH,  Piers  Penniless,  1592. 

"  Our  pleasant  Willy  ah  is  dead  of  late,"  &c. 

SPENSER,  Tears  of  the  Muses,  1590, 
refers  probably  to  Lilly,  who  "wrote  no  play  after  1589,"  says  Malone. 

' '  An  upstart  crow  beautified  in  our  feathers  that,  with  his 

'Tiger's  heart  wrapt  in  a  player's  hide,' 

supposes  he  is  as  well  able  to  bombast  out  a  blank  verse  as  the  best 
of  you,  and  being  an  absolute  Johannes  Factotum,  is  in  his  own 
conceit  the  only  Shake-scene  in  a  country." — GREENED  Groatsworth. 
of  Wit,  1592. 

"About  three  months  since  died  Mr,  Robert  Greene,  leaving 
many  papers  in  sundry  booksellers'  hands,  among  others  his  Groats- 
worth,  of  Wit,  in  which  a  letter  written  to  divers  playwriters  is 
offensively  by  one  or  two  of  them  taken ;  and  because  on  the  dead 
they  cannot  be  avenged,  they  wilfully  forge  in  their  conceits  a  living 
author  ;  and  after  tossing  it  to  and  fro,  no  remedy  but  it  must  needs 

light  on  me With  neither  of  them  that  take  offence  was  I 

acquainted,  and  with  one  of  them  (Marlowe  ?)  I  care  not  if  I  never 
be.  The  other  (Shakespeare  ?)  whom  at  that  time  I  did  not  so 
much  spare  as  since  I  wish  I  had  ....  that  I  did  not  I  am  as 
sorry  as  if  the  original  fault  had  been  my  fault ;  because  myself  have 
seen  his  demeanor  no  less  civil  than  excellent  in  the  quality  he 
professes.  Besides,  divers  of  worship  have  reported  his  uprightness 
of  dealing,  which  argues  his  honesty ;  and  his  facetious  grace  in 

writing,  that  approves  his  wit I  protest  it  was  all  Gieene's, 

and  not  mine  nor  Master  Nash's,  as  some  have  unjustly  affirmed." — 
CHETTLE,  KindHarfs  Dream,  1592. 

"Shakespeare  paints  poor  Lucreece'  rape." 

Willobie,  his  Avisa,  1594. 

"  And  there  though  last  not  least  is  Action, 

A  gentler  shepherd  may  no  where  he  found 
Whose  muse  full  of  high  thought's  invention, 
Doth  like  himself  heroically  sound." 

SPENSER,  Colin  Clout 's  come  Home  again,  1595. 


14  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

But  this  more  likely  means  Drayton  (Rowland),  author  of 
I  logical  Epistles  and  Idea  (t5ea  =  amoj/). — See  extracts  from 
Athena:um  in  Part  ii. 

Kempe.  — "  Why  here's  our  fellow  Shakespeare  puts  them  all  down, 
ay,  and  Ben  Jonson  too.  O  that  Ben  Jonson  is  a  pestilent  fellow ; 
he  brought  up  Horace  giving  the  poets  a  pill ;  but  our  fellow  Shake 
speare  hath  given  him  a  purge  that  made  him  bewray  his  credit. 

Burbage. —      "He  is  a  shrewd  fellow,  indeed." 

Return  from  Parnassus,  1602  (?). 

"  The  sweet  witty  soul  of  Ovid  lives  in  mellifluous  and  honey- 
tongued  Shakespeare.  Witness  his  Venus  and  Adonis,  his  Lucreece, 
his  sugared  Sonnets  among  his  private  friends.  Shakespeare  among 
the  English  is  the  most  excellent  in  both  kinds  for  the  stage.  For 
Comedy,  witness  his  Gentlemen  of  Verona,  his  Errors,  his  Love's 
Labour's  Lost,  his  Love's  Labour's  Won,  his  Midsummer's  Night's 
Dream,  and  his  Merchant  of  Venice ;  for  Tragedy,  his  Richard  the  2, 
Richard  the  3,  Henry  the  4,  King  John,  Titus  Andronicus,  and  his 
Romeo  and  Juliet. 

"The  Muses  would  speak  with  Shakespeare's  fine-filed  phrase  if 
they  would  speak  English,"  &c.,  &c.—  MERES,  Palladis  Tamia, 
1598. 

"  And  Shakespeare,  thou  whose  honey-flowing  vein 
Pleasing  the  world  thy  praises  doth  obtain, 
Whose  Venus  and  whose  Lucreece,  sweet  and  chaste, 
Thy  name  in  Fame's  immortal  book  hath  placed,"  &c. 

R.  BARNEFIELD,  Poems  and  Divers  Persons,  1598. 

"  Ad  Gulielmum  Shakespeare. 
"  Honey-tongued  Shakespeare,  when  I  saw  thine  issue 

I  swore  Apollo  got  them  and  none  other  : 
Their  rosy-tainted  features  clothed  in  tissue 

Some  heaven-born  goddess  said  to  be  their  mother : 
Rose  cheekt  Adonis,  with  his  amber  tresses, 

Fair  firehot  Venus,  charming  him  to  love  her, 
Chaste  Lucretia,  virgin-like  her  dresses, 

Proud,  lust-stung  Tarquin  seekbg  still  to  prove  her; 


SUPPOSED  ALLUSIONS  TO  SHAKESPEARE.       15 

Romeo,  Richard,  more  whose  names  I  know  not, 
Their  sugar'd  tongues  and  power-attractive  beauty, 

Say  they  are  saints,  although  that  saints  they  show  not, 
For  thousands  vows  to  them  subjective  duty  ; 

They  burn  in  love  thy  children,  Shakespeare,  het  them, 

Go  woo  thy  Muse  !     More  nymphish  brood  beget  them  ! " 

WEEVER,  Epigrams,  1596. 

"  Players,  I  love  ye  and  your  quality, 

As  ye  are  men  that  pastime  not  abused, 
And  some  I  love,  for  painting  poesy,       (W.  S.  R.  B.) 

And  say  fell  Fortune  cannot  be  excused 

That  hath  for  better  uses  you  refused. 
Wit,  courage,  good  shape,  good  parts,  and  all  good 

As  long  as  all  these  goods  are  no  worse  used, 
And  though  the  stage  doth  stain  pure  gentle  blood, 

Yet  generous  ye  are  in  mind  and  mood." 

SIR  JOHN  DAVIES,  Microcosmos,  1603. 

"  Nor  doth  the  silver-tongued  Melicert 

Drop  from  his  honey'd  Muse  one  sable  tear 
To  mourn  her  death  that  graced  his  desert 

And  to  his  lines  open'd  her  royal  ear. 
Shepherd,  remember  our  Elizabeth, 
And  sing  her  rape  done  by  that  Tarquin,  Death  !  " 

HENRY  CHETTLE,  England's  Mourning 
Garment,  1603. 

"  There  shalt  thou  learn  to  be  frugal  (for  players  were  never  so 
thrifty  as  they  are  now  about  London)  ;  and  to  feed  upon  all  men, 
to  let  none  feed  upon  thee,  to  make  thy  hand  a  stranger  to  thy 
pocket,  thy  heart  slow  to  perform  thy  tongue's  promise  ;  and  when 
thou  feelest  thy  purse  well  lined,  buy  thee  some  place  of  lordship  in 
the  country,  that,  growing  weary  of  playing,  thy  money  may  then 
bring  thee  to  dignity  and  reputation  ;  then  thou  needest  care  for  no 
man ;  no,  not  for  them  that  before  made  thee  proud  with  speaking 
their  words  on  the  stage.  Sir,  I  thank  you  (quoih  the  player)  for 
this  good  counsel.  I  promise  you  I  will  make  use  of  it,  for  I  have 
heard,  indeed,  of  some  that  have  gone  to  London  very  meanly,  and 


16  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

have  come  in  time  to  be  exceeding  wealthy." — Raisers  Ghost, 
1605-6. 

"  You  poets  all,  brave  Shakespeare, 

Jonson,  Greene, 
Bestow  your  time  to  write 
For  England's  Queen." 

A  Mournful  Ditty,  &c.,  1603. 

"  To  our  English  Terence,  Mr.  Will  Shakespeare. 

"  Some  say,  good  Will,  which  I  in  sport  do  sing, 

Hadst  thou  not  play'd  some  kingly  parts  in  sport 
Thou  hadst  been  a  companion  for  a  king, 

And  been  a  king  among  the  meaner  sort. 
Some  others  rail ;  but  rail  as  they  think  fit, 
Thou  hast  no  railing  but  a  reigning  wit ; 
And  honesty  thou  sowst  which  they  do  reap, 
So  to  increase  their  stock  which  they  do  keep." 

JOHN  DAVIES,  Scourge  of  Folly,  1607. 

"  That  full  and  heightened  style  of  Master  Chapman,  the  laboured 
and  understanding  works  of  Master  Jonson,  the  no  less  worthy 
composures  of  the  both  worthily  excellent  Master  Beaumont  and 
Master  Fletcher ;  and  lastly  (without  wrong  last  to  be  named),  the 
right  happy  and  copious  industry  of  Master  Shakespeare,  Master 
Dekker,  and  Master  Hey  wood."— JOHN  WEBSTER,  Dedication  to 
the  White  Devil,  1612. 

"  To  Master  Wm.  Shakespeare. 

"  Shakespeare,  that  nimble  Mercury,  thy  brain, 

Lulls  many  hundred  Argus'  eyes  asleep  : 
So  fit  for  all  thou  fashionest  thy  vein, 

At  th'  horse-foot  fountain  thou  hast  drunk  full  deep. 
Virtue's  or  vice's  theme  to  thce  all  one  is  : 

Who  loves  chaste  life,  there's  Lucreece  for  a  teacher  ; 
Who  lists  read  lust,  there's  Venus  and  Adonis, 

True  model  of  a  most  lascivious  lecher  ; 
Besides,  in  plays  thy  wit  winds  like  Meander, 

Whence  needy  new  composers  borrow  more 


SUPPOSED  ALLUSIONS  TO  SHAKESPEARE.       17 

Than  Terence  doth  from  Plautus  or  Menander, 

But  to  praise  thee  aright  I  want  thy  store. 
Then  let  thine  own  work  thine  own  worth  upraise. 
And  help  t'  adorn  thee  with  deserved  days." 

THOMAS  FREEMAN,  Rub  and  a  Great 
Cast,  1614. 

"  To  him  that  impt  my  fame  with  Clio's  quill, 
Whose  magic  rais'd  me  from  Oblivion's  den, 

That  writ  my  story  on  the  Muses'  hill, 
And  with  my  actions  dignified  his  pen  ; 

He  that  from  Helicon  sends  many  a  rill, 

Whose  nectar'd  veins  are  drunk  by  thirsty  men, 

Crown'd  be  his  style  with  fame,  his  head  with  bays, 

And  none  detract  but  gratulate  his  praise. 

Yet  if  his  scenes  have  not  engrost  all  grace, 
The  much  famed  actor  could  extend  on  stage, 

If  Time  or  Memory  have  left  a  place 

For  me  to  fill  t'  enform  this  ignorant  age  ; 

In  that  intent  I  show  my  horrid  face, 
Imprest  with  fear  and  characters  of  rage, 

Nor  acts  nor  chronicles  could  e'er  contain 

The  hell-deep  reaches  of  my  soundless  brain." 

C.  B.,  The  Ghost  of  Richard  III.,  1614. 

"A  hall,  a  hall! 

Room  for  the  spheres,  the  orbs  celestiall 
Will  dance  Kempe's  jig.     They'll  revel  with  neat  jumps  ; 
A  worthy  poet  hath  put  on  their  pumps. 

0  wit's  quick  travers,  but  sance  ceds  slow, 
Good  faith,  'tis  hard  for  nimble  Curio. 
Ye  gracious  orbs,  keep  the  old  measuring, 
All's  spoild  if  once  ye  fall  to  caperir.g. 

Luscus,  what's  playd  to-day?    Faith,  now  I  know  ; 

1  set  thy  lips  abroach,  from  whence  cloth  flow 
Nought  but  pure  Juliet  and  Romeo. 

Say  who  acts  best,  Drusus  or  Roscio  ? 


,8  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Now  I  have  him  that  ne'er  of  aught  did  speak 

But  when  of  plays  or  players  he  did  treat. 

H'ath  made  a  commonplace-book  out  of  plays, 

And  speaks  in  print,  at  least  whate'er  he  says 

Is  warranted  by  Curtain  plaudities. 

If  ere  you  heard  him  courting  Lesbia's  eyes, 

Say,  Courteous  Sir,  speaks  he  not  movingly 

From  out  some  new  pathetic  tragedy  ? 

He  writes,  he  rails,  he  jests,  he  courts,  what  not, 

Ami  all  from  out  his  huge  long-scraped  stock 

Of  well-penn'd  plays." 

.    MARSTON,  Scourge  of  Villany, 

Satire  x.,  1598. 

"  A  man,  a  man,  a  kingdom  for  a  man." 

From  the  same,  Satire  vii. 

Compare  with  the  foregoing  Romeo  and  Juliet : — 

"  Earth -treading  stars  that  make  dark  heaven  light." 

i.  2,  25. 

"  A  hall,  a  hall,  give  room  and  foot  it,  girls." 

i.  5,  24  (not  in  first  quarto). 

"  You  have  dancing  shoes  with  nimble  soles  .... 
Mer.  Soar  with  them  above  a  common  bound." 

i.  4,  12. 

"  Two  of  the  fairest  stars  in  all  the  heavens, 
Having  some  business,  do  entreat  her  eyes 
To  twinkle  in  their  spheres  till  they  return." 

ii.  2,  14. 
and  ii.  4,  60,'  &c.,  for  "wit's  quick  traverse." 

The  following  parallels  are  from  contemporary  plays  : — 

"Now  to  the  next  tap-house,  there  drink  down  this,  and  by  the 
operation  of  the  third  pot,  quarrel  again." — Ram  Alley,  ii.  2. 

"  He  enters  the  confines  of  a  tavern  ....  and  by  the  operation 
of  the  second  cup  draws  him  on  the  drawer." — Romeo  and  Juliet 
in.  J,  6. 


SUPPOSED  ALLUSIONS  TO  SHAKESPEARE.       19 

"  Dash,  we  must  bear  some  brain." 

Ram  Alley,  ii.  4. 
"Well  I  do  bear  a  brain." 

Romeo  and  Juliet ',  i.  3. 

"  Is  there  no  trust,  no  honesty  in  men  ?" 

Ram  Alley,  ii.  4. 

"There's  no  trust,  no  faith,  no  honesty  in  men." 

Romeo  and  Juliet,  iii.  2,  88. 

"  He  stirreth  not,  he  moveth  not,  he  waggeth  not." 

Ram  Alley,  iv.  2. 

*'  He  heareth  not,  he  stirreth  not,  he  moveth  not." 

Romeo  and  Juliet t  ii.  2,  16. 

"  But  why  speak  I  of  shame  to  thee,  whose  face 
Is  steel'd  with  custom'd  sin,  whose  thoughts  want  grace. 
The  custom  of  thy  sin  so  lulls  thy  sense, 
Women  ne'er  blush  though  ne'er  so  foul  th'  offence, 
To  break  thy  vow  to  me,  and  straight  to  wed 
A  doaiing  stinkard." 

Ram  Alley,  v.  3. 

Imitated  from  Hamlet,  iii.  4,  161  ;  i.  4,  48  :— 

"  That  monster  custom,  who  all  sense  doth  eat 
Of  habit's  devil,"  &c.     (not  in  Folio.) 

"  What  a  falling  off  was  there  I 
From  me,  whose  love  was  of  that  dignity 
That  it  went  hand  in  hand  even  with  the  vow 
I  made  to  her  in  marriage,  and  to  decline 
Upon  a  wretch." 

This  shows  that  at  the  date  of  the  acting  of  Ram  Alley  (published 
1611)  the  quarto  form  (Q  2)  of  Hamlet  was  acted  :  the  alterations  in 
the  folio  must  be  of  subsequent  date  ;  the  play  is  one  continuous 
parody  of  Shakespeare ;  contains  allusions  to  Othello  ("  Villain,  slave, 
thou  hast  wrong'd  my  wife  ! "),  to  Much  Ado  About  Nothing,  Measure 

2 — 2 


20  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

for  Measure,  All's  Well  that  Ends  Well,  and  other  plays.  It  was 
acted  by  the  Revells  Children  between  1607  and  1611,  probably 
not  so  near  the  later  date,  when  it  was  published,  as  the  former. 

The  Dumb  Knight,  by  Lewis  Machin  and  Gervase  Markham, 
acted  by  the  Revells  Children,  and  published  1608,  in  addition  to 
indirect  allusions  to  and  parodies  on  Lear,  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor, 
Othello,  Macbeth,  as  well  as  earlier  plays,  contains  this  passage  : — 

*'  A  book  that  never  an  orator's  clerk  in  this  kingdom  but  is  be 
holden  unto  ;  it  is  called  Maids'  Philosophy,  or  Venus  and  Adonis." 

If  the  character  of  Alphonso  is  imitated  from  lachimo,  Cymbdine 
cannot  be  later  than  1608  ;  but  I  think  this  not  likely. 

Another  play  filled  with  allusions  to  Shakespeare  is  the  Puritan, 
by  W.  S.,  1607,  acted  by  the  Paul's  Children  ;  for  instance  :— 

"  Instead  of  a  jester  we'll  have  the  ghost  in  a  white  sheet  set  at 
the  upper  end  of  the  table." 

Macbeth  was  the  first  of  Shakespeare's  plays  that  had  no  jester 


Act  iv.  Sc.  3  is  distinctly  imitated  from  Pericles,  iii.  2,  which  fixes 
the  date  oi  that  play  as  not  later  than  1607.  Compare  also 
Richard  III.,  i.  2,  33. 

"  Pyeboard.     Let  me  entreat  the  corpse  to  be  set  down. 

Sheriff.  Bearers,  set  down  the  coffin.  This  were  wonderful  and 
worthy  Stowe's  Chronicle. 

Pye.  I  pray  bestow  the  freedom  of  the  air  upon  our  wholesome 
art.  Mass  !  His  cheeks  begin  to  receive  natural  warmth.  Q, 

he  stirs,  he  stirs  again ;  look,  gentlemen  !  he  recovers,  he  starts,  he 
rises. 

Sher.     O,  O  defend  us  !  out,  alas  ! 

Pye.  Nay  ;  pray  be  still ;  you'll  make  him  more  giddy  else. 
He  knows  nobody  yet. 

Oath.     Zounds,  where  am  I  ?     Covered  with  snow  !     I  marvel. 

Pye.     Nay  ;  I  knew  he  would  swear  the  first  thing,  &c.  &c." 

In  comparing  Pericles,  note  that  Thaisa  says,  "  O,  dear  Diana  ' 
Where  am  I?"  on  awaking. 

Locrine,  1595,  edited  by.  W.  S.,  is  a  remarkable  play  ;  it  contains 
allusions  to,  parodies  on  lines  in,  or  the  lines  themselves  borrowed 


SUPPOSED  ALLUSIONS  TO  SHAKESPEARE.       21 

from,  the  plays  of  Peele,  Greene,  and  Marlowe  ;  the  so-called  plays  of 
Shakespeare,  Titus  Andronicus,  Henry  VI.,  and  Richard  III.  ; 
Kyd's  Jeronimo  and  other  old  dramas.  But  in  no  instance  can  I 
trace  any  allusion  to  any  undoubted  play  of  Shakespeare.  The 
wooing  of  Eshild,  Act  iv.  Sc.  I,  seems  to  be  imitated  from  Richard 
III.,  i.  2.  and 

"  Methinks  I  see  both  armies  in  the  field," 
echoes    . 

"  I  think  there  be  six  Richmonds  in  the  field." 

If  this  be  so,  Richard  III,  cannot  have  been  written  later  than  1595, 
which  agrees  with  the  date  I  give  to  it. 

Here  we  must  leave  this  subject,  not  from  deficiency  of  material, 
but  because  a  fuller  exposition  of  the  question  would  require  a 
volume,  and  is  unfit  for  an  elementary  treatise.  We  next  proceed 
to  consider  Shakespeare's  plays  individually  as  regards — I,  their 
authenticity  ;  2,  the  origin  of  their  plots  ;  3,  the  date  of  their  pro 
duction  ;  4,  miscellaneous  observations  which  do  not  fall  under  the 
above  headings.  Throughout  the  next  chapter  the  numbers  I,  2,  3, 
4,  refer  to  the  headings  now  enumerated. 

I  take  the  plays  in  their  chronological  order  as  nearly  as  it  can  be 
ascertained  ;  this  being  the  natural  order  for  study  or  investigation 
of  any  writer  whose  development  we  care  to  become  acquainted 
with ;  and  therefore  I  prefix  a  table  of  the  time-succession  of 
Shakespeare's  works.  The  reasons  for  the  order  will  be  found 
under  the  heads  of  each  play. 


CHAPTER  III. 
ON  THE  PLAYS  OF  SHAKESPEARE. 

Approximate  Chronological  Table  of  the  prediction  of  Shakespeare's 
Works. 

1588 — Venus  and  Adonis. 

1589 — Taming  of  a  Shrew  (part). 

Corambis  Hamlet  (part) 
i.      1591 — Love's  Labour's  Lost  (revised  1597). 

Love's  Labour's  Won. 
ii.      1592 — Comedy  of  Errors. 

iii.  Midsummer  Night's  Dream  (revised  1599). 

1593 — Lucrece. 

iv.  Richard  II.  (revised  1597). 

v.      1594— Edward  III.  (part). 

Troilus  and  Cressida  and  Twelfth  Night  (begun). 
vi-      1595— Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona  (completed), 
vii.  Richard  III.  (quarto), 

viii.  ?  Scene  in  I  Henry  VI. 

ix.  John. 

x.      1596— Romeo  and  Juliet  (first  revision), 
xi.  Merchant  of  Venice. 

Sonnets. 
1597— Romeo  and  Juliet  (finished). 

Love's  Labour's  Lost  (revised). 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  23 

xii.  I  Henry  IV. 

xiii.  1598—2  Henry  IV. 

xiv.  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor  (first  draught). 

xv-  Z599 — Henry  V. 

xvi.  Much  Ado  About  Nothing. 

xvii.  1600 — Julius  Csesar. 

xviii.  As  You  Like  It. 

xix.  1 60 1 — Twelfth  Night. 

xx.  Hamlet  (first  draught). 

xxi.  1602 — Taming  of  the  Shrew  (part). 

xxii.  ?  Sejanus  (part). 

Richard  III.  (folio). 

xxiii.  1603 — Measure  for  Measure. 
Hamlet  (complete) 

xxiv.      1 604 —All's  Well  that  Ends  Well  (re-written), 
xxv.  Othello. 

xxvi.      1605— Lear. 

Merry  Wives  of  Windsor  (complete). 

xxvii.  1606 — Macbeth, 
xxviii.  Timon  (part). 

xxix.  1607 — Troilus  and  Cressida  (finished). 
xxx.  Pericles  (part). 

xxxi.      1608 — Antony  and  Cleopatra. 
Cymbeline  (begun). 

xxxii.  1609 — Coriolanus. 
xxxiii.  Two  Noble  Kinsmen  (part), 

xxxiv.  1610 — Cymbeline  (finished). 

xxxv.  Tempest. 

xxxvi.  1611 — Winter's  Tale, 
xxxvii,  Henry  VIII,  (part). 


24  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


I. — LOVE'S  LABOUR'S  LOST. 

1.  Certainly  Shakespeare's. 

2.  Origin  unknown. 

3.  Dated  by  Drake  and  Delius  (rightly)  1591  ;  Chalmers,  1592  ; 
Malone,   1594.     It  was  printed  in  1598,  as  "presented  before  her 
highness  [Queen  Elizabeth]  last  Christmas  (1597),  and  newly  cor 
rected  and  augmented."     Among  the  added  parts  are  probably,  i.  2, 
171—192;  iii.   i,   166—207;  iv.  3,   1—25;  v.  2,  575—59°;  726— 
833  ;  847 — 879  ;  and  the  corrected  parts,  i.  I,  I — 48  ;  ii.  I,  1—177; 
iv.  i,  i — 12;  iv.  3,  290—380;  v.  2,  i — 40.     The  conceit  of  A-jax 
and  ajakes  being  perhaps  taken  from  Harrington's  Metamorphosis 
of  Ajax,    1596  (cf.   v.   2,  579),  and  "the  first  and  second  cause, 
passado,  duello,"  &c.,  alluding  to  Saviolo's  Treatise  of  Honour  and 
Honourable  Quarrels,  1595  (cf.  i.  2,  184). 

4.  Berowne  and  Rosaline,  in  this  play  are  first  sketches  of  Benedick 
and  Bettris  in  Much  Ado  About  Nothing.     There  was  a  companion 
play  called  Love's  Labour's   Won,   mentioned   by   Meres,  but   not 
extant.     This  is  generally,  and  no  doubt  rightly,  considered  to  have 
been  the  nucleus  of  All's  Well  that  Ends  Well.     Mr.  Brae  inclines  to 
Much  Ado  About  Nothing :  I  think  as  good  a  case  as  his  could  be 
made  out  for  Twelfth  Night  or  for  several  other  plays  of  Shake 
speare's.     The  title  is  alluded  to  in  Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona,  Act. 
i.  Sc.  i,  6. 


II.— COMEDY  OF  ERRORS. 

1.  Undoubtedly  Shakespeare's  (though  all  the  doggrel  lines  are 
suspected  by  Ritson). 

2.  Taken  from  the  Mtncechmi  of  Plautus  ;  in  great  part  of  the 
plot.     There  is  a  translation  of  this  comedy  by  W[illiam]  W[arner], 
1595.     From  the  last  line  of  the  prologue  to  this,  "Much  pleasant 
irror  ere  they  meet  together,"  Shakespeare  may  have  taken  his  title  ; 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  25 

but  the  foundation  of  the  play  was  probably  not  this  translation,  but 
"  The  Historic  of  Error  shewn  at  Hampton  Court  on  New  Yere's 
daie  at  night  (1576-7),  enacted  by  the  Children  of  Pawles."  Yet 
Warner's  play  was  entered  at  Stationers'  Hall  10  June,  1594,  and 
the  printer's  advertisement  states  it  had  been  circulated  for  some  time 
in  MS. 

3.  Assigned  by  Drake,  Chalmers,  and  Delius  to  1591,  by  Malone 
to  1592.     I  agree  with  Malone.     The  only  note  of  time  is 

"Ant.  S.  In  what  part  of  her  body  stands  France? 

"  Drom.  S.  In  her  forehead,  arm'd  and  reverted,  making  war 
against  her  hair. " 

The  heir  of  France  was  Henri  IV.  ;  the  war  about  his  succession 
began  August  1589.  Henri  became  a  Roman  Catholic  25  July, 
1593,  and  was  crowned  February  1594.  This  limits  the  date. 

4.  In  this  play,  as  in  the  preceding,  the  unity  of  time  is  observed  ; 
and  the  action  is  confined  to  one  town.     The  plot  is  so  improbable 
as  to  distinctly  mark  the  play  as  one  of  the  first  group,  of  plays  of 
fancy.    It  is  seldom  acted,  the  extreme  difficulty  of  obtaining  two  pairs 
of  actors  sufficiently  like  to  realize  the  "  errors  "  enough  for  modern 
taste  being  insurmountable.     Nor  is  it  in  any  sense  one  of  Shake 
speare's  best  plays.      It  is  more  like  Midsummer  Nighfs  Dream 
than  any  other  in  the  fantastic  tangle  of  events  on  which  the  plot  is 
founded.     The  opening  scenes  also  are  very  similar  in  their  motives. 
For  the  likeness  of  the  twins  compare  Viola  and  Sebastian  in  Twelfth. 
Night.    It  is  noticeable  that  in  this  the  first  play  in  which  Shakespeare 
treats  of  jealousy  it  is  the  woman  who  is  jealous. 


III. —MIDSUMMER  NIGHT'S  DREAM. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  Hints  for  the  framework  of  Theseus  and  Hippolyta  were 
probably  received  from  Chaucer's  Knight's  Tale;  for  the  interlude 
of  Thisbe  from  Chaucer's  Thisbe  of  Babylon  ;  for  the  fairies  from 
popular   tales   of  Robin    Goodfellow ;   but   Oberon   from    Greene's 
James  IV. 


26  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

3.  Dated  by   Drake,    1593;    Chalmers,    1598;   Malone,    1594; 
Delius  later  than  1594  ;  I  should  place  it  in  1592. 

Oberon  and  Titania  were  introduced  in  a  dramatic  entertainment 
before  Queen  Elizabeth  in  1591.  Act  v.  I,  52,  "The  thrice  three 
muses  mourning  for  the  death  of  learning,  late  deceased  in  beggary," 
alludes  to  the  Tears  of  the  Muses  by  Spenser,  published  in  1591,  or 
possibly  to  the  death  of  Greene  in  1592,  or  to  both. 

4.  This  play  is  full  of  young  poetry,  fanciful  and  lively  ;  the  story 
is  very  poor,  and  there  is  little  development  of  character  in  any  of 
the  personages  except  Bottom  and  his  company.     The  unity  of  time 
is  not  so  strictly  kept  as  in  the  Comedy  of  Errors  ;  the  time  occupied 
is  two  days  and  a  half.   It  is  very  like  the  Errors  in  its  embroilments 
and  its  framework.     For  the  name  compare  Winter's  Tale,  if  it  be 
taken  in  the  sense  of  a  "summer's  story"  (Sonnet  98);   but  the 
allusions  to  the  name  in  the  play  itself  (iv.  I,  end ;  Epilogue,  &c. ) 
do  not  confirm  this  interpretation.     Similar  allusions  are  found  in 
Comedy  of  Errors,  v.  i,  388  ;  Measure  for  Measure,  v.  I,  416  ;  All's 
Well  that  Ends  Well,  iv.  4,  35  ;  v.  I,  24. 


IV.— RICHARD  II. 

1.  Certainly  Shakespeare's. 

2.  Founded  on  Holinshed's  Chronicle. 

3.  Dated   1596  by  Drake,    Chalmers,    and    Delius;    1593    by 
Malone  (rightly). 

4.  There  was  an  earlier  play  (called  Henry  IV.)  in  which  Richard 
was  deposed  and  killed  on  the  stage.     It  was  performed  at  a  public 
theatre,  at  the  request  of  Sir  Gilly  Merick  and  other  followers  of 
Lord  Essex,  the  afternoon  before  his  insurrection.    Merick  gave  forty 
shillings  extra  to  Phillips  to  play  it,  as  the  play  was  old  and  would 
not  draw.     In  Shakespeare's   play  the   deposition   scene  was   not 
printed  till  1608.     It  was  probably  not  acted,  and  suppressed  in  the 
edition  of  1597  because  the   Pope  had  published   a  bull  against 
Elizabeth   in    1596  exhorting  rebellion.      In   1599   Hay  ward   was 


ON  THE  PL  A  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  27 

censured  in  the  Star  Chamber,  and  imprisoned  for  publishing  his 
History  of  the  First  Year  of  Henry  IV.,  which  is  simply  the  deposi 
tion  of  Richard  II. 

The  time  comprised  in  the  play  is  two  years,  1398-1400.  It  was 
Shakespeare's  earliest  historical  play,  and  rightly  called  a  tragedy 
in  the  title  of  the  old  quarto.  So  was  Richard  III.;  but  not 
Heury  IV.,  Henry  V.,  or  John. 

It  is  less  suited  to  the  stage  than  the  other  histories. 


V.— EDWARD  III. 

1.  Supposed  by  Collier,  Ulrici,  and  others,  to  be  entirely  Shake 
speare's.     In  my  opinion  only  the  love  story,  Act  i.  Sc.  2,  Act.  ii., 
is  his.     Mr.  Tennyson  tells  me,   however,   that  he  can  trace  the 
master's  hand  throughout  the  play  at  intervals.     See  my  paper  from 
the  Academy,  25  April,  1874,  in  Part  II. 

2.  Founded  on   Holinshed,   and  the  Shakespeare-part  on  the 
Palace  of  Pleasure. 

3.  Published  in  1596  as  having  been  "  played  sundry  times  about 
the  city  of  London."     Written  probably  a  year  or  two  before  this. 

4.  Unlike  Shakespeare's  undoubted  historical  plays  in  containing 
a  love  story  and  involving  the  principal  personage  in  unhistorical 
adventures.    In  these  and  other  respects  it  is  like  Peele's  Edward  I.; 
but  the  flow  of  metre  is  not  like  Peele.     Did  Shakespeare  finish 
and  correct  this  play  as  he  did  Richard  III.  ?    The  metre  is  like 
that  of  this  play  as  corrected.     Or  is  it  by  Lodge  ? 

VI. — Two  GENTLEMEN  OF  VERONA. 

I.  Mr.  Upton  and  Sir  Thomas  Hanmer  have  supposed  this  play 
to  be  spurious.  Mr.  Halliwell  (Phillipps)  and  I  at  one  time  sus 
pected  a  second  author  to  have  written  part  of  it ;  we  have  both 
withdrawn  this  opinion,  which  was  founded  on  the  ground  of 
numerous  expressions  not  found  elsewhere  in  Shakespeare.  They 
are,  however,  Shakespearian  in  manner. 


28  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

2.  The  greater  part  of  this  play  is  taken  from  the  Story  of  the 
Shepherdess  Filismena  in  the  Diana  of  Montemayor.      Bartholomew 
Young  published  a  translation  of  the  Diana;  his  dedication  is  dated 
November   1598.     It  had  been   previously   translated   by  Thomas 
Wilson  in   1595-6  ;   and  parts  by  Edward  Fasten  and  Sir  Philip 
Sidney.     Young's   was  the  only  one  published,  and  was  probably 
completed  as  early  as  1582-3.     The  ending  of  the  play  is,  however, 
taken   from  Apollonius  and  Sylla,    a  novel   by   Bandello,    extant 
(untranslated)   in    1554.     The   original  of  the  Diana  dates   1560. 
There  is  an  English  translation  of  Apollonius  and  Sylla  in  Riche,  his 
farewell  to  militaire  profession  1606.     This  and  Felix  and  Felismena 
are  reprinted  in  Collier's  Shakespeare 's  Library.     The  encomium  on 
solitude  (v.  4)  and  Valentine's  consenting  to  head  the  robbers,  are 
taken  from  P.  Sidney's  Arcadia,  B.  i.  Chap.  6,  where  Pyrocles  acts 
iix  a  similar  way  (published  1590). 

3.  This  play  is  assigned  by  Malone  to   1591,  by  Delius  to  an 
earlier  date  still ;  by  Chalmers  and  Drake  to  1595.     I  assign  the 
two  first  acts  to  the  beginning  of  1593,  the  three  last  to  1595.     The 
external  evidence  is  very  slight. 

"  Some  to  the  wars  to  try  their  fortunes  there ; 
Some,  to  discover  islands  far  away,"     (Act  i.  Sc.  3,) 

may  refer  to  the  following  circumstances  : — 

In  1595  Sir  W.  Raleigh  undertook  a  voyage  to  Trinidado,  whence 
he  made  an  expedition  up  the  Oronoque  to  discover  Guiana.  Sir 
Humphrey  Gilbert  had  made  a  similar  voyage  in  1594.  A  second 
invasion  by  the  Spaniards  was  expected  in  1595.  Soldiers  were 
levied,  fleets  were  equipped,  troops  were  sent  to  aid  Henri  IV.  of 
France  in  consequence. 

Speed  says, 

"Like  one  that  had  the  pestilence,"  (Act  ii.  Sc.  I.) 
There  was  a  great  plague  in  London  in  1593,  and  11,000  died  there. 
But  this  kind  of  evidence  has  little  value ;  Essex  had  been  joined 
by  many  volunteers  when  he  went  to  France  hi  1591.     There  was  a 
plague  in  1583. 

Marlowe's  Hero  arid  Leander  was  entered  at  Stationers'  Hall  18 
September,  1593.  Marlowe  was  buried  on  i  June,  the  same  year. 


ON  THE  PL  A  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  29 

There  is  an  allusion  to  that  story  in  Act  i.  Sc.  I,  probably  from 
Marlowe's  poem,  which  may  have  circulated  in  MS.  some  time 
before.  This  is,  however,  not  likely.  Shakespeare  alludes  to  the 
same  story  in  other  plays,  of  which  the  earliest  is  Romeo  and  Juliet 
(probably  1596),  Act  iii.  Sc.  I.  The  allusion  to  "Merops'  son"  is 
likely  to  be  taken  from  the  old  play  of  King  John  (1591), 

"As  sometimes  Phaeton 
Mistrusting  silly  Merops  for  his  sire." 

This  play  Shakespeare  certainly  read  before  1596,  as  his  own  King 
John^  founded  on  it  cannot  be  placed  later  than  that  year.  Mr. 
Boaden  (who  has  been  followed  by  many  later  critics)  observed  that 
the  germs  of  other  plays  are  contained  in  this  comedy. 

4.  This  play,  whether  from  being  an  early  work,  as  some  think, 
or  from  being  an  attempt  at  an  entirely  new  kind  of  comedy,  that  of 
social  life  as  distinguished  from  that  of  mere  fancy,  as  illustrated  in 
the  three  preceding  plays ;  or  from  having  been  produced  at  a  period 
of  depression  (compare  Sonnet  29,  &c.),  as  I  think,  is  certainly  one 
of  the  weakest  and  least  satisfactory  of  all  Shakespeare's  plays.  It 
is  less  poetic  than  any  other,  though  some  lines  are  eminently  beau 
tiful  and  quotable.  It  is  more  careless,  not  only  in  sending  Valentine 
to  Milan  by  sea,  but  also  in  twice  having  Verona  in  the  text  where 
Milan  is  required.  There  is  also  a  strange  confusion  between  duke 
and  emperor,  similar  to  confusions  which  I  notice  elsewhere.  It  is 
unnatural  in  some  of  its  incidents ;  in  Silvia's  giving  Proteus  her 
picture,  though  she  rejects  his  suit ;  in  Valentine's  surrendering 
Silvia  to  the  perjured  Proteus ;  in  Proteus's  threat  to  employ  force 
to  Silvia.  It  has  many  weak  versions  of  incidents  and  situations 
that  are  much  better  rendered  in  other  plays.  For  instance,  com 
pare  the  character  of  Valentine  with  that  of  Mercutio  in  Romeo 
and  Juliet ;  of  Launce  with  Lancelot  Gobbo,  and  of  Lucetta  with 
Nerissa  in  the  Merchant  of  Venice  ;  the  incidents  of  the  rope  ladder 
and  the  banishment  of  the  principal  character  with  those  in  Romeo 
and  Juhet. 

This  inferiority  must  not,  however,  be  taken  as  absolute  evidence 
as  to  relative  date,  since  it  often  happens  in  plays  known  to  be  later 
than  those  in  which  the  better  version  occurs.  Compare,  for 


3o  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

example,  the  Constable  in  Measure  for  Measure  with  Dogberry  in 
Much  Ado  About  Nothing. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  this  is  the  earliest  comedy  and,  except 
Richard  II.,  the  earliest  play  in  which  the  unity  of  time  is  altogether 
neglected  in  defiance  of  Sir  Philip  Sidney.  That  of  place  had  also 
been  given  up  in  Richard  II. 

The  plots  of  many  of  these  early  plays  are  built  up  of  the  same 
or  very  similar  materials.  The  following  table  may  be  useful  as 
showing  the  characters  to  be  compared  in  some  of  them,  and  in  the 
tales  from  which  this  play  is  taken  : — 


Romeo  and 

Two 

Felix 

Afiol. 

Twelfth 

Juliet. 

All's  Well. 

Gentlemen. 

and  Fel. 

and  Sylla. 

Night. 

— 

— 

Sebastian. 

Valeric. 

Silvio. 

Cesario. 

Rosaline. 

Helena. 

Julia. 

Felismena. 

Sylla. 

Viola. 

Juliet. 

Diana. 

Silvia. 

Celia. 

Juliana. 

Olivia. 

Romeo. 

Bertram. 

Proteus. 

Don  Felix. 

Apollonius. 

Count. 

Mercutio. 

— 

Valentine. 

Silvio. 

Sebastian. 

Some  of  the  weaknesses  of  the  play  arise  from  an  exaggerated 
carrying  out  of  the  main  idea,  which  is  certainly  that  of  friendship ; 
first  broken  then  restored ;  the  corresponding  play  is  the  Merchant 
of  Venice.  Antonio  is  the  contrast  to  Proteus ;  Launce  and  Lucetta 
are  clearly  germs  of  Launcelot  and  Nerissa. 


VII.— RICHARD  III. 

I.  Halliwell  thinks  that  the  turbulent  character  of  this  play  as 
we  now  have  it  is  due  to  an  older  one.  I  have  no  doubt  that  it  was 
originally  written  by  G.  Peele,  left  unfinished  by  him,  completed 
and  partly  corrected  by  Shakespeare  as  we  have  it  in  the  Quartos, 
and  that  Shakespeare  afterwards  altered  it  into  the  shape  in  which 
it  was  printed  in  the  Folio.  No  other  hypothesis  can,  I  think, 
account  for  its  similarity  to  much  of  Henry  VI.  which  is  not 
Shakespearian,  and  also  for  the  unparalleled  differences  between  the 
Folio  and  Quarto.  (See  my  essay  in  Macmillan's  Magazine  for 
November,  1875,  on  Henry  VI.) 

2.  Founded  on  Holinshed's  Chronicle  and  a  preceding  play  on 
the  same  subject  produced  by  the  Queen's  Company  in  1594. 


ON  THE  PL  A  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  31 

3.  Date  of  first  production  probably  1595. 

4.  Period  involved,  eight  years  :  1477-85.    This,  like  the  Taming 
of  the  Shrew,  has  always  been  a  favourite  acting  piece. 

VIII. — I  HENRY  VI. 


1.  Condemned   by   nearly  all   critics  ;    and  assigned  in  various 
divisions  to  Marlowe,  Greene,  &c.    I  have  little  doubt  that  Marlowe 
wrote  i.    I,   i.   3,  iii.  I,  iv.  I,  v.  I  ;  Lodge  wrote  i.  2 — 6,  ii.  I — 3, 
iii.  2,  3,  [?  iv.  2 — 7,  v.  2] ;    Shakespeare  wrote  ii.  4,  and  perhaps 
ii.  5  ;  and  possibly  he  in  his  very  early  time,  but  more  likely  Lodge, 
wrote  iv.  2 — 7  and  v.  2.     Some  fourth  and  unknown  hand  certainly 
wrote  iv.  4,  v.  I,  v.  5,  which  are  quite  different  from  the  rest  of  the 
play. 

2.  Founded  on  Holinshed  ;  but  not  following  him  so  closely  as 
the  histories  by  Shakespeare  do. 

3.  Certainly  before  1592,  when  it  was  acted  by  L.  Strange 's  men 
at  the  Rose.    The  Chamberlain's  Company  had  it  before  1599.     See 
Epilogue  to  Henry  V. 

4.  This  play  is  independent  of  2  Henry  VI.  and  3  Henry  VI.     It 
was  tacked  to  them  by  the  writer  of  the  last  scene  after  1600.     It 
probably  passed  to  the  Chamberlain's  Company  when  L.  Strange's 
men  joined  them  in  1594. 


IX.— JOHN. 

1.  Certainly  Shakespeare's. 

2.  Founded  on  The  Troublesome  Raigne  of  John,  King  of  England, 
with  the  Discoverie  of  King  Richard  Cordelioris  base  Son,  vulgarly 
named  the  Bastard  Fawconbridge  ;  also  the  Death  of  King  Jo  fin  at 
Swinstead  Abbey.    1591.     Falsely  attributed  to  Shakespeare  in  title- 
page  of  1622  and  to  W.  Sh.  in  that  of  1611. 


32  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

3.  Hamnet.  Shakespeare's  only  son,  died  in  August  1596.     Con 
stance's  lament  for  Arthur's  loss  (Act  iii.  Sc.  4)  would  appear  to  be 
written  soon  before  this  event. 

"  A  braver  choice  of  dauntless  spirits 
Than  now  the  English  bottoms  have  waft  o'er, 
Did  never  float  upon  the  swelling  tide 
To  do  offense  and  scathe  to  Christendom,"  (Act  ii.   Sc.  I,) 

was  probably  suggested  by  the  great  fleet  then  preparing  to  be  sent 
against  Spain  in  1596.  It  sailed  on  3  June,  the  great  armada  was 
destroyed,  Cadiz  sacked,  and  the  fleet  returned  by  8  August,  four 
days  before  Hamnet  died. 

The  Spanish  Tragedy,  Solyman  and  Perseda,  and  Captain  Thomas 
Stukely  are  quoted  or  alluded  to  ;  but  they  do  not  help  to  fix  the 
date,  which  Drake  arid  Chalmers  place  in  1598.  Mai  one  and 
Delius  in  1596.  I  prefer  1595. 

4.  The  action  extends  through  the  whole  of  John's  reign  from 
1199  to  1216.     It  is  the  first  historical  play,  properly  so  called, 
among  Shakespeare's  works. 


X. — ROMEO  AND  JULIET. 

1.  Boswell  has  conjectured  that  in  the  first  Quarto  (1597)  there 
are  embodied  remains  of  an  older  play   on  which    Shakespeare 
founded  his.     I  believe  that  G.  Peele  wrote  the  early  play  about 
T593  J   that  Shakespeare  in  1596  corrected  this  up  to  the  point 
where  there  is  a  change  of  type  in  Q  i  (to  end  of  Act  ii.  Sc.  3),  and 
in  1597  completed  his  corrections  as  in  Q  2. 

2.  Luigi  da  Porto's  novel,  Hysteria  di  dui  notili  Amanti  (Venice, 
1535),  followed  by  Bandello's  novel  (Lucca,  1554),  was  the  origin  of 
Boisteau's.     From  Boisteau,  Painter  took  his  Rhomeo  and  Julietta 
(Palace  of  Pleasure,   1567),  and  Arthur  Brooke  his  poem  of  The 
Tragical  History  of  Romeus  and  Juliet,  containing  a  Rare  Example 
of  True  Constancie,  &c.  (1562,   2nd  Edition,   1587).      Shakespeaie 
copied  the  poem,  using  the  novel  occasionally,  as  is  clear  from  the 
following  table : — 


ON  THE  PLAYS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  33 

fiovd.  Play.  Poem. 

Name  of  prince.  Signer  Escala.  Eskales.  Escalus. 

Romeo's  family.  Montesches.  Mountagues.  Montagues. 

Friar's  messenger.        Anselmo.  John.  John. 

Act  i.  Sc.  2,  1.  68-75.  Omitted.  Given.  Given. 

Capulet's  residence.      Villa  Franca.  Freetown.  Freetown! . 

Romeo's  name.  Rhomeo.  Romeo.         j  ^meo(once). 

Juliet's  sleep.  40  hours.  42  hours.  omitted. 

3.  Dated  by  Chalmers,  1592  ;  Drake,  1593  (rightly  for  George 
Peele's  share) ;  Delius,  1591 ;  Malone,  1596  (rightly  for  Shakespeare's 
corrected  edition).  Malone's  argument  is  this  : — Shakespeare,  Bur- 
bage,  and  others,  "the  Lord  Chamberlain's  men,"  on  the  death  of 
Henry  Lord  Hunsdon  the  Lord  Chamberlain  (22  July,  1596),  were 
protected  and  sanctioned  by  George  Lord  Hunsdon.  In  August 
1596  William  Brooke,  Lord  Cobham,  was  appointed  Chamberlain, 
who  died  5  March,  1596-7  ;  on  17  April  George  Lord  Hunsdon 
succeeded  him.  The  company  could  therefore  only  be  called  Lord 
Hunsdon's  men  (as  they  are  in  title-page  of  Quarto,  1597,)  between 
July  1596  and  April  1597.  [But  this  only  shows  that  the  piece 
was  produced  in  that  interval,  not  that  the  original  play  was  then 
written.] 

In  Act  iii.  Sc.  I,  Q  I,  the  "  first  and  second  causes  "  are  mentioned  : 
that  passage  (not  the  whole  play)  was  therefore  written  after 
Saviolo's  Book  on  Honour  and  Honourable  Quarrels  had  been 
published  (1594) ;  see  LovJs  Laboiir's  Lost,  Act  i.  Sc.  2.  This  fixes 
the  earliest  date  for  the  play,  say  some  critics  ;  but  Peele  may  have 
known  this  book  in  the  original  language. 

There  are  passages  in  Act  v.  very  like  some  in  Daniel's  Complaint 
of  Rosamond  (entered  February  1591-2). 

The  comedy  of  Doctor  Doddipcll,  which  appeared,  Malone  says, 
before  1596,  imitates  (?)  this  play ;  compare  Act  iii.  Sc.  2,  line  22, 
&c.,  Q2,  with 

"  The  glorious  parts  of  fair  Lucilia, 
Take  them  and  join  them  in  the  heavenly  spheres, 
And  fix  them  there  as  an  eternal  light 
For  lovers  to  adore  and  wonder  at." 

3 


34  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

In  v.  2,  9,  Q  I,  the  practice  of  sealing  up  the  doors  of  plague- 
infected  houses  is  alluded  to.  This  may  refer  to  the  plague  of  1593. 

In  Act  i.  Sc.  3,  line  23,  Q  I,  the  nurse's  speech  probably 
alludes  to  the  earthquake  in  1580  as  Juliet's  weaning  day  ;  and  as 
Juliet  is  nearly  fourteen  years  old,  this  brings  us  to  1593.  The 
nurse's  miscalculation,  that  fourteen  less  one  makes  eleven,  adds 
to  the  humour  of  the  passage. 

Weever's  Epigrams  (published  before  1595)  allude  to  this  play. 
Seepage  15. 

4.  This  is  certainly  Shakespeare's  earliest  tragedy.  It  was  prob 
ably  meant  as  a  companion  to  Troylus  and  Cressida,  ihe  love-story 
in  which  is,  I  think,  of  the  date  1594.  Faithful  Juliet  is  the  con 
trast  to  faithless  Cressid.  The  only  other  instances  of  similar 
titles  of  paired  names  are  Benedick  and  Betteris  {Much  Ado  About 
Nothing}  and  Antony  and  Cleopatra.  The  play  was  acted  at  the 
Curtain  Theatre  ;  it  is  rather  to  be  classed  with  the  other  early  ones 
as  a  love  play  than  with  the  great  tragedies,  which  form  a  group  by 
themselves.  Mercutio  is  like  Valentine  (Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona) 
before  he  meets  with  Silvia.  Romeo  in  his  inconstancy  is  like 
Proteus  ;  also  like  the  Count  in  Twelfth  Night.  The  time  occupied 
in  the  play  is  five*days. 


XL— MERCHANT  OF  VENICE. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  The  main  plot  is  from  the  Pecorene  of  San  Giovanni  Fiorentino ; 
Fourth  day,  first  novel,  Gianetta  (1378).     The  casket  story  from 
an  old  translation  of  the  Gesta  Romanorum  (1577).     Both  stories 
are  condensed  in  the  Variorum  Shakspeare  (1821).     Gosson  (1579) 
mentions  The  Jew  shown  at  the  Bull,  representing  the  greediness  of 
worldly  choosers  (casket- scene)  "  and  the  bloody  minds  of  usurers  " 
(Shylock). 

3.  Malone    identifies   this    play  with    The    Venesyan   Comedy, 
acted  at  the  Rose,  1594.     But  Shakespeare's  plays  were  not  at  any 
date  acted  there.    Drake  and  Chalmers  date  it,  nearly  rightly,  1597. 
I  prefer  1596. 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  35 

XIL— i  HENRY  IV. 

1.  Undoubtedly  Shakespeare's. 

2.  Founded  on  Holinshecl's  Chronicle,  and  The  Famous  Victories 
tf  King   Henry  the  Fifth,    containing  the  honourable  Battle    of 
Agincourt,  1594.  , 

3.  Entered  25  February,  1597-8.     Written  in  1596  (Drake),  or 
more  probably  1597  (the  general  opinion). 

4.  The  period  comprised  in  this  play  is  about  ten  months,  from 
14  September,    1402  (Holyrood  Day),  to  21  July,    140*3  (Eve  of 
St.  Mary  Magdalen).    In  this  and  the  succeeding  plays  Shakespeare 
reaches  his  highest  point  in  comedy  in  the  character  of  Falstaff. 
Prose  appears  here  for  the  first  time  as  an  essential  part  of  the 
drama  in  his  historical  plays. 

XIII.— 2  HENRY  IV. 

1.  Certainly  Shakespeare's. 

2.  Same  as  preceding. 

3.  Dated  by  Drake,   1596;  Chalmers,   1597;  Malone,   1598,  I 
think  rightly. 

In  Act  iv.  4,  1 1 8,  Clarence  says: — 

"  The  incessant  care  and  labour  of  his  mind 
Hath  wrought  the  mure,  that  should  confine  it  in, 
So  thin,  that  life  looks  through  and  will  break  out." 

In  Daniel's  Civil  Warres,  1.   iii.  st.    116  (entered  October  1594, 
published  1 595, )  we  find  : — 

"  Wearing  the  wall  so  thin  that  now  the  mind 
Might  well  look  thorough  and  his  frailty  find." 

In  Act  v.  :— 

"Not  Amurath  an  Amurath  succeeds," 

alludes  to  Mahomet's  strangling  his  brothers  on  his  succeeding  to 
his  father,  Amurath  III.,  in  February  1596. 

3-2 


36  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Pistol's  distic1*,  "Si  fortuna  me  tormenta,"  &c.,  appeared  in 
Wits,  Fits,  and  Fancies,  entered  at  Stationers'  Hall  in  1595. 
Justice  Shallow  is  alluded  to  by  name  in  Every  Man  in  His 
Humour,  acted  1598,  hence  the  date  is  fixed  to  1596,  1597,  or  159& 

4.  The  period  comprised  is  nine  years,  1403—1412. 


XIV.— MERRY  WIVES  OF  WINDSOR. 

1.  Certainly  Shakespeare's. 

2.  Founded  on  The  Lovers  of  Pisa,  a  tale  in  Tarleton's  News  out 
of  Purgatorie  (1589)  ;  printed  in  the  Variorum  Shakspeare  (1821). 

3.  Said  to  have  been  written  at  the  desire  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  to 
show  Falstaff  in  love.     Certainly  written  after  Henry  IV.  ;  possibly 
after  Henry  V.     This  play  does  not  form  one  of  the  Henry  IV.  and 
V.  series,  and  consistency  with  them  is  not  to  be  looked  for  in  it. 
Malone  and  Drake  date  it  1601.     I  prefer  1598  for  the  first  sketch, 
as  in  Q  i.     The  revised  form  of  it,  Q  2,  is   said  to   have   been 
written  about  1605,  because  "king"  is  substituted  for  "  council  "  in 
Act  i.    i,  113.     "These  knights  will  hack,"  iii.  i,  79,  is  supposed 
to  allude  to  the  237  knights  made  by  James  I.  before  May  1603. 
So  "  When  the  court  lay  at  Windsor,"  Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  1.  63,   means 
probably  July  1603  :  it  was  held  usually  at  Greenwich  in  the  summer. 
"Coach  after  coach,"  Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  1.  66,  could  not  be  much  before 
1605,  when  coaches  came  into  general  use  (Howe's   Continuation 
of  Stow Js  Chronicle].     "Outrun  on  Cotsale,"  Act  i.  Sc.  I,  1.  92, 
alludes  to  the  Cotswold  games  instituted  by  Robert  Dover  about 
1603. 

4.  The  surreptitious  copy  of  the  first  form  of  this  play  was  the 
only  one  published  before  the  First  Folio,  the  MS.  of  the  improved 
form  being  in  the  hands  of  the  proprietors  of  the  Globe  Theatre. 

The  title  Sir,  given  to  priests,  is  a  translation  of  Dominus  ;  it  was 
restrained  to  Sir  Knight,  Sir  Priest,  Sir  Graduate,  and  Sir  Esquire. 
See  A  Decacordon  of  Ten  Quodlibeticall  Questions,  &c.,  1602. 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  37 


XV.— HENRY  V. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  Same  as  Henry  IV. 

3.  Written  while  1  he  Earl  of  Essex  was  in  Ireland  (see  Act.  v. , 
Chorus,)  between  April  and  September  1599,  as  promised  in  Epi 
logue  of  2  Henry  IV. 

The  allusion  in  the  prologue  to  Every  Man  in  His  Httmour  is  of 
no  use  to  fix  the  date,  not  being  written  till  1601. 

4.  The  early  Quartos  of  this  play  are  not  first  sketches,  but  surrep 
titious  copies  grossly  mutilated.     The  period  comprised  is  from  the 
first  to  the  eighth  year  of  Henry  V.     The  allusions  to  Oldcastle 
(i   Henry  IV.,  i.  2,  48,   2  Henry  IV.,  Epilogue,)  refer  not  to  the 
play  of  Sir  John  Oldcastle,  wrongly  attributed  to  Shakespeare,  but 
to  the  character  who  takes  Falstaff 's  place  in  the  worthless  old  play 
of    The  Famous   Victories.     The  French  scene,  Act  iii.   Sc.  4,  is 
quite  exceptional.     I  hope  it  is  not  Shakespeare's,  and  believe  it  to 
be  Lodge's. 


XVI. — MUCH  ADO  ABOUT  NOTHING. 


1.  Certainly  Shakespeare's. 

2.  Taken  indirectly  from  a  novel  of  Belleforest's  after  Bandello. 
There  is  a  similar  story  in  Ariosto,  Orlando  Furioso,  Book  v. ,  and 
in  the  Geneura  of  Turbervil. 

3.  Written  in  1599  or  1600. 

4.  The  characters  of  Benedick  and  Betteris  are  founded  on  those 
of  Berowne  and  Rosaline  in  LovJs  Labour's  Lost.     The  old  tale. 
"  It  is  Not  So,"  is  given  in  the  Variorum  Shakspeare,  1821. 


3S  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


XVII.— JULIUS  CESAR. 

1.  Hitherto   undoubted.      I  have,    however,    given  reasons  for 
supposing  that  Jonson  either  revised  the  play  or  superintended  its 
revision,     Antony  is  throughout  it  spelled  without  an  h,  as  Jonson 
spells  it.     Shakespeare  elsewhere  always  uses  the  h.     There  are 
phrases,  such  as  "bear  me  hard,"  "I  will  come  home  to  you  (to 
your  house),"  "  quality  and  kind,"  &c.,  which  are  used  by  Jonson, 
not  elsewhere  by  Shakespeare.     The  play  is  singularly  free  from 
the  words  of  Shakespeare's  coinage  that  abound  in  his  other  plays  ; 
it  is  shorter  than  the  average  of  plays  of  similar  character  by  1,000 
lines  ;  the  metre  shows  clear  traces  of  having  been  abridged  like  the 
surreptitious  copies  of  Romeo  and  Juliet  and  Hamlet.     The  passage 
quoted  by  Jonson  as  ridiculous,  "  Caesar  did  never  wrong  but  with 
just  cause,"  does  not  occur  in  it,  but  has  been  altered  into  "  Know 
Caesar  doth  not  wrong,  nor  without  cause  will  he  be  satisfied" 
(see  Jonson's  Discoveries].     Compare  the  Induction  to  the  Staple  of 
News,  "Cry  you  mercy  !  You  never  did  wrong  but  with  just  cause." 

2.  Founded  on  North's  translation  of  PlutarcKs  Lives  of  Julius 
Caesar,  Marcus  Brutus,  and  Marcus  Antonius. 

3.  Assigned  by  Drake,    Chalmers,    and   Malone  to    1607 ;    by 
Halliwell  to  1600-1  ;  by  Delius  to  a  time  before  1604.     1  think  it 
was  produced  in  1600,  again  in  1607,  and  in  the  abridged  form  we 
now  have  it  after  1613. 

Malone  argues  for  1607  being  the  date  of  original  production  on 
the  ground  that  Lord  Sterling's  play  was  written  then  or  not  long 
before  ;  and  he  "  would  not  have  been  daring  enough  to  enter  the 
lists  with  Shakespeare."  The  inference  is  stretched  too  far ;  it  is 
only  fair  to  conclude  from  the  printing  of  Sterling's  Julius  Catsar, 
and  also  of  the  second  edition  of  the  Tragedy  of  Ca-sar  and  Pompey, 
or  Casals  Revenge,  in  1607,  that  a  production  or  revival  of  Shake 
speare's  piece  took  place  that  year.  A  much  stronger  argument 
would  have  been  the  probability  that  all  the  Roman  plays  were 
produced  in  successive  years,  like  the  groups  of  the  great  tragedies, 
or  the  historical  plays.  The  internal  evidence  for  an  early  date  is, 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  39 

however,  overwhelming  (especially  in  metre),  and  Mr.  Halliwell  has 
found  an  allusion  to  this  play  of  the  date  of  1601. 

4.  Shakespeare  makes  Caesar  be  killed  in  the  Capitol,  though 
Plutarch  expressly  says  in  Pompey's  portico  ;  he  was  probably  con 
tinuing  the  tradition  of  the  earlier  poems  and  plays.  Compare 
Hamlet,  iii.  2,  108,  &c.  (also  inQ  i),  and  Chaucer.  The  quarrelling 
scene  in  The  Maid's  Tragedy  (?  1609)  is  imitated  from  that  between 
Brutus  and  Cassius.  This  confirms  the  guess  that  the  play  was 
represented  in  1607.  It  was  called  also  Ccesar's  Tragedy  (1613), 
probably  in  its  altered  form.  Gosson  mentions  a  History  of  Ccesar 
and  Pompey  in  1579.  The  time  included  in  the  play  is  nearly  three 
years.  The  real  hero  of  the  tragedy  is  Marcus  Brutus.  The  treat 
ment  is  more  like  that  in  Henry  IV.  and  V.  than  that  of  the  other 
Roman  plays,  and  forms  a  connecting  link  between  the  histories 
and  tragedies.  See  Part  II.  on  this  play. 


XVIII.— As  You  LIKE  IT. 


I.  Undoubted. 


2.  Founded  on  Lodge's  novel  of  Rosalynd,  or  Euphues*  Golden 
Legacy  (1590).     The  characters  of  Jaques,  Touchstone,  and  Audrey 
are  entirely  Shakespeare's.     For  Lodge's  novel,  see  Collier's  Shake 
speare's  Library. 

3.  "  Staied,"  in  the  Stationers'  books,  4  August  (year  not  given, 
but  either  1600,  1601,  or  1602,  and  almost  certainly  1600),  along 
with  Henry  V.,  which  was  entered  again  14  August  and  published 
in  the  same  year ;  Muck  Ado  About  Nothing,  which  was  entered 
23  August  and  published  the  same  year  j  and  Every  Man  in  His 
Humour,  published  1601. 

Rosalind  says  : — 

"  I  will  weep  like  Diana  in  the  fountain." — iv.  I,  145. 

Stowe  mentions  this  image  of  Diana  as  set  up  in  1 598  and  decayed 
in  1603.  The  date  of  the  play  is  fixed  then  between  1598  and  1600. 
Malone  says  1599. 


4o  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

A  line  of  Marlowe's  Hero  and  Leander  is  quoted  (iii.  5,  83) ;  this 
poem  was  published  1598. 

4.  Shakespeare  played  Adam  in  this  play ;  he  continued  to  act 
till  1603,  when  he  played  in  Sejanus ;  he  also  acted  the  Ghost  in 
Hamlet,  &c. 


XIX.— TWELFTH  NIGHT. 


t.  Undoubted. 


2.  See  under  the  Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona  for  the  story  of  Viola ; 
that  of  Malvolio  is  Shakespeare's  own. 

3.  Used  to  be  dated  as  one  of  the  last  of  Shakespeare's  plays  on 
the  ground  of  allusions  to  "undertakers."  Dekker's  Westward  Ho ! 
Sir  Robert  Shirley  coming  as  ambassador  from  the  Sophy  ;  and  the 
internal  evidence  of  perfection  of  style,  &c.     It  is  now  certain  that 
it  was  produced  before  February  1602  ;  and  there  are  clear  indica 
tions  in  the  metre  that  some  parts  of  the  Viola  stoiy  were  written 
much  earlier — about  1594.     I  date  the  completion   1601.      The 
early  parts  are,  I  think,   traceable  all  through  the  verse  scenes, 
specially  in  Act  iii.  Sc.  I,  and  Act  v.  Sc.  I. 

4.  The  Count  in  this  play  is  called  Duke  in  Act  i.  Sc.  2  and  Sc.  4, 
just  as  the  Emperor  is  called  Duke  in  Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona 
and  the  King  is  called  Duke  in  Lovers  Labour's  Lost.     The  second 
name  of  the  play,  What  You  Will,  is  a  strange  one  ;  it  is  very  like 
that  of  As  You  Like  It.   Mr.  Staunton's  conjecture  that  Shakespeare 
not  having  named  these  plays  answered  hurriedly  to  the  inquiring 
manager,  "  Call  it  what  you  will ;  name  it  as  you  like  it,"  is  the  most 
plausible  explanation  of  their  origin.    Marston  took  the  name  What 
You  Will  for  a  play  of  his  own  in  1607.     The  name  Twelfth  Night 
was  probably  that  of  the  date  of   the  first  production  of   the 
play. 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  41 


XX. — HAMLET. 


I.   Undoubted. 


2.  Founded  on  an  older  play  now  lost ;   and  on  the  HystoHe  of 
Haniblett  (black  letter  ;  date  of  earliest  edition  unknown),  which 
was  translated  from  one  of  Belleforest's  novels.     He  took  it  from 
"Saxo  Grammaticus." 

3.  Dated  byMalone,  1600  ;  Chalmers,  1598  ;  Drake,  1597  (revised 
1600);  Delius  (more  rightly),  1602.     Steevens  mentions  a  reference 
to  Hamlet  in  Gabriel  Harvey's  handwriting  as  made  in  1598,  which 
may  have  been  written  any  time  before  1620  ;  and  the  reference  to 
the  inhibition  of  the  players  (Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  1.  346)  is  not  necessarily 
to  be  applied  to  the  first  order  of  the  Privy  Council  for  the  restraint 
of  the  immoderate  use  of  playhouses  (made  22  June,  1600),  for  this 
order  proved  ineffectual ;  but  rather  to  their  second  order,  made 
31  December,  1601.     The  Fortune  and  the  Globe  were  allowed  to 
remain  opera ;  the  others  were  closed  owing  to  the  personal  allusions 
indulged  in  by  some  of  the  companies.     The  play  was  probably 
revised  in  1603. 

4.  The  allusion  in  Nash's  epistle  to  "whole  Hamlets  or  handfuls 
of  tragical  speeches  "  must  allude  to  the  old  play  now  lost ;  and  so 
must  Lodge's  allusion  to  the  Ghost  that  cried,  "  Hamlet,  revenge  ! 
so  miserably."     Shakespeare's  play  was  entered  26  July,  1602.     I 
should  place  the  first  draft   in  1601,  the  complete  play  in  1603. 
I  have  little  doubt  that  the  early  Hamlet  of  1589  was  written  by 
Shakespeare  and  Marlowe  in  conjunction  ;  and  that  portions  of  it 
can  be  traced  in  the  First  Quarto  as  "  Corambis  "  Hamlet. 


XXI.— TAMING  OF  THE  SHREW. 

I.  Declared  spurious  by  Dr.  Warburton.      Dr.  Farmer  assigned 
only  the  Induction   and   the   character    of  Petruchio    to    Shake- 


42  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

speare,  with  occasional  touches  elsewhere.  Mr.  Collier  advocated 
the  same  opinion.  I  assign  to  the  second  writer  the  following 
parts:— L  I,  i.  2;iL  I,  except  1.  168—326;  iii.  I,  iii.  2,  129—150; 
iv.  2,  iv.  4;  v.  I,  and  perhaps,  v.  2,  176 — 189.  This  second  hand 
was  probably  T.  Lodge.  It  is  observable  that  in  all  these  parts 
there  is  scarcely  a  trace  of  the  old  play  The  Taminge  of  a  Shrewe  ; 
while  in  the  other  parts,  plot  and  even  language  is  freely  borrowed  ; 
exactly  in  the  way  in  which  Shakespeare  revised  his  first  drafts  of 
The  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor  and  Hamlet.  See  Part  II. 

2.  Founded  on  the  play  mentioned  above  and  on  the  Supposes  of 
Gascoigne  "englished  "  from  Ariosto,  1566. 

3.  Dated  by  Drake  and  Delius,  1594  ;  Chalmers,  1599;  Malone, 
1596  ;  Collier,  I  think  rightly,  1601-2. 

The  play  is  not  mentioned  in  Meres'  list  (1598).     The  line, 

"  This  is  the  way  to  kill  a  wife  with  kindness," 

seems  to  allude  to  Heywood's  play,  A  Woman  Killed  with  Kindness, 
the  date  of  which  is  1602.  The  play  of  Patient  Grissel  by  Dekker, 
Chettle,  and  Haughton,  was  brought  out  in  1599  ;  this  play  of 
Shakespeare's  is  clearly  a  rival  piece,  in  opposition  to  which  again 
came  out  Dekker's  Medicine  for  a  Curst  Wife  (July  1602). 

4.  The  old  play,  The  Taming  of  a  Shrew,  was  probably  written 
by  Marlowe  and  Shakespeare  in  conjunction  in  1589.     Shakespeare 
certainly  wrote  much,  if  not  all  the  prose  in  it.     This  early  drama, 
along  with  the  old  Hamlet,  2  and  3  Henry   VI. ,  and  Titus  Andro* 
nicus,  almost  certainly  came  into  the  possession  of  the  Chamber 
lain's  company  in  1600.      They  previously  belonged  to  the  Earl  of 
Pembroke's. 

2  AND  3  HENRY  VI. 

I.  The  Quarto  editions  have  always  been  regarded  as  earlier 
works  than  the  Folio.  They  are  quoted  under  the  names  of  :  The 
Contention  and  The  True  Tragedy.  The  full  titles  are  The  first 
part  of  the  Contention  betwixt  the  two  famous  Houses  of  York  and 
Lancaster  and  The  True  Tragedy  of  Richard  Duke  of  York.  The 
theories  that  have  been  held  as  to  the  authorship  are— I,  Malone's, 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  43 

that  Marlowe,  Greene,  &c.,  wrote  The  Whole  Contention  (that  is,  both 
Quartos),  and  that  Shakespeare  enlarged  and  completed  them  into  2 
and  3  Henry  VI. ;  2,  Knight's,  that  Shakespeare  was  author  of  both 
Quartos  and  Folio;  3,  Grant  White's,  that  Shakespeare,  Marlowe, 
and  Greene,  wrote  the  Quartos  from  which  Shakespeare  transferred 
his  own  work  to  the  Folio,  the  additions  also  being  his  ;  Hudson, 
Steevens,  Johnson,  Hazlitt,  Ulrici,  and  the  Germans  generally,  hold 
the  Shakespearian  authorship  of  the  Quartos  in  more  or  less  entirety. 
Other  critics  (except  myself)  hold  the  additions  to  be  his.  I  believe 
the  whole  of  2  and  3  Henry  VI.  to  be  by  Peele  and  Marlowe  :  the 
latter  writing  Act  iii.  Sc.  3  and  Act  iv.  Sc.  I  of  2  Henry  VI.  and 
Acts  ii.  v.  of  3  Henry  VI.  and  Peele,  the  rest. 

N.B.— 3  Henry  VI.  iv.  8  should  form  part  of  Act  v.— The 
grounds  of  my  view,  sesthetic,  artistic,  and  metrical,  are  given  in 
a  paper  by  me  in  Macmillan 's  Magazine  (Nov.  1875).  Of  course 
Shakespeare  revised  (though  he  did  not  write)  these  plays  about  1601. 

2.  Founded  on  Hall's  Chronicle;  not  Holinshed's  ;  but  follows 
him  loosely.     See  the  blunders  as  to  the  side  espoused  by  Lady 
Grey's  husband ;  the  marriage  of  the  Prince  of  Wales  to  Warwick's 
eldest  daughter,  &c.,  &c. 

3.  Written  not  later  than  1592.    See  the  quotation  of  "A  tiger's 
heart  wrapt  in  a  player's  hide,"  in  Greene's  Groatsworth  of  Wit. 

4.  The  Quarto  editions  are  merely  piratical  versions  taken  down  in 
shorthand  (in  my  opinion)  at  a  theatrical  representation.      There  is 
scarcely  anything  in  the  Quartos  not  in  the  Folio  ;  and  what  little 
there   is  seems   to  be  introduced  for  the  groundlings.      Malone's 
numbers  are  altogether  deceptive,  from  the  manner  in  which  they 
are  evolved.     The  plays  were  written  for  Pembroke's  company,  and 
the  earliest  notice  of  them  in  connexion  with  the  King's  is  on  the 
title-page  of  The  Whole  Contention  in  1619,  three  years  after  Shake 
speare's  death.     There  are  in  the  Quartos,  and  in  the  parts  peculiar 
to  the  Folio,  many  classical  allusions,  similes,  and  expressions  in 
the  styles  of  Marlowe  and  Peele.    Malone's  dissertation  is  the  store 
from  which    most  of   the  modern  arguments  concerning  author 
ship  have  been  taken. 


44  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

TITUS  ANDRONICUS. 

1.  In  1687  there  was  a  tradition  reported  by  Ravenscroft  that 
this  play  was  only  touched  by  Shakespeare.     Theobald,  Johnson, 
Farmer,  Stevens,  Drake,   Singer,    Dyce,    Hallam,   H.    Coleridge, 
W.  S.  Walker,  reject  it  entirely.    Malone,  Ingleby,  Staunton,  think 
it  was  touched  up  by  him.       Capel,    Collier,  Knight,    Gervinus, 
Ulrici,  and  many  Germans,  think  it  to  be  Shakespeare's  ;  R.   G. 
White,  that  it  is  a  joint  work  of  Greene,  Marlowe,  and  Shakespeare ! 
The  fact  that  it  was  acted  by  the  companies  of  Sussex,  Pembroke, 
and  Derby,  and  printed  as  so  acted  before  it  came  into  the  posses 
sion  of  the  Chamberlain's  company,  is  far  more  important  than  the 
mention  of  it  in  Meres,  or  the  reception  of  it  in  the  Folio.     It  was 
not  published  with  Shakespeare's  name  as  author  in  his  lifetime. 
Halliwell  thinks  Shakespeare's  play  (  ?  Titus  and  Vespasian)  is  lost, 
and  was  the  one  entered  by  J.  Danter  in  1594.     I  hold  this  play  to 
be  Marlowe's.     See  my  paper  mMacmillan's  Magazine  (Nov.  1875). 

2.  May  have  been  founded  on  a  ballad.     The  story  was  known  to 
Painter,  who  alludes  to  it  in  his  Palace  of  Pleasure. 

3.  Probably  1590.     See  Jonson's  allusion  to  it  in  Bartholomew 
Fair  (1614)  as  some  25  or  30  years  old.     He  couples  it  with  Kyd's 
Jcronimo.      Certainly  written  before  1592,  when  it  was  acted  at  the 
Rose. 

4.  A  stilted,  disagreeable  play  with  a  few  fair  touches.     It  has 
many  classical  allusions  in  it ;  many  coincidences  in  the  use  of  words 
and  phrases  with  Marlowe's  work,  and  with  Henry  VI.  ;  in  style 
and  metre   it  is  exactly  what  a  play  of  Marlowe's  would  be   if, 
corrected  by  Shakespeare  as  he  corrected  Richard  III.  of  Peele's. 

A  play  called  Titus  and  Vespasian  was  also  acted  at  the  Rose, 
which  appears  from  a  German  translation  to  have  treated  of  the 
same  story  as  Titus  Andronicus  (see  Cohn,  Shakespeare  in  Germany}. 
In  this  form  of  the  play  Vespasian  is  a  friend  of  Titus.  It  is  very 
likely  a  remnant  of  the  form  into  which  Shakespeare  cast  his  play, 
with  or  without  the  aid  of  Marlowe.  Our  present  play  is  not  Shake 
speare's  ;  it  is  built  on  the  Marlowe  blank-verse  system,  which 
Shakespeare  in  his  early  work  opposed  :  and  did  not  belong  to 
Shakespeare's  company  till  1600. 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  45 

XXIL— SEJANUS.(?) 

1.  Jonson  tells  us  that  in  the  first  form  of  this  play  as  acted  on  the 
public  stage  "  a  second  pen  had  good  share  ;  in  place  of  which  I 
have  rather  chosen  to  put  weaker  and  no  doubt   less  pleasing   of 
mine  own  than  to  defraud  so  happy  a  genius  of  his  right  by  my 
loathed  usurpation."      This  second  pen  was  usually,   until  lately, 
supposed  with    good   reason  to    be    Shakespeare's.      Most   critics 
now  reject  this  hypothesis  :   but  no   other  likely  name  has   been 
advanced  in  his  place,1  unless  we  admit  Dr.  Nicholson's  view  that 
Sheppard  was  the  "  second  pen."     I  cannot  think  so. 

2.  Founded  on  Tacitus,  Suetonius,  Seneca,  &c. 

3.  Produced  in  1603. 

4.  As  the  early  form  of  the  play  is  lost,  the  question  of  author 
ship  is  of  little  importance. 

XXIII. — MEASURE  FOR  MEASURE. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  Founded  on  Whetstone's  Promos  and  Cassandra,  1578,  printed 
in  Six  Old  Plays  on  which  Shakespeare  founded,  &c.    Nichols,  1779. 

3.  Generally  and  rightly  dated    1603.      It  apologises  for  King 
James3  ungracious  entry  into  England. 

"  I'll  privily  away.     I  love  the  people, 
But  do  not  like  to  stage  me  to  their  eyes. 
Though  it  do  well,  I  do  not  relish  well 
Their  loud  applause  and  aves  vehement." 

Act  i.  Sc.  i. 

"  The  general  subject  to  a  well-wisht  king, 

Quit  their  own  part,  and  in  obsequious  fondness 
Crowd  to  his  presence,  where  their  untaught  love 
Must  needs  appear  offense." 

Act  ii.  Sc.  4. 

1  Beaumont  did  not  begin  to  write  till  1606,  nor  Fletcher  till  1607,  as  far  as  we 
know.  Chapman  and  Marston  wrote  commendatory  verses  on  the  play.  Surely 
none  of  these  can  have  been  the  second  hand. 


46  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

James  had  issued  a  proclamation  forbidding  the  people  to   resort 
to  him. 

"  What  with  the  war,  what  with  the  sweat  ....  Heaven  grant  us 
peace  !  " — Act  i.  Sc.  2. 

The  war  with  Spain  still  existed  in  1603  :  but  James  had  shown 
he  meant  to  end  it,  as  he  did  on  19  August  1604.  In  1603  there 
was  a  plague,  which  carried  off  more  than  30,000  in  London. 

The  list  of  prisoners,  Act  iv.  Sc.  3,  contains  four  stabbers  ;  the 
roaring  boys,  bravados,  roysters,  &c.,  were  so  outrageous  in  1603 
that  the  statute  of  Stabbing  was  passed  in  the  first  half  of  1604. 

4.  This  play  is  the  central  one  for  the  metre  of  the  third  period  ; 
it  has  more  lines  with  extra  syllables  before  a  pause  in  the  middle  of 
a  line  than  any  other.  It  is  freer  in  rhythm  than  any  play  in  the 
first  and  second  periods. 


XXIV.— ALL'S  WELL  THAT  ENDS  WELL. 


1.  Undoubted. 

2.  The  main  plot   is  founded  on  Painter's   Giletta  of  Narbonne, 
in  the  Palace  of  Pleasure  Vol.  i.    The  comic  part  with  Parolles,  &c., 
is  Shakespeare's. 

3.  Dated  by  Malone  and  Chalmers,  1606  ;  by  Drake  and  Delius, 
1598 ;  I  assign  it  to  1604,  as  near  to  Measure  for  Measure  as  possible. 
It  contains  some  parts  of  very  early  work  (1591-2),  perhaps  remains 
of  Love's  Labour's  Won,  namely,  the  rhymed  parts  of— i.  I,  230 — 
244,  i-  3.  133—142  ;  ii.  i,  130—214,   ii.  3,  80—210,  ii.  3,  130— 
150  ;  iii.  4  ;  sonnet,  and  end  of  scene. 

4.  The  scene  Act  iii.  Sc.  5,  should   be    compared   with    Two 
Gentlemen  of  Verona  (Act  iv.  Sc.  2) ;  the  device  by  which  Bertram 
is  deceived  into  meeting  Helen,  his  wife,  with  that  in  Measure  for 
Measure, 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  47 

XXV.— OTHELLO. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  Founded  on  a  novel  by  Giraldi  Cinthio  (Decade  iii.  Novel  3). 

3.  Date  earlier  than  November  1604.     This  used  to  be  looked 
on  as  one  of  the  latest  of  Shakespeare's  plays. 

4.  The  names  Othello  and  lago  occur  in  Reynolds'  God's  Revenge 
against  Adultery.     The  date  of  the  action  is  1570.     Mustapha,  the 
general  of  Solymus  II.  attacked  Cyprus  in  May  in  that  year.      The 
Turkish  fleet  first  sailed  towards  Cyprus,  then  went  to  Rhodes,  met 
another  squadron,  and  resumed  its  course  for  Cyprus  ;  which  was 
taken  in  1571.     The  accounts  of  the  cannibals  and  "  men  whose 
heads  do  grow  beneath  their  shoulders  "  are  taken  from  Sir  Walter 
Raleigh's  narrative  of  the  Discovery  of  Guiana  (1600);  he  says,  "I  am 
resolved  they   are   true."      For  the  passion   of  jealousy  compare 
Othello  with  Troylus,  Leontes,  Ford,  and  Posthumus. 

XX  VI. —LEAR. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  Founded   on  Holinshed's  Chronicle  and   The  True  Chronicle 
History  of  King  Leir  and  his  three  Daughters,  Gonorill,  Ragan,  and 
Cordelia   (entered    1594,    printed    1605).       This    is    contained   in 
Steevens'  reprint  of  the  Quarto  editions  of  Shakespeare  ;  also  in  Six 
Old  Plays,  &c.     The  episode  of  Gloster  and  his  sons  is  taken  from 
the  story  of  the  blind  king  of  Paphlagonia  in  Sidney's  Arcadia,  re 
printed  in  the  Variorum  Shakspeare,  1821.     It  also  often  alludes  to 
Harsnet's  Declaration  of  Egregious  Popish  Impostures,  1603. 

3.  The  date  must  lie  between  1603  and  1606.      The  play  was 
entered  November  1607  as  having  been  played  in  December  1606. 
It  was  probably  produced  early  in  1605,  as  the  old  play  was  then 
reprinted  and   entered  8th  May,    "as   lately  acted,"    in   order  to 
deceive  the  public. 


48  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

"  I  smell  the  blood  of  a  British  man  "  (Act  iii.  Sc.  6  end), 
stands 

"I  smell  the  blood  of  an  English  man," 

in  Nash's  pamphlets,  1596.  England  and  Scotland  were  united  in 
name  and  James  proclaimed  king  of  Great  Britain,  24  October, 
1604. 

4    Compare  Hamlet  and  Ophelia  with  Lear,  for  the  phenomena 
of  madness. 

XXVIL-MACBETH. 

1.  Messrs.  Clark  and  Wright  reject  as   Middleton's — i.  I,  i.  2,  i. 
3,  1-37 ;  ii.  3  (Porter's  speech) ;  iii.  5  ;  iv.  3,  140—159  ;  v.  2,  v.  8  last 
forty  lines,  besides  many  rhyming  tags  :  I  reject  also  (but  not,  in 
all,  forty  lines)  various  other  rhyming  tags  :  but  retain  i.  2 ;  ii.  3  ; 
v.  2.     I  must  refer  to  my  essay  on  the  subject  in  Part  II.,  the  reasons 
cannot  be  condensed  here. 

2.  Founded    on   Holinshed's    Chronicle,    and   Reginald    Scot's 
Discovery  of  Witchcraft. 

3.  Dated  almost  without   exception  1606   (Middleton's   revision 
being  much  later).     In  Act  ii.  Sc.  3.     "  The  expectation  of  plenty." 
Wheat  was  lower  in  Windsor  market  in  1606  than  for  thirteen  years 
afterwards,  also  lower  than  the  year  before.     So  were  barley  and 
malt.    The  "  equivocators  "  in  the  same  year  must  mean  the  Jesuits, 
specially  Garnet  their  superior,  who  was  tried  for  gunpowder  treason 
on  28  March,  1606  (see  Malone).  Again  the  "  stealing  out  of  a  French 
hose  "  implies  that  they  were  at  that  time  short  and  strait.     Now  in 
1606,  in  Anthony  Nixon's  Black  Year  we  find  that  tailors  took  more 
than  enough  for  the  new  fashion's  sake.     In  1605  King  James  at 
Oxford  was  addressed  by  three  students  of  St.  John's  College  in 
Latin  verses  founded  on  the  weird-sisters'  predictions  to  Macbeth. 
It  is  not  likely  they  would  choose  this  subject  after  Shakespeare 
had  treated  it.       Middleton's   Witch  was   certainly  produced  after 
1613.       There   are   two   passages  from  Plutarch's  life   of  Antony 
alluded  to  in  this  play.     "The  insane  root  that  takes  the  reason 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  49 

prisoner,"  Act  i.  Sc.  3,  1.  84,  and  "My  genius  is  rebuked  as  it  is  said 
Mark  Anthony's  was  by  Caesar,"  Act  iii.  Sc.  I,  1.  57.  Shakespeare 
was  then  probably  reading  for  Anthony  and  Cleopatra,  which  was 
produced  before  May  1608. 

4.  For  treatment  of  Ghost  compare  Hamlet;  for  Witches  in  Act  iv. 
Sc.  2,  compare  Middleton's  Witch,  the  Witch  of  Edmonton  by 
Ford,  Dekker,  and  Rowley  (Witch-part  by  Ford),  and  Jonson's 
Masque  of  Queens  and  The  Sad  Shepherd. 


XXVIII.— TIMON  OF  ATHENS. 

1.  By  two  authors.     Shakespeare  undoubtedly  wrote  i.  I  (verse 
part);  ii.  i,  ii.  2  (verse  part);  iii.  6  (verse  part);  iv.  I,  iv.  3  ;  v.  I,  y. 
2,  v.  4.       Cyril  Tourneur  I  think  (Delius  says  Wilkins)  wrote  the 
rest.     Shakespeare's  part   was   certainly  written   first,  though   C. 
Knight  denies  this. 

2.  Founded  on  a  passage  in  Plutarch's  Life  of  Antonius^  and  the 
23th  novel  in  vol.  I  of  Painter's  Palace  of  Pleasuie  ;  also  on  Lucian's 
Dialogues. 

3.  Evidently  to  be  dated  between  the  great  tragedies  (which  it 
closely  resembles  in  tone),  VS^L  Anthony  and  Cleopatra^  reading  for 
which  Shakespeare  met  with  the  story.      I  assign  it  therefore  to 
1606,  a  year  before  the  other  plays  left  unfinished  by  Shakespeare, 
Pericles  and  Troylus  and  Cressida.     Delius  says  1608,  others  1610. 
The  date  of  the  completion  of  the  play  is  doubtful ;  it  may  have 
been  1608,  or  1623,  when  the  Folio  was  printed. 

XXIX. — TROYLUS  AND  CRESSIDA. 

1.  Nearly   the   whole   of  the   fifth   Act   has   been  suspected   as 
spurious,  so  has  the  Prologue. 

2.  Founded    on    Chaucer's     Troilus    and   Crcseide   for  the  love 
story  ;  Caxton's  Troy  Book  for  the  story  of  Hector  and  Ajax;  Ther- 
sites,  Patroclus,  &c.,  are  taken  from  Chapman's  Homer. 

4 


-^  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

3.  1  have  tried  to  show  that  these  three  portions  were  written  at 
different  dates  about  1594,  1595,  and  1607.     The  whole  play  was 
printed  in  1608  as  never  having  been  acted.      Thersites  is  referred 
to  in  Cymbeline — • 

"  Thersites'  body  is  as  good  as  Ajax 
When  neither  are  alive." — Act  iv.  Sc.  2,  I.  252. 

This  scene  in  Cymbeline  I  assign  to  1607-8,  \vhich  agrees  with  my 
date  tor  Troylus ;  which  Malone  places  in  1602,  on  account  of  an 
entry  in  the  Stationers'  books,  referring,  not  to  the  play  of  1599  by 
JJekker  and  Chettle,  but  to  one  acted  by  the  Chamberlain's  men ; 
and  there  is  a  reference  to  the  story  of  Troylus  and  Cressida  in  the 
comedy  of  Histriomastix,  which  seems  to  imply  ^that  Shakespeare 
had  written  some  play  on  this  subject  before  Elizabeth's  death  :  she 
is  spoken  of  as  alive  in  the  last  Act. 

"•  Troy.   Come  Cressirla,  my  cresset  light, 

Thy  face  doth  shine  both  day  and  night. 
Behold,  behold  thy  garter  blue 
Thy  knight  his  valiant  elbow  wears, 
That  when  he  SHAKES  his  furious  SPEARE, 
The  foe,  in  shivering  fearful  sort 
May  lay  him  down  in  death  to  snort. 
Cress.  O  Knight,  with  valour  in  thy  face 

Here  take  my  skreene,  wear  it  for  grace  ; 
Within  thy  helmet  put  the  same, 
Therewith  to  make  thy  enemies  lame." 

Tliis  surely  refers  to  the  changing  of  sleeve  and  glove  in  the 
play  in  direct  connexion  with  Shakespeare's  name.  Was  the  play 
by  him.  not  containing  the  Thersites  and  Achilles  part,  exhibited 
soon  after  1595?  Troylus  is  referred  to  in  Much  Ado  about  Nothing 
0599)  as  the  first  employer  of  Pandars.  I  cannot  hesitate  on  this 
matter.  Shakespeare's  play  in  its  firtt  form  was  exhibited  before 
*599>  probably  in  1597. 

4.  The  love  part  of  this  play  is  a  pendant  to  Romeo  and  Juliet ; 
T^ndarus  should  be  compared  with  the  Nurse. 


ON  THE  PL  A  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  51 

XXX.— PERICLES. 

f.  First  two  Acts  and  Gower  throughout  unquestionably  by 
Wilkins,  who  founded  a  novel  on  this  play  afterwards.  The  brothel 
scenes  in  Act  iv.  Sc.  5  and  6  by  Rowley,  I  think  ;  S.  Walker  says 
by  Dekker,  who  did  not  write  for  the  King's  Company.  Acts  iii., 
iv.,  v.,  with  these  omissions,  by  Shakespeare.  The  play  put 
together  by  Wilkins. 

2.  Founded  on  a  novel  by  T.  Twine,   The  Patterne  of  Painful 
Adventures,   &>c.y    that  befell  unto    Prince  Appolonius,    the  Lady 
Lucina  his  wife,  and  Tharsia  his  daughter,  &c.,  re-published  in 
1607,  entered  in  1576.     Gower  tells  the  story  in  Confessio  Amantis 
1554.      The   play    follows    this   version    sometimes.      The    Gesta 
Romanorum  story  (nearly  the  same)  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
used. 

3.  Certainly  before  2  May,  1 608,  when  it  was  entered;  probably 
before  the  re-publishing  of  Twine's  novel  in  1607.     I  should  date 
1607.     Delius  tells  me  that  he  prefers  1608. 

4.  The  Shakespeare  part  should  be  carefully  compared  with  the 
corresponding  stories  in  Cynbeline  and  Winters  Tale,  especially  the 
latter,  in  which  the  same  extraordinary  lapse  of  time  is  permitted  be 
tween  the  Acts.   This  play  and  Rowley's  New  Wonder,  and  Marston's 
Insatiate  Countess,  are  probably  the  three  most  incorrectly  printed 
plays  in  the  language.     The  beginning  of  the  Shakespeare  part, 
Act  iii.  Sc.  I,  should  be  compared  with  the  opening  of  The  Tempest. 
Restorations  to  life  after  apparent  death  occur  in  Romeo  and  Juliet, 
Muck  Ado  about  Nothing,  Cymbdine,  and  Winter's  Tale. 

XXXI. — ANTHONY  AND  CLEOPATRA. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  Founded  on  Plutarch's  Life  of  Marcus  Antonius* 

3.  Dated  unanimously  early  in  1608. 

4—2 


52  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

XXXIL— CORIOLANUS. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  Founded  on  Plutarch's  Life  of  Coriolanus. 

3.  Usually  dated  1609-10;  I  prefer  1609.     Menenius'  fable  (Act 
i.  Sc.    l)  is  taken  from  Camden's  Remaines  (1605),  and  not  from 
North's  Plutarch.     TLe  play  must  have  been  written  before  1612 
for  this  reason  ;    Mr.  Halliwell  has  found  that  in  every  edition  of 
North's  Plutarch  up  to  1603  "unfortunately"  is  printed  for  "unfor 
tunate  "  in  the  passage  corresponding  to  Act  v.  Sc.  I,  1.  98.      This 
is  an  evident  misprint,  as  it  spoils  the  meaning.     Shakespeare  cor 
rected  it,  and  wrote  "unfortunate,"  which  was  adopted  in  the  1612 
edition  of  North's  Plutarch.     As  to  Shakespeare's  own  copy  being 
the  one  in  the  Greenock  library  dated  1612,  if  it  was  so  he  must 
have  used  another.     He  did  not  write  Julius  Ccesar  after  that  date. 

XXXIII.— THE  Two  NOBLE  KINSMEN. 

1.  Written  by  Shakespeare  and  Fletcher  as  stated  in  the  Quarto 
of  1634.     Shakespeare's  part  consists  of  Act  i.j  Act  iii.  Sc.  I,  2  ; 
Act  v.  Sc.  I,  3,  4. 

2.  Founded  on  the  Knights  Tale  of  Chaucer. 

3.  The  date  of  Shakespeare's  share  I  fix  from  internal  evidence 
as  1609 ;  that  of  Fletcher's  completion  of  the  play  is  probably  the 
same  as  that  of  his  finishing  Henry  VIII.  1613. 

XXXIV.— CYMBELINE. 

1.  The  wretched  vision  in  Act  vi.  Sc.  4  cannot  be  Shakespeare's; 
the  rest  of  the  scene  is  also  doubtful. 

2.  Dated  by  Drake,    1605 ;    Chalmers,    1606;    Malone,    1609; 
Delms,  1610.     Some  scenes  are  probably  earlier,  about  1607-8  ;  for 


ON  THE  PLA  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  53 

the  rest,  Delius  is  probably  right,  or  nearly  so.  The  name  Leonatus 
is  from  Sidney's  Arcadia,  which  Shakespeare  used  for  his  Lear. 
The  story  of  Cymbeline  in  Holinshed  is  near  that  of  Lear  and  that 
of  Macbeth  ;  and  the  story  of  Hay  and  his  sons  staying  his  country 
men  in  a  lane  in  a  battle  against  the  Danes  is  near  that  of  Macbeth 
in  Holinshed's  Chronicle  of  Scotland.  Shakespeare,  therefore,  pro 
bably  wrote  Lear,  Macbeth,  and  Cymbeline  nearly  at  the  same  time. 
There  is  also  an  allusion  to  Cleopatra's  sailing  on  the  Cydnus  to 
meet  Anthony ;  he  had  therefore  been  reading  for  the  play  of 
Anthony  and  Cleopatra.  The  character  of  Imogen  is  distinctly  imi 
tated  in  the  Euphrasia  of  Beaumont's  Philaster  (dated  by  Dyce 
1608,  possibly  1610-11).  Compare  also  : 

"  I  hear  the  tread  of  people  ;  I  am  hurt : 
The  gods  take  part  against  me,  could  this  boor 
Have  hurt  me  thus  else  ?  " 

Philaster  iv.  I. 
with 

"  I  have  bely'd  a  lady, 

The  princess  of  this  country ;  and  the  air  of  't 
Revengingly  enfeebles  me  ;  or  could  this  carle, 
A  very  drudge  of  Nature's,  have  subdued  me 
In  my  profession  ?  " 

Cymbeline  iv.  2. 

I  date  the  play  as  completed  1609-10,  after  Coriolanus,  Lear, 
Macbeth,  and  Anthony  and  Cleopatra. 

3.  Founded  on  Holinshed's  Chronicles  and  a  novel  of  Boccaccio 
(Day   II,  Novel   9).      The  story  is   also   found   in  Westward  for 
Smelts  (1603).     The  scenes  containing  the  story    of  Bellario  and 
Imogen's  flight  I  assign  to  an  earlier  date  than  the  rest  of  the  play  ; 
the  whole  of  the  scenes  with  lachimo  are  certainly  of  the  later  date 
(1609-10  ?). 

4.  The  date  of  the   commencement  of  the  play  is  A.D.    16, 
Cymbeline's  24th  year  of  reigning,  Augustus'  42nd. 


54 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


XXXV.— THE  TEMPEST. 


1.  The  masque  in  Act  iv.  Sc.  I  has  been  considered  by  the  Cam 
bridge  editors  an  insertion,  like  the  vision  in  Cymbeline. 

2,  3.  The  pamphlet  describing  the  tempest  of  July  1609,  which 
dispersed  the  fleet  of  Sir  George  Somers  and  Sir  Thomas  Gates,  in 
which  the  Admiral-ship  was  wrecked  on  the  island  of  Bermuda,  was 
published  in  December  1609,  or  January  1609-10.     The  narrative  of 
Jourdan,  in  which  "the  Bermudas"  is  called  the  Isle  of  Devils,  is 
dated  13  October,   1610.      The  True  Declaration  of  the  Councill  of 
Virginia   was    also  published    in   1610.     Shakespeare's   play  was 
produced  either  late  in  1610  or  early  in  1611.     There  can  be  no 
doubt  of  the  play  having  been  founded  on  these  narratives.     (See 
Malone's  essay  in  Variorum  Shakspeare,  1621.) 

4.  This  is  one  of  the  plays  that  observes  the  unity  of  time.  Mr. 
Staunton  conjectured  that  one  of  the  characters  at  least  (the  Duke 
of  Milan's  son,  Act  i.  Sc.  2,  1.  438)  is  lost.  He  thought  that 
each  player  had  a  property  in  his  own  part,  and  that  sometimes  all 
the  parts  could  not  be  bought  up  by  the  publishers.  The  play  is 
certainly  very  short,  only  2,068  lines,  the  average  being  3,000  ;  and 
it  is  strange  that  this  character  of  the  Duke's  son  is  not  brought  on 
the  stage.  Perhaps  Francisco  is  what  is  left  of  him.  The  pronun 
ciation  of  Stephano  (pronounced  Stephano  in  the  Merchant  of 
Venice  1596)  was  probably  learned  from  Ben  Jonson's  Every  Man 
in  His  Humour  (1598),  in  which  Shakespeare  acted.  Compare 
with  this  in  Cymbeline,  Act  iv.  Sc.  2,  the  proparoxyton  pronuncia 
tion  of  Posthumus. 


XXXVI.— WINTER'S  TALE. 

1.  Undoubted. 

2.  Founded  on  Greene's  Dorastus  and  Fawnia  (1588). 

3.  Dated   1610-11.     Mentioned  in  Sir  Henry  Herbert's  Office 
Book  as  an  olde  playe  called  Winters  Tale,  formerly  allowed  of  by 


02V  THE  PL  A  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  55 

Sir  George  Bucke,  who  took  possession  of  the  office  of  Master  of 
the  Revels  in  August  1610. 

4.  To  be  compared  with  Pericles  and  Cymbeline  for  the  stories  of 
Perdita  and  Marina  and  Imogen  ;  with  Henry  VIII.  for  the  queen's 
trial.  Said  to  be  sneered  at  by  Jonson  in  the  Induction  to  his 
Bartholomew  fair,  1614,  along  with  The  Tempest. 

*'  If  there  be  never  a  servant-monster  (Caliban)  in  the  Fair  who  can 
help  it,  nor  a  nest  of  anticks  ?  (The  twelve  Satyrs :  Winter's  Tale,  iv.  4. 
352.)  He  is  loth  to  make  Nature  afraid  in  his  plays,  like  those  that 
beget  Tales,  Tempests,  and  such  like  drolleries. "  In  his  conversations 
with  Drummond  of  Hawthornden  (1619),  he  said  that  Shakespeare 
wanted  art  and  sometimes  sense  ;  for  in  one  of  his  plays  he  brought 
in  a  number  of  men  saying  they  had  suffered  shipwreck  in  Bohemia, 
where  is  no  sea  near  by  100  miles. 


XXXVII.— HENRY  VIII. 

1.  This  play  was  written  by  Shakespeare  and  Fletcher  jointly ; 
Shakespeare's  part  is  Act  i.  Sc.  I,  2  ;  Act  ii.  Sc.  3,  4 ;  Act  iii.  Sc. 
2  ;  Act  v.  Sc.  I.     (See  Mr.  Spedding's  essay,  Gentleman's  Magazine, 
Aug.  1850.) 

2.  Founded  on  Holinshed's,  Chronicle,  Cavendish's  Life  of  Wot sey, 
and  Fox. 

3.  Date  1613.     In  Act  v.  Sc.  5,  1.  51,  we  read  : 

"  Wherever  the  bright  sun  of  heaven  shall  shine, 
His  honour  and  the  greatness  of  his  name 
Shall  be,  and  make  new  nations. 

A  State  lottery  was  set  up  expressly  for  the  establishment  of  English 
Colonies  in  Virginia  in  1612.  Rowley's  Henry  VIII.  and  the  drama 
of  Lord  Cromwell  were  reprinted  in  1613  with  the  usual  fraudulent 
intentions.  Sir  Henry  Wotton  says  in  his  letters,  that  the  Globe 
was  burnt  down  on  30  June  O.  S.,  St.  Peter's  day  1613,  while  a  new 
piece  named  All  is  True  was  performing ;  this  piece  from  his  minute 
description  was  certainly  Henry  VIII.  Yet  Shakespeare's  part 
may  have  been  written  earlier  than  Fletcher's,  say  in  1611. 


56  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

4.  In  1613  the  titles  of  many  of  Shakespeare's  plays  were  changed. 
I  Henry  IV.  was  called  Hotspur;  and  Henry  IV.  (or  Merry  Wives 
of  Windsor  1],  Sir  John  Falstaff  ;  Much  Ado  About  Nothing, 
Benedick  and  Beatrix ;  Julius  Ccssar,  Cesar's  Tragedy.  In  both 
plays  completed  by  Fletcher,  Shakespeare  introduces  and  completely 
sketches  all  the  principal  characters.  For  the  vision  in  Act  iv.  Sc. 
2,  compare  Pericles,  Act  v.  Sc.  2 ;  and  Cymbeline,  Act  v.  Sc.  4. 
None  of  these  are  Shakespeare's  work.  The  time  involved  in  the 
play  is  twelve  years,  1521-33.  Historically  Katherine  survived  the 
birth  of  Elizabeth  three  years. 


SPURIOUS  PLAYS. 

Other  plays  have  been  assigned  to  Shakespeare  without  reason 
able  ground  ;  for  instance  : — 

1.  The  London  Prodigal,   printed  in    1605   by   T.  Creede   for 
N.  Butter  ;  acted  at  the  Globe. 

2.  The  Yorkshire  Tragedy,  printed  in  1608  by  T.  Pavier ;  acted 
at  the  Globe. 

3.  Sir  John  Oldcastle,  printed  in  1600,  entered  on  the  Stationers' 
books  by  T.  Pavier,  acted  by  the  Admiral's  Company. 

All  these  three  had  Shakespeare's  name  in  full  on  the  title-page  ; 
all  were  printed  for  piratical  booksellers.  N.  Butter  was  the  pub 
lisher  of  the  shamefully  garbled  Quarto  of  King  Lear.  Sir  John 
Oldcastle  was  written  in  1599  by  Munday,  Dray  ton,  Wilson,  and 
Hathway. 

4.  Lord  Cromwell,  printed  in  1602,  entered  on  the  Stationers' 
books  by  W.  Cotton,  acted  by  the  Queen's  Company. 

5.  The  Puritan^  published  by  G.    Eld   in   1607,   acted   by  the 
Children  of  Paul's. 

6.  Locrine,  "newly  set  forth,  overseen,  and  corrected  by  W.  S.," 
printed  by  T.  Creede,  1595. 

These  latter  three  have  W.  S.  on  the  title-page.  The  relation  of 
Lccrine  to  Shakespeare  has  never  been  fully  worked  out.  It  is 


ON  THE  PL  A  YS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  57 

worth  investigation.    The  whole  six  were  printed  along  with  Pericles 
in  the  Third  Folio  as  additions  to  the  collection  in  the  First  Folio. 

7.  The  Birth  of  Merlin  was  printed  by  T.    Johnson  in    1662 
for  Francis  Kirkham  and  Henry  Marsh,  as  by  Shakespeare   and 
Rowley ;  "several  times  acted." 

8.  The  Troublesome  Reign  of  King  John  was  published  by  S. 
Clarke  in  1591,  and  again  by  J.  Holme  (printed  by  V.  S[immes])  in 
1611.     It  was  acted  by  the  Queen's  Company.      "  By  W.  Sh."  was 
inserted  on  the  title-page  in  1611. 

9.  The  Merry  Devil  of  Edmonton  was  published  by  J.  Hirst  and 
T.  Archer  in  1608.     Acted  at  the  Globe.     The  author,  T.B.,  was 
probably  Tony  Brewer. 

10.  Fair  Em.  was  published  in  1631.     Acted  by  Lord  Strange's 
Company  before  1591,  in  which  year  it  was  criticised  by  Greene. 

11.  Mucedorus  was   published   in    1598;    acted   at  the  Globe; 
probably  written  by  Lodge. 

12.  Arden  of  Feversham  was  printed  in  1592. 

None  of  these  plays  can  be  Shakespeare's.  In  addition  to  the 
decisive  internal  evidence,  note,  with  regard  to  Nos.  3,  4,  5,  8,  that 
no  company  except  the  Chamberlain's  (afterwards  the  King's)  and 
possibly  Lord  Strange's  ever  acted  any  play  of  Shakespeare's. 
Yet  many  German  critics  and  one  or  two  English  believe  in  the 
authenticity  of  many  of  these  dramas.  Mr.  Simpson  has  in  the 
press  a  volume  of  various  other  plays  in  which  he  thinks  Shake 
speare  may  have  been  concerned. 

[Note  on  Richard  II. — Since  p.  26  was  in  type  Mr.  Hales  has 
shown  reason  for  identifying  the  play  of  Henry  IV.  performed  for 
Sir  Gilly  Merrick  with  Shakespeare's  Richard  II.  I  find  this  con 
firmed  by  Camden's  account  of  the  trial.  Another  play  called 
Richard  II.,  mentioned  by  Forman  in  his  Diary,  I  identify  with  The 
Life  and  Death  of  Jack  Straw,  mentioned  in  a  subsequent  chapter.] 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ON   VARIOUS   QUESTIONS    CONNECTED  WITH 
SHAKESPEARE'S    PLAYS. 

(A.) — What  plays  published  in  Shakespeare's  name  are  genuine? 

1.  There  are  some  plays  included  in  all  editions  of  his  works 
which  he  probably  never  wrote  a  line  of,  namely  : — 

1.  Titus  Andronicus. 

2.  2  Henry  VI. 

3.  3  Henry  VI. 

The  first  of  these  is  by  Marlowe,  the  other  two  by  Peele  and 
Marlowe  jointly.  The  division  of  their  work  is  given  under  the 
heading  of  each  play. 

The  original  editing  of  I  Henry  VL  was  probably  Marlowe's. 
Shakespeare  having  added  ii.  4  and  (?)  5  about  1596  without  re 
touching  the  rest. 

Many  persons,  however,  still  believe  that  Shakespeare  wrote  large 
portions  of  these  plays ;  they  have  never  succeeded  in  separating 
his  work. 

2.  There  are  plays  finished  by  Shakespeare  and  rewritten  by 
him,  viz.  :— 

1.  Romeo  and  Juliet. 

2.  Richard  III. 

3.  Taming  of  the  Shrew, 


WHA  T  PL  A  YS  A  RE  GENUINE  ?  59 

The  two  first  of  these  in  the  Quarto  editions  show  us  Peele's  work 
after  Shakespeare's  first  corrections,  the  Folios  after  his  rewriting  ; 
he  probably  corrected  them  after  Peele's  death.  In  the  Taming  of 
the  Shrew  his  share  is  confined  to  the  Petruchio  story ;  the  rest  of 
the  play  is  most  likely  by  T.  Lodge. 

3.  There  are  plays  left  unfinished  by  Shakespeare  and  completed 
by  others,  viz.  : — 

1.  Timon. 

2.  Pericles. 

3.  Troylus  and  Cressida, 

His  share  of  Timon  was  confined  to  the  story  of  Timon  himself; 
Cyril  Tourneur  probably  writing  the  rest.  Of  Pericles  he  wrote  the 
story  of  Marina  ;  Rowley  (?)  wrote  the  brothel  scenes,  and  Wilkins 
the  rest ;  Wilkins  being  also  the  plotter  and  editor.  Of  Troylus 
and  Cressida  the  part  not  Shakespeare's  is  confined  to  the  last  Act. 
This  is  probably  taken  from  the  old  play  by  Dekker  and  Chettle  ; 
acted  in  1599. 

4.  There  are  plays  which  are  joint  productions  of  Shakespeare 
and  Fletcher,  namely  : — 

1.  Two  Noble  Kinsmen. 

2.  Henry  VIII. 

He  also  possibly  helped  Ben  Jonson  in  his  first  draft  of  Sejanus. 

5.  There  are  plays  to  which  Shakespeare  contributed  isolated 
scenes : — 

1.  I  Henry  VI.  (as  noticed  above). 

2.  Ed-ward  III.  (Act  i.  2  ;  ii.  all). 

6.  Some  of  Shakespeare's  plays  have  been  greatly  abridged  foi 
theatrical  purposes,  namely  : — 

1.  Tempest. 

2.  Julius  Casar. 

7.  One  has  not  only  been  abridged,  but  interpolated  :— 

I.     Macbeth. 


60  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

8.  Similar  interpolations  may  be  found  in  Cymbeline,  and  possibly 
in  The  Tempest,  Henry  V.  (French  scene),  and  Merry  Wives,  Q  I 
(Fairies). 

Of  these  results  those  concerning  the  Two  Noble  Kinsmen  (Hick- 
son  and  Spalding,  after  Weber),  Henry  VIII.  (Spedding),  Troylus 
and  Cressida  (Dyce  and  Fleay),  Timon  of  Athens  (Fleay),  Pericles 
(Fleay),  Taming  of  the  Shrew  (Fleay),  are  granted  by  all  the  best 
critics ;  those  concerning  Macbeth  (Clark,  Wright,  and  Fleay), 
Tempest  (Staunton),  Romeo  and  Juliet  (Fleay),  Richard  III.  (Fleay), 
Henry  VI.  (Fleay),  Edward  III.  (Fleay),  Julius  Ccesar  (Fleay),  are 
yet  disputed. 

N.  B.  The  names  in  parentheses  in  the  above  indicate  not  the  first 
proposers  of  the  theory  of  combined  authorship  in  each  case,  but 
the  first  critics  who  brought  the  several  theories  to  distinct  tests  by 
separating  the  Shakespearian  portions  from  the  second  writers. 
The  theory  of  double  authorship  in  Timon  has  been  previously 
advanced  by  Knight  and  Delius  ;  in  the  Taming  of  the  Shrew  by 
Collier ;  in  Pericles  by  Delius  and  Tennyson  (forty  years  since  he 
tells  me) ;  not  to  mention  earlier  statements  for  the  most  part  very 
indefinite.  For  details,  see  the  notices  under  the  heading  of  each 
play. 

Besides  this  question  of  authenticity  it  may  be  well  here  to  notice 
a  question  which  involves  similar  critical  investigation.  There  are 
certain  plays  that  were  not  entirely  written  at  one  date. 

1.  AlFs  Well  that  Ends  Well  was  probably  a  recast  of  Love's 
Labour's  Won.    Traces  of  the  early  work  may  be  found  in  it.     (See 
p.  46.) 

2.  Troylus  and  Cressida  was  certainly  written  at  three  dates  : — 

1.  The  Troylus  love  story. 

2.  The  Hector  story. 

3.  The  Achilles  story. 

The  last  of  these  dates  about  1608.  The  two  earlier  of  these  written 
about  1593-6,  probably  constituted  the  play  entered  in  1602  on  the 
Stationers'  books  by  J.  Roberts,  as  acted  by  the  Chamberlain's  men. 

3.  The  verse  part  of   Twelfth  Night  (in  my  opinion)  was  first 
written  about  1594  and  recast  1601,  when  the  rest  of  the  play  was 
added. 


EARL  Y  EDITIONS.  6 1 

4.  We  know  that  the  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor  and  Hamlet  were 
thus  written,  since  we  have   the   first  drafts  (imperfectly)  in   the 
first  quartos,  j 

5.  Love's  Labour 's  Lost  certainly,  and  Midsummer  Nighfs  Dream 
and  Richard  II.  probably,  were  recast  previously  to  publication. 

(B.}—The  Early  Editions  of  Shakespeare's  works  : — 

Besides  the  Folio  of  1623,  the  first  collected  edition  of  the  plays, 
there  were  a  number  of  separate  plays  published  in  quarto  before 
that  date.  In  the  table  in  Part  II.  will  be  found  the  printers'  and 
publishers'  names  of  every  one  of  these  editions  anterior  to  1623. 
The  later  copies  are  of  no  critical  value.  The  symbols,  Q  I,  Q  2, 
&c.,  are  those  used  in  Clark  and  Wright's  excellent  "Cambridge 
Shakespeare  ; "  a  *  indicates  all  the  editions  published  without 
Shakespeare's  name  on  the  title-page  ;  a  t  that  the  printers  of  the 
Folio  used  that  edition  to  print  from. 

The  Folio  editions  were  published  in  1623  (F  i),  1632  (F  2),  1664 
(F  3),  1685  (F  4). 

(C.) — On  the  Relative  Value  of  the   Quarto  and  Folio  Texts  of 

Shakespeare : — 

The  following  results  are  derived  from  a  careful  examination  of 
the  Quarto  and  Folio  editions,  aided  by  but  not  dependent  on  the 
collations  in  the  "  Cambridge  Shakespeare"  : — 

i.  The  Cambridge  editors  are  quite  right  in  stating  that  the  fol 
lowing  plays  in  the  Folio  are  printed  from  the  Quarto  texts,  and 
therefore  the  earliest  complete  Quarto  must  be  looked  to  in  each 
case  as  being  the  highest  authority  :— 

1.  Richard  II. 

2.  I  Henry  IV. 

3.  Love's  Labour 's  Lost. 

4.  Much  Ado  about  Nothing. 

5.  Romeo  and  Juliet. 

6.  Titus  Andronicus. 


62  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

2.  I  also  agree  with  them  that  the  Fisher  Quarto  of  Midsummer 
Night's  Dream  gives  better  readings  than  the  Roberts,  which  was 
used  by  the  Folio  editors.     But  for  the  Merchant  of  Venice  the 
Heyes  Quarto  used  for  the  Folio  seems  to  me  better  than  the  Roberts 
Quarto. 

3.  In  no  other  case  did  the  Folio  editors  use  the  Quarto  texts, 
which  were  undoubtedly,  as  they  state  in  their  preface,  all  surrep 
titious. 

4.  All  omissions  of  passages  in  the  Folio  texts  may  be  reduced  to 
two  classes  :  one  of  accidental  omissions  of  words  or  lines  in  print 
ing,  the  other  of  intentional  cancelling  of  long  passages  for  purposes 
of  stage  representation.     The  passages  found  in  the  Folio  but  not 
in  the  Quarto,  on  the  other  hand,  are  generally  such  as  would  not 
be  so  omitted. 

5-  The  Quarto  Lear  abounds  with  errors  of  ear,  and  was  clearly 
surreptitiously  taken  down  by  notes  at  the  theatre.  Henry  V.,  the 
Contention,  and  the  True  Tragedy  were  similarly  though  still  more 
clumsily  stolen. 

6.  Romeo  and  Juliet,  Q  I,  the  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor,  Q  I,  and 
Hamlet,  Q  i,  though  surreptitious  and  abridged,  still  represent  the 
earliest  forms  of  these  plays  ;  they  were  all  rewritten  afterwards,  but 
they  are  very  valuable  to  the  Shakespeare  student,  as  showing  his 
manner  of  work,  as  well  as  sometimes  preserving  lines  or  expressions 
which  we  would  not  willingly  lose.  Richard  III.  in  some  respects 
belongs  to  this  class.  One  other  Quarto,  which  might  be  thought  to 
be  analogous  (Henry  V. ),  is  merely  an  imperfect  piratical  issue,  and 
utterly  worthless.  The  Contention  and  the  True  Tragedy,  on  which 
Henry  VI.  has  been  supposed  to  be  founded,  are  in  like  manner 
merely  piratical  issues  grossly  imperfect,  by  the  same  publisher, 
T.  Pavier,  possibly  touched  up  by  his  partner,  H.  Chettle. 

7-  Hamlet,  Q  2,  and  Othello,  Q  2,  were  not  derived  from  sources 
independent  of  their  first  quartos,  but  were  formed  by  corrections 
being  made  in  copies  of  Q  i  at  subsequent  representations.  The 
same  thing  is  true  for  the  Whole  Contention  of  1619,  which  does  not 
give  an  intermediate  stage  of  composition  between  the  Quartos  and 


EARLY  EDITIONS.  63 

Folios  as  has  been  supposed.  This  conclusion,  which  is  quite  certain, 
is  most  important.  So  Hamlet  and  Othello,  Q  2,  are  founded  on 
Q  I,  with  corrections  from  the  Folio. 

8.  The   Troylus  and  Cressida  Quarto  has  been  printed  from  a 
written  transcript  of  a  copy  belonging  to  the  theatre,  hastily  and 
not  quite  accurately  made. 

9.  The  Richard  III.  Quarto  represents  Shakespeare's  first  cor- 
rection  of  an  earlier  play  ;  so  does  the  First  Quarto  of  Romeo  and 
Juliet. 

10.  The  Quartos  of  2  Henry  IV.  and  Othdlo  are  useful  for  cor 
rection  of  many  readings  :  they  are  transcripts  of  the  stage  copies 
as  first  used,  obtained  in  somewhat  the  same  way  as  the  Troylus 
and  Cressida. 

From  all  this  it  results  that  in  every  instance  except  the  first  two 
groups,  eight  plays  in  all,  our  text  must  be  founded  on  the  Folio  of 
1623.  But  for  these  eight  the  Quarto  readings  are  generally  better. 
As,  however,  even  in  these,  the  Folio  spelling  and  punctuation  agrees 
more  nearly  with  the  rest  of  the  plays  in  the  Folio,  it  is  preferable 
to  correct  the  Folio  te::t  from  the  Quarto  for  a  revised  edition  than 
conversely.  For  a  scholar's  text  the  Folio  with  the  Quarto  variations 
noted  (and  introduced  where  desirable),  is  the  one  thing  needful. 
Booth's  wonderfully  accurate  repi'int  of  this  edition,  or  Chatlo  and 
Windus's  photographic  reproduction,  if  interleaved,  will  enable  any 
student  to  make  such  an  edition  for  himself  without  great  labour. 
In  any  case  he  had  better  use  the  Folio  as  the  foundation  of  all  his 
work.  No  published  edition  except  Knight's  has  done  this,  and  he 
has  gone  too  far  by  rejecting  the  Quarto  readings  even  in  the  eight 
plays  mentioned. 


(D.) — On  the  division  into  Acts  and  Scenes  of  Shakespeare* s 
Plays:— 

There  is  no  authority  for  this  division  for  any  play  (except  OtheUn, 
Q  I,  1622)  anterior  to  the  Folio  edition  of  1623.  And  in  that  edition 
not  all  are  divided.  The  exceptions  are  :— 


64  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

1.  Plays  printed  from  Quarto  editions  : — 

Lovers  Labour's  Lost. 

Midsummer  Nights  Dream. 

Merchant  of  Venice.  \  Divided  into  Acts  only. 

Much  Ado  about  Nothing. 

Titus  Andronicus. 

Romeo  and  Juliet.  Not  divided  at  all. 

2.  Plays  probably  produced  between  1606  and  1609  : — 

Timon.  \ 

Troylus  and  Cressida.  \  Not  divided  at  all. 

Anthony  and  Cleopatra. 

Coriolanus.  ^ 

Julius  Casar.  /  Divided  into  Acts  only, 

Pericles.  J 

3.  Plays  produced  before  1604. 

Comedy  of  Errors. 

Affs  WM  tltat  Ends  mil.         Divided  into  Acts  on]y_ 

Taming  of  the  Shrew. 

Htnry  V.  } 

2  Henry  VI.  \  Not  diyided  ftt  all 

3  Henry  VI.  / 

The  other  eighteen  plays  in  the  Folio  (just  half)  are  divided  into 
Acts  and  Scenes. 

Lists  of  the  Dramatis  Persona  (Actors'  Names)  are  given  only  in 
seven  plays : — 

Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona. 

Measure  for  Measure. 

Timon. 

Pericles. 

Henry  V. 

Tempest. 

Winter's  Tale. 

(E.)— Dates  of  Entries  at  Stationers'  Hall :— 

Venus  and  Adonis.  1593     April  18. 

Titus  Andronicus.  *594    February  6. 


EARLY  EDITIONS. 


First  Contention. 

Taming  of  a  Shrew. 

Lucreece. 

Locrine. 

Edward  III. 

Romeo  and  Juliet  (ballad  ?) 

Richard  II. 

Richard  III. 

1  Henry  IV. 
Merchant  of  Venice. 
As  You  Like  it. 
Henry  V. 

Much  Ado  about  Nothing. 

Henry  V. 

Much  Ado  about  Nothing. 

2  Henry  IV. 

Midsummer  Nighf  s  Dream. 
Merchant  of  Venice. 
Merry  Wives  of  Windsor. 
Henry    VI.      First  and  Second 

Parts  ;  (2  and  3  Henry  VJ. } 
Titus  Andronicus. 
Hamlet. 

Troylus  and  Cressida. 
Romeo  and  Juliet 
Love's  Labour's  Lost. 
Taming  of  a  Shrew. 
Hamlet. 

Taming  of  a  Shrew. 
Romeo  and  Juliet. 
Love's  Labour's  Lost. 
Lear. 
Pericles. 

Anthony  and  Cleopatra. 
Troylus  and  Cressida. 
Sonnets. 
Othello. 
First  Folio. 


1594  March  12. 
„  May  2. 

„  May  9. 

,,  July  20. 

1595  December  I. 

1596  August  6. 

1597  August  29. 
,,  October  20. 

1598  February  25. 
,,  July  22. 

August   4.     [("To  be 
1600         stayed")  Note  at  be 
ginning  of  Register. \ 

„  August  14. 

,,  August  23. 

„  October  8. 

,,  October  28. 

1602  January  18. 

,,  April  19. 

„  July  26. 

1603  February  7. 

1607  January  22. 


,,  November  19. 

,,  November  26. 

1608  May  20. 

1609  January  28. 
,,  May  20. 

1621  October  21. 

1623  November  8. 


CHAPTER  V. 
PRONUNCIATION  AND  METRE. 

TABLE  of  Vowel  Pronunciation,   extracted  from  Mr.   A.  J.  Eilis's 
large  work  on  the  subject : — 

Spelling.  Pronunciation* 

a  long  as  a  in  father. 

(  as  a  in  mare. 

(  rarely  as  c  in  eve. 
i    ,,  as  i  in  tmie  (Scotch). 

I  as  o  in  vu/mo  (Italian). 

(  rarely  as  oo  in  pool, 
u    „  as  u  in  fl/2te  (French). 

a  short  as  a  in  chatte  (French). 

f    ,,  as  <?  in  md:. 

z     »»  as  i  in  nver. 

I  as  o  in  homme  (French), 
rarely  as  ou  in  poule  (French), 
or  u  in  p«ll. 

j  as  ou  in  poule  (French). 
(  or  u  in  pwll. 

(  as  «y  / 
<?z 

(  rarely  as  a  in  mare. 

as  ey  in  th<?j/. 
or  a  in  m(7re. 
rarely  as  ay! 


PRONUNCIATION  AND  METRE.  67 

Spelling.  Pronunciation, 

ee 

ie  medial 

ie  final  }  (  as  i  in  t/me  (Scotch). 

y    ,,       j[  (  or  as  z'  in  r/ver. 

as  e  in  rve. 

or  #  in  m<7re. 

oi  ,,  as  eu  in  n^w  (N.  German). 

au  ,,  as  a#;  in  rtzmi. 

«/  ,,  as  .£W  in  £ui'opa,  (Italian). 

00  ,,  as  oo  in  p#01. 

as  oiv  in  kn^w  (occasional  English). 

or  as  Dutch  0#. 

as  a  in  m«re. 

rarely  as  e  in  £>ve. 

very  rarely  as  a  in  chrttte  (French). 

occasionally  as  <?  in  nut. 
These  conclusions  are  no  doubt  nearly  accurate  as  to  the  normal 
pronunciation  of  Shakespeare's  time.  I  have  found,  however,  by 
an  independent  investigation,  that  great  laxity  prevailed  from  1580 
to  1630,  and  that  scarcely  any  vowel  sound  was  determinate  in 
popular  use.  The  statements  given  below  embrace  the  varieties  of 
sound  allowed  by  the  poets  and  dramatists  of  that  period.  I  have 
not  attempted  to  give  them  accurately ;  indeed,  the  nature  of  the 
case  would  not  permit  it ;  but  I  have  given  the  nearest  sounds  now 
in  use  to  those  which  formed  the  limiting  pronunciations  in  each 
case.  Mr.  Ellis' s  table  will  supply  some  corrections  necessary  to 
those  who  desire  more  exact  information. 

1.  I  believe  the  short  vowels  were  sounded  nearly  as  in  bill,  dell, 
ran,  doll,  pull,  at  the  present  time  ;  o  occasionally  taking  the  sound 
of  *;  d  that  of  o ;  £that  of  d;  and  /that  of  /. 

2.  The  long  vowels  were  sounded  nearly  as  in  time,  marc,  father, 
Rome,  pool. 

1  sometimes  taking  the  sound  of  ee  in  feel, 
e  ,,  ,,  ,,  <?in<?ve. 

a  ,,  ,,  ,,  au  in  daunt, 

d  ,,  ,,  ,,  oo  in  p<wl. 

5-2 


68  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

So  far  I  difter  little  from  Mr.  Ellis;  but  in  the  diphthongal 
spellings  I  venture  to  assert  that  in  many  of  them  the  pronunciation 
was  not  fixed,  but  varied  from  that  of  one  of  the  component  signs 
to  that  of  the  other.  Thus  : — 

ai  varied  between  a  in  m^re,  and  i  in  /sland. 
ei        „         ,,         ei  in  d^zgn,  and  i  in  z'sland. 
oi        ,,         ,,         oy  in  ]oy,  and  i  in  z'sland. 
ui        ,,         ,,         u  in  rale,  and  i  in  /sland. 
ou       ,,         ,,         o  in  no,  and  u  in  rule, 
eo        ,,         ,,         e  in  eve,  and  o  in  no. 

e  in  ^ve,   and  a  in  mare ;  ea  was  sometimes 
also  shortened. 

As  to  the  sounds  of  au,  eu,  oo,  ie  medial,  ie  and  y  final,  they 
were,  I  think,  respectively  those  of  aw  in  awn,  eu  in  £urope,  oo 
in  pool,  e  in  eve,  *  in  tz'me  (or  y  in  easily),  which  are  nearly  the 
same  as  those  given  by  Mr.  Ellis.  The  reasons  for  these  state 
ments  are  too  lengthy  to  be  here  given,  even  in  a  condensed 
form.  I  may  say,  however,  that  they  depend  partly  on  the  nature 
of  the  rhymes  (supposed  generally  to  be  imperfect)  that  were 
admitted  by  the  Elizabethan  writers,  and  partly  on  variations  in  the 
spelling  of  words  that  were  of  common  recurrence. 

There  are  some  other  laws  of  pronunciation  which  have  been  not 
at  all  or  imperfectly  recognised.  At  the  risk  of  infringing  on  the 
office  of  the  grammarian  it  may  be  well  to  give  them  here  : — 

1.  Laws  of  Contraction. — S.  Walker  has  noticed  that  where  two 
syllables  end   in   s  with  a  short  vowel   between   them,   the  latter 
syllable  may  be  omitted  ;  thus  horses  is  often  contracted  into  horse* ; 
this  if  into  this1.     But  he  has  not  noticed  that  the  law  extends  to  all 
dentals   thus  :    let  it  may  be   contracted  into  let' ;    committed  into 
commit'  ;  proceeded  into  proceed\  &c.  &c. 

2.  It  has  often  been  observed  that  heaven,  even,  and  the  like,  are 
frequently  one  syllable ;  and  that  in   some  cases,   as  sennight  for 
seven-night,  the  v  is  not  pronounced  ;  but  it  has  not  been  noticed  that 
any  word  containing  v  between  two  vowels  may  omit  the  v  in  pro 
nunciation,    so    that    driven   becomes   drfen;    love,   lc?e;    corsive, 
corsie,  &c.      The  same  omission  takes  place  sometimes  for  other 
letters,  as  id  en  for  taken. 


PRONUNCIA  TION  AND  METRE.  69 

3.  Laws  of  Resolution. — The  separation  of  final  -tion,  -ston,  &c., 
into  two  syllables,  ti-on,  si-on,  is  well  known  :  not  so  the  following. 

4.  Any  two  consecutive  consonants,  whether  initial  or  medial, 
may  be  separated  by  a  slight  sound  corresponding  to  the  Hebrew 
Shwa,    and   so   give   rise   to   an   extra   syllable.      Thus   we   have 
G'ratiano,  kinsman,  lor'd,  pronounced  nearly  as  Geratiano,  kinis- 
man,  lorttd,  &c. 

5.  Any  syllable  involving  a  w  or  y  sound  in  it  may  be  resolved 
into  two  ;  no  matter  whether  the  sound  be  diphthongal  or  the  -w  or 
y  be  consonantal.     Thus  twelve  becomes  too-ehe ;  ay  becomes  ah-ee; 
sweet  becomes  soo-eet ;  boy  becomes  baw-ee ;  &c.  &c. 

6.  The  pronunciation  of  vocal  r,  in  fi-er  (fire),  su-er-ly  (surely),  is 
well  known. 

For  other  questions  of  contraction,  accent,  resolution,  £c.,  see 
Abbott's  Shakespearian  Grammar. 

METRE. 

The  following  canons  as  to  Shakespeare's  metre  are  derived  either 
from  Sidney  Walker's  excellent  criticisms  or  from  my  own  personal 
observation  : — 

1.  Shakespeare  admits,  in  addition  to  the  regular  5 -foot  blank 
verse  line,    the  Alexandrine,    short   lines  of  I,   2,  or  3  feet,  and 
rhyming  lines  of  4  or  5  feet. 

2.  He  does  not  admit  blank  lines  of  4  feet  (Walker), 

3.  Nor  does  he  admit  lines  in  blank  verse  deficient  by  an  initial 
syllable  (Walker). 

4.  Wherever  there  is  an  appearance  of  a  4-foot  line,  it  is  either 
made  up  of  two  shorter  lines  (3  +  1,2  +  2),  or  it  is  corrupt.   Thus  : — 

"  What  I  shall  think  is  good. 

The  princess." 
"  Stands  for  my  bounty. 

But  who  comes  here  ?  " 
are  according  to  Shakespeare's  usual  manner. 


70  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

"To  let  these  hands  obey  my  blood," 
is  corrupt  either  by  omission  or  misarrangement.     (Fleay.) 

5.  Shakespeare  admits  an  extra  syllable  before  a  pause  either  in 
the  middle  or  at  the  end  of  a  line.     In  fact,  he  treats  any  line  con 
taining   a   full    stop   or   even   a   colon    as   if    it   were    two    lines 

(Walker).     Thus:— 

' '  Have  sure  more  lack  of  rea.5wz. 

What  would  you  say  ?  " 
"  Forerunning  more  requito/. 

You  make  my  bonds  still  greater." 
The  end  of  a  line  always  counts  as  a  pause  whether  stopt  or  not. 

6.  Shakespeare's  metre  varies  at  different  periods  of  his  life  to  an 
extent  unknown  to  any  other  writer  ;  for  instance  : — 

a.  Doggrel  lines  abound  in  his  earliest  comedies.     Love's  Labour's 
Lost  has    194 ;  the    Com-.dy  of  Errors,    109  ;    Two    Gentlemen  of 
}rerona,  1 8  ;  Merchant  of  Venice,  4.     They  never  occur  after  this. 

b.  Alternately   rhyming   lines   abound   in   his   early   plays,    but 
gradually  decrease,  and  at  the  end  of  his  second  period  are  for  ever 
thrown  aside. 

c.  The  use  of  rhyme  couplets  diminishes  gradually  from  a  pro 
portion  of  two  rhyme  lines  to  one  of  blank  verse,  down  to  an  absolute 
absence  of  rhyme. 

d.  Alexandrines,  which  are  absent  in  his  earliest  plays,  increase 
gradually,  though  irregularly,  until  his  latest. 

e.  Alexandrines  not  only  increase   in   frequency,   but  assume  a 
freer  form,  having  pauses  in  the  later  plays  after  the  2nd,  7th,  8th, 
or  loth  syllable,   like   Spenser's,  instead  of  being  confined  to  the 
French  form  with  pause  in  the  middle,  as  in  his  first  and  second 
periods. 

f.  Lines  with  an  extra  syllable  before  a  pause  are  most  frequent  in 
his  third  period. 

g.  On  adopting    the    use   of   lines   with   weak    or    unemphatic 
endings  (with,  of,  you,  and,  &c.,   for  final  words),  he  gave  up  in 
some  measure  the  lines  mentioned  in/ 


PRONUNC1A  TION  AND  METRE.  71 

//.  Lines  with  extra  end-syllable,  or  female  lines,  as  they  are  often 
called,  increase  in  frequency  from  none  to  726. 

/.  Lines  of  less  than  5  measures  are  more  abundant  in  the  later 
plays  ;  but  how  far  this  is  due  to  omissions  and  alterations  for  stage 
purposes  we  cannot  tell. 

j.  The  use  of  weak-ending  hues  increases  regularly  throughout 
the  fourth  period  of  these  plays. 

k.  On  the  combined  use  of  these  facts  as  foundations,  it  is  possible 
to  construct  a  scheme  of  chronology  for  the  plays  which  shall  not 
contradict  any  external  evidence,  and  shall  be  in  accordance  with 
critical  dicta  derived  from  higher  considerations.  Such  a  scheme 
is  given  in  Part  II.  with  the  numerical  data  on  which  it  is  founded. 

As  these  peculiarities  of  metre  have  been  applied  not  only  to  the 
determining  the  chronological  succession  of  our  author's  works,  but 
also  to  the  distinguishing  his  work  from  that  of  others,  it  may  be 
well  here  to  note  the  characteristics  of  a  few  authors  sufficiently  to 
ensure  the  recognition  of  their  work. 

Fletcher  can  be  at  once  distinguished  by  the  number  of  female 
lines,  in  which  he  exceeds  every  other  English  author.  His  lines 
are  usually  "stopt,"  and  often  end  in  an  extra  emphatic  syllable. 

Thus  :— 

"  And  stand  upon  as  strong  and  honest  guards  too." 

Massinger  is  known  instantly  by  his  numerous  weak  endings,  in 
which  he  indulges  beyond  any  other  writer;  his  lines  are  usually  not 
stopt ;  he  avoids  lines  of  less  than  5  feet. 

Neither  of  these  writers  admits  prose. 

Jonson  is  known  by  jolting  rough  tri-syllabic  feet  where  there  is 
no  pause. 

"  Best  put  yourself  in  your  case  again  and  keep." 

He  avoids  lines  of  less  than  5  feet,  and  is  singularly  regular  in  his 
metre. 

Ford  has  many  female  lines,  but  avoids  short  lines,  which  dis 
tinguishes  him  from  Fletcher.  The  chronological  order  of  his  plays 
exactly  agrees  with  the  proportions  of  rhymes  and  female  lines  in 
them. 


72  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Chapman  can  be  known  by  his  use  of  such  rhymes  as  garland, 
hand;  palace,  face  ;  by  his  frequent  elision  of  v  between  two  vowels, 
as  in  do' en,  gfen,  &c.,  and  his  regular  verse  not  admitting  lines 
of  less  than  5  feet,  except  in  a  very  few  instances. 

Peek  uses  rhymes  (like  Chapman)  such  as  garland,  hand,  &c., 
and  indulges  in  tri-syllabic  feet  like  Jonson,  but  to  a  much  greater 
extent. 

Beaumont  is  distinguished  from  Fletcher  by  admitting  prose,  not 
using  the  extra  emphatic  syllable,  allowing  rhymes  in  the  middle  of 
his  blank  verse,  and  frequent  unstopped  lines. 

Marlowe  is  distinguished  from  Pede  by  his  not  using  the  Chapman 
rhymes  nor  the  tri-syllabic  feet  of  Jonson  ;  from  Greene  by  his 
frequent  omissions  of  the  initial  syllable  in  his  blank  verse.  It  is 
very  doubtful  if  any  prose  in  his  plays,  as  published,  is  of  his  writing. 

Greene  is  distinguished  by  his  regular  see-saw  unmelodious  rhythm 
and  his  abundance  of  stopped  lines.  He  never  acquired  any  pro 
ficiency  in  his  handling  of  blank  verse. 

Lodge  is  remarkable  for  the  similarity  of  his  metrical  style  to  that 
of  the  earliest  plays  of  Shakespeare.  He  belongs  to  the  rhyming 
school  as  opposed  to  the  blank  verse  school  of  which  Marlowe  was 
the  founder. 

Tourneur  uses  lines  of  irregular  length  to  an  extent  unknown  in 
other  authors. 

Similar  marks  or  tests  can  be  given  for  every  author  who  is  not  a 
mere  imitator ;  but  my  object  here  is  to  illustrate  not  exhaust  this 
subject,  merely  with  regard  to  the  authors  who  have  been  sup 
posed  to  have  written  portions  of  plays  commonly  attributed  to' 
Shakespeare. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

ON  THE  MANNER   IN   WHICH    PLAYS   WERE 
PRESENTED. 

WE  shall  be  able  to  conceive  the  nature  of  our  early  theatrical  per 
formances  most  readily  if  we  give  details  for  the  earliest  house 
known,  and  then  mention  such  alterations  as  were  introduced  in 
later  theatres  in  due  course.  Let  us  imagine,  then,  what  would  be 
our  mode  of  proceeding  if  we  were  visiting  the  Curtain  in  1596  to  see 
the  performance  of  Romeo  and  Juliet.  Having  ascertained  from  the 
displaying  of  the  flag  on  the  pole  on  the  theatre  roof  that  exhibitions 
were  going  on,  we  should,  if  we  had  come  from  any  distance,  first 
look  out  for  some  one  to  care  for  our  horses  while  we  were  in  the 
theatre  ;  for  the  Curtain  stood  well  out  of  the  town  in  Shoreditch 
Fields.  If  one  of  the  traditional  Shakespeare  boys  could  be  pro 
cured,  we  should  of  course  give  him  the  preference.  The  next 
point  to  determine  would  be  which  part  of  the  house  we  should  go 
to.  The  Pit,  or  "  ground,"  was  the  cheapest  place  (i^.);  but  stand 
ing  in  the  Pit  is  not  comfortable,  especially  as  the  whole  central  part 
of  the  theatre  is  open  to  the  sky;  neither  are  the  "groundlings" 
the  best  society  for  appreciating  such  a  play  as  this.  The  twopenny 
Galleries,  on  the  other  hand,  are  not  well  placed  for  seeing  the 
actors,  Shall  we  then  try  the  "  Rooms  "  or  Boxes  ? — the  cost  will  be 
3</.  at  least  if  we  do.  We  should  prefer  if  we  could  to  go  on  the  stage 
itself  and  take  a  "stool"  as  they  do  in  the  new  private  house,  along 
with  the  "gallants,"  even  at  a  cost  of  another  6d.  or  is.,  according 
to  the  convenience  of  the  place  we  can  obtain.  Having  taken  our 
place,  let  us  look  round  before  the  curtains  are  drawn  aside ;  the 
"musics"  are  collecting  themselves  in  their  usual  station  over  the 


74  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

"room"  nearest  the  stage;  the  critics  and  wits  are  "drinking 
tobacco,"  or  discussing  the  author,  or  getting  their  "tables"  ready 
to  make  notes  ;  an  emissary  of  Pavier  or  some  other  pirate  of  the 
time  is  arranging  his  paper  to  take  down  as  much  of  the  play  in 
shorthand  us  he  can,  with  a  view  to  surreptitious  publication ;  the 
rushes  are  strewn  upon  the  stage  ;  the  inner  curtain  which  covers 
the  balcony  where  Juliet  is  to  speak  "aloft,"  and  where  the  "scroyles 
of  Angiers"  flouted  King  John  last  year,  is  carefully  drawn  ;  the 
"flourishes"  are  sounded  by  the  trumpets;  the  front  curtains 
separate,  and  the  play  commences.  As  the  stage  is  hung  with  black 
we  know  that  a  tragedy  is  to  be  performed,  and  that  man  in  a  long 
black  cloak  is  of  course  the  Prologue.  The  board  on  which  the  name 
of  the  scene  is  written  tells  us  that  the  plot  is  laid  in  Verona ;  and 
the  erection  over  the  trap,  which  we  can  see  from  our  place  in  the 
rooms,  hints  that  a  "tomb"  will  be  required  in  the  fifth  Act.  It  is 
hard  to  follow  the  changes  of  scene  ;  we  cannot  help  wishing  that 
some  of  those  mechanical  devices  so  lavishly  expended  on  Court 
pageants  could  be  introduced  here.  Why  should  not  the  stage  be 
more  real?  Would  it  lower  the  character  of  the  plays  by  appealing 
too  much  to  the  groundlings  behind  the  pales  there  ?  We  have  plenty 
of  time  to  think  on  such  matters  while  the  trumpets,  cornets,  organs, 
viols,  hautboys,  or  recorders  are  playing  between  the  Acts.  Another 
thought  that  will  haunt  us  is  how  much  will  the  poet  get  for  this 
play?  Will  the  profits  of  his  "second  day"  be  large?  Twenty 
nobles  (6/.  13^.  4^.)  seems  a  small  sum  for  such  a  noble  piece  of 
work.  But  perhaps  he  will  publish  it  himself  and  get  something 
out  of  the  sale  of  copies.  I  am  ready  for  one  with  my  sixpence, 
for  I  like  the  play.  He  gets  something,  however,  as  an,  actor, 
probably  more  than  as  a  poet.  He  has  shares,  too,  I  am  told,  in 
the  theatre;  and  when  they  perform  at  Court  the  Queen  gives  i8/ 
or  20/.  for  each  performance.  Perhaps  he'll  be  rich  yet  if  he's 
prudent.  But  the  curtain  is  drawn ;  the  play  is  over,  shall  I  stay 
for  the  jig?  I  think  I  will.  I  don't  care  much  for  the  clown's  dancing 
and  singing,  but  Kempe  's  a  clever  fellow ;  I'll  see  him  for  once, 
and  "throw  up  a  theme  or  two  for  him  to  extemporize  on."  But 
it's  past  three  already ;  the  play  must  have  lasted  more  than 
two  hours  ;  a  long  performance  to-day.  I  shall  have  to  switch 
and  spur  to  get  home  as  I  appointed. 


MANNER  OF  PRESENTING  PL  A  VS.  75 

Such  would  be  as  near  as  I  can  judge  a  description  of  our  earliest 
theatre.  I  add  further  details  for  the  others.  The  Bull,  Curtain,  and 
Globe  were  public  theatres.  The  Cockpit,  Whirefriars,  and  Biack- 
fiiars  were  "private  houses."  The  Globe  was  round;  the  Curtain 
was  square. l  At  the  Bull,  Fortune,  and  Theater,  the  lowest  price 
for  the  "ground"  was  zd.  ;  at  the  Globe,  Blackfriars,  Phcenix,  and 
Hope,  it  was  6d.,  the  "rooms"  being  is.,  and  places  on  the  stage 
an  additional  6d.  or  is.  The  time  of  commencing  performances 
grew  gradually  later  ;  in  1609  it  was  2  P.M.;  in  1632,  3  P.M.  Two 
Dr  three  new  plays  were  produced  each  year  at  a  house,  consequently 
Shakespeare  must  have  nearly  sufficed  for  the  requirements  of  the 
Globe.  The  lists  I  have  given  of  the  plays  of  other  authors  will 
enable  the  student  in  great  measure  to  reconstruct  the  history  of 
other  houses.  The  poet  was  allowed  the  profit  of  either  the  second 
or  third  night ;  poets  were  often  admitted  gratis.  An  office  fee  for 
licensing  new  plays  of  6s.  8d.  had  to  be  paid  to  the  Master  of  the 
Revels.  At  the  private  houses  the  performance  was  usually  by 
candlelight.  The  common  statement  that  the  Globe  was  a  summer 
theatre  only,  does  not  apply  to  Shakespeare's  theatre,  but  to  the 
re-erection  after  the  fire  of  1613. 

1  The  Fortune  as  built  in  1599  was  square  ;  as  rebuilt  after  the  fire  of  1621  it 
•was  round  The  confusion  of  one  of  these  erections  with  the  other  has  been  a 
prolific  source  of  error. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

ON  THE  EARLIEST  ENGLISH  THEATRICAL 
COMPANIES. 

(From  the  Athenaum,  July,  1875.) 

OUR  stage  historians  have  repeatedly  asserted  that  as  many  as 
fifteen  distinct  companies  of  actors  existed  in  the  time  of  Elizabeth, 
independently  of  the  companies  of  "  children."  I  have  found  that 
a  closer  investigation  shows  that  more  than  six  companies  of  men 
and  four  of  children  never  existed  in  London  at  one  time  ;  and  that 
these  can  all  be  traced  down  to  three  companies  of  men  and  two  of 
children.  The  obscurity  of  the  history  of  these  times  does  not  arise 
from  the  paucity  of  our  material,  as  our  great  critic,  Mr.  Halliwell, 
has  recently  complained,  but  from  want  of  sufficiently  minute  in 
vestigation  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  existence  of  different  com 
panies,  in  successive  times,  under  the  same  name,  on  the  other.  I 
have  been  much  gratified  by  finding  that  Mr.  Halliwell's  investiga 
tions,  unrivalled  for  comprehensive  research,  have  confirmed  the 
only  point  in  what  I  shall  have  to  say  that  needed  confirmation. 

The  companies  enumerated  by  Chalmers,  in  his  "  Farther 
Account  of  the  English  Stage,"  are  :  of  adults,— Lord  R.  Dudley's, 
Sir  R.  Lane's,  Lord  Clinton's,  the  Earl  of  Warwick's,  the  Lord 
Chamberlain's,  the  Earl  of  Sussex's,  Lord  Howard's,  the  Earl  of 
Essex's,  Lord  Strange's,  the  Earl  of  Darby's,  the  Queen's,  the  Lord 
Admiral's,  the  Earl  of  Hertford's,  the  Earl  of  Pembroke's,  and  the 
Earl  of  Worcester's  :  and  of  boys— the  Children  of  Paul's,  of  the 
Chapel,  of  Westminster,  and  of  Windsor.  He  is  also  careful  to  tell 


EARLIEST  THEATRICAL  COMPANIES.  77 

us  that  Shakespeare  was  admitted  into  the  Chamberlain's  company, 
started  in  1575  ;  that  whether  W.  Elderton  and  R.  Mountcaster 
were  then  the  leaders  of  it  is  uncertain  ;  that  Lord  Strange's  com- 
pany  of  tumblers  began  to  play  at  the  Rose  in  1592  ;  and  other 
matters  which  I  have  found  to  be  unfounded.  I  will  treat  of  these 
companies  in  groups. 

Group  I.— Lord  Darby's  company  of  1580-2  were  in  all  prob 
ability  the  same  company  as  his  son  Lord  Strange's  of  1592-3. 
These  must  be  carefully  distinguished  from  Lord  Strange's  group 
of  tumblers  of  1580-2,  who  were  not  the  players  at  the  Rose  ;  and 
from  the  later  company,  also  called  Lord  Darby's,  formed  under 
Brown  in  1600. 

Lord  Hunsdon's  company  of  1582  took  the  name  of  Lord  Cham 
berlain's  on  his  accession  to  that  office  in  1585,  and  retained  it  till 
his  death  in  1596.  In  the  few  months  of  Lord  Brooke's  chamber- 
lainship  (during  which,  as  Malone  proved,  Romeo  and  Juliet  was 
produced  at  the  Curtain  Theatre)  they  passed  to  his  son,  just  as  Lord 
Darby's  did  to  his  son  Lord  Strange,  and  were  then  called  Lord 
Hunsdon's.  On  this  second  Lord  Hunsdon  being  made  Chamber 
lain,  in  1597,  they  again  took  the  title  of  the  Chamberlain's  servants, 
and  retained  it  till  King  James's  accession  in  1603,  when  they 
became  the  King's  company. 

Into  this  company,  Lord  Strange's  (which,  and  not  the  Lord 
Chamberlain's,  was  very  probably  the  company  in  which  Shake- 
speai-e  made  his  first  appearance)  was  absorbed  in  1594.  Mr. 
Halliwell  has  given  evidence  of  this  union  in  his  latest  work. 

The  houses  generally  used  by  this  group  were  the  Theatre,  the 
Curtain,  and  the  Cross  Keys  (in  winter  only),  until  they  removed  to 
the  new  Globe  in  1599. 

We  must  now  recur  to  an  earlier  time.  From  1574  to  1582  a 
company  played  under  the  names  indifferently  of  the  Earl  of  Sussex's 
or  the  Lord  Chamberlain's  servants.  These  have  been  confused  by 
all  the  writers  I  have  seen  with  the  later  Lord  Chamberlain's  men, 
yet  nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  my  statement  is  right ;  the 
evidence  is  positive.  After  the  appointment  of  Lord  Hunsdon  as 
Chamberlain,  they  were  called  only  by  the  name  of  the  Earl  of 
Sussex  till  1594. 


78  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

From  1594  to  1597  the  Earl  of  Pembroke  too,  had  a  body  of 
players,  perhaps  the  same  as  Lord  Seymour's  (the  Earl  of  Hertford's) 
of  1592. 

These  were  almost  certainly  united  with  the  Sussex  company  to 
form  the  second  Earl  of  Darby's  company  (under  Brown),  about 

1599- 

The  Earl  of  Pembroke's  company  was  incorporated  into  the 
Lord  Chamberlain's  in  1600;  but  probably  not  directly,  but  passing 
through  an  intermediate  stage  as  the  company  of  the  Earl  of 
Darby. 

Group  2. — Lord  Philip  Howard,  Earl  of  Arundel,  had  a  company 
from  1574  to  1580,  which  afterwards  passed  to  Lord  Charles 
Howard,  and  was  called  indifferently  the  Lord  Admiral's  or  the 
Earl  of  Nottingham's  servants. 

In  1603  they  became  the  Prince's  servants. 

This  company  played  first  at  the  Theatre  and  Curtain ;  then  (with 
Henslow)  at  the  Rose  ;  finally  at  the  Fortune  (built  in  1600),  where 
they  remained  permanently  till  1622. 

Group  3. — In  1562  Lord  R.  Dudley  had  a  company  of  players, 
called  afterwards  the  Earl  of  Leicester's  (1565-1582),  on  his  acces 
sion  to  that  title. 

In  1564,  J.  Dudley,  Earl  of  Warwick,  had  a  company,  which  was 
afterwards  united  with  Sir  R.  Lane's  (1571-3)  about  1574.  It 
retained  the  title  of  the  Earl  of  Warwick's  till  1582. 

In  1 582,  out  of  the  Earl  of  Warwick's  and  the  Earl  of  Leicester's 
the  Queen's  company  was  formed,  which  continued  till  1594. 

This  company  may  have  been  absorbed  into  the  Earl  of  Worces 
ter's,  which  became  the  Queen's  (Queen  Anne's)  in  1603,  after  a 
year  or  two,  during  which  they  kept  the  designation  of  the  Earl  of 
Worcester's  men.  They  played  chiefly  at  the  Red  Bull  and  the 
Curtain.  If  the  above  be  true— and  there  are  not  more  than  a  very 
few  conjectural  points  in  it,  and  those  of  the  slightest  possible  im 
portance  ;  all  the  rest  is  proven  by  statements  in  our  records  hitherto 
overlooked— then  the  history  of  all  the  adult  companies  is  traced 
down  to  the  three  that  we  know  existed  at  the  accession  of  James 
the  First. 

Now  let  us  look  to  the  children. 


EARLIEST  THE  A  TRICAL  COMPANIES.  79 

Group  i. — Consists  of  only  the  Children  of  Paul's,  established 
1563,  who  played  at  their  own  house  till  1591,  and  also  from  1601 
to  1605. 

Group  2. — The  Chapel  Children,  established  1565,  gradually  ab 
sorbed  the  Children  of  Westminster  (1567-1575)  and  the  Children  of 
Windsor  (1571-1577).  They  acted  at  Blackfriars  from  1596  to  1601, 
and  about  1605  they  took  the  name  of  Children  of  the  Revels.  In 
1612  they  removed  to  Whitefriar^,  and  were  ultimately  formed  by 
Beeston  into  the  Company  of  the  Revels. 

One  chief  point  to  note  here  is  the  singular  blunder  that  has  con 
fused  Elderton  and  Mountcaster  with  managers  of  the  Chamberlain's 
company,  besides  confusing  that  company  (Sussex's)  with  Lord  Huns- 
don's.  Elderton  and  Mountcaster  were  masters  of  "  boys. "  Elderton 
is  expressly  stated  to  be  master  of  the  Westminster  boys,  and  Mount- 
caster  of  Merchant  Taylors'.  The  erection  of  these  into  separate 
companies  is  purely  imaginary.  The  Earl  of  Oxford's  company  were 
also  boys.  I  have,  of  course,  not  given  here  the  mass  of  material 
from  which  these  results  have  been  obtained.  Slender  as  they  may 
seem  when  thus  abstracted  from  their  foundations,  they  are  the  out 
come  of  many  hours'  labour,  it  having  been  necessary  in  order  to 
obtain  them  to  tabulate  every  entry  of  whatever  kind  for  every  play 
mentioned  in  our  dramatic  literature  up  to  1603  in  three  separate 
forms. 

At  the  accession  of  James  I.  (1603)  there  were  then  four  com 
panies.  The  King's  (formerly  the  Chamberlain's),  the  Queen's 
(formerly  the  Earl  of  Worcester's),  the  Prince's  (formerly  the 
Admiral's),  and  the  Children  of  Paul's.  This  last  was  succeeded  by 
the  Revels  Children  in  1605,  who  in  turn  were  incorporated  with 
Queen  Anne's  about  1613,  to  form1  the  company  of  the  Revels. 
Lady  Elizabeth  had  also  a  company  of  actors  from  about  1612  on 
wards,  or  even  earlier. 

In  1622,  great  changes  took  place  in  all  these  companies,  and  a 
new  one  (the  Palsgrave's)  was  formed.  It  lasted,  however,  only  to 
1624.  After  1625,  the  companies  in  existence  were  the  Queen's 
(Henrietta's),  the  Bull,  the  Fortune,  and  the  King's,  which  out 
lasted  all  changes  till  1642.  In  1629  a  new  Company  of  Revels 
is  started,  which  becomes  the  Prince's  on  the  birth  of  Charles  II. 


80  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

This  company  must  not  be  confused  with  the  former  Princes' 
(Henry's  and  Charles  I.)  any  more  than  the  two  Chamberlain's 
companies  above  noticed,  or  Queen  Henrietta's  with  Queen  Anne's 
or  Queen  Elizabeth's.  The  new  Prince's  company  had  not  one 
actor  in  common  with  the  old  one.  In  1637  another  company 
(Beeston's  boys)  was  established,  and  in  1640,  under  the  same 
manager,  the  "  King's-and-Queen's  "  was  incorporated.  This  con 
cludes  our  enumeration  of  changes  till  1642,  when  the  theatres 
were  closed. 

It  will  be  found  easy  to  follow  these  complicated  alterations,  if 
constant  reference  be  made  to  the  chronological  tables  of  theatres 
and  companies  at  the  end  of  this  chapter.  They  have  been  care 
fully  compiled,  and  although  they  are  contradictory  to  many  re 
ceived  notions,  may  be  depended  on  as  accurately  giving  all 
information  at  present  attainable. 

In  the  annexed  Table  the  top  line  gives  dates  at  intervals  of  two 
years ;  a  line,  thus ,  indicates  the  period  during  which  the  com 
pany  whose  name  is  over  it  is  known  to  have  existed  ;  changes  of 
name  are  indicated  by  printing  the  names  in  succession  over  a  line 
broken  at  the  date  of  change,  thus  Chamb.  King's  ;  union  of  two 

companies  to  form  a  third,  by  a  brace,  thus — :"'  ^unsden  !  Lord 
Chamberlain  ;  absoiption  of  a  company  into  another  by  an  arrow, 

Chamberlain 
~  Pembroke^" 

If  from  the  small  scale  of  the  Table  any  date  appear  doubtful 
refer  to  pp.  76-80. 


O 

1 

! 

^^ 

c 

1 

3 

£ 

r^ 

o 

0 

»/ 

C/2             o 

p1 

a 

£ 

o 

g     « 

S 

u 

^  s 

*    ft 

1 

u       „     g 

N 

. 

^ 

*O 

<        °     S 

0 

! 

2 

c 

c 

u 

h 

5 
-i 

2 

c 

S     TO 

_J3 

IS 

9 

H              VO 

b 

I 

(j 

x— 

•^  > 

6 

S3 

H            «          £ 

<    ^18    1"| 

r 

3 

i 

,s 

"S 

! 

Somerset. 
Worcester. 

5 
^ 

w 

"g 

1 

.  **-• 

u            |l 

r 

^ 

W 

^                    o  ^ 

rO 

CH             **"      to 

/ 

—     .S    r-A 

Wl 

V 

JS         ft 

•S 

tJ              w        rt.b 

S      a  u| 

f— 

fefi 

1 

J     ^ 

g     J  : 

J 

S 

-§     O  • 

^ 

S 

o 

1 

1     1  J 

1 

S      *   ~ 

r: 

tr 

"2      x"  i 

J* 

PQ                  1 

/• 

_—  *•  — 

*s  ^ 

1 

"3 

,  —  , 

—  —  s 

<          "      < 

>^ 

1 

1       r  • 

rt      ^~ 

u 

S 

1 

NOLOGICAL 

2  4  6  8  80 
P.  Howard,  Ear 

Q 

"H 
S 

1 

E 

rt 

u 

j 

Children 

irl  of  Le'ster  (1565) 
0^1  ^f  \\7~,~,,,;s.i, 

t 
j 
: 

i 

2 

O           o 

W        & 

1 

£>                         tX 

U 

^••^  ^"v 

d 

,    ^ 

«         S 

j      . 

* 

G       (i 

i  1   7 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
ACCOUNT  OF  THE  THEATRES  FROM  1576  TO  1642. 

THE  earliest  theatres  of  which  we  have  record  were — the  Curtain 
(1576),  the  Theater  (1576),  and  the  private  room  belonging  to  the 
Children  of  Paul's  (1574).  The  two  former  theatres  were  both 
public,  and  occupied  by  various  companies,  the  Queen's,  the 
Admiral's,  Lord  Strange's,  the  Earl  of  Sussex's,  the  Earl  of  Pem 
broke's,  &c.,  of  whose  occupancy  we  have  no  precise  records.  The 
Queen's  Company  (under  Tarleton)  also  acted  at  the  Red  Bull. 
Henslow  opened  the  Rose  theatre  in  1592,  where  the  following 
companies  played  successively  : — 

Lord  Strange's,  beginning  19  February,  1592. 
Earl  Sussex's,  27  December,  1593. 
Sussex's  and  the  Queen's,  2  April,  1594. 
Admiral's,  14  May,  1594. 
Admiral's  and  Chamberlain's,  3  June,  1594. 
Admiral's,  27  October,  1596. 

In  1596  Blackfriars  was  adapted  for  theatrical  purposes  by  J. 
])urbage,  and  let  out  to  the  Children  of  the  Chapel,  who  occupied 
it  till  1601.  They  were  then  possibly  succeeded  by  the  Children  of 
Paul's,  who  had  been  suspended  in  1591,  and  who,  in  1605,  gave 
place  in  like  manner  to  the  Children  of  the  Revels. 

Meanwhile,  in  1599,  J.  Burbage  pulled  down  the  Theater,  where 
the  Chamberlain's  company  had  settled  about  1595-6,  and  built 
the  Globe.  To  this  new  building  that  company  moved  in  1599- 
1600,  and  occupied  it  till  1642,  except  during  the  short  time  of  its 


THEA  TRES  FROM  1576  TO  1642.  83 

rebuilding  after  the  fire  of  1613.     They  took  possession  of  the  Black- 
friars  theatre  in  1613,  and  used  it  as  well  as  the  Globe  till  1642. 

In  1600,  Alleyn  built  the  Fortune  theatre,  to  which  the  Admiral's 
company  moved  from  the  Rose  and  continued  there  until  1621, 
when  the  Fortune  was  burnt  down.  In  that  year  the  same  company 
(then  called  the  Prince's)  left  the  Fortune  for  the  Curtain,  where 
they  remained  two  or  three  years,  the  new  company  (the  Palsgrave's) 
taking  their  place  at  the  Fortune  in  1622,  on  its  rebuilding.  This 
company  died  out  in  1624  ;  and  the  Company  occupying  this  house 
was  called  the  Fortune  company  simply  :  it  remained  there  till  1640, 
when  it  exchanged  with  the  Prince's  (Charles  II.)  and  went  to  the 
Bull. 

When  the  Children  of  the  Revels  were  turned  out  of  Blackfriars 
in  1612  they  went  to  Whitefriars,  and  remained  there  till  1613.  In 
that  year  they  ceased  to  exist  as  a  children's  company,  and  the  com 
pany  of  the  Revels  was  formed  out  of  them  and  the  Queen's  com 
pany  (formerly  the  Earl  of  Worcester's),  who  had  occupied  the  Red 
Bull  and  the  Curtain  since  1599.  The  Revels  company  occupied  the 
same  two  houses  from  1613  to  1622,  when  the  Prince's  came  there. 
As  the  Prince  became  King  in  1625,  this  company  ceased  to  exist, 
and  the  Curtain  was  abandoned.  The  Bull  was  still  kept  in  action, 
(the  company  playing  there  being  simply  called  the  Bull  Company) 
till  1637,  when  the  Salisbury  Court  company  (Prince's  or  Revels) 
came  to  the  Bull  and  played  there  as  the  Prince's  company  till  1640, 
when  they  exchanged  with  the  Fortune. 

The  Curtain  theatre  followed  the  Red  Bull  in  all  its  changes. 

In  1619,  the  Cockpit  (Phoenix),  which  had  been  destroyed,  was 
rebuilt  and  occupied  by  the  company  of  the  Lady  Elizabeth  (after 
wards  Queen  of  Bohemia)  which  had  previously  performed  some 
time  at  the  Swan  :  this  company  lasted  till  1624.  In  1625,  the 
Queen's  (Henrietta's)  actors  set  up  at  this  house.  In  1637,  William 
Beeston's  boys  succeeded  the  Queen's,  who  went  to  Salisbury  Court, 
where  the  Prince's  (Charles  II.)  or  Revels  company  had  acted  pre 
viously.  They  had  at  first  been  called  the  Revels  Company,  but  on 
the  birth  of  Charles  (1630)  took  the  name  of  the  Prince's.  Salis 
bury  Court  was  built  in  Whitefriars  in  1629.  In  1640,  Beeston's 
boys  were  formed,  with  new  recruits,  into  the  King-and-Queen's 
company. 

6-2 


84  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

We  have  now  gone  through  the  history  of  the  principal  theatres 
in  detail :  omitting  nothing  but  a  few  occasional  changes  of  a  very 
temporary  kind  (probably  only  for  a  night  or  two).  The  facts  here 
stated  differ  in  many  details  from  those  in  any  previously  published 
account  of  our  theatres  ;  but  for  every  statement  made  I  have 
positive  evidence  which  I  hope  some  day  to  give  in  full.  It  would 
be  out  of  place  in  so  small  a  work  to  enter  into  minute  particulars. 

In  the  annexed  Table  the  names  of  the  principal  theatres  are 
given  in  the  left-hand  column  :  dates  (at  intervals  of  two  years)  are 

printed  along  the  top  line  :  the  line  under  these  dates 

opposite  the  name  of  a  theatre  shows  the  years  during  which  per 
formances  were  exhibited  in  it  :  wherever  dates  can  be  ascertained 
the  companies  who  occupied  the  theatre  are  printed  over  the  line. 
Thus,  the  Red  Bull  was  successively  occupied  by  the  Queen's  com- 
pany  (Elizabeth's) ;  the  Earl  of  Worcester's  (afterwards  Queen 
Anne's)  ;  then  by  the  Revels  company  :  then  by  the  Prince's,  &c.  ; 
this  is  plain  at  a  glance.  In  like  manner  we  can  see  that  the  Revels 
Children  on  leaving  Blackfriars  went  to  Whitefriars,  and  were  after 
wards  incorporated  with  the  Queen's  into  the  Revels  company,  &c., 
&c.  If  from  the  small  scale  of  the  table  any  doubt  as  to  a  date 
arises,  reference  should  be  made  to  pp.  82-84. 


M 

.«! 

. 

CJ 

0 

1       1 

PH 

1 

X"1 

co 

W 

6»           ^ 

c 

vO 

i?           ^ 

S. 

c/5 
W 

e$           N 

* 

"fi 

*8               S 
1               | 

PU                               0 

j 

c 

s    & 

W                      00 

W 

I 

1 

1                ^ 

3 

1 

H 

H 

N 

"« 

"u 

i           "*" 

S 

Q 

•2 

rt 

<J                        N 

>> 

pJ 

AH 

*-*                             M 

^ 

>, 

j? 

1 

0 

M 

5 

P4             *° 

1 

1 

AH               „. 

.'"    N 

£3           °^ 

^^^ 

w 

cS 

ir 

•) 

H           S 

fi^ 

s   | 

§ 

1 

fj 

^       O1 

3 

O1 

& 

o 

^2 

P4         N 

II 

II 

w        „ 
§        "   -s 

H      ^18    1 

c 

3 

N 

1 

^3 
.^ 

1 

! 

Worcester'; 

Admiral's 

5     «  1 

i—  i            . 
O 

1 

1 
S 

0           « 

*c 

a 

1 

1      " 

g 

>  c 

a       * 

1 

u 

IS 

N 

S 

00 

S 

«j» 

/^- 

^ 

:         t 

! 

s 

2 

X 

N       J            •            • 

| 

i 

j 

11 

N        i 

| 

\         \ 

: 

j 

.§ 

^•> 

^      1"      'J       "^ 

' 

i     « 

I 

: 

0 

3 

1 
5 

i: 

a; 

i  i   I  J 

C/3          >           W 

'S 

3 
u 

CHAPTER  IX. 

ON  THE  DRAMATIC  AUTHORS  CONTEMPORARY 
WITH  SHAKESPEARE. 

IT  does  not  come  within  the  scope  of  this  book  to  treat  of  any 
author  except  Shakespeare  critically.  It  is  however  indispens 
able  for  the  accurate  determination  of  the  chronological  arrangement 
of  his  plays,  and  for  the  understanding  of  his  relations  to  his  con 
temporaries,  that  Tables  of  their  plays  arranged  in  order  of  time 
should  be  accessible.  Such  Tables  have  never  hitherto  been  formed. 
I  annex  therefore  lists  of  the  plays  of  all  the  dramatists  whose  works 
have  been  republished  in  a  collected  form,  and  a  list  of  plays  of 
other  authors  contained  in  Dodsley  (Hazlitt's  edition)  &c.,  with 
dates  of  publication  (and  production,  where  possible),  and  notices  of 
the  theatre  and  company  to  which  each  play  belonged.  The  dates 
of  production  will  be  found  to  differ  largely  from  those  hitherto 
assigned  in  many  instances,  but  never  without  reasons  grounded  on 
external  evidence  and  confirmed  by  internal.  This  evidence  I  hope 
to  give  in  a  future  work.  For  information  concerning  plays  now 
lost  or  not  republished  in  modern  times,  Halliwell's  Dictionary  of 
Old  Plays  will  supply  all  necessary  information.  With  a  few  ex 
ceptions  (for  which  special  reasons  exist)  only  published  plays  are 
noticed  here. 

In  the  annexed  Table  a  dotted  line indicates  the  period  of 

the  author's  life ;  a  line  not  broken  that  of  his  working 

career. 


H 

H 

to 

O 

w 

_1 

PQ 
•< 

J 
< 
U 
i— i 

o 

s 

o 

I 

tf 

K 
U 


N 

5- 

30 

0 

*                  1 

M                                        PH 

&                                   i 
oo                                    : 

VO 
N 

: 
: 

: 

1 

"cJD 

>  "c 

ll 

King's  and  Queen's 

Phoe.,Sal.Ct.&BllJrs. 

I 

.«« 

« 

- 

c  ;  Vr 

'rt  '    C 

« 

Prince's  and  Queei 

6- 

Prince's  &  Rev. 

1 

U 

Queen's  and  King' 

King's,  5  Revels 

^ 

"w 

| 

£  £ 

5 

1 

• 

»M 

"3 

a! 

1 

s 

Ui 

3 

a 

1             OH 

PH 

^ 

< 

^4 

r* 

8                           o 

-B    S    S 

1 

•£ 

cS 
P) 

'O 

< 

00                       1  •«  -§ 

J3    ^1  IO 

*°              1            O       • 

*       g          «     ! 

5              bo      : 

: 

: 

: 

"    &    i|i 

§»            u5    y>   &  |w5        J 

i 

' 

3^3^      j     : 

: 

*    *S    1"      J     I 

«      rt  5       :     :     :     : 

: 

o   1    !  M  M 

HIM 

i 

,:  U  1  1|  | 

i     ^>    £  ^   VO    ^0     jn 

s  r 

n  ° 

o     ) 

s, 

0 

•^.    o 

0 

J    - 
.0 

^  & 

O  u 

0 

1 

0      C*    ex 
o    in    L 

Jn   " 

3 
O       l 

S  vE 

1       1       [JVC 

KJI  i'-g  1  1 
9  1  J  11  d  . 

: 

ij 

u 

(J 

j 

; 

^  H 

i  5 
fS 

I 

i- 

?  < 

\  • 

n 

i 

D 

;  5 

5  g 

1  I 

:  £ 

ill 

1. 

j  ; 

-i    U 

: 

:   J 

.'Z. 

I.—  LILLY  : 

.  -.  ~.         —         ...... 

ramorphosis  -.    ~  ~  ~  Chapel.  Paul's    ~.    ~.     ... 

3.  Gunpasix                       ...     ...  -.  -.  Cnapel,  Paul's    ~. 

4.  Sappho  and  Phao  ......     ~.  «.  ...  Chapei,  Paul's    ~. 

*.  Galathea  ~.     »..  ......... 

y  6,  Eodyxnioo       ~.     «.     ...     ~.  ~  ~.  Paul's    ~.     ^. 

.:os      «.     —     ...    ^.     ~.  ~.  ~  P                           m     M    ^.    x^>» 

8.  Mother  Bombie  ».  ...  Paul's     ^-     ...                       .     159^ 

9.  TMakTsMctamorphosk      ...  ...  ~  Paul's    ^.     ... 

Tbese  (except  9)  u^re  all  produced  before  1589  (MabneX 

TI.—  PKELE    (GEORGE),   born  1552,  began  work  1584,   died 
1596-7:- 

XamttfPlay^zHdAmitor)  €«*&*?.  .    ,         ,i  >.-.'.-. 

1.  Arraignment  of  Paris  .........    Chapel  .~  «.    «.    1584 

2.  David  and  Bethsabe     ...     ^.     ... 

3.  Locrine  (Tibey)    «.«.«.«.!»,  Strange's  «.    w    1595         1586 

4.  Battle  of  Akaaar^.    _    ..    _  -    -    i»i         158? 

5.  Edward  I.       _.    M    _.    w     ...  — 

--    i*K         1589 

hn  (Troublesome  Reign)   Queen's     ^.    _     ^     ^ 

Pembroke's      ^.    ~  1594 

9.  ?  Edward  III.  (Shakespeare)     _    ?  L.  Sttange's  ^.    «.  il 

..hard  1  1  1.  (Shakespeare)     ...    Chamberlain's  ^    ^.  vS 

,  Mneo  and  Juliet  (Shakespeare)    Hunsdon's       ......  1597         135^6 

III.—  GREENE  (ROBERT),  bora  1561,  began  wort    i;S;,  died 

'  :~ 


i.  Alphonsus   ......    _    «.    _         -...__     ...     I599 

a-  O  .......  ,586 

^n        ...     ^     w  ,588 

......... 

dass  for  London  (with\n        , 
LCK..  ..........  ..    ~.    1594 


PHER),  bora  1564,  began  work  15$$, 


C«*t«*y.  /W.     Writ**. 

i.  Tamburlaine  !.«.«.«.«.  Admiral's     «.    ^ 

a.  Tamburlaine  II.       ^    ^    ...  Admiral  ^ 

3-  Faust    ............    w     ...  AdmiraV- 

4-  Jew  of  Malta    ........... 

*    MM»»»flfI«toia     .........  Mmmfs     .........    n.  j 

6.  !  Taming  of  a  Shrc 

--:    .....    '         . 


'•rPORA  RY  A I  'THORS. 

XameefPlay.  ,        r   -, 

7.  ?  Titus  Andronl.  ...  ^'fJJS-**"'1*''**' 

8.  fz  &  3  Hrnry  VI.  (Pcele)       ...  Pembr,  ; 

9.  Edward  II.  ...  Pembroke's  ~.     i5s>S 

xo.  Dido  (Nash)      Chapel  .-     ...     ~.     ...     1594 

V. — SHAKESPEARE  (WILLIAM).     See  Chapter  iii. 
VI.— CHAPMAN  (GEORGE),  bora  1557,  began  work  1597,  died 
1634:— 

X<MM*tfPl*r(*m4AMA»l  Ctmfmny.  Tktmtre.  />«*.  Writ. 

i.  Blind  Beggar  of  Alexandria  _  Admiral's...  Rose...  «.  1598  1598 

a.  Humorous  Day's  Mirth  _     -.  Admiral's  -.  Rose  ~  ...  1^99  1599 

3-  Boayd-Amhois-.    ~    -.    -  PauTs-    -  -    _  «.  1607  1602-4 

4.  Eastward  Ho aonsoB,Marston).{H^e^_}     Bladttnars..     1605    1605 

5-  AH  Fools     __-.-.-    [Revels]     -     Bkckfiiars..     1605     1605 
6.  Gentleman  Usher -.  -         ^     1606      - 

•^m • ^fc^vw J  HCT       .MjJ>    \       •*• «_j*  •  _^_^-        _r  ^*- 

<x  VWITC      •••     «H     *M  ^  ^^?t  j f     mcirirtiLr? .  *     rtoo    xooo 

» i"^^r°-*iacsr  ""n        f»^«-~  «  ^» 

xi.  Mayday       ~    ~    „    _    „  !      [Revels]    <  BbdkfriaR..     x6ix    1611 
xa.  Widows'  Tears  -.-.-. 

iv  Kev^i;-  -:  lossy  d  A-:-.  .>  ... 


Kicg's        «.  Bfackfrius.    1654      — 


!.  Alphonsnsof  Germanyt  -. 
For  the  S****M*H0£* 

VIL—  JONSON  (BENJAMIN),  boni  1574,  began  work  1596,  died 
1637  :- 

H*mrifPl*7(*mJA*tk*^.        Cimf**?.     Tt^hr,  Pwt.     Writ. 

•    x.  Eray  Man  in  his  HuoKMtr    -.    Chambln's      Globe  -  1601,  i€r6    1598 

«.  Erery  Man  cot  of  his  Humour  {^g^    }  Blacktnars  -    i6cx>    1599 
*C«isAte«d  ----    ChOdm.    «  Bbddmrs-    1609    ,599 


5-  Cynthia's  RereJs      _    _     _    Gbapel       -  Hacktmrs  -.    xtioo    1600 

7-  SejanosCSWkrspeare)!    I     OiamWs      GJobe  -.     -.    1605    1603 
&.  Eastward  Ho^GhaptMuwMarstM)  Revels        -.  Blacifiiars  -.     1605    1605 


:  dates  are  those  of! 

endenoe  of  Charnan  s  writing 

^:h,K:-,->A.:,:v:^^ 


by  tke  Kia^s  QMBMy aJtBUdt&iars.  May  5.  i^3<5. 

-:,,   !.,.•-.:,>      ..:.     ^    .     ..^_  :,,...: :....::    c  =:_. 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


Name  of  Play  (2nd  A  uthor.  ) 

Company. 

Theatre. 

Pub. 

Writ. 

9.  Volpone        

King's 

Globe 

1605 

1605 

10.  Epiccene      

King's        ... 

Globe   

1609 

1609 

ii.  Catiline        

[King's       ... 

Globe]  

1611 

1611 

12.  Alchemist    

King's 

Globe    

1612 

1612 

13.  Bartholomew  Fair     

L.  Eliz.     ... 

Hope    

1614 

1614 

14.    Devil  is  an  Ass     •     ...     ...     ... 

a 



1641 

1616 

15.  Staple  of  News  (entered  1626).. 

_ 

—      

1631 

1625 

King's      ...  [  

Blkfrs.1... 

1631 

1629 

17.  Magnetic  Lady  

1640 

1632 

1  8.  Sad  Shepherd    \     fl  .  ,     , 
19.  Mortimer's  Fall/unfinished    " 

t  - 

-       '"     "'• 

1640 
1640 

1637 

VIII.—  DEKKER  (THOMAS) 

,  born  1575, 

began  work 

1598,  died 

1641  :— 

Name  of  Play  (znd  Author). 

Company. 

Theatre. 

Pub. 

Writ. 

i.  Old  Fortunatus  

Admiral's  ... 

Rose      

1600 

150 

2.  Patient    Grissell    (Haughton, 
Chettle)     

{•Admiral's  ... 

Rose    28  Mar. 

1600 

1597 

3.  Satiromastix       

/Chamber-    \ 
Uain's,Paul'sj 

[Globe]  

1602 

1602 

4.  Westward  Ho  (Webster)  

1607 

1602—4 

5.  Northward  Ho  (Webster)       ... 

Paul's  

—    

1607 

1602—4 

6.  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt  (Webster)... 

Queen's 

[Bull]    

1607 

1603-4 

7.  Honest  Whore  I.  (Middleton).. 

Prince's 

Fortune 

1604 

1604 

8.  Roaring  Girl  (Middleton) 

Prince's 

Fortune 

1611 

?i6o6 

9.  Whore  of  Babylon     

Prince's 

Fortune 

1607 

1607 

10.  Honest  Whore  II  

[Prince's    ... 

Fortune] 

1630 

1608 

n.  If  it  be  not  good,  &c  

Queen's 

Bull       

1612 

1612 

12.  Match  me  in  London       .»    ... 

[Queen's]   ... 

Bull       

— 

— 

[Queen's]   ... 

Phoenix 

1631 

— 

13.  Guy  of  Warwick  (Day)    

_ 

_    

1619 

— 

^14.  Virgin  Martyr  (Massinger)     ... 

Revels 

Bull      

— 

11614 

>,/i5.  Witch  of  Edmonton  (Ford)     ... 

Prince's 

Cockpit 

1658 

1623-4 

.  16.  Sun's  Darling  (Ford)       
17.  Wonder  of  a  Kingdom    

Their  Maj... 

Cockpit 

1657 
1636 

1624 

18.  Shoemaker's  Holiday  (Wilson). 

Admiral's  ... 

Rose  

1600 

— 

IX.—  HEYWOOD  (THOMAS) 

,  born  1582, 

began  work 

1599,  died 

1640:— 

Name  of  Play  (znd  Author). 

Company. 

Theatre. 

Pub. 

Writ. 

i,  2.  Edward  IV  

Darby's 

1600 



3.  Woman  Killed  with  Kindness.  (Queen's, i6o7){seg^slow>s}  1607     1602 

4.  Four  Prentices  of  London      ...  [Queen's]   ...  Bull  .'     1615  ?  1604 

5.  Fair  Maid  of  Exchange —  _    l6o?      _ 

6.  7.  If  you  Know  not  Me,  &c.  ...          _  Cockpit  1632.     1606      - 


CONTEMPORARY  AUTHORS. 


Name  of  Play  (znd  A  uthor). 
8.  Rape  of  Lucreece      

Company. 
Queen's 

Theatre.  , 
...  Bull  1638 
...  Bull 

Pub. 
...     1608 
...     1611 
...     1613 
1613 
1632 
...     1637 

Writ. 

10.   Silver  Age    

12,  13.  Iron  Age       ~          — 
14.  Royal  King  and  Loyal  Subject.    Queen's 
15,16.   Fair  Maid  of  West     Queen's 
17.  Life  of  Duchess  of  Suffolk      ... 
18.  English  Traveller      — 
19.   Maidenhead  well  Lost     — 
20.  Love's  Mistress  Queen's 
21.  Amphrisa     •— 
22.  Love's  Masterpiece  — 
23.  Wise  Woman  of  Hogsdon       ...           — 
24,  Fortune  by  Land  &  Sea  (Rowley)  Queen's 

Cockpit 
Cockpit 
...  Cockpit 

...  Globe  ... 

1631 

...     1634 
...     1636 
...     1637 
...     1640 
...     1638 
-     1655 
...     1634 

26.  Challenge  for  Beauty 


[King's]     ...  Globe  &  Blkfs.  1636      — 


X. — MIDDLETON  (THOMAS),  born  1574,  began  work  1599,  died 
1 624 : — 


I 

Name  of  Play  (znd  Author). 
Mayor      of     Quinborough       ) 

Company. 
Admiral's 

Theatre. 
...  Rose    

Pub. 
1661 

Writ. 
JS97 

i. 

2. 

Old  Law  (part)  

Blurt  Master  Constable  

Paul's  ... 
Paul's 

—    

1656 
1602" 

1599 

1 

4- 

5- 
6. 
7- 
8. 
9- 

10. 

ii. 

T2. 

13- 

I4. 

15- 

16. 

*7- 
18. 

Michaelmas  Term  
Mad  World,  my  Masters  

Trick  to  Catch  the  Old  One  ... 
Honest  Whore  (Dekker)  
Your  Five  Gallants  
Mayor  of  Quinborough    
Family  of  Love  
Chaste  Maid  in  Cheapside     ... 
Roaring  Girl  (Dekker)     
Fair  Quarrel  (Rowley)     
World  Tost  at  Tennis  (Rowley) 
Changeling  (Rowley)       
Spanish  Gipsy  (Rowley)  
Widow  (Jonson,  Fletcher) 
More      Dissemblers       besides) 
Women  .- 

Paul's  ... 
Paul's  ... 

Paul's  ... 
Prince's 
[Revels] 

Revels 
Lady  Eliz. 
Prince's 
Prince's 
Prince's 
[Prince's] 
[Prince's] 
King's 
King's 

...  Blackfriars  ... 
...  Fortune 
...  Blackfriars  entd 
?  Blackfriars.. 
...  [Blackfriars].. 
...  Swan    
...  Fortune 
...  [Fortune]     ... 
—    ...  entd. 
(  Drury  Lane  "J 
'"<  (1623)  Salsb.  [ 
"•(     Ct.(i63i-3)j 
...  Blackfriars  ... 

...  Blackfriars  ... 

1608 
1604 
.  1608, 
1661 
1608. 
1630 
1611 
16171 
1620' 

1653 
1657 

1 

;  1601-4 

1604 
[1605-8 

?i6o6 
1611-15 

1611-15 

1615-16 
fold  in 

Kfioo 

SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


92 

Name  of  Play  (?nd  Author}.          Company.         Theatre. 
19.  Anything  for  Quiet  Life  ......     King's        ...  Blackfriars  ... 


Pub.     Writ. 


i662\ 
's7 


20.  No  Wit  :  no  Help,  Kc  

..                                     ~     

IU57\    - 

/  IDI7-23 

21.  Women'beware  Women  ...     . 

—                 —     

l657| 

22.  Witch   • 

,.     King's         ...  Blackfriars  ... 

MS.) 

23.  Game  at  Chess      • 

,.     [King's]      ...  Globe    

[1625]    1624 

XL—  MARSTON  QOHN), 

born    1575,    began    work 

1602,    died 

1624  :—  • 

Name  of  Play  (znd  Author). 

Company.        Theatre. 

Pub.   Writ. 

x.  2.  Antonio  and  Mellida     ...     « 

,.     Paul's  —     

1602      — 

3.  Malcontent  (cf.  Webster) 

..    Admiral's  ...  Rose      

1604      — 

4.  Eastward  Ho  (Jonson,  Chapman)  [^^.'J  Blackfriars  - 

1605      — 

5.  Dutch  Courtisan       

,..    {^Jds5'  }  [Blackfriars].. 

1605      — 

6.  Fawn    

-     {^evd?.'..}  [Blackfriars].. 

1606*    — 

7.  Sophonisba  

...     [Revels]     ...  Blackfriars  ... 

1606      — 

8    What  you  Will  

Revels        ...  [Blackfriars].. 

1607      — 

9.  Insatiate  Countess  (Barksted) 

...     [Revels]     ...  Whitefriars  ... 

1613      — 

XII.  —WEBSTER  QOHN), 

born  ?I582,   began  work 

1602,   died 

1652  :— 

Name  of  Play  (?nd  Author). 

Company.       Theatre. 

Pub.   Writ. 

i.  Malcontent  (additions  to) 

..     King's        ...  Globe    

1604     1604 

a.  Northward  Ho  (Dekker)...     . 

..     Paul's  —     

1607     1602-4 

3.  Westward  Ho  (Dekker)  ...     . 

..     Paul's  —     

1607     1602-4 

4.  Sir  T.  Wyatt  (Dekker)     ...     . 

..     Queen's      ...  [Bull]   

1607     1603-4 

.    5.  White  Devil        

,..     Queen's      ...j  [Bull]    

1612     1611 

—          (Phoenix 

1631      — 

6.  Duchess  of  Main        ...     ~ 

...     King's       ...  Globe  &  Blkfs 

.  1623     1616 

7.  Devil's  Law  Case       

...     Queen's     ...        —     

1623     1622! 

8.  Appius  and  Virginia  

...    (Cockpit  1639)'    —     

1654      — 

9.  Cure  for  Cuckold  (Rowley)  \ 
xo.  Thracian  Wonder  (Rowley)  i 

[probably    only    begun    by  f 
Webster]     I 

1651      — 
1651      — 

*  Fawn  was  acted  also  at  Paul's  before  1606. 

t  This  is  Dyce's  date ;  I  date  the  play  between  1608-15  >  rather  earlier  than 
later. 


CONTEMPORARY  AUTHORS.  93 

XIII.— FLETCHER,  born  1576  )  {  1625. 

XIV.-BEAUMONT,  born  1586  |  beSan  work  l6°7»  died  {  I6i6. 

Title.  Author.  Date. 

1.  Woman  Hater        Beaumont  (E.)      1607 

2.  Faithful  Shepherdess    Fletcher  (F.)        before  1610 

3.  Four  Plays  in  One         B.  and  F 

4.  Wit  at  Several  Weapons      ...  do.  

5.  Thierry  and  Theodoret do.  

6.  Maid's  Tragedy     do.          before  1611 

>  7.  Philaster do.           „     1611 

8.   King  and  No  King       do.           1611 

v    g.   Knight  of  Burning  Pestle  ...             clo.           1611 

10.  Cupid's  Revenge    do.           1612 

u.  Scornful  Lady        ...      -     ...             do.           1609-12 

12.  Coxcomb F 1612 

13.  Captain     do 1613 

u,   14.   Henry  VIII F.  and  Shakespeare    ...  1613 

15.  Two  Noble  Kinsmen   do.  ?  1613 

16.  Honest  Man's  Fortune         ...     B.  and  F 1613 

17.  Masque     B 1613 

18.  Wit  without  Money      F before  1619 

19.  Bonduca do „     1619 

,     20.  Valentinian      do ,,     1619 

h    21.  Knight  of  Malta    F.  and  Middleton  (Md.)        ,,     1619 

22.  Queen  of  Corinth do.  1616-19 

23.  Mad  Lover      F before  1619 

24.  Loyal  Subject do 1618 

25.  Humorous  Lieutenant         ...     do before  1620 

26.  Woman's  Prize       do    after    1619 

27.  Chanqes    do „      1619 

28.  M.  Thomas     do „      1619 

,  29.  Double  Marriage do ,,      1619 

30.  Women  Pleased     ....     do „      1619 

31.  Island  Princess      do at  Court  1621 

^2.  Pilgrim     do ,,        1621 

33.  Wild  Goose  Chase do „        1621 

••',4.  Custom  of  the  Country        ...     do 1621 

1  35.  False  One        F.  and  Massinger  (M.)  after    1618 

•-     56.  Little  French  Lawyer do.  „      1619 

37.  Very  Woman  (Woman's  Plot)  do.  1621 
altered  byMassinger  probably  1634 

38,  Laws  of  Candy       do.  after    1619 

.     39.  Beggar's  Bush        do.                   at  Court  1622 

40.  Prophetess       do.      licensed  14  May,  1622 

41.  Sea  Voyage     do.             ,,      22  June,  1622 

42.  Spanish  Curate      do.             ,,      24  Oct.  1622 

43.  Lover's  Progress do.  before  1623 

44.  Love's  Cure    F.,  M.,  Rowley  (R.)  after  1622 


94  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Title.                                     Author.  Date. 

45.  Maid  in  the  Mill    F.  and  Rowley  (R.)  licensed  29  Oct.  1623 

46.  Wife  for  a  Month F „       27  May,  1624 

47.  Rule  a  Wife,  &c do „        19  Oct.  1624 

48.  Bloody  Brother      F.  and  ? after  1623 

49.  Elder  Brother F.  and  M „    1625 

50.  Fair  Maid  of  the  Inn F.  M.  R licensed  22  June,  1626 

51.  Noble  Gentleman F.  and? „         3  Feb.  1626 

52.  Nice  Valor      F.  and  ? after  1624 

53.  Night  Walker        F.  and  Shirley     ...  „       1625 

54.  Love's  Pilgrimage         do.                ...  ,,       1625 

Whether  Fletcher  wrote  any  part  of  The  Widow  (by  Middleton 
and  Jonson,  about  1615)  is  very  doubtful.  He  certainly  had  no 
share  in  the  Faithful  Friends,  which  I  assign  to  Beaumont  alone, 
date  1606.  All  these  plays  were  produced  by  the  King's  company 
except  No.  i,  by  Paul's  Children;  9,  10,  n,  by  Revels  Children; 
53  by  the  Cockpit  company. 

XV.— TOURNEUR  (CYRIL).     See  page  99. 

XVI.— ROWLEY  (WILLIAM),  bora  1591  (?),  began  work  1607, 
died  1627 :— 


Name  of  Play  (znd  A  uthor).    Company. 

Theatre.           Pub. 

Written. 

i.  Travels  of  Three  Brothers) 
(Day,  Wilkins)  [ 

Curtain     ...     lost  

1607 

2.  Match  at  Midnight        ...  Revels    ... 

[Bull]        ...     1633 

before   1622 

3.  Fair  Quarrel  (Middleton)  Prince's  ... 

—            1617 

»        1623 

4.  World    Lost    at    Tennis)^  • 
(Middleton)        JPnnces... 

—        entd.  1620 

,,        1623 

5.  Old  Law  (Middleton)   ...         — 

{  Salisbury  \     ,-  , 
Ct.  1631-3  }I656        - 

»»         1623 

6.  SpanishGipsy(Middleton)          —        \ 

f    Drury     )     , 
i  Lane,  1623)  l653        - 

„         1623 

7.  Changeling    (Middleton)          —        j 

/  Salisbury  \     , 
\  Ct.  1631-3  )  l653 

„         1623 

8.  Witch  of  Edmonton  (Ford)  -r,  . 
andDekker)       jPnnces... 

Cockpit    ...     1658 

1623-4 

9.  All's  Lost  by  Lust  {SuSSl} 

Phoenix    ...     1633 

1623 

10.  Maid  in  the  Mill(Fletcher)  King's     ... 

Blackfriars.       — 

1623 

ii.  New  Wonder  [King's]  ... 

Blackfriars]     1632 

1624-6 

12.  Cure     for     Cuckold        *\rv     >  -i 
(Webster)    {[King's]  ... 

1651 

1624-6 

13  ThracianWonder(Webster)[King's]  ... 

~~            1651         ... 

1624-6 

14.  Birth  of  Merlin  (?  Shake-  lrl,.     .  , 
speare)...                        HKings]... 

—            1662 

1624-6 

CONTEMPORAR  Y  A  UTHORS. 


95 


XVIL—  MASSINGER   (PHILIP),   born   1584,  began  work   1613, 
died  1640  :  — 


Name  of  Play  (znd  Author).   Company.  Theatre.           Pub. 

1.  Virgin   Martyr  (Dekker)    Revels  ...  Bull  ......  1622 

2.  Fatal  Dowry  (Field)      ...     King's  ...  Blackfriars  1632 
3-13.  Eleven  Plays  with  Fletcher  (see  under  Fletcher). 

14.  Unnatural  Combat         ...     King's  ...  Globe         ...  1639 

15.  Duke  of  Milan        ......     King's..  Blackfriars  1623 

16.  New  Way  to  pay  Old  Debts       —  Phoenix    ...  1633 


King's 


17.  Maid  of  Honour 

18.  Bondman 
iq.  Renegado' 

20.  Parliament  of  Love 

21.  Roman  Actor 

22.  Great  Duke  of  Florence     Queen's... 

23-  Picture      ............     King's... 

24.  Believe  as  you  list  ......  .          — 

25.  City  Madam   .........     King's... 

26.  Guardian  ............     King's  ... 

27.  Bashful  Lover         ......     King's  ... 

28.  Old    Law   (revised    from 


'   }  Phoenix     •"     l632 


Written. 
...    ?  1613 
?  1614 

before  1622 
„  1622 
„  1622 

»       l622 

Cockpit     ...     1624  licensed  Dec.  1623 
}  Drury  Lane  6Mar.  1630      i7Apl.  1624 

Cockpit  ...  29june,i66o  3  June,  1624 
1629  ...  n  Oct.  1626 
1636  ...  5  July,  1627 

**  ~  8June>l629 

sent  back  u  Jan.  1631 

*58  "<  25May,i632 

1655  ...  31  Oct.  1633 

1655  ...  9  May,  1636 


Blackfriars 
Phoenix    ... 


Blackfriars 
Blackfriars 


Rowley  and  Middleton) 


J  Salisbury  1 


after  1629"* 


asury         ,•  *  aer  129 

House   /     l6s6        "'     I    ?  1637     / 


XVIII.  —  FORD   (JOHN),    born    1586,    began   work    1621,    died 
1639  :— 


Name  of  Play  (2nd  Author). 

1.  "Tis  Pity  she's  a  Whore        ... 

2.  Love's  Sacrifice      ......... 


4.  Sun's  Darling  (Dekker) 

5.  Lover's  Melancholy 

6.  Broken  Heart 

7.  Perkin  Warbeck 

8.  Fancies  Chaste  and  Noble 

9.  Ladies'  Trial 


Company. 

Theatre. 

Pub. 

Written. 

Queen's  [1633] 

Phoenix  ... 

1^33 

?l621 

Queen's  [1633] 

Phoenix  ... 

1633 

?l622 

Prince's  

Cockpit  ... 

1658 

1623-4 

(TheirMaj.i657> 

Cockpit  ... 

l657 

1624 

King's    

/Globe  and) 
\Blackfriarsj 

1629 

1628 

King's    ...     ... 

Blackfriars 

l633 

1633 

Queen's 

Phoenix  ... 

l634 

1634 

Queen's 

Phoenix  ... 

1638 

i637 

Their  Majesties 

Drury  Lane 

1639 

1638 

96 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


XIX.— SHIRLEY  (JAMES),  born  1595,  began  work   1625,  died 
1666:— 


Name  of  Play  (znd  Author). 

Company.         Theatre. 

Pub. 

Written. 

i.  Constant  Maid  

—          Nursery 

1640 

11624 

2.  (Love  Will   Find  Out  the) 

—          Hatton  Garden 

1661 

__ 

Way;  ?  T.  B.)     j 

3.  Humorous  Courtiers 

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

1640 

?i624 

4.  Arcadia 

—          Phoenix  

1640 

?i624 

5.  Bird  in  Cage     

—          Phoenix  

1633 

?l624 

6    Wedding 

—          Phoenix  

1629 

before  1625 

7.  School    of    Compliments! 
(Love  Tricks)       J 

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

1631 

/     .licensed 
\  10  Feb.  1625 

8.  Maid's  Revenge       

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

1639 

9  Feb.  1626 

9.  Brothers     

—          Blackfriars    ... 

1652 

4  Nov.  1626 

10.  Witty  Fair  One       

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

1633 

3  Oct.  1628 

1  1  .  Faithful  (Grateful)  Servant 

—                     — 

lost 

3  Nov.  1629 

12.  Traitor  (Rivers)        

—                     — 

1635 

4  May,  1631 

13.  Duke  

—                     — 

lost 

7  May,  1631 

14.  Love's  Cruelty  

Drury  Lane  ... 

1640 

Nov.  1631 

15.  Changes     

Revels        SalisburyCourt 

1632 

10  Jan.  1632 

1  6.  Hyde  Park       

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

1637 

20  Apr.  1632 

17.  Ball  (Chapman)       

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

1639 

16  Nov.  1632 

18.   Beauties     

—                     — 

lost 

21  Jan.  1633 

19.  Young  Admiral        

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

1637 

3  July,  1633 

20.  Gamester    

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

*637 

ii  Nov.  1633 

TT  Yarn  nip 

—          Drury  Lane  ••• 

16^7 

2A  Tune  i63A 

22.  Opportunity       

—      .    Drury  Lane  ... 

ivJO/ 

1640 

•^  J  u*lc>   AUO^ 

29  Nov.  1634 

23.  Coronation        

HerMaj.    Drury  Lane  ... 

1640 

6  Feb.  1635 

24.  Chabot  (Chapman)  

—   '       Drury  Lane  ... 

1639 

29  Apr.  1635 

25.  Lady  of  Pleasure    

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

l637 

15  Oct.  1635 

26.  Duke's  Mistress      

—          Drury  Lane  ... 

1638 

1  8  Jan.  1636 

27.   Royal  Master   ,  ... 

—          Dublin   

1638 

23  Apr.  1638 

28.  St.  Patrick  for  Ireland  ... 

—                      — 

1640 

'1624 

29.  Gentleman  of  Venice 

—           SalisburyCourt 

1655 

30  Oct.  1639 

30.  Look  to  the  Lady    

—                     — 

lost 

10  Mar.  1639 

31.   St.    Albans     (entered    14) 

Feb.  1639)     1 

lost 

32.  Rosania  (Doubtful   Heir) 

—                     — 

1652 

i  June,  1640 

33.  Politic  Father  (Politician) 

—           SalisburyCourt 

1655 

26  May,  1641 

34.   Cardinal     

—           Blackfriars    ... 

1652 

25  Nov.  1641 

35.   Sisters         

—           Blackfriars    ... 

1652 

26  Apr.  1642 

36.  Court  Secret     

—          Blackfriars    ... 

1653 

— 

37.  Imposture  

—          Blackfriars    ... 

1652 

— 

38.  Honoria     and    Mammon\ 

(from  Masque  of  Honor  1 
and  Riches,  1633)  [seej 

—                     — 

1659 

— 

also  under  Fletcher]  .„) 

CONTEMPORAR  Y  A  UTHORS.  9 7 
XX.— RANDOLPH  (THOMAS)r  born  1605,  died  1639  : — 

Name  of  Play.  Written. 

1.  Conceited  Pedlar before  1630 

2.  Aristippus        ,,       1630 

3.  Jealous  Lovers        ,,       1632 

4.  Amyntns   ...     .. „       1638 

5.  Muses  Looking  Glass „       1638 

6.  Hey  for  Honesty    — 


XXL — BROME  (RICHARD)  : — 


Name  of  Play  (-2nd  Author). 

1.  Fault  in  Friendship  (Jonsonjuu. 

2.  Late  Lancashire  Witches  (Hey 

wood)         

3.  Northern  Lass     

4.  Sparagus  Garden         , 

5.  Antipodes  (for  Cockpit)    ...     ., 

6.  Novella 

7.  City  Wit       , 

8.  Damoiselle 

9.  Court  Beggars      

to.  Mad  Couple  Well  Matched     . 

11.  Queen's  Exchange      , 

12.  Weeding  of  Covent  Garden     ., 

13.  New  Academy    , 

14.  Lovesick  Court    

15.  English  Moor       

16.  Queen  and  Concubine        

17.  Jovial  Crew  (Merry  Beggars).. 


Company.        THeatre.         Pub. 
Curtain — 


Globe      ... 
Globe  and 


:}  - 

(   Globe  and  \ 

\  Blackfriars  I 

Revels    SalisburyCourt 

Queen's  SalisburyCourt 

—        Blackfriars    ... 


Written. 
I  entered 
[2  Oct.  1623 


—                  — 

1653 

King's    Cockpit  

165$ 

—        Cockpit  (1639) 

1653 

—                   — 

1657 

—                   _ 

1658 

—                   — 

1658 

—                   — 

1638 

Queen's             — 

1659 

—                   — 

1659 

—        Cockpit  

1652 

1634  — 

1632  — 

1640  before  1635 
1640  „  1.638 
1653  .1632 


1632 


1641 


XXII.— GLAPTHORNE  (HENRY)  :— 

Name  of  Play.  Company. 

1.  Hollander  (written  1635)   — 

2.  Argalus  and  Parthenia       — 

3.  Ladies'  Privilege — 

4.  Wit  in  a  Constable      

5.  Alb.  Wallenstein King's    ... 

?     Parricide  (Revenge  for  Honor)     Prince's  ... 
probably  altered  from  Chapman. 

The  dates  of  writing  given  in  the  last  column  of  these  tables  are  only  approxi 
mations  in  many  instances  :  but  where  a  month  and  day  are  given  a  definite  entry 
is  refeired  to  and  an  inferior  limit  of  time  is  thus  fixed. 


Theatre.  PublisJied. 

Cockpit 1640 

Drury  Lane  ...  1639 

Drury  Lane  ...  •  1640 

Cockpit 1639 

Globe     1639 

(     entered 
*"  1 27  May,  1624 


[Bull] 


9s  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

XXIII. — List  of  Plays  which  are  not  included  in  the  foregoing, 
but  which  have  been  republished  (most  of  them  in  the  new  edition 
of  Dodsley)  : — 


Name  of  Play. 

Author. 

Company.       Theatre. 

Pub. 

Writ. 

i.  Royster  Doyster  ... 

(  Nicholas  1 
1     Udall    / 

—                '  — 

1566 

1550 

2.  Ferrex  and  Porrex 

/    Norton,  \ 
1  Sackville  J 

—                   _ 

1565 

1562 

3.  Appius  and  Virginia 

R.  B  

—                   — 

1575 

1563 

4.  Damon  and  Pythias 

Rich.  Ed  wards 

—                   — 

1571 

1565 

5.  Gammer     Gurton's) 

Needle      } 

S[**"J  

1575 

1566 

6.  Cambyses      

Th.  Preston 

—                   — 

^570 

1569 

7.  Promos  and  Cassan-1 
dra      J 

G.  Whetstone 

__                   _ 

1578 

- 

8.  Sir  Clyomon  

— 

Queen's  ...           — 

1599 

?  1582 

y.  Three      Ladies     oft 
London      ) 

R.  Wilson  ... 

[Queen's]              — 

1584 

1584 

10.  Locrine   

(   Tylney    \ 
land   Peele* 
f  (edited   ~| 
|_byW.S.)J 

L.Strange's          — 

1595 

1586 

n.   Marius    and    Sylla 

T.  Lodge  ... 

Admiral's 

1594 

1586-8 

12.  Three     Lords    and) 
Ladies  of  London) 

R.  Wilson  ... 

[Queen's] 

1590 

1588 

13.  Jeronimo         

T.  Kyd      ... 

—                  

1605 

) 

34.  Spanish  Tragedy  ... 

T.  Kyd      ... 

—                   — 

[i594] 

before 

15.  Soliman  and  Perseda 

?T.  Kyd    ... 

_                  _ 

J   1589 

1  6.  Taming  of  a  Shrew 

— 

Pembroke's          -  - 

1594 

1589 

17.  Sir  T.  More   

— 

_                    



i3.  Troublesome  Reign  I 
of  King  John  .../ 

[G.  Peele]  ... 

Queen's  ...           — 

i59i 

159° 

19.  Fair  Emm      

— 

L.Strange's          — 

1631 

1590 

20.  London  Prodigal  ... 

- 

L.Strange's  {(I^gS'j 

>     1605 

I591 

21.  King  Leir      

— 

Queen's  ... 

1605 

1592 

22.  Two  Angry  Women 

H.  Porter  ... 

Admiral's 

1599 

?  1592 

23.  Summer's  Last  Will 

T.Nash     „ 

Chapel    ... 

1600 

1592 

24.  Arden  of  Feversham 

— 

L.  Strange's          — 

1592 

1592 

25.  Grim  the  Collier   ... 

J.  T  M 

—                   — 

[1662] 

fafter) 
(1590  t 

26.  Look  about  You   ... 

[A.  Munday] 

Admiral's              — 

1600 

?  1592 

27.  Downfall  of  Robinl 
Hood  ) 

A.    Munday 

Admiral's              — 

1601 

28.Death  of  Robin  Hood 

J  A.  Munday\ 
IH.  Chettle) 

Admiral's             — 

1601 

?I593 

29.  Richard  III  

— 

Queen's  ... 

1594 

1593 

30.  Knack  to   Know  a) 
Knave        j 

[?  T.  Lodge] 

Alleyn's...    (QJLord, 
I  Strange  s 

]}i594 

1593 

CONTEMPORARY  AUTHORS. 

99 

Name  of  Play. 

Author. 

Company. 

Theatre. 

Pub. 

Writ. 

31.  Mucedorus     

[T.  Lodge] 

{Kivgs    ... 

Globe      ... 

ISQ8 
1613 

1594 

1010 

32.  George  a  Green    ... 

— 

Sussex's  ... 

— 

1599 

1594 

33.  How  a  Man  may,  ' 

|j.  Cooke    ... 

Worcester's 

i- 

1602 

?I597 

34-  Englishmen  for  MyJ 

W.Haughton 

Admiral's 

— 

1616 

1598 

fMunday,  \ 
Drayton,  1 

|     Wilson,    1 

35.  Sir  John  Oldcastle 

(Hathaway) 

Admiral's 

— 

1600 

1599 

[iscribed  to") 
Shake 
speare    J 

36.  Timon     ...    ...     ... 

— 

— 

University 

— 

7i6oo 

37.  Return  fromParnassus          —                     — 

(S.John's\ 
\Camb.   ) 

1606 

1602 

38.  Hoffmann      

H.  Chettle 

Admiral's 

xPhi?3nix'} 

1631 

1602 

39.  Cromwell       ...     ... 

— 

Chamberlain 

— 

1602 

— 

40.  Lingua    ~ 

— 

— 

— 

1607 

1602 

41.  Wiry  Beguiled      ~. 

— 

— 

— 

1606 

1603 

42.  Yorkshire  Tragedy 

— 

— 

— 

1605 



43.  Puritan   

— 

Paul's     ... 

— 

1607 

— 

44.  Dumb  Knight 

l&MSr} 

j  King's  1 
\  Revels  f 

BIackfriars 

1608 

1607 

45.  Miseries  of  enforcedl 

[  G.     Wilkins 

King's    -. 

Globe     ... 

1607 

1607 

46'  Mem7nSnVil  ?f.  ^"j 

\  T.  B  

King's    ... 

Globe     _ 

1608 

1607 

47.  Revenger's  Tragedy 

C.  Tourneur 

King's    ... 

Globe     ... 

1607 

1607 

48.  Atheist's     Tragedy 

C  Tourneur 

King's    ... 

Globe     ... 

1611 

?i6o9 

49.  Ram  Alley     

L.  Barry   ... 

{Si?} 

BIackfriars 

1611 
,Tri 

1611 

51.  Woman's  aWeather- 
cock    

N.  Field    ... 

(Queen's  \ 
I  Revels  / 

Whiles 

3i»J 

1617 

*!!! 

52.  Amends  for  Ladies 

N.  Field    ... 

{£""£&} 

BIackfriars 

1618 

1613 

53.  Albumazar     

J.Tomkis... 

- 

{-Camb7} 

1614 

1613 

54'  H°Pear£U..L°.~   *!!! 

[  R.  Tailor  ... 

Apprentices  Whitefriars 

1614 

1613 

55-  Heir        ' 

T.  May     ... 

Revels    ... 

— 

1633 

1630 

56.  Old  Couple    

T.  May      ... 

— 

— 

1658 

— 

57.  Revenge  for  Honour 

?  Glapthorne 

Prince's  ... 

— 

1654 

1624 

58.  City  Nightcap 

R.Davenport 

Queen's  ... 

Phoenix  ... 

1661 

1624 

59.  Microcosmus  ...     ...    T.  Nabbes  — 

60.  Ordinary        ...    ...    W.  Cartwright         — 


l6s7 
—  1651 

7—2 


ICO 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


Name  of  Play. 

A  uthor. 

Company. 

Theatre. 

Pub. 

Writ. 

61. 

London  Chanticleers 

_ 

— 

— 

1659 

1636 

62. 

Shepherd's  Holiday 

Rutter 

Queen's  ... 

— 

1635 

— 

63- 

Fuimus  Troes 

J.  Fisher    ... 

- 

(Magdalen! 
\     Oxon.    J 

1633 

1633 

64. 

Lost  Lady      

W.    Barclay 

— 

— 

1639 

— 

65- 

City  Match    

J.    M[ayne] 

King's    ... 

Blackfriars 

1639 

1639 

66. 

Queen  of   Arragou 

W.Habington 

— 

— 

1640 

— 

67. 

Antiquary      

S.  Marmion 

Queen's  ... 

Cockpit  ... 

1641 

— 

63. 

Rebellion        

T.  Rawlins 

Revels    ... 

— 

1640 

— 

69. 

Andromana   

J.  G  

— 

— 

1660 

— 

70. 

Parson's  Wedding 

T.  Killigrew 

— 

— 

1664 

— 

71. 

Five  Wise  Men  and  1 

I 







all  the  rest  Fools] 

\ 

72. 

Sophy     

Sir  J.  Denham 

King's    ... 

Blackfriars 

1641 

— 

The  following  are  of  inferior  importance,  and  a  simple  enumera 
tion  of  them  will  suffice  for  our  purpose  : — 

DANIEL  (SAMUEL),  born  1562,  died  1619  ;  wrote  Philotas  (printed 
1605),  Cleopatra  (printed  1594),  Queen's  Arcadia  (presented  1605), 
Hymen's  Triumph  (acted  1614),  Vision  of  Twelve  Goddesses  (1604), 
and  Tetkys'  Festival  (1611). 

ALEXANDER  (WILLIAM,  Earl  of  Stirling),  born  1580,  died  1640); 
wrote  four  "Monarchicke"  tragedies  ;  Darius  (printed  1603),  Crcesus 
(1604),  Julius  CcBsar  (1604),  and  The  Alexandrian  Tragedy  (1605). 

CARTWRIGHT  (WILLIAM),  born  1611-15,  died  I(H3  J  wrote  The 
Royal  Slave  (acted  1636),  The  Lady  Errant  (printed  1651),  The 
Siege  (printed  1651),  besides  The  Ordinary  already  mentioned. 

SUCKLING  (Sm  JOHN),  born  1608,  died  1641-2 ;  wrote  The 
Goblins,  Aglaura,  Brennoralt  (all  printed  1646),  and  The  Sad  One 
(1658). 

DAVENANT  (SiR  WILLIAM),  born  1606,  died  1669  ;  wrote  before 
1642;  Albovine  (printed  1629),  Cruel  Brother  (1630),  Just  Italian 
(1630),  Platonic  Lovers  (1636),  Wits  (1636),  Love  and  Honor 
(licensed  1634,  printed  1649),  News  from  Plymouth  (licensed  1635), 
Unfortunate  Lovers  (licensed  1638,  printed  1643),  Fair'  Favorite 
(licensed  1638),  and  Distresses,  or  Spanish  Lows  (licensed  1639). 
He  also  wrote  other  plays  after  1656. 


CHAPTER  X. 

A    CHRONOLOGICAL    TABLE    OF    MISCELLANEOUS 
MATTERS  PERTAINING  TO  THE  THEATRE, 

FROM  1558  TO  1642. 

1558.  Queen  Elizabeth's  accession. 

1561.  T.  Beyer  made  Master  of  the  Revels. 

1566.   Still's  Gammer  Gurton's  Needle  produced. 

1574.  The  Earl  of  Leicester's  players  licensed.    Burbage,  Perkin, 

Langham,  Johnson,  R.  Wilson,  &c. 
Plays  performed  on  Sundays  cut  of  prayer  time. 
1576.  The  Theater  and  the  Curtain  built  in  Shoreditch. 

1578.  The  Privy  Council  limited  plays  in  the  City  to  the  companies 

of  the  Chapel  Children,  Paul's  Children,  Earl  of  Warwick, 
Earl  of  Leicester,  and  Earl  of  Essex. 

1579.  24th  July,  E.  Tilney  made  Master  of  the  Revels. 

1580.  Plays  on  Sundays  abolished.     Newington  Butts  built. 

1581.  Whitefriars  built.     Pulled  down  soon  after  by  the  Queen's 

order,  as  well  as  the  Cross  Keys,  Bull,  Bell  and  Savage, 

and  Paul's. 

1583.  The  Queen's  company  selected. 
1585.  The  Rose  and  the  Hope  opened. 

1588.  Paris  Garden  opened. 

1589.  A  Commission  of  Censure  appointed. ' 

1591.  No  plays  allowed  on  Thursdays  because  of  bear-baiting  being 

interfered   with  by   them.     Interdict  on  Paul's   Children 
imposed  after  1591. 

1592.  Dr.  Rainolds  and  Dr.   Gager  hold  forth  at  Oxford  on  the 

unlawfulness  of  stage  plays. 


102  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

1593.  The  Queen's  company  dispersed. 

1594.  Lord  Strange's  company  absorbed  into  the  Chamberlain's. 

1595.  Swan  opened. 

1596.  Blackfriars  building  adapted  for  a  theatre.     Chapel  Children 

put  in  by  Burbage. 

1599.  The  Fortune  built  by  Alleyn  for  the  Admiral's  company. 

1600.  The  Globe  built  by  Burbage. 

1601.  The  interdict  on  Paul's  Children  removed  before  1601. 

All  theatres  ordered  to  be  shut  except  the  Fortune  and  the 
Globe. 

1603.  King  James  I.  succeeds  to  the  throne.  He  licenses  Shakespeare, 

Burbage,  Philipps,  Hemings,   Condell,   &c.,  who  usually 

play  at  the  Globe. 
No  plays  allowed,   except   at    Court  and   in    private,    on 

Sundays. 
The  King  takes  the  Chamberlain's  company  for  his  own  ; 

the  Queen  the    Earl  of   Worcester's ;    the    Prince    the 

Admiral's. 

1604.  Prince's  company  at  the  Fortune  (not  the  Curtain). 
Blackfriars  bought  by  the  Globe  company. 

1605.  Children  of  the  Revels  at  Blackfriars  (formerly  the  Chapel 

Children). 

First  moveable  scenes  at  Christ  Church. 
1607.  T.  Coryat  at  Venice. 

Plays  in  Lent  forbidden  early  in  this  reign. 
1 6  ro.  November  7.     Sir  G.  Buck  Master  of  the  Revels. 

1612.  Lady  Elizabeth's  company  join  the  Revels,  separating  next 

year  (Collier). 
Revels  Children  at  Whitefriars. 

1613.  J-  Taylor  head  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  company  at  the  Hope. 
Globe  burnt. 

Swan  and  Rose  shut  up  before  1613. 

Lady  Elizabeth  becomes  Queen  of  Bohemia. 

1614.  Globe  rebuilt.     Hope  burnt  down. 

1616.  Dispensation  granted  for  playing  in  Lent,  except  Wednesdays 

and  Fridays.     The  Red  Bull  and  Fortune  have  tumblers  at 
this  season. 

1617.  The  Cockpit  (nuper  erectum}  pulled  down. 


M ISC  ELL  A  NE  0  US  MA  TTERS.  1 03 

1619.  Queen  Anne's  death. 
Cockpit  rebuilt. 

The  Queen's  Revels  company  become. the  King's. 
The  united  Four  Companies  formed. 

1621.  December  15.     The  Fortune  burnt. 
Sir  J.  Astley  Master  of  the  Revels 

1622.  The  Revels  company  at  the  Red  Bull  formed   from  Queen 

Anne's,  which  was  licensed  to  bring  up  children  for  the 
Revels. 

Sir  Henry  Herbert  Master  of  the  Revels. 
The  Red  Bull  not  one  of  the  Four  Companies. 
1625.  King  Charles  married,  and  succeeds  to  the  throne. 

Prince's  servants  at  the  Curtain  for  last  time. 
1627.  Red  Bull  company  forbidden  to  play  Shakespeare. 

1629.  Women  on  stage  at  Blackfriars. 
Whitefriars  rebuilt  as  Salisbury  Court. 

A  French  company  performs  at  Blackfriars,  the  Bull,  and  the 
Fortune. 

1630.  Playhouses  shut  from  April  to  November  on  account  of  the 

plague. 

1633.  Histriomastix  published. 
Prynne's  ears  cut  off. 

1634.  Henrietta  Maria  at  Blackfriars. 

1635.  French  players  at  the  Cockpit 

1636.  First  scenery  used  in  a  private  performance  of  Love's  Mistress, 

at  Denmark  House. 

Theatres  shut  on  account  of  the  plague. 
William  Beeston  ordered  to  make  a  boys'  company  at  the 

Cockpit  (King  and  Queen's). 

1639.  Poets  receive  second  day's  money  taken  at  door. 

1640.  The    Prince's   company  go  to   the   Fortune ;    the   Fortune 

company  to  the  Bull. 
Beeston  dies  ;  Davenant  succeeds  him. 
1642.  Theatres  shut.     War  breaks  out. 

NOTE. — Stage  plays  were  suppressed  definitely  in    1647,  and  the 
first  scenery  on  the  stage  was  introduced  in  1662. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

A  LIST  OF  BOOKS  MOST  DESIRABLE  FOR  A  STUDENT 
OF  SHAKESPEARE  TO  POSSESS. 

1.  The    reprint   of   the   Folio    edition  of   1623,    now  sold  by 
Glaisher,  Holborn ;  or  the  reproduction  by  photolithography  pub 
lished  by  Chatto  and  Windus. 

2.  The  Globe  edition  (Macmillan),  for  reference,  the  lines  being 
numbered. 

3.  The  Variorum  edition  of  1821.     20  vols.     This  is  the  store 
house  of   all  important  facts  concerning  Shakespeare  from  which 
the  main  part  of  modern  editions  is  derived. 

4.  Mrs.  Ct>wden  Clarke's  Concordance  to  the  plays. 

5.  Mrs.  Furness's  Concordance  to  the  Poems. 

6.  Schmidt's    Shakespeare    Lexicon,    2   vols.      (Williams   and 
Norgate. ) 

7.  Clark  and  Wright's  Cambridge  edition,   for  the  Collations. 
9  vols.  (out  of  print).     (Macmillan.) 

8.  Dr.  Abbott's  Shakespearian  Grammar.     (Macmillan.) 

9.  S.  Walker's  Criticisms,  4  vols.     (A.  R.  Smith.) 

10.  S.  Neil's  Shakespeare  :  a  Biography.    (Houlston  and  Wright.) 
The  large  modern  editions  by   Knight,    Staunton,    Dyce,    and 

Halliwell  are  all  useful  for  reference;  but  for  anyone -with  limited 
means,  after  getting  Nos.  i,  2,  4,  6,  8,  10,  which  are  almost  in 
dispensable,  a  better  investment  is  to  procure  copies  of  the  old 
dramatists,  viz.  : — 

(a)  Beaumont    and    Fletcher,    by  Dyce,  2  vols.     (Phillips    and 
Sampson,  Boston,  1854),  if  possible  :  if  not,  then  that  by  Darley, 
2  vols.     (Routledge  and  Co.). 

(b)  Massinger,  by  Cunningham.     (Chatto  and  Windus.) 


LIST  OF  BOOKS.  105 

(r)  Ben  Jonson,  by  Cunningham,  3  vols.     (Chatto  and  Windus.) 

(d)  Webster,  by  Dyce.     (Routledge.) 

(e)  Marlowe       ditto  (ditto). 
(/)  Greene  and  Peele            (ditto). 

(g)  Chapman's  works,  3  vols.     (Chatto  and  Windus.) 
(h)  Marston  (A.  R.  Smith),  3  vols. 

(f)  Lilly  (ditto)  2  vols. 
(/)  Randolph  (Kerslake). 

(k)  Brome,  3  vois.  ;  Uekker,  4  vols.  ;  Heywood,  6  vols.  ;  Glap- 
thorne,  2  vols. ;  Chapman,  3  vols. ;  are  published  in  Pearson's 
reprints.  Middleton  and  Shirley,  by  Dyce,  are  out  of  print. 
A  more  useful  expenditure  than  these  editions  de  luxe  would 

•Up   . 

(/)  Dodsley's  Old  Plays,  by  W.  C.  Hazlitt,  14  vols. 

(m)  The  best  selection  for  those  who  do  not  care  to  have  the 

minor  dramatists  complete,  is  the  Ancient  British  Drama 

by  Sir  W.  Scott,  3  vols. 
Other  important  works  are  : — 

U.   Halliwell's  Dictionary  of  Old  Plays. 

12.  Halliwell's  Dictionary  of  Archaic  words,  2  vols.  (very  useful). 

13.  W.  C.  Hazlitt's  Handbook  to  Early  English  Literature. 

14.  W.    C.   Hazlitt's  edition  of   Collier's   Shakespeare  Library, 
6  vols. 

15.  Arber's  reprints  of  Old  English  Literature  are  very  useful 
and  cheap. 

16.  Professor  Ward's   History  of  Dramatic  Literature,   2  vols. 
(Macmillan),  is  very  valuable. 

Books  about  Shakespeare,  called  aesthetic,  are  best  eschewed 
entirely  until  a  distinct  opinion  has  been  formed  from  independent 
study.  Among  the  best  of  these  are  Gervinus  ;  Ulrici ;  Dowden  ; 
Hazlitt.  Schlegel  is  useful,  but  not  trustworthy.  The  publications 
of  the  (older)  Shakspeare  Society  are  valuable.  So  will  be  the 
Quarto  reprints  of  the  New  Shakspere  Society,  a  cheap  edition  of 
which  is  promised  for  non-subscribers  in  the  prospectus.  It  is  im 
possible  to  give  anything  like  full  information  on  this  subject  in 
this  Manual.  Hence  I  omit  from  the  list  given  above  such  books 
as  Cotgrave,  Florio,  Minsheu,  and  many  other  old  dictionaries, 
with  other  books  equally  desirable  but  not  necessary. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

ON    THE    TESTS    BY  WHICH    CHRONOLOGY   AND 
AUTHORSHIP  CAN  BE  DETERMINED. 

THESE  tests  are  made  up  of  two  distinct  classes,  External  and 
Internal.     The  External  tests  divide  into  :— 

1.  Direct. — These  consist  of, definite  and  positive  statements  made 
by  authorities  whose  veracity  and  ability  can  be  depended  on. 

2.  Indirect. — These  consist  of  deductions  made  from  direct  state 
ments  :  for  instance,  from  the  facts  that  certain  actors  were  engaged 
in  representing  a  play,  one  or  more  of  whom  joined  or  left  the 
company  for  which  it  was  written  at  a  given  date  ;  or,  that  the  play 
was  produced  at  a  theatre  of  known  name  at  which  the  company  to 
whom  the  play  belonged  only  acted  at  a  certain  time  ;  and  the  like. 

The  former  of  these  is  the  only  kind  of  direct  evidence  that  has 
hitherto  been  successfully  used.  The  latter  is  that  which  has  been 
of  the  greatest  service  to  me  in  correcting  erroneous  statements 
hitherto  admitted  as  accurate,  and  in  determining  the  dates  of  plays 
not  previously  chronologically  placed. 

Of  Internal  evidences  there  are  several  kinds,  namely  :— 

3.  Allusive. — It  is  not  uncommon  for  a  play  to  contain  allusions 
to  other  plays,  or  to  political,  theatrical,  or  other  public  matters 
whose  dates  are  known  from  other  sources.    This  evidence  is  usually 
more  valuable  by  way  of  confirmation  than  of  positive  determina 
tion.     It  must  be  carefully  watched  and  not  strained  too  far,  not 
only  because  such  allusions  are  ^often  imagined  to  exist  without 


CHRONOLOGY  AND  A  UTHORSHIP.  107 

sufficient   grounds,   but  also  because  the  custom  of  altering  and 
rewriting  plays  was  extremely  prevalent  in  the  Elizabethan  era. 

4.  Aesthetic. — Under  this  head  I  include  all  evidences  (usually- 
separated  into  several  branches)  that  depend  on  the  taste  or  capacity 
of  the  critic  who  uses  them,  such  as  the  estimate  hetforms  of  the  power 
of  the  writer  in  forming  a  plot  or  in  distinguishing  his  characters, 
or  the  knowledge  he  displays  of  human  nature,  or  the  general  poetic 
merit  of  the  work  examined.     Of  course  the  verdict  of  a  great  critic 
based  on  the  result  of  an  attentive  reading  is  of  value,  even  when 
no  grounds  are  alleged  ;  but  the  lamentable  mistakes  that  all  critics 
of  this  kind  have  fallen  into  should  make  us  very  careful  in  doing 
anything  more  than  making  their  decisions  the  ground  for  further 
investigation.     No  evidence  based  on  impressions  should  be  allowed 
to  overweigh  one  definite  fact,  any  more  than  evidence  to  character 
is  allowed  to  overweigh  positive  evidence  of  events  or  actions  in 
a  court  of  law. 

5.  Language. — So  far  as  mere  "style"  is  concerned,  this  in  some 
measure  falls  under  the  last  head,  and  is  liable  to  the  same  objections 
as  are   there   adduced.      The  practice   of   the   old  dramatists   of 
writing  plays  in  which  one  man  furnished  the  plot  and  another 
wrote  the  dialogue,  has  led  to  great  error  in  determinations  based  on 
this  ground.     But  so  far  as  the  use  of  peculiar  phrases,  unusual 
words,  and  above  all  of  idiotisms  or  specially  individual  grammatical 
forms,  is  concerned,  the  test  is  of  high  value,  and  has  not  been  at  all 
sufficiently  attended  to.     Among  such  forms,  not  only  the  use  of 
particular  affixes,  prepositions,  inflexions,  £c.  must  be  included,  but 
also  inversions  and  other  peculiarities  in  the  formation  and  arrange 
ment  of  sentences. 

6.  Metre. — This  is  the  most  valuable  of  all  internal  tests,  because 
in  it,  and  in  it  only,  can  quantitative  results  be  obtained.     This  has 
been   completely   overlooked  by  some,    who   seem   to   think  that 
results  may  be  grounded  on  the  number  of  times  that  an  author 
uses  a  certain  form  of   expression,  such  as  "for   to   go,"  for  in 
stance.     This  would  be  absurd.     It  is  impossible  to  determine  the 
number  of    times   that   such  an  expression  might  have  been  intro 
duced  in  a  play  of  (say)  3,000  lines,  and  therefore  it  is  impossible 


io8  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

to  say  how  often  he  has  preferred  this  mode  of  expression  to 
any  other.  But  in  a  play  of  3,000  lines  of  verse  every  line  must 
have  a  masculine  or  feminine  termination  ;  hence,  the  number  of 
feminine  terminations  gives  us  a  quantitative,  test.  In  like  manner 
every  line  must  rhyme  or  not  rhyme  with  the  line  next  to  it ;  every 
line  must  have  a  definite  number  of  beats  or  measures ;  rhyming 
passages  must  be  heroic,  or  alternate,  or  follow  some  other  definite 
system  :  in  all  these  cases  we  can  get  quantitative  positive  results. 
And  it  is  certain  that  these  results  do,  when  properly  used,  give 
true  and  important  consequences.  On  the,  other  hand,  such  tests  as 
the  so-called  weak-ending  test,  the  pause  test,  &c.,  which  partly 
depend  on  the  aesthetic  sense  of  the  critic  and  are  consequently 
indefinite  as  to  quantity,  can  only  be  depended  on  as  affording  a 
basis  for  subsequent  investigation.  The  great  need  for  any  critic 
who  attempts  to  use  these  tests  is  to  have  had  a  thorough  training  in 
the  Natural  Sciences,  especially  in  Mineralogy,  classificatory 
Botany,  and  above  all,  in  Chemical  Analysis.  The  methods  of  all 
these  sciences  are  applicable  to  this  kind  of  criticism,  which,  indeed, 
can  scarcely  be  understood  without  them. 

As  to  their  history,  it  will  suffice  here  to  say  that  Malone  used 
them  as  qualitative  tests  only ;  that  Mr.  Spedding  applied  the 
female  ending  test  to  the  play  of  Henry  VIII.  quantitatively  ;  that 
Professor  Hertzberg  counted  the  female  endings  in  some  of  the 
plays  of  Shakespeare  but  failed  in  obtaining  any  satisfactoiy  results 
from  them  ;  that  I  reduced  the  theory  of  such  tests  to  a  system, 
established  the  canons  for  their  use,  assigned  special  distinctive  tests 
to  each  of  the  Elizabethan  dramatists  and  worked  out  the  results 
for  the  whole  of  their  plays.  I  have  also  applied  the  same  kind  of 
tests  to  some  of  the  Greek  dramatists  and  obtained  satisfactory 
results  for  JEschylus  and  Sophocles  ;  while  in  the  case  of  Homer,  I 
find  that  language  tests  are  conclusive  as  to  the  existence  of  an 
Achilleis  completed  afterwards  by  the  author  of  the  Odyssey  into 
the  present  form  of  the  Iliad.  My  results  (independently  worked 
out)  on  this  author  agree  in  most  points  with  those  of  Professor 
Geddes  ;  but  Books  XIII.— XV.,  XVII.  do  not  form  part  of  my 
Achilleis. 

I  have  been  thus  explicit  on  this  kind  of  test,  because  it  is  not  as 
yet  at  all  generally^understood,  and  because  I  attach  to  it  the  highest 


CHRONOLOGY  AND  AUTHORSHIP.  109 

importance.  As  in  the  Second  Part. of  this  book  several  instances 
of  its  application  occur,  I  need  give  no  further  detail  here ;  but 
I  must  specially  notice  the  extremely  careful  manner  in  which  the 
weak-ending  test  has  been  applied  to  Shakespeare  by  Professor 
Ingram.  Although  I  do  not  agree  with  him  as  to  its  value  in  chro- 
nologising  the  plays  of  the  Fourth  Period  (for  the  reasons  given 
above),  yet  to  him  is  due  the  pointing  out  its  perfection  as  a  dis 
criminating  test  between  the  plays  of  the  Third  Period  and  the 
Fourth  when  used  as  a  class  test ;  and  his  steady,  careful  work,  and 
entirely  courteous  treatment  of  those  who  differ  from  him,  make  his 
Essay  a  model  to  be  imitated  by  critics  on  this  subject. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 
ON  EMENDATION  OF  THE  TEXT. 

THE  text  of  Shakespeare  has  been  made  to  so  great  an  extent  the 
pretext  for  ingenious  persons  to  display  their  cleverness  by  rewriting, 
altering,  inserting,  omitting,  and  otherwise  tampering  with  the  old 
editions,  and  on  the  other  hand  the  old  copies  are  in  many  places 
so  undoubtedly  incorrect,  that  it  seems  desirable  to  attempt  to  lay 
down  here  a  few  general  principles  as  to  the  limits  within  which  it 
is  permissible  to  propose  any  alteration  of  the  text  as  originally  pub 
lished  ;  at  present  the  general  system  of  editors  seems  to  be  to  alter 
not  only  everything  they  do  not  understand,  but  also  everything 
that  they  think  could  be  written  better.  The  following  canons 
would  exclude  two-thirds  of  the  emendations  that  have  been 
proposed. 

I.  That  no  emendation  however  plausible  can  be  admitted,  un 
less  either  the  passage  as  it  stands  is  inexplicably  absurd,  or  in 
direct  violation  of  the  author's  metrical  system.  Thus  the  well- 
known  passage,  "his  nose  was  as  sharp  as  a  pen  and  a  table  of 
green  fields,"  was  absolute  nonsense  and  required  emendation  ;  and 
the  lines 

"They  say  she  hath  abjured  the  sight 
And  company  of  men.     O  that  I  served  that  lady !  " 

are  so  palpably  unmetrical  that  they  could  not  have  been  so  written 
by  Shakespeare.  Hence  the  readings  "a'  babbled"  "company 
and  sight "  were  rightly  proposed  by  Theobald  and  Steevens,  and 
adopted  by  all  the  best  editors.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are 
hundreds  of  instances  in  which  Pope  and  Steevens-  endeavoured  to 
reduce  Shakespeare's  free  metre  to  regular  Iambic  five-foot  lines  ; 
and  numerous  alterations  by  such  critics  as  Warburton,  who 


ON  EMENDATION  OF  THE  TEXT.  in 

evidently  thought  he   could  improve  his   author,    are  absolutely 
unjustifiable. 

2.  No  emendation  can  be  admitted  unless  the  mode  in  which 
the  reading  of  the  old  editions  originated  from  it  can   be  clearly 
Explained.      This    point    seems    almost    entirely    disregarded  by 
editors. 

3.  The  character  of  the  copy  under  consideration,  as  shown  by 
the  known  or  admitted  errors  in  other  parts  of  it,  must  be  taken  into 
account.     Thus  an  emendation  which  would  be  easily  admissible  in 
the  Quarto  Edition  of  Lear,  could  not  be  allowed  in  a  play  of  Ben 
Jonson's,  if  it  depended  for  its  justification  on  similarity  of  sound 
with  the  printed  edition.     The  former  being  a  surreptitious  copy 
carelessly  printed,  the  latter  seen  through  the  press  by  the  author 
himself. 

4.  The  most  usual  errors  arise  from  these  causes  : — 

a.  Errors  in  Writing: — Every  one  who  writes  much  and  thinks 
rapidly  knows  how  often  he  omits  or  repeats  words  in  his  writing  ; 
these  errors  are  usually  corrected  in  modern  times  in  subsequent  re 
vision  by  the  author,  or  by  the  reader  for  the   press.       In   older 
times   dramatic   authors   were   often   careless  in   this  matter,    and 
readers  for  the  press  did  not  exist. 

b.  Errors  in  Reading: — These  arise  from  the  setter-up  of  the  type 
not  being  clever  in  deciphering  MSS.,  or  from  want  of  clearness  in 
the  author's  handwriting  ;  both  fruitful  causes  of  error.     In  the  case 
of  Shakespeare,  every  instance  of  certain  emendation  ought  to  be 
tabulated  and  the  cause  of  the  corruption  assigned. 

c.  Errors  of  Hearing: — These   occur  when    "copy"   has  been 
taken  down  from  dictation  :  sometimes  an  author  dictates  his  work 
originally, — but  more  frequent  cases  arise  from  the  production  of 
surreptitious  editions  derived  from  notes  taken  in  shorthand  at  the 
theatre  or  from  recitations  of  actors  in  private. 

d.  Errors  of  Printing  : — These  arise  from  the  type  being  sorted 
into  wrong    compartments  of  the   compositor's  case,  or  from  the 
compositor  dipping  his  hand  into  the  wrong  compartment  to  take 
out  a  type,  or  from  his  eye  being  caught  by  a  wrong  word  (especially 
where  the  same  word  occurs  twice  or  oftener  near  together)  ;  these 
causes  give  rise  to   such   misprints  as  b  for  c  (compartments  for 


iii  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

these  letters  being  in  close  proximity) ;  to  such  errors  as  r,  c,  t;  a, 
e;  C,  G ;  &c.,  being  substituted  for  each  other  (similarity  of  type 
leading  to  wrong  sorting)  ;  to  omissions  and  repetitions  from  the 
eye  catching  the  first  of  two  like  words,  or  conversely,  and  so  on. 

e.  Errors  of  Correction : — These  are  caused  either  by  the  author's 
not  clearly  pointing  out  to  the  printer  alterations  in  "copy,"  whether 
made  on  MS.  or  on  a  previous  edition,  or  by  the  printer  not  under 
standing  the  directions  given  to  him.  This  kind  of  error  has  scarcely 
been  noticed  heretofore. 

/.  Errors  of  partial  Alteration: — These  arise  from  an  author's 
writing  a  second  part  of  a  sentence  on  a  plan  different  from  that  on 
which  he  originally  began  it,  and  forgetting  to  alter  the  first  part 
to  correspond.  These  occur  most  often  through  the  exigences  of 
rhyme.  They  were  pointed  out  by  me  in  the  Provincial  Magazine, 
article  "Shelley,"  1857. 

g.  The  players  often  inserted  oaths,  obscene  jests,  &c.,  at  their 
will :  sometimes  these  got  into  the  text,  especially  in  surreptitious 
copies. 

h.  Errors  of  Accident  /—These  cannot  be  classified.  Under  this 
head  I  should  place  accidental  destruction  of  part  of  MSS.  from  any 
cause ;  obliteration  of  words  or  lines  ;  falling  out  of  a  type  ;  and  all 
the  numerous  conceivable  occasions  of  error  which,  occurring  only 
rarely,  are  not  deserving  of  special  notice. 

5.  The  errors  resulting  from  these  causes  are— 

A.  Errors  of  omission. 

B.  „  ,,  insertion. 

C.  „  ,,  transposition. 
-D.  „  „  substitution. 
E.  „  ,,  corruption. 
&•  ,,  „  repetition. 

It  would  be  inconsistent  with  our  plan  to  go  into  this  question  in 
greater  detail :  but  any  error  not  falling  under  one  of  the  heads  in 
(5),  not  traceable  to  one  of  the  causes  in  (4),  not  corrigible  in 
accordance  with  (i)  (2)  (3),  ought  not  to  be  assumed  to  exist.  The 
curse  of  modem  editing  is  unnecessary  emendation. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 
ON  THE  ACTORS  OF  THE  ELIZABETHAN  PLAYS. 

IT  is  not  part  of  our  scheme  to  give  details  of  the  lives  of  these  men. 
The  Variorum  Shakspeare  and  Collier's  History  of  Dramatic 
Literature  are  the  great  storehouses  of  facts  on  that  subject,  and 
they  are  easily  accessible ;  but  as  hitherto  tabulated  lists  of  the 
several  companies  arranged  in  chronological  order  have  never  been 
published,  such  lists  are  here  appended.  They  are  of  the  highest 
value  for  determining  dates  in  many  instances,  and  have  been  far  too 
much  neglected  for  that  purpose.  The  tables  here  given  are  derived 
— the  first  nine  from  the  old  editions  of  such  plays  as  have  lists  of 
actors  prefixed,  and  from  the  Varioritm  Shakspeare^  vol.  ii. ;  the 
last  four  from  the  (old)  Shakspearian  Society  papers  vols.  i.  and  iv. 
The  arrangement  of  the  tables  is  self-explanatory. 

i.   Chamberlain's  (King's)  Company  1594 — 1619 
ii.  King's  „         1619 — 1642 

iii.   Prince's  „         1598—1615 

iv.  Queen's  (Revels)  „         1622 — 1639 

v.  Revels  Children  „         1609 — 1613. 

The  rest  are  single  lists,  requiring  no  parallel  columns.  Of  course 
the  sign  —  opposite  an  actor's  name  and  under  the  title  of  a  play, 
&c.,  indicates  his  forming  one  of  the  company  of  that  date.  The 
Roman  numerals  in  the  last  column  indicate  that  the  actor's  name 
to  which  they  are  opposite  will  be  found  also  in  the  table  indicated 
by  the  numeral.  All  the  actors  given  in  the  Folio  Shakespeare  list 
are  indicated  by  their  having  the  date  of  their  death  or  a  (?)  in  a 
special  column  in  Table  I. 

8 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


§ 

6 

ffi 

rt 

.'•" 

c 
£ 

K 

o 

| 

G 

a 

w 

j^ 

c 

o 

1 

O 

5 

•" 

i.  —  KING'S 

I 

> 

i 

c 
rt 

Z 

C 

*0 

'5 

'J 

^ 

u 

TJ 

See  also 

(Chamberlain's.  ) 

i: 

V 

G 

>> 
U 

3 

s 

£ 

§ 

•j 

3 

's 

V 

c 

•£ 

d 

1 

1 

"3 

> 

3 

Table 

0 

3 

"rt 

J 

*^r 

_rt 

X 

•£ 

u 

> 

"C' 

j 

u 

W 

w 

rjq 

~ 

vS 

rc 

CJ 

_rt 

a 

"rt 

1 

3 

| 

! 

'5 

rt 

^ 

S 

* 

3 

g> 

0 

0 

^ 

m 

0 

3 

£ 

i? 

« 

o 

"2 

"S 

"S 

^M 

3 

Belt,  T  

Goodall,  T  



_ 

Allen,  Edw  

_ 

? 

. 

XI. 

Duke,  Jno.  

JL 



Beeston,  Chr.  ... 

vi.    x. 

Sinkler  

Bryan,  Geo  
Pope,  Thos  
Phillips,  Aug.... 
Kempe,  Wil  

- 

v 

" 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

1598 
1603 
1605 

1606 

Armui,  Rob  







Sly,  Wil  





_ 







__ 

1612 

Cook,  Alex  
Shakespeare,  W. 
Cowley,  Ric  
Burbage,  Ric.... 

_ 

— 

- 

- 

= 

• 

" 

16x4 
1616 
1619 

v. 

Hemings,  Jno... 
Condell,  Hen.... 

— 

9 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1619 
1630 

Gough,  Rob  

1  f 

Ostler,  Wil  

^ 

viii. 

Tooley,  Nic  
Pallant,  Ric  

[ 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1623 

Lowin,  Jno  
Underwood,  Jno 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1658 

Eccleston,  Wil.  . 
Rice,  Jho  
Robinson,  Ric... 
Pollard,  Tho  



— 



- 

— 

— 

— 

1624 
1629 
1629 
'1650 

viii. 
.    v. 

Sharp,  Ric  

Thomson,  Jno... 

Field,  Nat  
Holcome,  Tho.  . 

- 

- 

1641 

v.,  viii. 

Benfield,  Rob... 
Taylor,  Jos  
Gilburn,  Sam.... 

- 

- 

— 

'1650 
1653 

v. 

v.,  vi.,  xii. 

Cross,  Sam  
Shank,  Jno  

'  1600 
1650 

iii. 

ACTORS  OF  THE  ELIZABETHAN  PLAYS.        115 


; 

i'C 

, 

j 

j 

1  .2 

1 

T3 

| 

1 

£ 

o 
> 

rt 

s 
c 

ii.  —  KING'S,      "o 

5        -Q 

:  rt 

.    in 
B     » 

O   «3 

J 

be 

o 

C 
J 

: 

i 

c 

rt 

5! 

*o 

j 

3 

a 

V 

jj 

»_  * 

fc 

c 

3 

0) 

2 

J 

See  also 
Table 

! 

j 

ll 

3  -2 

r.    "»• 

1 

rt 
V 

to 

i 
S 

2'.w 

rt  IS 

2 

C. 

B 

1 

| 

o\ 

1 

§ 

Q 

"5 

1 

1 

5 

II 

vg 

vS 

D 

*£ 

3 

1 

0 

1 

1 

Tooley,  Ric  — 
Lowin,  Jno  — 



_  _ 













_ 

_ 

__ 

_ 



i. 

i. 

Eccleston,  Wil.  .  — 





_ 



i. 

Underwood,  Jno  — 



-    _ 

_ 

— 

— 

— 

_ 

i. 

Rice,  Jno  

— 





i. 

Pollard,  Tho  

— 

— 

— 

— 





— 

_ 

— 

_ 

— 

i. 

Sharp,  Ric  — 

— 

_  _ 



— 



— 

- 

— 

_ 

i. 

Thomson,  Jno— 
Robinson,  Ric.. 

— 

~_ 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

I 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

i. 

Holcome,  Tho...  — 
Benfield   Rob 

— 

i. 

- 

i. 

i. 

Shank,  Jno  

_ 





_ 

_ 

Birch,  Geo  

_  — 

_  



— 

Home,  Jas  



— 



Rowley,  Wil  

— 



iii.,  xii. 

Penn,  Wil  

— 

_ 

_ 

— 

— 

V. 

Swanston.Eliard 



_ 



— 

— 

— 

vi. 

H  amerton,  Step. 

— 

Trigg.Wil  



— 

— 

Gough,  Alex  

— 

Honeyman,  Jno. 

— 

— 

— 

Pallant,  Ric  



Patrick,  Wil.  .... 

_ 



_ 

Greville,  Curtis.. 



vii. 

Smith,  Ant  







Vernon,  Geo  





Hobbes,  Tho.  ... 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Baxter,  Ric  



?  viii. 

Horton,  Edw  .. 

Clerk.  Hugh..... 



iv. 

Bird,  Theo.  (= 

— 

iv. 

T.  Bourne.... 

Allen,  Wil  

— 

£~a 


u6 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


in  1—  PRINCE'S  (Admiral's.) 

1 

1  Tamar  Cham. 

1 

•o 
c 

rt 

1 

1  Shoemaker's 
Holiday,  1600.  ] 

1603  ?  List. 

n3 
I 

ui 

vS 

See  also 
Table 

Heywood,  Tho  
Hearne,  Tho  
Munday,  Ant  
Spencer,  Gab  

__ 







— 

Will,  (boy)  
Rowley,  Tho  

~~ 

_ 

XI. 

Brown,  Edw  
Gill's  boy  

- 

XI. 

,   _ 

George  

— 

. 

_ 

±J  -nYS 

?  viii. 

v 



Wilson       

__ 

9 

Shaw    Rob  



9 

vii. 

Singer,  John  
Allen    Ric                     

— 

— 

— 

v. 

Shank   Jno  



j, 

vii. 

Stratford   Wil            

Pryone,  Ric.  (?  =  R.  Pryce)  
Colbrand   Edw  

— 

Parr  Wil                        

Cartwright  Wil  

j 

vii. 

,  Wil.  (Bird)    

Rowley,  Wil  

— 

11,  Xll. 

ACTORS  OF  THE  ELIZABETHAN  PLAYS.         117 


1 

1 

I 

_« 

£ 

. 

"a 

.^ 

• 

M 

1 

« 

t 

1 

u" 

vS 

5 

^ 

I 

£ 

iv.—  QUEEN'S, 

£c. 

cs 

'5. 

'd 

^r 

.£ 

O> 

JJ 

v.  —  REVELS 
(Children.) 

H 

3 
t/j 

= 

O1 

'o 

x 

— 

^ 

$ 

"2 

3 

OS 

« 

CJ 

bj 

.•2 

•c 

•a 

H 

M. 

^ 

^ 

H 

i/T 

r- 

G 

V-H 

rt 

c 

s 

c 

£ 

4-t 

° 

> 

V 

"C 
> 

1) 

'-& 

-o 

1 

c 

c 

•a 

'5 

| 

I 

•« 

X 

Pi 

^ 

'•** 

I 

A 

w 

W 

^ 

£ 

w 

Worth,  Ellis  

ix. 

Cook,  Alex  

Basse,  Tho  
Cumber,  Jno.... 
Blaney,  Jno  
Robins[on],  Wil 

- 

— 

V. 
V. 

Cary,  Gilb  

Atawell,  Hugh. 
Smith    John  
Barksted.  Wil... 

- 

- 

Perkins,  Ric  

_^ 

Penn   Wi 

•• 

Sumner,  Jno.  ... 

_ 



~ 



Allen,  Rich  





iii. 

Bowyer,  Mich.. 
Reynolds,  Wil.. 



— 

— 

— 

Blaney,  Jno  
Field,  Nat  

— 

IV. 

i. 

Allen,  Wil  



Benfield    Rob... 

Shakerly,  Edw. 
Rogers,  Edw.... 

_ 

Taylor,  Jos  
Read,  Emm  

- 

— 

''•' 

Bourne,  Theo... 





Basse,  Tho  





iv. 

Sherlock,  Wil... 

• 

Turner,  Ant  
Wilbraham.Wil. 

~ 

~ 

— 

- 

- 

vi. 

Young,  Jno  



Dobson,  Jno  



Clerk    Hugh.... 

Pass,  Jno  
Read,  Tim  

— 

Axel,  Rob  

Goat  

Hatfield,  Geo... 



Fenn,  Ezek  



1 

T&ckscn  •*•••*•  ft 

~ 

ii3  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

vi. — PHCENIX  COMPANY,  1622. 
Lady  Elizabeth's. 

Beeston,  Christopher  (Queen's  1624;  see  i.,  x.) 

More,  Joseph 

Swanston,  Hilliard  (see  ii.) 

Cane,  Andrew  (see  vii.,  ix.) 

Greville,  Curtis  (see  vii.) 

Sherlock,  William  (see  iv.) 

Turner,  Anthony  (see  iv.) 

Taylor,  Joseph  (see  ii.) 
Blagrave  (King's,  1629). 

The  two  last  names  are  not  in  the  list  of  1622  ;  I  take  them  from 
M  alone. 

vii. — FORTUNE  COMPANY,  1622, 
Palsgrave's. 

Grace,  Francis  (see  iii.) 
Massey,  Charles  (see  iii. ) 
Price,  Richard  (see  iii.) 
Fowler,  Richard  (see  ix. ) 
Cane,  Andrew  (see  vi.,  ix.) 
Greville,  Curtis  (see  ii.,  vi. ) 

VIIL— CYNTHIA'S  REVELS,  1600 ;  AND  POETASTER,  1601. 
Chapel  Children. 

Field,  Nathaniel  (see  i.) 

Pavy,  Salathiel  (died  young) 

Day,  Thomas 

Underwood,  John  (see  ii.) 

Baxter,  Robert  (1600  only  ;  see  ii.) 

Frost,  John  (1600  only) 

Ostler,  William  (see  i. ) 

Martin,  John  (?see  iii.) 


ACTORS  OF  THE  ELIZABETHAN  PLA  VS.  '      119 

ix. — HOLLAND'S  LEAGUER,  1633. 
Prince  Charles'  (II.)  Company. 

Brown,  William 

Worth,  Ellis  (see  iv.) 

Keyne,  Andrew  (see  vi. ,  vii. ) 

Smith,  Matthew 

Sneller,  James 

Gradwell,  Henry 

Bond,  Thomas 

Fowler,  Richard  (see  vii.) 

May,  Edward 

Huyt,  Robert 

Stafford,  Robert 

Godwin,  Richard 

Wright,  John 

Touch,  Richard 

Saville,  Arthur 

Mannery,  Samuel 

x. — QUEEN'S  COMPANY,     609.' 

Greene,  Thomas 

Beeston,  Christopher  (see  i.,  vi.) 

Heywood,  Thomas 

Pallant,  Richard  (see  i.) 

Swinnerton,  Thomas 

Duke,  John 

Hault,  James 

Beeston,  Robert 

xi. — WORCESTER'S  COMPANY,  1586. 

Browne,  Robert  (see  iii. } 
Tunstall,  James 
Allen,  Edward  (see  i.) 


120  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Harrison  William 
Cooke,  Thomas 
Johns,  Richard 
Browne,  Edward  (see  iii.) 
Andrews,  Richard. 


xii.— SERVANTS  OF  THE  DUKE  OF  YORK  AND  ROTHSAY. 
(Afterwards  Charles  I.)  1610. 

Garland,  John 

Rowley,  William  (see  ii.,  iii.) 

Hobbes,  Thomas 

Dawes,  Robert 

Taylor,  Joseph  (see  i.,  vi.) 

Newton,  John 

Reason,  Gilbert. 

XIIL — CURTAIN  COMPANY,  1582. 

Wilkinson,  Thomas 
Wilkins,  Thomas 
Medley,  Robert 
Hicks,  Richard 
Lanman,  Henry 
Manne,  Robert 

Dowle,  Isaac,  1580 
Stoddard,  Thomas,  1582 
Ainsworth,  John  (died)  1582 
Bent,  Richard,  1583 
Tarleton,  Richard  (died)  1588 

]  Humphrey  (died)  1592 
Burbage,  Cuthbert,  1597 
Cowley,  Richard,  1597 
Burbage,  Richard  (died)  1619 
Wilkins,  George,  (died)  1613. 


PART     II. 


CHAPTER  I. 

ON  METRICAL    TESTS   AS   APPLIED    TO   DRAMATIC 
POETRY. 

PART  I. — SHAKESPEARE. 

(Read  before  the  New  Shakspere  Society,  March  13,  1874.) 

THIS  subject  has  scarcely  at  all,  and  never  sytematically,  been  hither 
to  worked  out.  The  portion  of  the  dramatic  literature  of  England 
to  which  I  have  directed  my  attention  in  this  respect  has  been  that 
which  is  usually  called  the  Elizabethan  period,  and  comprises  the 
following  authors  :  Greene,  Peele,  Marlowe,  Ben  Jonson,  Beaumont 
and  Fletcher,  Webster,  Chapman,  Massinger,  Ford,  Marston,  and 
Shakespeare,  in  their  entire  works  ;  and  portions  of  Dekker,  Middle- 
ton,  Rowley,  Heywood,  and  others.  My  first  two  papers  are  de 
signed  to  gather  together  the  results  I  have  arrived  at  with  regard 
to  some  of  the  greatest  of  these,  viz.  Massinger,  Beaumont,  Fletcher, 
and  especially  Shakespeare.  But  before  entering  into  details  it  may 
be  advisable,  as .  the  subject  is  new  to  so  many,  to  endeavour  to 
clearly  point  out  the  nature  of  these  tests  and  their  object.  First, 
then,  as  to  their  nature.  Malone  and  others  had  long  ago  been 
struck  by  the  difference  of  style  in  Shakespeare's  plays  produced  at 
different  periods,  and  had  in  a  vague  sort  of  way  used  one  of 
these  tests  at  any  rate  as  an  indication  of  chronological  arrange 
ment.  I  allude  to  the  frequency  of  rhyming  lines.  Bathurst  has 


122  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

since  also  indicated  a  metrical  test  for  the  same  purpose,  viz.  the 
unstopped  line.  But  the  vague  manner  in  which  the  rhyme  test 
has  been  used  may  be  shown  by  one  example :  Hallam  in  his 
Literature  of  Europe  says,  "  Were  I  to  judge  by  interns  1 
evidence,  I  should  be  inclined  to  place  this  play"  (i.e.,  Romeo 
and  Juliet}  "before  the  Midsummer  Night's  Dream:"  and  then 
alleges,  among  other  reasons  as  a  justification  of  this  inference, 
"the  great  frequency  of  rhymes"  in  Romeo  and  Juliet.  Now,  in 
fact,  there  are,  as  will  be  seen  on  reference  to  the  table,  p.  16, 
nearly  twice  as  many  rhymes  in  Midsummer  Nights  Dream  :  so 
that  the  argument  actually  tells  the  other  way.  I  cannot  speak 
definitely  as  to  the  stopped-line  test,  not  having  worked  it  out ;  but 
Bathurst's  arrangement  is  evidently  based  only  on  the  general 
impression  derived  from  reading  the  plays, — which  in  the  case  of 
plays  that  were  not  written  all  at  one  time,  or  in  one  style,  is  sure 
to  be  deceptive, — and  to  be  founded  chiefly  on  the  last  acts. 
Beyond  this  I  know  of  nothing  that  has  been  done  of  a  similar 
kind,  except  that  in  his  examination  of  Henry  VIII.  Mr.  Spedding 
tabulated  the  number  of  double  endings  in  that  play.1  This,  how 
ever,  is  the  great  step  we  have  to  take  ;  our  analysis,  which  has 
hitherto  been  qualitative,  must  become  quantitative  ;  we  must  cease 
to  be  empirical,  and  become  scientific  :  in  criticism  as  in  other 
matters,  the  test  that  decides  between  science  and  empiricism  is 
this  :  ' '  Can  you  say,  not  only  of  what  kind,  but  how  much  ?  If 
you  cannot  weLjh,  measure,  number  your  results,  however  you  may 
be  convinced  yourself,  you  must  not  hope  to  convince  others,  or 
claim  the  position  of  an  investigator  ;  you  are  merely  a  guesser,  a 
propounder  of  hypotheses." 

But  is  not  metre  too  delicate  a  thing  to  be  put  in  the  balance 
or  crucible  in  this  way?  Is  it  possible  so  to  examine  the  outer 
form  in  which  genius  has  clothed  itself,  as  to  obtain  any  definite 
results?  Do  not  the  great  men  of  any  particular  time  resemble 
each  other?  Do  not  the  lesser  men  imitate  them?  Can  we 
always  distinguish  a  poet  from  his  imitators  ?  and  is  not  any  trick 
of  melody  easily  acquired  and  reproduced  ?  There  is  something 
in  these  objections,  but  not  much.  We  can  always  distinguish  the 

1  Professor  Ingram  has  since  done  an  admirable  paper  on  Shakespeare's  weak 
endings  (September  1875). 


METRICAL  TESTS.  123 

great  men  from  each  other  by  sufficient  care  ;  and  imitators,  who 
have  no  style  of  their  own,  seldom  survive  their  own  time  to  trouble 
us.  If  they  do,  their  intrinsic  worthlessness  shows  up  in  some  way 
or  other,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  course  of  these  inquiries. 

In  order  to  show,  however,  the  kind  of  work  before  us  more 
distinctly,  I  have  taken  a  piece  of  Dryden's  "  All  for  Love"  (10 
lines),  and  rewritten  it,  as  far  as  metre  (and  metre  only)  is  con 
cerned,  in  the  styles  of  Fletcher,  Beaumont,  Massinger,  Greene,  and 
Rowley.  The  original  runs  thus  : — 

"  I  know  thy  meaning. 
But  I  have  lost  my  reason,  have  disgraced 
The  name  of  soldier  with  inglorious  ease  : 
In  the  full  vintage  of  my  flowing  honors 
Sat  still  and  saw  it  prest  by  other  hands  : 
Fortune  came  smiling  to  my  youth  and  wooed  it, 
And  purple  greatness  met  my  ripen'd  years. 
When  first  I  came  to  empire,  I  was  borne 
On  tides  of  people  crowding  to  my  triumphs ; 
The  wish  of  nations  and  the  willing  world 
Received  me  as  its  pledge  of  future  peace." 

Fletchers  Metre. 

' '  I  know  thy  meaning  : 

But  I  have  lost  my  reason,  and  have  disgraced  me  : 
Inglorious  ease  has  shamed  my  name  of  soldier. 
In  the  full  vintage  of  my  flowing  honors 
I  saw  it  prest  by  others  hands  and  sat  still  : 
Fortune  came  smiling  to  my  youth  and  wooed  it, 
My  ripend  years  were  clothed  in  purple  greatness  : 
When  I  first  came  to  empire  I  was  borne  forth 
On  tides  of  people  crowding  to  my  triumphs, 
The  wish  of  nations  and  the  willing  world 
As  a  dear  pledge  of  its  future  peace  received  me. "  r 

1   "What  should  I  do  there  then?    You  are  brave  captains, 
Most  valiant  men :  go  up  yourselves :  use  virtue : 
See  what  will  come  on't :  pray  the  gentleman 
To  come  down  and  be  taken  ?    Ye  all  know  him  : 
I  think  ye've  felt  him  too :  there  ye  shall  find  him. 


I24  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Beaumonfs. 

"  I  understand  ;  but  now  my  reason  's  lost : 
My  soldier's  name  by  ease  of  little  boast 
I  have  disgraced  ;  yea,  while  my  honor  flowed 
In  vintage  of  the  fullest,  sat  and  saw 
It  prest  by  other  hands  :  then  to  my  youth 
Came  Fortune,  wooing  smilingly,  and  with 
Th'  imperial  purple  met  my  ripened  years  : 
When  first  I  came  to  empire,  on  full  tide 
Of  populous  crowds  to  triumph  I  did  ride, 
The  wish  of  nations  :  all  men  willingly 
Received  me  as  a  pledge  of  peace  to  be. "  ' 

But  Beaumont's  style  is  often  more  like  Mas?inger's. 

Massinger's. 

"  I  know  thy  meaning,  but  have  lost  my  sense, 
And  have  disgraced  the  name  of  soldier  with 
Inglorious  ease ;  in  the  full  vintage  of 
My  flowing  honors  I  sat  still,  and  saw 
It  prest  by  other  hands  :  and  smiling  Fortune 
Came  to  my  youth  and  wooed  it.     Purple  greatness 
Met  my  ripe  years.     When  first  I  came  to  empire, 
On  tides  of  crowding  people  I  was  borne 
To  triumph.     Yet  the  wish  of  nations  and 

His  sword  by  his  side:  plumes  of  a  pound  weight  by  him, 
Will  make  your  chops  ake :  you'll  find  it  a  more  labour 
To  win  him  living  than  climbing  of  a  crdw's  nest. " 

FLETCHER,  Bonduca.  v.  2. 

1  "  Insatiate  Julius,  when  his  victories 

Had  run  o'er  half  the  world,  had  he  met  her, 
There  he  had  stopt  the  legend  of  his  deeds, 
Laid  by  his  arms,  been  overcome  himself, 
And  let  her  vanquish  th'  other  half :  and  fame 
Made  beauteous  Dorigen  the  greater  name. 
Shall  I  thus  fall?    I  will  not :  no,  my  tears 
Cast  in  my  heart  shall  quench  these  lawless  fires  ; 
He  conquers  best,  conquers  his  lewd  desires." 

BUAUMONT,  Triumph  of  Honor,  Sc.  2. 


METRICAL  TESTS.  125 

The  willing  world  received  me  as  its  pledge 
Of  future  peace."  * 

Greene's. 

"  I  know  thy  sense  :  but  with  inglorious  ease 
I've  shamed  my  soldier 's  name  ;  my  reason's  fled. 
Erewhile  my  honor  flow'd  in  vintage  full : 
I  sat  and  saw  it  prest  by  other  hands  : 
Then  Fortune  came,  and  smiling  wooed  my  youth  : 
And  purple  greatness  met  my  ripen'd  years. 
And  I  was  borne,  when  first  I  came  to  reign,   ; 
Triumphant  on  the  tides  of  peopled  crowds  ; 
The  wish  of  many  a  race  ;  and  the  glad  world 
Received  me  as  its  pledge  of  future  peace."  * 

Rowley's  (at  his  worst,  doing  job-work). 

"  I  know  thy  meaning,  but  have  lost  reason  : 
I  have  disgraced  the  name  of  soldier 
With  inglorious  ease  :  in  the  full  vintage 
Of  flowing  honors,  I  sat  still  and  saw 
It  prest  by  other  hands.     Smiling  Fortune 

1  "  To  all  posterity  may  that  act  be  crowned 

With  a  deserved  applause,  or  branded  with 
The  mark  of  infamy!  stay  yet— ere  I  take 
This  seat  of  justice  or  engage  myself 
To  fight  for  you  abroad  or  to  reform 
Your  state  at  home,  swear  all  upon  my  sword, 
And  call  the  gods  of  Sicily  to  witness 
The  oath  you  take,  that  whatsoe'er  I  shall 
Propound  for  safety  of  your  commonwealth, 
Not  circumscribed  or  bound  in,  shall  by  you 
Be  willing!,,  obeyed." 

MASSINGER,  Bondtnan,  i.  3. 

2  "  Fair  queen  of  love,  thou  mistress  of  delight, 

Thou  gladsome  lamp,  that  wait'st  on  Phrebe's  train, 
Spreading  thy  kindness  through  the  jarring  orbs, 
That  in  their  union  praise  thy  lasting  powers  : 
Thou  that  hast  stayed  the  fiery  Phlegon's  course, 
And  made  the  coachman  of  the  glorious  wain 
To  droop  in  view  of  Daphne's  excellence, 
Fair  pride  of  morn,  sweet  beauty  of  the  even, 
Witness  Orlando's  faith  unto  his  love  !  " 

GRKENE,  0;-/<j ;.-,/,>. 


126  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Came  to  my  youth  and  wooed  it,  and  purple 
Greatness  met  my  ripen'd  years.     When  at  first 
I  came  to  empire,  I  was  borne  on  tides 
Of  people  crowding  unto  my  triumphs  ; 
The  wish  of  nations  and  the  willing  world 
Received  me  as  its  pledge  of  future  peace. "  * 

This  hardly  seems  metre  at  all  :  but  it  has  its  own  law  ;  and  passages 
like  the  above  have  passed  with  some  editors  as  Fletcher's. 

These  examples  are  sufficient  to  show  what  variety  of  styles  may 
exist  in  blank  verse,  and  what  I  shall  prove  do  exist  in  the  authors 
named.  Moreover,  these  differences  can  be  tabulated  ;  the  number 
of  lines  with  double  endings  ;  the  number  of  rhyming  lines  ;  the 
number  of  lines  with  more  or  less  than  five  measures  can  be  stated. 
But  to  what  purpose  ?  If  we  learn  nothing  further  from  these 
tables,  they  are  useless.  There  are  two  ends  to  be  served  by  such 
lists.  If  an  author  has  distinctly  progressed  in  the  manipulation  of 
his  art,  if  he  has  different  manners  of  work  in  different  periods  of 
his  life,  such  tables  are  very  valuable  for  determining  the  chrono 
logical  order  of  his  productions.  This  is  the  main  use  which  the 
Director  of  our  New  Shakspere  Society  anticipated  from  the 
application  of  metrical  tests,  and  the  table  I  have  formed  for 
Shakespeare's  plays  will,  I  have  no  doubt,  be  useful  for  this  purpose. 
But  the  far  more  important  end  from  my  point  of  view  will  be  the 
determination  of  the  genuineness  of  the  works  traditionally  assigned 
to  a  writer.  These  metrical  tests  made  me  suspect  the  genuineness 
of  the  Taming  of  the  Shrew,  parts  of  Timon,  Pericles,  and  Henry 
VIII.,  when  I  was  not  aware  that  they  had  ever  been  suspected  ;  I 
hope  the  evidence  I  have  gathered  on  these,  and  on  Henry  VI. , 
will  be  some  furtherance  to  the  objects  of  our  Society.  These, 
however,  must  be  treated  in  separate  papers  ; — this  one  will,  I  fear, 
be  too  long  as  it  is  j — and  so  must  the  examination  of  Fletcher  and 

«   "Ant.  But  is  it  possible  that  two  faces 

Should  be  so  twinn'd  in  form,  complexion, 
Figure,  aspect,  that  neither  wen  nor  mole, 
The  table  of  the  brow,  the  eyes  lustre, 
The  lips  cherry,  neither  the  blush  nor  smile 
Should  give  the  one  distinction  from  the  other? 
Does  Nature  work  in  moulds? 
Mart.  Altogether! 

ROWLEY,  Maid  a'  Mill,  ii.  2. 


METRICAL  TESTS.  127 

Massinger,  which  I  regard  as  far  the  most  valuable  result  of  my 
work.  I  will  only  say  here  that  I  have  discoverd  distinctive  tests 
of  their  manners;  that  some  of  the  plays  have  been  quite  wrongly 
assigned  by  every  editor  ;  that  Massinger's  hand  is  distinct  in  about 
nine  of  Fletcher's  plays  ;  and  that  if  the  results  of  the  examination  of 
Shakespeare's  text  be  unsatisfatory  to  any  one  (as  I  doubt  not  they 
will  be  to  some,  the  problem  is  so  very  complicated),  at  any  rate 
let  them  suspend  their  judgment  as  to  the  value  of  metrical  tests 
generally,  till  they  see  how  simply  that  easier  problem  of  Fletcher's 
authorship  is  disposed  of  by  them.  I  was  of  opinion  myself  that 
this  question  should  have  been  discussed  first ;  but  our  Director  over 
ruled  me,  partly,  no  doubt,  to  get  the  Shakespeare  table  in  print  as 
a  guide  for  future  workers  in  the  same  track. 

I  must  now  ask  you  to  refer  to  the  table  constantly,  so  as  to 
verify  the  following  conclusions.  I  suppose  that  no  one  will  doubt 
on  other  than  metrical  grounds,  that  Love's  Labour 's  Lost  is  one  of 
the  earliest,  and  Winter's  Tale  one  of  the  .latest,  of  Shakespeare's 
comedies.  Let  us,  then,  for  simplicity  begin  by  comparing  these 
two.  In  Love's  Labour 's  Lost  we  find  more  than  1,000  rhyming 
lines  in  the  dialogue  ;  in  Winter's  Tale  none.  In  Love's  Labour's 
Lost  only  seven  lines  with  double  endings  ;  in  Winter's  Tale  639. 
I  \\  Love's  Labour's  Lost  few  incomplete  lines;  in  Winter's  Tale  many. 
In  Love's  Labour 's  Lost  one  Alexandrine  ;  in  Winter  s  Tale  16.  In 
general  terms,  then,  we  may  expect  to  find,  that  in  Shakespeare's 
development  he  gradually  dropped  the  rhymed  dialogue,  adopted 
double  endings,  Alexandrines,  and  broken  lines  ;  and  this  is  undoubt 
edly  true.  On  reference  to  the  table,  however,  you  will  see  that  a 
chronology  founded  on  any  of  the  last  three  tests  would  lead  to  the 
strangest  results,  e.g.  the  double  endings  would  place  Richard  III. 
very  late  indeed,  and  John  very  early  ;  the  two  parts  of  Henry  IV. 
would  be  widely  separated.  The  Alexandrine  test  would  make 
Measure  for  Measure  the  latest  of  the  comedies  ;  the  test  by  broken 
lines  would  make  Lear  far  the  latest  of  all  the  plays ;  the  rhyme 
test — and  the  rhyme  test  only  of  all  that  I  have  as  yet  applied 
— is  of  use  per  se  for  determining  the  chronological  arrangement 
of  Shakespeare's  works.  It  is,  however,  worth  while  to  print 
the  table  in  extenso,  as  it  will  be  valuable  for  reference  for  many 
other  purposes,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  questions  of  the  genuineness 


128  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

of  disputed  plays.  In  using  it,  however,  we  have  another  important 
consideration  to  allow  for.  We  know  from  the  title-pages  to  the 
Quartos  that  Shakespeare  was  in  the  habit  of  making  additions  to  his 
works,  and  we  have  strong  reason  to  believe  that  in  some  instances, 
viz.  in  the  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor,  Romeo  and  Juliet,  and  Hamlet, 
we  are  in  possession  of  early  sketches  of  these  plays,  or  at  any  rate 
of  the  acting  versions  of  these  early  sketches.  We  also  find  that  in 
Lear,  Hamlet,  and  Richard  III.,  we  have  two  versions,  one  of 
which  differs  much  from  the  other  in  quantity  ;  and  in  these  as  well 
as  in  Othello,  2  Henry  IV.,  and  Troylus  and  Cressida,  there  are  many 
various  readings  that  affect  such  a  table.  Now  my  table  is  made 
from  the  Globe  edition,  as  being  the  most  convenient  portable  one 
with  numbered  lines  ;  but  any  conclusions  drawn  from  it  will  be 
subject  to  some  discount  on  account  of  these  variations.  The  chro 
nological  scheme,  then,  that  I  shall  propose,  is  only  provisional, 
and  to  serve  as  a  basis  for  more  accurate  investigation  of  each  play, 
based  on  all  its  editions.  Such  an  investigation  I  am  making  as  to 
Romeo  and  Juliet,  and  the  results  will,  I  hope,  be  given  in  the  edition 
to  be  edited  for  our  Society  by  Mr.  P.  A.  Daniel.  We  must  also 
consider,  when  we  have  Quartos,  the  relative  accuracy  of  the  printers, 
and  I  may  refer  you  to  my  table  of  these  editions  as  useful  on  this 
point.  The  following,  then,  are  the  results,  as  I  interpret  them,  to 
be  drawn  from  my  metrical  table  as  to  the  succession  of  Shakespeare's 
plays  :— 

1.  Henry  VI.  and  Titus  Andronicus  are  not  Shakespeare's  in  the 
main  bulk ;  they  are  productions  of  what  I  may  call  the  Lodge,  Peele, 
and  Marlowe  School.     I  shall  not  go  into  the  evidence  here,  as  I 
shall  give  it  in  full  in  separate  papers. 

2.  Henry    VIII.  and    The    Two    Noble    Kinsmen   are    partly 
Fletcher's,  as  has  been  shown  by  others. 

3.  The  Taming  of  the  Shrew,  Pericles,  and  Timon  of  Athens  are 
also  only  partly  Shakespeare's  :    these  plays  I  shall  also  discuss 
separately.1     The  plays  fall  distinctly  into  four  periods  : — 

i  Since  writing  this  I  have  investigated  Romeo  and  Juliet,  and  Richard  I II., 
and  found  reason  to  believe  that  they  are  founded  on  earlier  plays  by  George 
Peele. 


METRICAL  TESTS.  129 

I.  The  Rhyming  period,  including  Love's  Labour 's  Lost,  Mid 
summer  Night's  Dream,  Comedy  of  Errors,  Romeo  and  Juliet,  and 
Richard  II. 

II.  The  History  period,  including    Two   Gentlemen  of   Verona, 
Merchant  of  Venice,    Twelfth.  Night,   As   You  like  It,    Taming  of 
the  Shrew,    Merry    Wives  of  Windsor,  Much  Ado  about  Nothing, 
Richard  III ,  John,  Henry  IV.,  Henry  V.,  and  Julius  Ccssar. 

III.  The  Tragedy  period,   including   Macbeth,  Hamlet,  Othello, 
Lear,  Timon,  Troylus  and  Cressida  (which  was  partly  written  much 
earlier),  Measure  for  Measure,  and  probably  AWs    Well  that  Ends 
Well,  which  is   certainly   a  revision  of  an  earlier  play,  probably 
Love's  Labour  's  Won. 

IV.  The  Fual  period,  including  Pericles,  Cymbeline,  Coriolanus, 
Anthony  and  Cleopatra,    Henry  VIII. ,   Two  Noble  Kinsmen,    The 
Tempest,  and  Winters  Tale. 


I3o  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

s  a  a    S  a  a     I    I  ||  1 1  f  fill  1 1 1    I* 

^—CT^   .  <u     '          •§"         ,0  feo^Ml°7~o'^ 


d 


r"  j'o      « c  e  «« t.^  >»  s  ?  J  P*O  8  3'  s  • « 

!_«a   *^5           drtS  £<""5c^J2'u!3<'>'£:£r 

§H   S  #<g    fc    2   ^   £  8=:  "3    c    >,  .1   £ 

rt      „  N    S  §  H  A  O^-KI-.  <  u  H  5: 


?  :  =r  n  i  <  i 

c     _     •->   K   j*  g     u 

2               O    j     CM   g  «  I      ? 

£  M          o    .-6..J2W  •§«  «       |     g 

y        r                  £        P^>MH-"'->'S6  (ou        »    *"        S^T3           T3        ^ 

H-,-;-J^  I^M  511  *M 

^>  >-i 

"O      u» 


d      H  2=^>  c  v.  ;^    r  ^  >  «  5c3  &  « «.  §:«•   :- 

>,a    3»  «    S    a  3  §  S    -2 

&  h^j-it'Ml  2 

a^      &5"sMs"s^   ^^al^^^^aHH^  6 


S    •"  5    •      *Sf  *T*  .5  a          wO;*1^      ^tflO'.-^P 

£^-S§  °^  s  11     .s  >  g  i  -^  •§  |  5£.s    ^ 

99  (2*^a     «       5  ,*  ^l2^^H<y-:35,9rt'.>     -^ 


S    ^  .  I  •>    S  • 

1       1    I   I      d       ?r  b     .-S      §    S 

6 


L 


!£  d    {  4  J%  CJ      J.6 

^^"  1  dsi}s  -  ^  4 1s' Js"  1    jfl  i  1  g  3 
>*  il^j  °  <  3  ¥j?>  JJ    1^  &  I  *  % 


>   g.-s  |  §2jg2   s    ^     ^  l^§   S  sl°=  1  '2  -S   1^-S 
.SKSHH,     S^^ffi^ffiS  ^CJH^  3  o  S  W  a 


<y     • 

f-H      ^ 


« 


f  ^   ^«-  >rf-fjp4 

g'H  §M  .-§  i^.fi^  g  ?-s's^i3"§s  I  &r  ^ 

>H   ^   WJ   W     ^   «     tf        «     W   CJ    2  H   S   OJ^H   U   O   CJ   ^ 


METRICAL  TESTS.  131 

I  give  above,  in  parallel  columns,  the  scheme  proposed,  and  those 
of  Delius,  Malone,  Drake,  and  Chalmers.  I  quote  these  three 
latter  from  Allibone.  Before  remarking  on  the  scheme,  I  desire  to 
add  that  it  is  by  no  means  final  :  I  have  myself  several  other  tests 
in  course  of  application,  and  I  have  no  doubt  other  workers  in  the 
same  field  will  find  additional  ones,  now  that  the  subject  is  venti 
lated.  As  a  provisional  scheme,  however,  1  place  some  confidence 
in  it,  for  this  reason  :  that,  although  it  is  based  solely  on  the  metrical 
table,  it  in  no  instance  contradicts  any  external  evidence.  It  also 
distributes  the  work  much  more  equally  than  the  other  schemes  ; 
never  requiring  more  than  two  plays  to  be  written  in  one  year. 

Remarks  on  the  Position  of  certain  Plays  in  this  List : — 

First  Period. — These  five  plays  are  distinctly  marked  off  as  a 
separate  class  by  the  vast  preponderance  of  rhyming  lines.       Love's 
Labour  's  Lost  has  more  than  1000,  Midsummer  Nighfs  Dream  850, 
Romeo  and  Juliet  650,    Richard  II.    530,  and  Comedy  of  Errors 
(though  a  very  short  play)  380,  which  is  equivalent  to  6co  in  a  play  of 
ordinary  length.      Now,  no  other  of  Shakespeare's  plays  reaches  to 
the  number  of  200  rhyming  lines  ;  and  as  the  battle  between  rhymed 
and  unrhymed  compositions  was  fierce  at  this  time,  I  feel  that  there 
is  no  dcubt  that  Shakespeare  joined  the  advocates  of  rhyme  at  first, 
and  gradually  learned  to  feel  the  superi  >rity  of  blank  verse  ;  at  any 
rate,  the  difference  between  these  Five  Plays  of   the  first  period,  as 
to  amount  of  rhyme,  is  too  great,    in  my  opinion,   to  admit   any 
other  play,  however  inferior,  to  be  ranked  with  them.     I  know  how 
strongly  some  think  that  the   Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona  must  have 
preceded   Midsummer   Nighfs  Drram,    because    this   latter  is  so 
beautiful  a  "work."     I  do  not  say  a  "play  ;"  for  I  agree  with  N. 
Drake  and  others  in  the  view  that  the  Tiuo  Gentlemen  is  superior  as 
an  acting  piece,  however  inferior  as  a  poem.     I  must,   for  want  of 
space,  refer  to  Drake's  Treatise  for  a  full  statement  of  his  arguments. 
J''or  myself,  I  find  it  impossible  to  believe  that  the    Two  Gentlemen 
was  not  written  some  two  years  before  as  the  Merchant  of  Venice > 
which  is  so  like  it  in  metrical  handling  ;  and  equally  impossible  to 
regard  the  Midsummer  Nighfs  Dream  as  a  production  of  any  but 
the  earliest  period,  when  fancy  was  strong,   and  the  sense  of  the 
prose  realities  of  life  comparatively  weak.     Note  also  that  the  three 

9-2 


I32  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

comedies  in  this  first  period  all  observe  the  unity  of  time,  no  action 
extending  to  the  second  day,  and  that  they  are  all  similar  in  their 
nature,  turning  on  the  solution,  as  it  were,  of  an  embroilment  pro 
duced  under  circumstances  barely  or  only  hypothetically  possible. 
The  almost  total  absence  of  Alexandrines  in  Romeo  and  Juliet,  and 
their  absolute  absence  in  the  three  comedies  (the  one  instance  in 
Lome's  Labour 's  Lost  I  think  is  corrupt),  is  another  very  striking 
difference  from  all  the  other  plays.  In  Richard  11,,  however,  these 
Alexandrines  are  admitted,  and  this  is  therefore  the  play  in  which 
this,  the  frst  sign  of  the  Second  Period,  begins  to  show  itself.  In 
other  respects  this  play  is,  to  my  thinking,  far  removed  from  John 
or  Henry  IV,  It  bears  something  of  the  same  relation  to  Mar 
lowe's  Edward  II.  that  the  Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona  does  to  the 
Taming  of  a  Shrew,  or  Richard  III.  to  Henry  VI.  Shakespeare  in 
it  seems  not  to  move  with  the  same  freedom  that  he  does  in  his  later 
plavs,  and  the  whole  work  has  an  artificial  air.  Another  point  that 
distinctly  separates  the  earlier  from  the  later  historic  plays  is.  the 
absence  of  prose  :  Richard  II.  and  John  have  none,  Richard  III. 
only  one  bit,  but  that  reads  like,  and  I  believe  is,  a  portion  of 
Peek's  work  ;  and  of  these  earlier  plays  Richard  III,  is  the  only 
one  that  is  absolutely  devoid  of  Comedy.  This  also  marks  its 
position. 

Second  Period. — The  positions  I  have  given  to  the  plays  in  this 
period  so  nearly  coincide  with  those  generally  assigned  (except  as  to 
the  Two  Gentleman  of  Verona,  which  has  already  been  noticed)  that 
no  special  remarks  seem  needed.  One  general  characteristic  of 
the  period  is  the  diminution  of  the  number  of  rhyming  lines,  which - 
number  about  100  to  200  in  this  period  for  a  full  play.  Much  Ado 
and  Merry  Wives  have  a  smaller  number,  but  are  almost  entirely  in 
prose,  being  quite  exceptional  in  this  respect.  Also  the  number  of 
short  lines  is  considerably  increased,  though  not  nearly  so  much  as 
in  the  next  period.  Alexandrines  are  admitted  from  5  to  20  in  a 
play  (but  in  Richard  II.  there  are  33?)  ;  the  number  of  feminine 
endings  increases,  but  not  in  any  regular  progression ,  and  doggerel 
lines,  stanzas,  sonnets,  and  alternate  rhymes  (which  abound  in  the 
earliest  plays)  gradually  die  out :  there  are  not  many  in  any  plays 
of  this  period. 


METRICAL   TESTS.  133 

Third  Period. — In  this  a  few  words  may  be  needed  on  the 
position  I  have  assigned  to  Macbeth.  I  agree  with  Clark  and 
Wright  that  this  play  has  been  much  altered  since  its  first  composi 
tion,  and  has  now  many  interpolations  in  it;  in  Act  iv.  Scene 
3  —  the  passage  on  the  touching  for  the  evil  —  the  marks  of 
interpolation  are  palpable  ;  1.  159  follows  metrically  on  1.  139, 

" 'Tis  hard  to  reconcile — See  who  comes  here" 

making  a  perfect  line  :  the  Doctor  (unknown  elsewhere  in  the  play) 
is  dragged  in  for  the  express  purpose  of  introducing  the  subject ;  and 
"Comes  the  king  forth,  I  pray  you,"  1.  140,  is  inconsistent  with 
"Come,  go  we  to  the  king,"  1.  236. 

In  this  Third  Period  the  metre  is  much  freer  ;  prose  and  verse  are 
intermingled  in  the  same  scene  ;  tri-syllabic  feet  abound  ;  short  lines 
are  very  abundant  ;  double  endings  very  greatly  multiplied  ;  Alex 
andrines  not  composed  of  two  lines  of  six  syllables  are  introduced  ; 
ihe  Alexandrines  with  regular  caesura  increase  greatly  ;  the  number 
of  rhyming  lines  gradually  falls  off.  The  plays  are  difficult  to  test, 
as  to  metre,  in  this  period  ;  partly  from  the  similarity  of  style  in  the 
great  plays,  partly  from  the  great  variations  in  the  Quarto  and  Folio 
texts.  I  am,  however,  applying  further  tests,  which  I  hope  will  be 
decisive. 

Fourth  Period. — In  this  the  rhymes  fall  off  rapidly,  and  in  the 
Comedies  actually  disappear ;  the  metre  becomes  more  regular  and 
less  impassioned,1  and  the  general  impression  left  by  these  later 
works  is,  that  they  were  produced  at  greater  leisure,  and  more  care 
fully  polished.  The  dates  given  by  metrical  considerations  agree 
too  nearly  with  those  assigned  on  external  evidence  to  need  com 
ment. 

And  here  I  think  I  may  fairly  point  out  how  singular  the  coinci 
dence  of  the  order  here  given  is  with  that  assigned  by  the  best 
English  critics  on  external  evidence.  This  order  was  first  made 
out  from  the  rhyme-test  only  ;  and,  except  in  the  instances  of  plays 
which  are  not  undoubtedly  authentic  or  written  at  two  different 
periods,  I  have  not  changed  the  relative  position  of  one  since  I  first 

1  Professor  Ingram  has  since  shown  that  "  weak  endings"  are  the  characteristic 
rest  of  the  Fourth  Period. 


i;>4  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

sent  this  list  to  Messrs.  Claik  and  Wright  in  1870.  At  that  time  I 
had  not  read  any  treatise  on  the  external  evidences,  and  was  not 
even  aware  that  any  attempt  had  been  made  to  classify  the  plays 
into  periods.  I  own  this  with  some  shame  ;  but  claim,  at  the  same 
time,  some  additional  confidence  in  the  results  of  the  rhythmical 
tests.  It  may  seem  to  some  ludicrous  to  speak  even  of  the 
application  of  mathematics  to  such  a  subject  ;  but  it  will  be  seen 
from  the  table  that  the  plays  assigned  to  the  period  ending  in  1598 
by  the  rhyme  test,  exactly  agree  with  those  in  Meres 's  list  (setting 
aside  questions  of  genuineness).  Now,  the  doctrine  of  chances 
gives  us  as  the  odds  against  these  10  plays  being  selected  out  of 
the  30  which  are  undoubtedly  more  or  less  Shakespeare's,  more  than 
20  m  llions  to  one  :  in  exact  numbers,  one  chance  only  out  of 
20,030,010  would  hit  on  this  exact  selection  of  plays.  To  a  mind 
accustomed  to  the  exact  sciences,  this  fact  alone  is  conclusive  as 
to  the  immense  value  of  the  rhyme  test. 

I  might  go  into  detail  concerning  the  reasons  for  the  position  of 
each  particular  play  ;  but  I  think  it  better  to  consider  all  special 
matter  separately.  The  table  itself  is  subjoined.  It  is  only 
necessary  here  to  add  a  caution  as  to  the  amount  of  subjectivity 
to  be  expected  in  such  a  table  as  this  ;  there  must  be  some  until 
the  laws  of  metre  are  more  definitely  laid  down  than  they  are  at 
present.  (I.)  As  to  the  rhymes,  it  is  sometimes  doubtful  if  a  rhyme 
is  intentional  or  accidental.  In  such  cases  the  rhyme  is  counted  in 
this  table.  (II.)  It  is  sometimes  doubtful  if  one  line  of  six  feet,  or 
two  lines,  one  of  five  feet,  and  one  of  one,  be  intended.  In  the 
following  table  the  line  is,  if  possible,  reckoned  as  divided.  (III.) 
In  some  instances,  lines  of  four  feet  in  the  Globe  Edition  can  be 
avoided  by  re-arranging  the  line*  without  altering  the  reading  ;  this 
has  been  sparingly  done  in  Pericles,  and  in  cases  where  the  arrange, 
ment  of  the  lines  is  made  by  modern  editors  without  authority  in 
the  original  texts.  (IV.)  All  Alexandrines  proper  with  caesura  at  the 
end  of  the  third  foot  are  counted  in  the  six-measure  lines,  and  not 
as  two  lines  of  three  measures,  except  where,  as  in  The  Two 
Gentlemen  of  Verona  and  Kichard  III.,  lines  of  six  syllables  are 
repeated  many  times  together.  In  the  larger  tables  from  which 
this  one  is  abridged,  all  peculiarities  are  noted  for  each  scene  ; 
perhaps  when  our  text  is  settled,  it  may  be  worth  while  to  print  such 


METRICAL  TESTS. 


135 


tables  in  full  for  each  play.  The  four  last  lines  in  the  table  are 
from  the  imperfect  editons  in  the  first  Quartos. 

With  regard  to  the  position  of  the  Taming  of  the  Shrew  as 
assigned  by  me,  as  also  indeed  for  Timon,  Pericles,  and  Heriry  VI., 
I  must  ask  for  absolute  forbearance,  until  my  special  papers  on  these 
plays  are  read.  I  hope  the  first-mentioned  of  these  plays  especially 
will  not  appear  so  misplaced  as  it  must  do  now  after  the  paper 
devoted  to  it  has  been  studied. 

N.B.  The  columns  headed  Alternates,  Sonnets,  and  Doggerel are 
included  in  the  totals  summed  in  the  column  headed  Rhymes,  5 
measures,  which  gives  the  number  of  all  rhyming  lines  not  shorter 
than  the  ordinary  blank-verse  line. 


METRICAL  TABLE  OF  SHAKESPEARE'S  PLAYS. 


Play. 

k 

r 

1 

c 

rt 

3 

Rhymes,  1 
5  Measures. 

li 

in 

bt 

j 

If 

Alternates. 

Sonnets. 

Doggerel. 

u 

i 

2  Measures  | 

3  Measures.  | 

|  4  Measures.  | 

6  Measures. 

I—PLAYS  OF  FIRST  (RHYMING)  PERIOD. 

Love's  L.  Lost... 

2789)1086 

579 

1028!  54 

32 

9|236 

71    194 

4(12 

13 

-1     i 

Midsum.  N.  D... 

2251 

441 

878 

73i  138 

63 

29158 

— 

—    5 

3 

Com.  of  Errors- 

1770 

240 

1150 

137    64 

— 

109 

3    8 

9 

_    _ 

Rom,  and  Juliet.. 
Richard  II  

3002 
2644 

405 

2III 
2TO7 

5371  — 

- 

»8   62 

148!    12 

28 

10  20 
n|i7 

16 
26 

?2>    6 

II.  -HISTORIES  OF  SECOND  PERIOD. 

Richard  III  (3599 
King  John  12553 
i  Henry  IV  13170 
2  Henry  IV  3437 

?55 

1464 
1860 

3374 
2403 
1622 
1417 

170 

ISO 

84 
74 

7 

—  1   570 
—      54 
-      60 
15    203 

12 

4 
[Pi 

t«!6 

41.] 

20 

T 

16 
3 

39 
9 
17 

13 
4 
16 
7 

23 

4 
16 

16 

2. 

Henry  V    

,,20 

tf 

16*78 

g 

Julius  Caesar  

jJ-tV  *-jj*- 

2440    165 

2241 

34    - 

369    -1  1- 

- 

14 

X3 
3i 

55 

4 
6 

Z3 

16 

III.-COMEDIES  OF  SECOND  PERIOD. 

Two  Gent.  ofV.. 
Merchant  of  Ven. 
Twelfth  Night... 

2705 
2684 

409 

673 
1741 

1510 
1896 
763 

116 
93 

I2O 

—    15    203 
34  !  9    297 
—   6o|  152 

16 
4 

- 

18     8|is 
4  !  8:16 

—         8  21 

32 
22 
23 

8      5 

2      I4 

5,  10 

As  you  Like  it... 
Merry  Wives  
Much  Ado,  &c... 

2904  1  68  1 
3018  2703 
2823  2106 

925 
227 
643 

40 

130 
18 

97    211 
19      32 
16    129 

10 

[Pi? 

22 

tol  3 

2 

1033 

M 

I 

4 

5 
3 
4 

136 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


Play. 


I"i 

3w 


IV.— COMEDIES  OF  THIRD  PERIOD. 

All's  Well |298i|i4S3l"34|  280!     2  ',12    223]     8  I   14  I  —  I   7'sij   31) 

Measure  for  M... 128091113411574!     73'  22  I  6    338:  —  I  —  |  —  11029;  66) 


V.— TRAGEDIES  OF  THIRD  PERIOD. 


Troylus  &  Cres... 

Macbeth 

Hamlet 

Othello 

King  Lear 


3423  11862025!  196!  —    16,  441!  —  |  —  |  — 
1993    15811588 
3924  1208  2490 
3324!   54i|2672 
3298.   903:2238; 


6211- 


43 

x8x29  — |  399;  —  I  —  I  —  8;28  43  8  18 
8x  —  6o|  508  [86  I.  in  play]  20  53  5511147 
86|  —  ;zs!  6461  —  I  —  I  —  xo,66|  71113:73 
74!  —  '83'  567!  —  I  —  I  —  |i8  341116:22150 


VI.— PLAYS  OF  FOURTH  PERIOD. 


Cymbeline 

Ccriolanus 

Anthony  and  C.. 

Tempest 

Winter's  Tale.... 


5448!  638:2585!   107]  — 
3392    8292521)     49    — 
3964    25527611     42 
2068    458  1458'       - 
2750!  844,1825 


726  [84  Lin  vision] 
708 

013 


[54!.  masq.] 
[32  1.  chor.] 


8'is]  3ili8]42 

333  ?6|t942 

14  38  84  31  16 

2  16  47    5  ii 

8,141  I9;I3  ID 


VII.— PLAYS  IN  WHICH  SHAKESPEARE  WAS  NOT  SOLE 
AUTHOR. 


Taming  of  hhrew  12671!  5i6'i97i 

Henry  VIII '9754  ?  67:2613 

Two  Noble  Kins.  2734    1792468 


169  15 
x6  — 
54  — 


-I  26o!.-.l.-|   49 
.  in  Prol. 


121195 
331079 


Epilogue]. 


Pericles 2386    4181436;  225    89  > —    120  [2?2.1.Gower] 

TimonofA ^2358,  5961560,  184    18  ; —   257,    — |  —  |  — 


4(18 

2  1C, 

9I£ 
1741. 

15,26 


22  23i    5 

18  332 
46:17  5 
592618 

543037 


VIII.-FIRST  SKETCHES  IN  EARLY  QUARTOS. 


Rom.  and  Juliet.  2066!  26111451 

Hamlet  |2o68|  5091462 

Merry  Wives '[13951207    ~  ° 

Henry  V 


Titus  Andron.  . 

1  Henry  VI 

2  Henry  VI 

3  Henry  VI 

Contention 


True  Tragedy  ... 


—    I— I       92 j     28  ]  —  |    —        7I26|    30  2 1 !92 

43  I— I  209  [36  1.  in  play]    i^5\  763730 


METRICAL  TESTS. 


137 


POSTSCRIPT  TO  PAPER  I. 

Table  of  Ratios  of  rhyme-lines  in  rhyme-scenes  to  blank-verse  lines 
in  each  play  : — (First  approximation.) 


COMEDIES. 


Love's  Labour 's  Lost 
Mid.  Night's  Dream 
Comedy  of  Errors 


j  1st  Plot  of  1 2th  Night 
\  2  Gent,  of  Ver. 

Merchant  of  Venice 
(  Much  Ado,  &c. 
(  Merry  Wives  (Quarto) 
/As  You  Like  It 


Compln.  of  1 2th  Night.    Prose. 
Com.  of  Tarn,  of  the  Shrew  20 


HISTORIES  AND  TRAGEDIES. 
First  Period. 
•6 


I 

Richard  II. 

4 

3 

Romeo  and  Juliet 

4'3 

Second 

Period. 

7'5 

1st  Plot  of  Troy  1.  &  Cres. 

3-4 

II 

2nd  do.         do. 

13-6 

Richard  III, 

* 

16 

John 

16 

21 

ii  Henry  IV. 

19 

2  Henry  IV. 

19 

19 

Henry  V. 

19 

Julius  Caesar 

* 

Third  Period. 


Measure  for  Measure  22 
All's  Well,  &c.  (rewrit. )  22 
Merry  Wives  (Folio)  22 


Hamlet 
Othello 
Lear 

Macbeth  ? 
Part  of  Timon 


about     30 
30 

30 
* 
t> 

33 


Compln.  of  Troyl.  &  Cres.  54^5 


Fourth  Period. 

Cymbeline  about     30     I  Coriolanus  60 

Part  of  Pericles  32     j  Anthony  and  Cleopatra       66 


138  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

COMEDIES.  HISTORIES   AND   TRAGEDIES. 

Fifth  Period. 

(  Tempest  729          j  Part  of  Two  1^.  Kinsmen  281 

|  Winter's  Tale  infinity      {  Part  of  Henry  VIII.       infinity. 

The  above  table  is  corrected  up  to  the  date  of  my  present  in 
vestigations  (Sept.  1875)  from  one  published  in  The  Academy  by  me 
(March  28,  1874). 

My  reasons  for  all  alterations  will  be  given  in  my  special  paper  on 
each  play.  They  are  based  chiefly  on  a  more  scientific  application  of 
the  rhyme-test,  aided  by  the  "weak-ending  test,  the  middle  syllable  test, 
and  above  all  by  the  ccesura  test,  which  is  next  in  importance  to  the 
rhyme-test ;  and  has  helped  me  much  in  making  a  different  division  of 
the  plays  in  some  instances.  Cymbeline,  however,  was  misplaced 
through  another  cause,  a  numerical  blunder;  which  I  have  now  cor 
rected.  As  these  investigations  extend,  this  table  will  require  further 
correction. 


CHAPTER  II. 

ON  THE  QUARTO  EDITIONS  OF  SHAKESPEARE'S 
WORKS. 

A  LIST  of  these  has  long  been  wanted,  drawn  up  in  such  a  way  as 
to  afford  ready  reference  to  students  in  search  of  such  information  as 
can  be  obtained  from  the  title-pages  of  the  various  volumes.  These 
have  often  been  reprinted  ;  but  such  a  table  as  is  annexed  will  give 
readier  access  to  the  inquirer,  and  also,  from  the  manner  of  its 
arrangement,  supply  information  that  would  otherwise  require  many 
separate  documents. 

F,xplanalio)i  of  the  Table. — In  the  extreme  left-hand  and  right- 
hand  columns  are  placed  the  dates  of  publication,  and  in  the  hori 
zontal  lines  between  these  the  names  of  the  works  published  in  those 
years,  as  well  as  the  names  of  the  printers  and  publishers ;  and  the 
symbols  (Q  I,  Q2,  &c. )  by  which  the  Cambridge  editors  refer  to 
each  edition.  The  works  are  divided  into  four  groups,  partly  with 
a  view  to  avoid  the  straggling  arrangement  which  would  be  neces 
sary  \\ere  no  such  division  adopted  ;  partly  with  regard  to  certain 
peculiarities  in  each  group,  which  will  presently  be  pointed  out  in 
the  Notes.  The  first  of  these  groups  contains  poems  only,  viz.  Venus 
and  Adonh,  Lucrcece.,  and  the  Passionate  Pilgrim,  The  second  group 
contains  the  Sonnets,  Richard  77,  Richard  III.,  1st  and  2nd  Henry 
1 V. ,  and  Much  Ado  about  Nothing.  The  third  group  contains  three 
plays  originally  published  in  imperfect  editions,  Romeo  and  Juliet, 
Hamlet,  and  The  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor  ;  three  plays  that  differ 
much  from  the  Folios,  viz.  Troylus  and  Cressida,  Lear,  and  Othtilo  ; 
two  plays,  of  which  two  editions  each  were  published  originally  in 


I4o  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

the  same  year,  viz.  Midsummer  Nights  Dream  and  the  Merchant  of 
Venice ;  and  Shakespeare's  probably  earliest  play,  Love's  Labour's 
Lost.  In  the  fourth  group  are  placed  plays  more  or  less  spurious, 
viz.,  the  Quarto  Romeo  and  Juliet,  The  Contention  of  the  Houses  of 
York  and  Lancaster,  The  True  Tragedy  of  Richard  Duke  of  York, 
Henry  V.  (as  first  issued),  Pericles,  and  Titus  Andronicus.  The 
abbreviations  used  for  the  titles  of  these  plays,  &c.,  are  given  on 
p.  144,  and  it  is  hoped  will  require  no  further  explanation.  One  or 
two  other  signs  may  however  require  it,  e.g.  "Q_4f.  Q3,"  in  the 
second  column  for  each  group,  means  "  the  fourth  edition  published 
in  quarto,  which  edition  is  considered  by  the  Cambridge  editors  to 
have  been  printed  from  the  third  ; x  "  *Q,  means  "an  edition  without 
Shakespeare's  name  on  the  title  page ;"  +Q,  means  "the  edition  from 
which,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Cambridge  editors,  the  Folio  was 
printed  ;  "  J.  R[oberts]  means  that  J.  R.  is  printed  on  the  title-page, 
and  that  J.  R.  is  ascertained  from  the  entries  in  the  Stationers' 
books  or  other  reliable  evidence  to  mean  J.  Roberts.  There  is  no 
thing  else  in  the  table  that  requires  explanation.  Nor  is  it  necessary 
to  point  out  in  detail  its  use  for  showing  at  a  glance  the  successive 
editions  of  each  work,  the  dates  at  which  the  copyright  of  each 
changed  hands,  the  number  of  works  published  in  each  year,  the 
date  of  the  maximum  number  of  publications  (1598 — 1600),  the 
sudden  appearance  of  Shakespeare's  name  on  all  his  authentic  works 
in  1598  (except  the  edition  of  Romeo  and  Juliet  in  1609),  &c.  But 
in  the  Notes  will  be  found  some  additional  particulars  which  are  of 
interest. 

*  The  Ven.  &  Ad.  *Q  4  is  the  Isham  copy  found  at  Lamport  by  Mr.  Charles 
Edmonds,  and  edited  by  him.  It  was  not  discovered  till  after  the  Cambridge 
Shakespeare  was  published,  and  consequently  all  our  notation  will  have  to  be 
altered  in  a  future  edition.  The  1630  Ven.  and  Ad.  (now  in  the  Bodleian)  with 
title-page,  was  formerly  in  the  Ashmole  Museum,  but  I  have  not  seen  it. 
According  to  Edmonds  it  was  "printed  by  J.  H.,  and  are  to  be  sold  by  Francis 
Coules.  He  adds  that  it  is  different  from  our  Q  10,  which  is  in  the  Bodleian 
without  title,  but  catalogued  with  date  1630.— W.  ALDIS  WRIGHT. 

Mr.  Wright  has  consequently  altered  the  notation  in  the  table  to  that  to  be 
auopted  in  the  next  edition  of  the  Cambridge  Shakespeare.— F.  G.  F. 


QUARTO  EDITIONS  OF  SHAKESPEARE. 


141 


TABULAR  VIEW  OF  THE  QUARTO  EDITIONS  OF 
SHAKESPEARE'S  WORKS, 

FROM  1593  TO  1630  A.D. 


Supplementary  List  of  Quartos  from  1630  to  1652,  which 
not  conveniently  be  put  in  the  Table,  pp.    142-3. 


•iROUP.                 NAME   OF   PLAY. 

EDITION. 

PRINTER. 

PUBLISHER. 

f  1631  Love'sLabour'sLost 
IllJ     ?              Hamlet 
V  1631  Taming  of  Shrew 

Q2  from  Fi 
Q5  from  Q4 
Qi  from  Fi 

w.  s. 

do. 
do. 

J.  Smethwicke 
do. 
do. 

f  1632        i  Henry  TV. 
IlJ    1634         Richard  II. 
I     „         Richard  III. 

Q7  fromQ6 
Q5  from  F2 
Q8  from  Q; 

J.  Norton 
do. 
do. 

W.  Sheares  . 

IV.       1635            Pericles 

tQ6 

T.  Cotes 

I.       1636  Venus  and  Adonis 

*Qi3 

J.  H. 

F.  Coules. 

j    1637          Hamlet 
III.  C      „       Romeo  and  Juliet 

Q6  from  Qs 
Qs  from  Q4 

R.  Young 
do. 

J.  Smethwicke 
do. 

I     ,,      MerchantofVenice 

Q3  from  Q2 

M.  P. 

L.  Heyes 

II.       1639        i  Henry  IV. 

Q8  from  Q/ 

J.  Norton 

H.  Perry 

III.       1652  MerchantofVenice 

Q4  from  Q3 

W.  Leake 

142 


SHAKESPEARE  MA.VCAL. 


GROUP  I.— POEMS. 


GROUP  II. 


v!  Name 

Name 

S  S            Of         EDITION' 

PRINTER. 

PUBLISHER. 

of 

EDITION 

PRINTER. 

PUBLISHER. 

£|    Aork. 

Play- 

—  i 
1593  V  A. 

*Qto.  i 

R.  Field 

see  Note 



1594 

do 

Luc 

*Q2f.Qi 
*Qi 

do. 
do. 

do. 
J.  Harrison 

1595 

1596 

V.  A. 

*Q3f.Q2 

do. 

da 

1597 

R.IT. 

*QtO.   I 

V.  Simmes 

A.  Wise 

H.  Ill 

*Qi 

do. 

do. 

1598 

Luc- 

*Q2f.Qi 

P.  S[hort] 

do. 

1H-IV 
R.  II- 

*Qi 
Q2  f.  Qi 

P.  S[hort] 
V.  Simmes 

do. 
do. 

1599 

P.P. 
V-  A. 

*    Qf 

forW.  Jaggard 

W.  Leake 
do. 

R.  III. 
1H.1V. 

Q2  f.  Qi 
Q2  f.  Qi 

T.  Creede 
S.  Stafford] 

do. 
do. 

1600 

V  A- 

*Qsf  Q4 

J.  Hfarrison] 

J.  Harrison 

2H.IV 

Qi 

V.  Simmes 

A.  Wise  and  1 
W.  Aspley     1 

,, 

Luc- 

*Q3^-Q2 

do. 

do. 

•• 

M.A. 

tQi 

do. 

do. 

1602 

V-  A- 

*Q6fQ5 

W.  Leake 

R.  Ill- 

Q3  f-  Q2 

T.  Creede 

A.  Wise 

1603 

1604 

1H.IV 

Qs  f-  Q2 

V.  Simmes 

M.  Law 

160" 

R.  III. 

'  ^4.  f    O^ 

T.  Creede 

do. 

1607 

Luc. 

*Q4f.Q3 

N.  O[kes] 

J.  Harrison 

1608 

1H.IV 

Q4  f.  03 

do. 

„ 

R.  II. 

Qs  *•  Q2 

W.  W[aterson] 

do. 

1609 

Son- 

G.  Eld. 

J.  Wright  and! 
W.  Aspley    1 

1611 

1612 
1613 
1615 

P.P. 

Q* 

W.  Jaggard 

R.  Ill 
1H.IV 
R.  IL 

Qs  f  Q4 
tQ5f-Q4 
tQ4f.Q3 

T.  Creede 
W.  W[aterson] 

M.  Law 
do. 
do. 

1616 
1617 

vLul. 

Qs 

*Q8 

T.  S. 

R.  Jackson 
W.  B[arret] 

1619 

1620 

do- 

*Q9 

J.  P[arker] 

1622 

R.  III. 

Q6f.  Q5 

T.  Purfoot 

do. 

1604 

1627 

Inc. 

Q6f.  Q5 
*Qio 

J.  Bfenson] 
J.  Wreittoun 

R.  Jackson 

1H.IV 

Q6  f.  Q5 

do. 

do. 

1629 
1630 

do. 
do. 

*Qii? 

*Ql2 

do. 
J.H. 

F.  Coules. 

R.  in. 

Q7  f-  Q6 

J   Norton 

do. 

Q UA RTO  EDI TIONS  OF  SHA KESPEA RE.         143 


GROUP  III. 


GROUP  IV. 


Name 

I 

Name 

v  | 

of 

EDITION!      PRINTER. 

Pt-BLISHER. 

of 

EDITION 

PRINTER. 

PUBLISHER.      :  fc  ? 

1    Play. 

Play- 

=  ^ 

1 

"~ 

i 

?T.A. 

n.  e. 

J.  Danter 

!T593 

Con. 

*Qto.  i 

T.  Creede 

T.  Millington    1594 

T.  T. 

*Qi 

P.    S[hort] 

do.J            1  5  <,3 

E.  J- 

*Qiimp. 

J.  Danter. 

entered  for           f 
E.  White       I5' 

:  1597 

L.L. 

tQ  to  i 

W.W[aterson] 

C.  Burbie 

1598 

K.J. 

*Q2 

T.  Creede 

do- 

»S99 

M.D. 

tQ2 

J.  Roberts 

Con- 

*Q2f  Qij     V.  Simmes 

do. 

1600 

do. 

Qi 

T.  Fisher 

T.T. 

*Q2f.Q2  W.  W[aterson] 

do. 

n 

M.  V- 

tQa 

J.  Roberts 

L.  Heyes 

H.  V. 

*Qiimp. 

T.  Creede 

T.  MilHneton 
andT  Busbie 

„ 

do. 

Qi 

do. 

T.  A- 

*Qi 

J.  R[oberts] 

E.  White 

„ 

M  W- 
Ham. 

Qr.  imp. 
Qi 

T.  C[reede] 

A.  Johnson 

N.  Lfingl  and 
J.  Trundel! 

H.  V. 

*Q2f.Qi 

T.  Creede 

T.  Pavier 

1602 
1603 

do 

Q2 

J.  Roberts] 

N.  L  ing] 

1604 

do- 

Q3  f.  Q2 

do. 

do. 

16.35 

1607 

Lr. 

QiQ2 

N.   Butter 

H.  V- 

*Q3f.Q2 

T.  P[avier] 

i6c8 

R.J. 

t*Qs  f- 

O2 

J.  Smethwickc 

Per. 

QiQ2 

H.  Gosson 

1609 

T.  C- 

(bis) 

Qi 

G.  Eld. 

R.  Bonian  and 
H.  Whalley. 

Ham- 

Q4  f.  Q3 

J.  Smethwick- 

do- 

Q3f.  Q2 

S.  S[tafford] 

1611 

7H.J. 

Q4  f.  Q3 

do. 

T.  A. 

t*Q,,} 

E.  White 

,, 

1612 

1613 

1615 

1616 

1617 

M-W. 

Q2  f.  Qr 

A.  Johnson 

v.  C.) 
Per-  J 

Qs  f-  Q2 

Q4  f-  Q3 

T.  Pfavier] 

1619 

1620 

Oth- 

Qi 

N.  0[kes] 

T.  Walkley 

1624 

1629 

do- 

M.W. 

Q3Qr.'F, 

A.  M. 
T.  H. 

R.  Hawkins 
R.  Meighen 

Per- 

Q5  (inc.) 

J.  N[orton] 

R.  Bfirde] 

1630 

144 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


ABBREVIATIONS  USED  FOR  NAMES  OF  PLAYS,  &c., 
in  pp.    142-3. 


V.  A. 

Luc. 
P.  P. 
R.  II. 
R.  III. 

1  H.  IV. 

2  H.  IV. 
M.  A. 

Son. 
R.  J. 
L.  L. 
M.  D. 
M.  V. 
M.  W. 
Ham. 
Oth. 
Lr. 
T.  C. 
Con. 
T.  T. 
H.  V. 
Per. 
T.  A. 
W.  C. 


imp. 
inc. 
n.  e. 


Venus  and  Adonis. 
Lucreece. 

Passionate  Pilgrim. 
Richard  II. 
Richard  III. 
First  Part  of  Henry  IV. 
Second         do.         do. 
Much  Ado  about  Nothing. 
Sonnets. 

Romeo  and  Juliet. 
Love's  Labour  's  Lost. 
Midsummer  Night's  Dream. 
Merchant  of  Venice. 
Merry  Wives  of  Windsor. 
Hamlet. 
Othello. 
Lear. 

Troylus  and  Cressida. 
Contention  of  York  and  Lancaster. 
True  Tragedy  of  Duke  of  York. 
Henry  V. 
Pericles. 

Titus  Andronicus. 

Whole  Contention  of  York  and  Lan 
caster  including  Con.  and  T.  T. 

imperfect, 
incorrect, 
not  extant. 


;  Group  I. 


Group  II. 


Group  III. 


)  Group  IV. 


QUARTO  EDITIONS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  145 


NOTES  ON  THE  TABLE. 

Group  I. — The  edition  of  Venus  and  Adonis,  1593,  was  to  be  sold 
at  the  White  Greyhound,  St.  Paul's  Churchyard,  where  we  find, 
from  the  title-p3.ge  of  Lucrecce,  Q  I,  that  in  1594  J.  Harrison  was 
carrying  on  his  business  ;  in  1599,  however,  W.  Leake  is  in  pos 
session  of  the  Greyhound,  and  from  this  date  J.  Harrison's  books 
have  no  address.  In  1602  (cf.  Venus  and  Adonis,  Q  5),  W.  Leake 
had  given  up  the  Greyhound,  and  had  taken  a  new  shop  with  the 
sign  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (or  did  he  change  his  sign  only?). 

W.  Jaggard,  the  printer  of  the  Passionate  Pilgrim,  was  one  of  the 
proprietors  of  the  1st  Folio. 

The  entries  in  the  Stationers'  books  give  some  further  information. 
On  18  April,  1593,  the  Venus  and  Adonis  was  entered  by  R.  Field, 
and  was  not  assigned  to  J.  Harrison  till  25  June,  1594,  which  assign 
ment  is  also  entered :  the  dates  of  the  other  entries  are  by  W.  Leake, 
25  June,  1596;  W.  Barret,  16  February,  1616;  and  J.  Parker, 
8  March,  1619. 

Group  II, — M.  Law  evidently  became  possessor  of  A.  Wise's 
copyright  about  1594. 

W.  Aspley,  at  one  time  in  connection  with  A.  Wise,  was  one  of 
the  proprietors  of  the  1st  Folio. 

Group  III. — Arthur  Johnson's  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor  is  the 
imperfect  copy, 

Othello  and  Lear  differ  much  from  the  1st  Folio,  and  do  not 
come  from  the  same  source  as  it  does. 

J.  Roberts,  the  printer  of  The  Merchant  of  Venice  and  Midsummer 
Night's  Dream,  seems  to  have  been  given  to  piracy  and  invasion  of 
copyright. 

J.   Smethwicke  was  one  of  the  proprietors  of  the  ist  Folio. 

From  the  entries  in  the  Stationers'  books  we  can  trace  some  of 
the  copyrights.  On  iS  January,  1 601-2,  the  Merry  Wives  of 


146  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Windsor  was  transferred  from  T.  Busbie  to  A.  Johnson.  This  T. 
Busbie  was  partner  with  T.  Millington  in  the  spurious  copy  of 
Henry  V.,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  Merry  Wives,  Q  I,  was 
surreptitious.  It  had,  however,  Shakespeare's  name  on  the  title-page, 
and  has  remains  of  an  earlier  sketch  from  his  hand  ;  it  should 
perhaps  be  placed  in  the  fourth  group.  On  7  February,  1602-3, 
Troylus  and  Cressida  was  entered  by  Mr.  Roberts.  On  22  January, 
1606-7,  Nich.  Ling  entered,  with  consent  of  Mr.  Busbie,  Romeo  and 
Juliet,  Love's  Labour's  Lost,  and  The  Taming  of  a  Shrew  (viz.  the 
old  play  entered  by  P.  Short  in  1594)  ;  he  did  not  print  the 
two  former,  though  he  did  the  latter  ;  and  accordingly,  on  19 
November,  1607,  we  find  John  Smethwicke  enters  Hamlet  (the 
imperfect  sketch),  The  Taming-  of  a  Shrew,  Romeo  and  Juliet,  and 
Love's  Labour's  Lost,  al  of  which  had  belonged  to  Ling.  Smeth 
wicke  also  took  Ling's  house  of  business,  under  (the  dial  of)  St. 
Dunstan's,  Fleet  Street.  Smethwicke's  son  sold  Romeo  and  Juliet 
to  Flesher  in  1642. 

The  Lear,  published  by  N.  Butter,  was  entered  on  26  November, 
1607,  for  N.  Butter  and  T.  Busbie.  We  have  seen  that  Busbie  had 
to  do  with  the  spurious  Merry  Wives  ;  and  the  printing  of  the  Lear 
is  not  like  that  of  a  genuine  copy,  though  it  has  much  matter  not  in 
the  Folios. 

In  1619  Lawrence  Heyes  entered  The  Merchant  of  Venice,  but 
did  not  print  it  till  1637. 

Group  IV. — On  igth  April,  1602,  Millington's  copyrights  were 
sold  to  Pavier,  and  among  them  a  Titus  Andronicus,  which  the 
Cambridge  editors  think  to  be  the  one  entered  by  J.  Banter  in  1593. 
It  cannot  be  the  one  published  by  White,  as  he  issued  editions  in 
1600  and  in  161 1 ;  i.e.  both  before  and  after  the  transaction  between 
Millington  and  Pavier. 

All  the  publications  in  this  fourth  group  are  clearly  surrep 
titious. 

From  the  Stationers'  books  we  learn  that  the  same  E.  White 
mentioned  above  entered  the  spurious  King  Leir,  afterwards  pub 
lished  by  J.  Wright  in  1605.  The  date  of  entry  is  I4th  May, 
1594.  This  White  also  entered  the  surreptitious  ist  Quarto  of 
Romeo  and  Juliet. 


QUARTO  EDITIONS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.          147 


There  is  an  interesting  entry  in  1626,  when  E.  Brewster  and  R. 
Birde  acquired  J.  Pavier's  right  in  "Shakespeare's  plays  or  any  of 
them."  Sir  John  Oldcastle,  Titus  and  Andronicus,  and  Hamblet, 
are  mentioned.  And  on  8th  November,  1630,  is  entered  the  assign 
ment  to  Richard  Coates,  by  R.  Birde,  of  Henry  V.,  Sir  John  Old- 
castle,  Titus  and  Andronicus,  York  and  Lancaster,  Agincourt, 
Hamblet,  Pericles,  and  The  Yorkshire  Tragedy.  Evidently  Pavier 
was  a  wholesale  dealer  in  spurious  issues. 

I  add  the  addresses  of  some  publishers  and  printers  mentioned 
in  the  above  table: — 


L— R.  Field, 

Francis  Coules 
J.  Harrison, 
W.  Leake, 

R.  Jackson, 
J.  Benson, 
L.  Heyes, 

II.— A.  Wise. 
M.  Law, 
J.  Wright, 
R.  Bonian  and 
H.  Whalley, 

V.  Simmes, 

T.  Creede, 
Th.  Purfoot, 


J.  Norton. 

III.—  C.  Burbie, 
T.  Heyes, 
T.  Walkley, 
R.  Hawkins, 


Anchor,  Blackfriars,  near  Ludgate. 
In  the  Old  Bailey  without  Newgate. 
White  Greyhound,  St.  Paul's. 

1.  Greyhound,  St.  Paul's. 

2.  Holy  Ghost,  St.  Paul's. 
Conduit,  Fleet  Street. 

St.  Dunstan's. 
On  Fleet  Bridge. 

Angel,  St.  Paul's. 

Fox,  St.  Paul's,  near  St.  Augustine's  gate. 
Christ  Church  gate. 

(  Spread  Eagle,  St.  Paul's,  over  against 
<       Great  North  door. 
White    Swan,    near    Barnard    Castle, 

Adling  Street. 

Catharine    Wheel,     near    Old    Swan, 
Thames  Street. 

1.  Lucretia,  St.  Paul's. 

2.  Within  New  Rents,  Newgate. 

3.  Opposite  St.  Sepulchre's,  &c. 
Queen's  Arms. 

Near  the  Exchange. 
Green  Dragon,  St.  Paul's. 
Eagle  and  Child,  Britain's  Burse. 
Chancery  Lane,  near  Serjeant's  Inn. 

10—2 


i48  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

T.  Fisher,  White  Hart,  Fleet  Street. 

N.  Ling,  Under  St.  Dunstan's,  Fleet  Street. 

J.  Smethwicke,  do.  (under  the  dial). 

(  Pied  Bull,  St.  Paul's,  near  St.  Austin's 
N.  Butter,  j      gate> 

(  Crown,  Fleet  Street,   between  the  two 
W.  Leake  (.652),   }      Temple  Rates. 

j  Middle  Temple  Gate  and  St.  Dunstan's 
R.  Meighen,  j      Churchyard,  Fleet  Street. 

IV.— T.  Millington,  Under  St.  Peter's  Church,  Cornwall, 

do.  with  T.  Busbie,  Carter  Lane,  next  Powle's  Head. 

Cat    and    Parrot,    Cornhill,    near    Ex- 
change. 

(  Gun,     near    Little    North    door,     St. 
E.  White,  pau].s 

Flower     de     Luce     and     Crown,     St. 


A.  Johnson, 

(      Paul's. 

H.  Gosson,  Sun,  Paternoster  Row. 

R.  Birde,  Bible,  Cheapside. 

In  order  finally  to  point  out  the  importance  of  ready  reference  to 
such  a  table  as  the  above,  I  subjoin  a  list  of  the  results  which  it 
manifestly  leads  to  as  to  the  work  needed  at  the  present  time  in  the 
way  of  reprinting  those  old  texts. 

I. — We  want  texts  printed  in  parallel  columns  of— 

Romeo  and  Juliet  Q  2  \ 

Hamlet  Q2 

Merry  Wives  of  Windsor  F  i       and  the  imPerfect  sketches 

2  Henry  VI.  F  i  (        ^Wlth  collations  of  otlier 

3  Henry  VL  F  i  editions). 
Henry  V.                             F  i  J 

These  are  needed  to  give  a  basis  to  determine  Shakespeare's  manner 
of  work,  if  the  early  sketches  are  from  his  hand  (as  I  believe  the 
first  three  are),  and  if  not,  to  disprove  the  genuineness  of  the  sketch 
plays. 


QUARTO  EDITIONS  OF  SHAKESPEARE.  149 

. — We  want  texts  in  parallel  columns  of — 

Richard  III.  Q  I 

2  Henry  IV.  Q  I 


and  F  I  (with  collations). 


Troylus  and  Cressida         Q  I 
Lear  Q  I 

Othello  Q  i  and  Q  2 

Hamlet  Q  i 

to  ascertain  the  relation  of  the  Folio  text  with  that  of  the  previous 
editions. 

III. — We  want  texts  of  the  two  earliest  Quartos  in  parallel 
columns  of — 

Midsummer  Night's  Dream, 
Merchant  of  Venice, 

to  ascertain  which  edition  should  have  the  preference  for  a  revised 
text. 

IV. — Of—          Much  Ado  about  Nothing, 
Love's  Labour's  Lost, 
Richard  II. 
I  Henry  IV. 

we  want  single-text  reprints  of  Q  i,  as  being  preferable  to  F  i,  which 
was  printed  from  the  Quartos  in  these  plays.  Pericles,  Q  i,  and 
Two  Noble  Kinsmen,  Q  i,  would  also  be  desirable  reprints.  It  is 
clearly  useless  to  reprint  the  Folio  for  plays  where  it  is  merely 
copied  from  the  Quartos. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  of  the  eight  plays  which  the  proprietors 
of  the  Folio  printed  from  the  Quartos,  three,  viz.  Lovers  Labour's 
Lost,  Romeo  and  Juliet,  and  Much  Ado  about  Nothing,  had  become 
their  property  ;  so  that  (setting  Titus  Andronicus  aside  as  spurious) 
they  had  only  to  get  permission  to  print  four ;  viz.  Richard  II. , 
I  Henry  IV.,  Midsummer  Nighfs  Dream,  and.  Merchant  of  Venice; 
and  even  of  these  four  we  have  no  positive  evidence  that  they  did 
not  buy  up  three;  as  there  are  no  reprints  after  1623  for  the 
previous  proprietors  of  the  Quartos  (except  Merchant  of  Venice, 
1637?) 


150  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

As  I  have  spoken  above  of  reprints  needed  in  parallel  columns, 
I  may  here  mention  as  a  cognate  matter  the  need  of  reprints  of  the 
passages  from  North's  Plutarch,  Holinshed's  Chronicle,  &c. ,  parallel 
to  revised  texts  of  the  Historical  and  Roman  plays  founded  on  them ; 
and  of  reprints  of  plots  of  the  old  plays  of  The  Taming  of  a  Shrew, 
Promos  and  Cassandra,  The  troublesome  raigne  of  King  John,  &c., 
parallel  with  the  plots  of  the  plays  founded  on  them. 

I  am  also  strongly  of  opinion  that  revised  texts  of  the  early 
sketches  of  Romeo  and  Juliet,  Hamlet,  The  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor, 
The  Contention,  and  the  True  Tragedy,  should  be  printed  parallel 
with  revised  texts  of  the  plays  in  their  fuller  and  later  forms.  Such 
revised  texts  of  the  early  sketches  have  never  been  printed. 

[P.S. — When  I  wrote  this  paper  I  was  not  aware  that  Romeo  and 
Juliet  had  been  edited,  on  the  plan  proposed  in  page  148,  by 
Mommsen  ^with  a  most  valuable  introduction  and  collations),  and 
that  an  edition  of  Hamlet  on  a  somewhat  similar  plan  had  been 
issued  in  England.— F.  G.  F.  Jan.  1876.] 


CHAPTER  III. 


ON   METRICAL    TESTS   AS   APPLIED    TO   DRAMATIC 
POETRY. 

PART  II. — FLETCHER,    BEAUMONT,    MASSINGER. 
(Read  March  27,   1874.) 

THE  fact  that  Fletcher  was  aided  in  his  plays  by  Massinger  has  long 
been  known,  and  in  one  or  two  instances  conjectures  have  been 
made  that  Massinger  helped  him  in  specific  plays  ;  but  on  this 
point,  as  well  as  on  the  question  of  what  share  Beaumont  had  in  the 
plays  produced  in  the  joint  names  of  himself  and  Fletcher,  no 
definite  conclusion  has  been  arrived  at.  It  will  be  convenient  for 
future  reference  if,  before  entering  on  our  present  inquiry,  I  subjoin 
a  Table  of  the  plays  passing  under  the  names  of  Beaumont  and 
Fletcher,  with  the  dates  of  their  production  (when  known)  and  the 
authors  to  whom  I  assign  them,  pointing  out  the  instances  in  which 
I  differ  from  Mr.  Dyce  in  this  respect. 

GROUP  I.— PLAYS  PRODUCED  BEFORE  BEAUMONT'S  DEATH. 


Date. 

Name  of  Play. 

Authors 
(F.  G.  Fleay). 

Authors  (Dyce). 

B 

F  

F 

? 
? 
? 
Before  1611 

Fo  ir  Plays  in  one  
Wit  at  several  Weapons 
Thierry  and  Theodoret... 
Maid's  Tragedy  
Philaster  

B.  and  F  
B.  and  F  
B.  and  F..  
B.  and  F  

B  and  F 

B.  and  F. 
B.  and  F. 
B.  and  F. 
B.  and  F. 
B   and  F 

1611 
1611 

1611-12 
? 

King  and  No  King  
Knight  of  B.  Pestle  
Cupid's  Revenge    
Scornful  Lady  

B.  and  F  
B.  and  F  
B.  and  F  
B.  and  F  

B  and  F 

B.  and  F. 
B.  and  F. 
B.  and  F. 
B.  and  F. 
B   and  F 

1613 

1612 

*Captain  

B.  and  F.... 
B     

F.  (after  Weber). 
B 

1613 

*Honest  Man's  Fortune 
Henry  VIII     

F.  and  Anon.  ... 
F  and  Shakes 

B.  and  F. 

1613 

Two  Noble  Kinsmen  

F.  and  Shakes.  . 

F.  and  Shakes. 

152  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

GROUP  II.— PLAYS  BY  FLETCHER  ONLY  (FLEAY). 


Date. 

Name  of  Play. 

Author  according  to 
Dyce. 

After    161 

Probably  F   only 

Before  1619  ... 

F.  (R.  and  F.,  Weber) 

F  (B  and  F    Darley) 

M*  (II!1^11  ' 

1618  ... 

F 

' 

F. 

F 

9 

F 

9 

F 

After     1618  ... 

F 

9 

F. 

1621  ... 

F 

F 

1621  ... 

Wild-Goose  Chase  

F 

1621  ... 
1624  ... 

Cust»m  of  Country  
Rule  a  Wife  and  Have  a  Wife    

Probably  F.  only. 
F 

Wife  for  a  Month    

F 

GROUP  III.— PLAYS  BY  FLETCHER  AND  ANOTHER  AUTHOR. 


Date. 

Name  of  Play 

Other  Autho.- 
(Fleay). 

Other  Author 
(Dyce); 

After    1618  ... 

False  One  

Massin-er 

'Massinger  (after 

9 
l62I    ... 

*Little  French  Lawyer... 

Do  

Do 

(     Weber). 
Beaumont. 
(Altered  by  Mas- 

l622    ... 

Do 

l    singer. 

1622    ... 

Do 

Do 

l622    ... 

Do 

Do 

l622    ... 

Sea  Voyage  

'  Do. 

Altered 

After     1621  ... 
After  F.'s  death 

AfterF.'sdeath 
Before  1619  ... 

1622  ... 
1623  ... 
1624?... 

*Laws  of  Candy  
*Elder  Brother  

Lover's  Progress  

*Knight  of  Malta  
*Queen  of  Corinth  
*Love's  Cure  
Maid  of  Mill  
*  Bloody  Brother  

?Do  
Do  

Do  

Middleton    
Do  
Mid.  and  Row... 
Rowley..  ...  

Beaumont  (perh.) 
(No      other      un- 
l     donbtedly. 
(  Massinger   (after 
\     Weber). 
No  other. 
Rowley. 
No  other. 
Rowley. 

1625-6 

*Fair  Maid  of  Inn  
Nice  Valour  

? 

9 

No  other. 

1625-6 
1633  ... 

*Noble  Gentleman  
Night  Walker  

? 

^Shirley         (after 
I     Weber). 

After  F.'s  death 

Love's  Pilgrimage  

Do  . 

Do 

METRICAL  TESTS.  153 

Tn  these  Tables  B,  and  F.  stand  for  Beaumont  and  Fletcher 
respectively.  I  have  formed  the  plays  into  three  groups  :  the  first 
of  these  extends  to  Beaumont's  death  ;  the  second  includes  all  the 
plays  in  which  Fletcher's  hand  alone  is  perceptible;  the  third 
includes  the  rest  of  the  plays.  It  will  be  seen  that  I  have  starred 
in  the  table  all  the  plays  as  to  the  authorship  of  which  I  hold  an 
opinion  different  from  Mr.  Dyce.  This  is  the  case  as  to  three  in 
the  first  group  ;  which  are  important,  and  as  to  which  I  think  him 
decidedly  wrong.  In  seven  cases  in  the  third  group  I  find  traces 
of  a  second  author  where  Dyce  does  not ;  and  in  four  cases  I 
differ  from  him  as  to  who  the  author  is  ;  but  in  the  second  group 
we  agree  entirely  that  it  is  solely  Fletcher's  work.  It  will  be 
well,  then,  to  begin  with  these  plays,  and  examine  what  are  their 
peculiarities  in  rhythm.  They  are  distinguished — 

(1)  By  number  of  double   or  female   endings  :    these  are  more 
numerous  in  Fletcher  than  in  any  other  writer  in  the  language,  and 
are  sufficient  of  themselves  to  distinguish  his  work. 

(2)  By  frequent  pauses  at  the  end  of  the  lines  :  this  union  of 
"the  stopped  line"  with  the  double  ending  is  peculiar  to  Fletcher  : 
Massinger  has  many  double  endings,  but  few  stopped  lines. 

(3)  By  moderate  use  of  rhymes  :  this  distinguishes  him  from  Beau 
mont,  who  has  more  rhymes  than  Fletcher  or  Massinger,  and  who 
in  serious  passages  has  few  double  endings. 

(4)  By  moderate  use  of  lines  of  less  than  five  measures  :  he  has 
more  than  Massinger,  however. 

(5)  By  using  no  prose  whatever.     Massinger  also  admits  none  : 
there  are  two  little  bits  in  his  work  ;   both,  I  think,  intercalated. 

(6)  By   admitting  abundance   of   tri-syllabic   feet,    so   that  his 
(Fletcher's)     lines   have    to  be   felt  rather   than    scanned ;    it    is 
almost  impossible  to  tell  when  Alexndrines  are  intended. 

I  now  give  a  Table  of  the  rhythmical  pecularities  of  this  group; 
and  a  similar  Table  of  Massinger's  plays  in  which  he  worked  alone  ; 
these  are  rightly  given  in  the  editions,  with  one  exception  ;  viz.  A 
Very  Woman,  which  is,  as  Dyce  conjectured,  an  alteration  of 
Fletcher's  A  Right  Woman,  which  was  previously  supposed  to  be  lost. 


154 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


Name  of  Play. 

No.  of  Double 
Endings. 

Rhyming 
Lines. 

Alexan 
drines. 

T-                    C    1 

Lines  of  : 
less  than 
5  Measures 

Custom  of  Country  

I7S6 
1500 

14 

42 

5 

5° 

8 

20 

1947 

38 

10 

26 

Mad  Lover  

1507 
2266 

8 
20 

21 

26 

29 

?6 

5 

27 

Humorous  Lieutenant  ... 
Women  Pleased  
Woman's  Prize  

2193 
1823 
1678 
1236 

12 
12 
22 

18 

5 

5 
8 

20 

7 
57 
29 

Island  Princess  

2059 
1845 

12 

18 

6 
6 

29 
18 

Wild-Goose  Chase  
Monsieur  Thomas  
Wit  Without  Money  ..._ 
Rule  a  Wife  &c 

1949 
1800 
1543 

6 

2 

6 

3 

5 
50 

24 

28 

21 

I 

Average  

1777 

16-3 

10  '6 

25  '5 

N.B. — The  Chances  is  a  very  short  play,  about  four-fifths  of  an 
average  one  ;  and  the  Laws  of  Candy  is  so  corrupt  as  to  be  un 
countable  with  accuracy. 

TABLE  OF  MASSINGER'S  PLAYS. 


Name  of  Play. 

No.  of  Double 
Endings. 

Rhyming 
Lines. 

» 

Alexan 
drines. 

Lines  of 
less  than 
sMeasures 

Unnatural  Combat  
Duke  of  Milan   

934 
1146 

1085 

10 

34 

I 
2 

2 

6 

Parliament  of  Love   

si 

14 

7 

5 

Great  Duke  of  Florence. 
Maid  of  Honour  

1006 

10 
22 

i 

3 
4 

°5 

Emperor  of  East  
A  New  Way,  &c  
City  Madam  

1058 
1228 
1081 

8 

20 

6 
g 

2 

6 

2 

3 

Bashful  Lover  

4 

Believe  as  You  List  

Q2S 

12 

4 
3 

3 

Average  

1059 

i6'8 

2  '5 

2  '3 

METRICAL  TESTS.  155 

On  comparing  these  Tables,  it  is  evident  that,  as  to  the  author 
ship  of  a  play,  it  would  not  be  safe  to  conclude  to  which  of  these 
two  authors  it  belonged,  on  the  evidence  of  the  number  of  rhymes  ; 
but  that  the  double  endings  would  be  conclusive.  Fletcher's  range 
is  from  15°°  to  2000,  in  round  numbers,  with  an  average  of  1775  '•> 
while  Massinger's  ranges  from  900  to  1200,  with  an  average  of  1000. 
A  play,  having  between  1200  and  1500  double  endings  and  divisible 
into  parts  of  distinctly  different  styles,  would  probably  be  a  joint 
production  of  Massinger's  and  Fletcher's,  especially  if  the  part  con 
taining  the  greater  proportion  of  female  endings  had  also  the  larger 
share  of  short  lines  and  Alexandrines.  Now  examine  the  fol 
lowing  Table  of  the  plays  which  I  assign  to  Fletcher  and  Massinger 
jointly. 


I56 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


?!  = 

C    tt    y 


NMMinl         uivo 


jinl 


a 
a 


^\O  1  '  O    •*        VO     1  •*• 

n       1  M  n  1        H 


N  * 

O 


H         tx        mroo        CO         O    t^  t^l^O  ^O    O\        H          ro        O 
O\        ^"        ONfOO          ro        WroOtHHM         ^VO          tN. 


p,     ci     did-ci     a,     a  d.  ex  d.  di  d<      i 
ft     ft     p,ao,     ft     ft  a  a  a.  ft  ft      1 


:  g  > 
S  - 


1  I 


ge 
Ca 


I     I 

r  i 


METRICAL  TESTS.  157 

It  is  evident  at  once  that  all  the  metrical  conditions  required  are 
fulfilled  by  the  division  here  made.  In  every  instance  the  propor 
tion  of  double  endings  is  that  which  would  be  expected  from  the 
tables  previously  made  for  Fletcher  and  Massinger.  There  is  the 
same  irregularity  as  to  the  number  of  rhymes  ;  the  same  excess  of 
Alexandrines  and  short  lines  on  the  part  of  Fletcher,  to  a  similarly 
varying  amount.  Now  let  us  turn  to  evidence  of  a  different  cha 
racter.  We  all  know  Sir  Aston  Cockayne's  lines  addressed  to 
Charles  Cotton  concerning  Beaumont : — • 

"  His  own  renown  no  such  addition  needs 
To  have  a  fame  sprung  from  another's  deeds, 
And  my  good  friend,  old  Philip  Massinger, 
With  Fletcher  writ  in  some  that  we  see  there. " 

In  another  poem  he  says, 

"  For  Beaumont,  of  those  many,  writ  in  few, 
And  Massinger  in  other  few. " 

And  in  a  third  place,  speaking  of  Fletcher-  and  Massinger,  Sir 
Aston  says  :— 

"  Plays  did  they  write  together,  were  great  friends." 

If  these  plays  which  I  have  selected,  and  which  do  fulfil  the 
necessary  metrical  requirements,  are  not  the  plays  in  question,  are 
we  to  look  for  them  among  those  which  do  not  fulfil  the  require 
ments?  But  again.  Although  these  tests  are  satisfied  by  the 
division,  the  division  was  not  made  by  means  of  these  tests ,:  the 
weak- ending  test  was  the  one  I  selected  for  this  purpose.  Massinger 
often  ends  his  lines  with  words  that  cannot  be  grammatically  separated 
from  the  next  line  ;  articles,  prepositions,  auxiliaries,  &c.,  am,  be, 
of,  in,  the,  this,  &c.  Fletcher  uses  tne  stopped  line,  usually.  On 
this  ground  I  made  the  separation  :  I  then  made  tables  of  the  Acts 
and  Scenes  in  which  each  character  app'ears,  to  see  if  the  manner  of 
work  and  the  apportionment  of  it  between  the  authors  could  be 
traced  ;  and  having  found  my  first  judgment  invariably  confirmed, 
I  then  applied  the  tabular  test.  As  yet  I  have  found  all  the  tests 
give  the  same  result.  It  would  not  be  possible  to  give  all  the  in 
vestigations  in  one  paper  :  but  for  an  example  I  will  take  the  play  of 


I5S  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

the  Little  French  Lawyer,  the  first  on  our  list.  A  simple  reading  of 
the  text  shows  the  existence  of  two  authors,  from  the  frequent 
changes  of  style  and  treatment :  a  marking  of  the  unstopped  lines 
makes  the  division  exactly  as  I  give  it  in  the  table  :  and  an  examin 
ation  of  the  plot  shows  that,  ot  the  three  stories  contained  in  this 
play,  namely,  that  of  La  Writ,  and  that  of  Annabella,  were 
assigned  to  Fletcher ;  the  third,  that,  of  Lamira,  being  given  to 
Massinger. 

Nor  does  our  evidence  end  here  :  on  looking  into  the  text  we  find 
that  in  every  place  where  Dinant's  name  occurs  in  the  scenes 
assigned  to  Fletcher,  it  is  pronounced  Dinant,  paroxyton  :  but  in  the 
Massinger  scenes  it  is  oxyton,  Dinant.  The  fact  being  settled, 
then,  that  there  are  two  authors,  and  one  of  these  Fletcher,  and  it 
being  quite  evident  (as  we  shall  presently  see)  that  Beaumont  was 
not  one, — Beaumont  introduces  prose  scenes,  eschews  double 
endings,  and  rhymes  abundantly, — our  choice  probably  lies  between 
Massinger,  Middleton,  and  Rowley,  as  being  the  only  playwrights 
known  to  have  worked  with  Fletcher.  But  the  phenomena  are 
exactly  the  same  for  eight  plays  in  our  list,  and  nearly  so  for  the 
two  marked  with  a  (?),  and  the  dates  of  three  of  these  are  about 
1622  ;  this  gives  another  argument  against  Beaumont,  who  died 
in  1615-16;  and  conclusively  disposes  of  Rowley,  whose  style  is 
utterly  unlike  the  writer's  we  are  in  search  of,  and  who  had  not 
the  poetical  faculty  shown  in  the  Massinger  part  of  these  eight 
(or  ten  ?)  plays.  And  besides  this,  three  of  these  plays  have  already 
been  conjecturally  assigned  to  Massinger,  as  part  author,  by  Dyce 
(in  two  instances  following  Weber),  who  has  also  given  us  his 
opinion  that  A  Very  Woman  is  a  rifacimento  of  A  Right  Woman 
by  Fletcher,  which  it  certainly  is.  It  is  strange  that,  having  got 
so  far  on  the  right  track,  Dyce  did  not  anticipate  our  restoring 
all  eight  (or  ten  ?)  of  these  plays  to  Fletcher  and  Massinger ;  and 
still  more  strange,  that  Seward  and  Weber  should  single  out  the 
character  of  La  Writ,  who  never  speaks  a  line  that  is  not  pure 
Fletcher  in  every  way,  as  being  the  unassisted  work  of  Beau 
mont. 

There  is  another  point  of  external  evidence  yet  to  notice  :  five 
(or  seven  ?)  of  these  plays  were  produced,  three  of  them  certainly  in 
1622  ;  two  of  them  probably  very  near  that  elate.  The  other  three 


METRICAL  TESTS.  259 

were  not  produced  till  after  Fletcher's  death.  Now,  1622  and 
1623  are  just  the  dates  in  which  no  play  of  Fletcher's  (unassisted) 
is  on  our  list ;  and  after  the  notice  of  the  Virgin  Martyr,  October 
1620,  in  the  book  of  Sir  George  Buck,  Master  of  the  Revels,  there 
is  no  entry  as  to  Massinger  till  December  1623,  when  the  Bondman 
was  produced.  This  may  be  regarded  as  finally  settling  this 
question. 

With  regard  to  the  other  subdivisions  of  the  third  group,  as 
only  four  of  the  ten  plays  contained  in  them  were  produced  in 
Fletcher's  lifetime,  they  are  far  less  interesting,  and  do  not  give  aid 
in  examining  the  method  of  the  poet's  work.  I  give  a  Table  of 
their  Rhythm,  however,  for  the  sake  of  completing  our  scheme  ; 
and  for  the  same  reason  add  a  Table  of  the  plays  in  which  Massinger 
worked  with  other  authors. 

Note.— R.  stands  for  Rowley  in  this  table,  and  Md.  for  Middle- 
ton. 

[I  ought  also  to  state  that  the  lines  of  demarcation  are  much  more 
definite  in  this  and  the  preceding  Tables  than  in  that  which  em 
braces  the  works  on  which  Beaumont  and  Fletcher  wrought  together ; 
for  these  two  friends  and  these  only,  as  far  as  I  can  discover, 
habitually  aided  each  other,  not  only  by  writing  scenes  separately 
in  each  play,  but  also  by  writing  portions  of  scenes,  speeches,  or 
even  lines,  in  the  same  scenes,  jointly ;  for  instance,  Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  in 
the  Maid's  Tragedy,  tabulated  as  Fletcher's,  unquestionably  con 
tains  some  of  Beaumont's  writing,  though  much  more  of  his  co 
adjutor's.  Fletcher's  hand  can  also  frequently  be  traced  in  Beau 
mont's  prose-scenes,  though  he  never  introduces  prose  himself. 

~F.  G.  F.  Jan.  1876.] 


i6o 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


•«  c  « 

<2  •"  rt 

M    M    ro<£>    O    "~t 

'S03      1      J     K     S     S 

M  OO         \O    CM  kC  00           M 
W                       w          M         CO 

|| 

|    ^--oj    ,    c, 

vn  -^       I        N      oo      oo       O 

?N              |      ^HN           VO              , 

bXl 
c    • 

M 

00    O    Tf  Tf-  •*•  (M  V 

m      co  ••*-      v 

SI                I               IM             !N             <N           V£) 
1                1               tx           t^           M 

co  N       M  ••*•  -*  o       >n       | 

M            CM    CM     01  t>.          -^-           1  . 

« 

LNo.  of 
Double 
Endings. 

M-  O     H  00     N     M 

tx  N  vo  >o  ro  o  v 

3  £       1        v8       oo"       S       c? 

n  in       m  ro  t^  re       <?       JE     ! 
DM        mMincM       vo        g 

ft^aaas: 

^"1  ^  O  00    "<t-  O\ 

1  1  1  1  1  1 

ift      cxci.ci.di      ft      ci 

Z.CX        CX^CXO^        ft        ft 
H    M           CM    CM  ^I^H't         in          OS 

co  "    :    :  ^ 

<»'S'-b3  :«  :  '*    -a     ^ 

:       •->  :    :  "  1  •-       .   : 

O       ^    .     .    .  f£ 

^              ~     *     ^       "     C^ 

i^p^     •            r^n        j 

r?i    |     t   ^      .    > 

o 

J3 
3 

>    ^  1  2"  «*  M" 

"lllgji      le'l 

>':':.>;  N  N      6 

"*! 

^    ^  >•..>•.. 

N  cT  rt  rt    :  'S  ^^      "J  *•§  d 

„'."!    j    H    ifH-.S          ^ 

•7^ 

Cf  )  .  *    <*O  -  -    ••*• 

>    ^^^IDTJ-*-*^^;-^ 

OM*"*H^'"1           —» 

8 

H^            ^       -1      ^      *      • 

PO  >     U     ^       *             QJ  N^  8    <•*            4J 

ft.  -;    •  "•;c  **  H^     <f* 

o 

:a      H."^  1..-7 

N"'-  o  S   :  §  ^  o  S?.  >,< 

^."1   i""  'N":3':3       c_ 

D 

i 

^Jv   •"'"•-     m^ 

^||j||||^|cd 

PH  H1    '   -  'H~  ^"M        ^  tl 

.    :            -  .      o  cj 

i. 

?|Hrf-H««^ 

Ji'l'l'illlrrfa* 

« 

M-  tJ  r<->  hT   •  H    - 

»H"I)^S  iJo^'H    ^:s 

>'  'II     *   '-J  '«       'I!  ^^^    • 

PH 

"—  .  rdco     ^  5? 

6^  £  I^'M  S  °  ^<"'S'sr 

<2<!  ^•a^'tJ^'S  M  *" 

.-  *  tJ:3  o  '•"•-! 

^13  J"5*"*   "^  |  I<>°-^--'>>" 

•<  sf  N  o  «f  ^  §o'a  > 

-M)H<;    W  ^  —    H    ci  •" 

o  c  ^  o     •  <I  o 

y2g.5>2*c'o8^*o 

T3    ."6  ~d    « 

fa     ^  fe  3  S  fe 

^°rrrrr 

1  1  >IJ^1  >l  H 

:         :       i       i       : 

:         : 

:         :       :  . 

:         : 

rt 

^          1       J 

:            •                  G          •           t 

o 

p  t 

a         o      •— 

:              c       :        w 

O 

55 

'S      •£     >s 
u       2          C 

•s    w    *  d 

I  111 

p>     «    M  -1 

S    ?  J  a  .1    - 

°       3  1  ?   ^ 

1    1  2  1  5?    4 

•     1   I 

S     s       * 

1  -1    - 

fe       j>         O 

METRICAL  TESTS.  161 

The  work  in  the  Bloody  Brother  is  curiously  arranged.  Fletcher 
wrote  all  the  parts  connected  with  the  poisoning  attempted  by  La 
Torch, — namely,  ii.  I,  2;  iii.  2;  and  the  parts- involving  Edith, — 
namely,  iii.  2  ;  v.  2  ;  and  the  impassioned  speeches  of  Edith  in 
iii.  I  ;  v.  I  ;  the  rest  is  not  his.  The  Maid  in  the  Mill  is  noticeable 
as  being  one  of  the  plays  containing  prose  in  which  Fletcher  had  a 
share  that  were  produced  after  Beaumont's  death  and  during  Fletcher's 
lifetime.  Fletcher's  part  was  the  story  of  Ismenia,  arid  Rowley's 
that  of  Florimel,  at  the  outset ;  but  they  soon  changed  the  parts, 
and  after  changing  kept  them  distinct  to  the  end.  I  cannot  agree 
with  Dyce  in  assigning  Rollo  and  The  Queen  of  Corinth  partly  to 
Rowley  ;  they  seem  much  more  like  Middletonr  and  are  far  removed 
from  Rowley's  style. 

We  have  now  left  for  consideration  only  the  group  of  plays 
produced  before  Beaumont's  death.  The  dates  of  most  of  these  are 
known  ;  but  some  we  cannot  determine  from  external  evidence.  I 
have  assigned  conjectural  dates  to  them,  for  reasons  which  will 
appear.  Before  examining  these,  it  is  necessary  to  determine  the 
general  characteristics  of  Beaumont's  metre.  This  has  been  hitherto 
regarded  as  an  insoluble  problem.  The  habit,  of  which  we  are 
traditionally  and  rightly  informed,  which  Beaumont  and  Fletcher 
had  contracted,  namely,  that  of  writing  together  in  the  same  scene, 
seems  to  forbid  any  analysis  being  applied  which  can  separate  the 
two  authors'  work.  This  separation  can,  however,  be  made,  to 
some  extent.  We  know  from  our  second  group  (of  Fletcher's  un 
doubted  plays)  what  his  characteristics  are  —  no  prose  ;  many  double 
endings  ;  pauses  at  the  end  of  lines.  If  we  find  any  work  in  which 
these  characteristics  are  entirely  absent,  that  work  will  probably  not 
be  Fletcher's.  Now,  there  is  a  work  called  Four  Plays  in  One, 
that  is  evidently  by  two  authors.  The  first  two  of  these  short  plays 
are  in  every  respect  different  from  the  other  two.  The  latter  two 
are  in  Fletcher's  usual  style.  In  7  pages  we  find  673  double  end 
ings  ;  5  rhymes  ;  4  incomplete  lines  In  the  former  two  plays,  in 
1 8  pages  there  are  only  172  double  endings  ;  85  rhymes  ;  13  incom 
plete  lines,  and  a  considerable  amount  of  prose  ;  the  lines  also  are 
in  Shakespeare's  later  manner,  ending  on  particles,  &c.,  so  as  to  run 
on  continuously  with  the  succeeding  line.  These  must  be  by 
Beaumont.  We  have  then,  here,  the  characteristics  of  his  style 

II 


1 62  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

unmixed  with  Fletcher's,  which  gives  us  the  key  we  require.  We 
can  now  separate  their  work. 

It  may  seem  strange  that,  since  Weber  had  rightly  apportioned 
these  plays  to  our  authors,  characteristics  so  salient  should  never 
have  led  any  critic  to  assign  the  other  plays  rightly.  This,  I  think, 
may  be  explained.  There  is  an  inveterate  habit  among  editors  to 
read  their  authors  too  much  in  the  order  in  which  the  old  editions 
were  printed.  I  can,  in  many  recent  issues  of  great  value,  trace  the 
mischief  and  inaccuracy'that  is  still  produced  by  this  cause,  and  in 
none  more  than  in  Dyce's  "  Beaumont  and  Fletcher." 

The  Woman  Hater  was  first  published  in  Quarto,  and  was  un 
doubtedly  the  earliest  of  these  plays  that  has  reached  us.  Therefore 
Dyce  studies  it  first ;  finds  it  to  be  almost  or  entirely  by  one  author  ; 
finds,  moreover,  that  it  was  first  published  in  the  name  of  Fletcher 
only,  and  concludes  that  it  was  mainly  by  him.  Hence  he  gets  a  fal?e 
notion  of  Fletcher's  style  that  invalidates  all  his  conclusions  as  far 
as  this  first  group  is  concerned.  I  doubt  not  that  other  editors  have 
been  similarly  influenced  ;  and  for  myself,  I  can  say  that  the  accept 
ance  of  this  conclusion  of  Dyce's  kept  me  two  years  from  seeing  the 
proper  starting-point,  namely,  the  plays  written  by  Fletcher  alone 
after  Beaumont's  death.  As  to  the  title-page  of  the  Wo>nan  Hater, 
it  does  not  stand  alone.  The  first  play  published  in  the  names  of 
Beaumont  and  Fletcher  jointly  was  The  Scornful  Lady,  in  1616;  but 
Cupid's  Revenge  was,  published  in  1615  in  Fletcher's  name  singly. 
The  Woman  Hater  (1607),  Knight  of  the  Burning  Pestle  (1613), 
Maid's  Tragedy  (1619,  1622),  and  Thierry  and  Theodoret  (1621), 
were  published  without  authors'  names.  In  1648,  Thierry  and 
Theodoret  and  The  Woman  Hater  were  published  in  Fletcher's  name 
singly  ;  in  1649  both  of  them  in  the  joint  names  of  Beaumont  and 
Fletcher,  as  Cupid* s  Revenge  had  already  been  in  1630.  Now,  that 
Cupid's  Revenge  and  Thierry  and  Theodoret  were  joint  works,  all  the 
editors  admit.  This  one  play,  The  Woman  Hater,  is  treated 
differently  by  them  ;  in  opposition,  I  think,  to  the  external  evidence, 
and  certainly  to  the  internal.  I  must,  however,  before  giving  my 
theory  on  this  group,  call  your  attention  to  the  following  Table,  which 
is  similar  to  those  already  under  our  notice  for  the  other  groups. 


METRICAL  TESTS. 


163 


<u  *J  rt 

ir*«ri,  5 

5^,'-i  «.r. 

II 

N                        H                               N 

I   *     M     «      *             0              *            M^O 

| 

bO 

'S  -5 
Pp 

co      ro  if)     •*•     TT               N           c 

tlOO-^--^-            N              O              O^f 

,       I             £          CO        M                    C*                    « 

6  o  "3 

IU1U  •  ! 

3-^-iornm        oo         -4-        fxoo 

1  1  i  gg    i    \ 

iS  1   1         1      1      &  & 

*  *  1?  «    * 

1       j   {  M"    |           ^ 

a 

I        H     »    4  :     H       '- 

i         ^i'i;       &              53 

Jj 

£,      .£     >     ^    .'    ...        "^ 

•           >     ^   .^        s£|.                    * 

3 

£  „  '„"  '«  «  i  N     «i 

:         '.1   rt  ""        co                "1 

i 

2 

.H    H'^    *!  \t  «"  "       :S 

L-15  A      i 

flifS-i       2 

1 

Js    J.3-    6   ;d  f.  ^  ^     H 

5  1  *  "  -S  J       i 

to 

1  —  '    rT  M           M  rn  *"  '^ 

i 

1   :!^   1    :S  «    *«    « 

Si"  1  i  1^1     «?  1 

J 

°*  N.  u  .s  "^  j  ^  *!  " 

au   |  .S   8  .S  -  J         H  ^ 

o  j^*^  jo    ^c/3       .S;  ^ 

^  .jfar  •§    .j:d     *•  '„-  .-  J 

!!.£:    S  "S    g?  it>  £'&      ^  "1 

I    <"«     g    ^<    "<:3    •§  ' 

^   S   2   f    S  «  3*S       "    s 

«^rt*J      «^« 

•tO'Wflj*'       °              *fl 

m  na  ^  w^  fa^  co 

_t;  d,  fe  H  fe^  fc^        6 

§  i  : 

pi  i      1         s 

&        C 

K~ 

rt        T3                                           ^ 

?      to    :           :                 t; 

o 
D 

a 

silt 

1  •  •  1  1  1  ,  ' 

g    «    :      :                 o 

g    g)    ^       :                   fe 

1  '  2  J  S  I     ^ 

^   ^   ^   S    £     * 

2    w  "3     "g       c        « 
^  jb   ^      o       '5          S 

'2      3      8        O           e<             O 

W   U  co     CJ       0         K 

II— 2 


1 64  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

I  have  still  to  make  a  few  remarks  as  to  the  points  where  I  differ 
from  Dyce.  As  to  the  authorship  of  the  Captain,  the  difference  is 
not  important,  as  that  play  certainly  is  two-thirds  Fletcher.  Had 
Dyce  not  been  misled  by  the  Woman  Hater  in  which  Fletcher  had 
no  share,  and  had  he  been  aware  that  Fletcher  wrote  no  prose,  he 
would  not  have  made  any  mistake.  The  play  of  the  Honest  Man's 
Fortune  is  partly  by  Fletcher  ;  but  that  the  other  part  is  Beaumont's 
I  am  not  sure  :  it  reads  to  me  differently  from  his  other  works. 
Still  I  have  not  entirely  examined  this  play,  and  prefer  to  leave  the 
question  open  :  it  may  be  Beaumont's  ;  at  any  rate,  only  one  act  is 
Fletcher's. 

Before  concluding  this  paper  I  must  again'  repeat  that  it  is  only 
preliminary.  The  matters  I  believe  to  be  absolutely  fixed  in  it  by 
the  application  of  metrical  tests  are,  the  part  authorship  of  Massinger 
in  the  plays  given  in  the  table  above  ;  the  relative  amount  of  Beau 
mont's  work  ;  and  the  classification  of  these  plays.  If  on  these 
points  I  have  not  produced  conviction,  the  fault  lies  in  the  narrow 
limits  which  I  feel  it  right  to  impose  on  a  first  work  of  this  kind  ;  or 
more  probably  in  defective  manner  of  exposition.  I  am  certain  that 
no  one  can  go  through  the  detailed  evidence  in  the  way  I  have  done 
aad  remain  unconvinced.  To  produce  conviction  in  others  who 
can  have  set  before  them  only  part  of  the  mass  of  statistics  on  this 
subject,  is  veiy  difficult.  In  my  next  paper  I  hope  to  produce  all 
the  evidence  in  full  as  to  one  or  two  plays  that  have  passed  under 
Shakespeare's  name.  To  do  this  for  all  the  plays  I  have  considered 
would  require  many  volumes  ;  but  I  hope  the  sample  will  be  a  fair 
one,  and  that  my  work  will  be  judged  from  it. 


TABLE  OF  QUARTO  EDITIONS. 

(FOR   REFERENCE.) 

Woman  Hater,  1607  (n.n.)  ;  1648  (F.)  ;    1649  (B.  and  F.). 
Faithful  Shepherdess,  no  date  (F.)  ;  1629  (F.) ;  1634  (F.),  &c. 
Knight  of  Burning  Pestle,  1613  (n.n.) ;    1635  (B.  and  F.). 
Masque,  no  date  (n.n.)  ;  ascribed  to  B.  in  Folio. 


PASSAGES  FOR  ILLUSTRATION.  165 

Cupid's  Revenge,  1615  (F.)  ;  1630  (B.  and  F.)  ;  1635. 
Scornful  Lady,  1616  (B.  and  F.)  ;  1625  ;  1630;  1635  ;  1639,  &c. 
Maid's  Tragedy,  1619  (n.n.)  ;  1622  (n.n.)  ;  1630  (B.  andF.)  ;  1638  ; 

1641,  &c. 

King  and  No  King,  1619  (B.  and  F.) ;  1625  ;   1631  ;  1639,  &c. 
Philaster,  1620  (B.  and  F.)  ;  1622  ;  1628  ;  1634;  1639,  &c. 
Thierry  and  Theodoret,  1621  (n.  n.)  ;  1648  (F.) ;  1649  (B.  &  F.). 
Wit  without  Money,  1639  (B.  and  F.),  &c. 
Monsieur  Thomas,  1639  (F.). 
Rule  a  Wife,  &c.,    1640  (F.). 
Elder  Brother,  1637  (F.). 

Bloody  Brother,  1639  (by  B.  J.  F.) ;  1640  (F.). 
Night  Walker,  1640  (F.). 
Two  Noble  Kinsmen,  1634  (F.  and  Shakespeare). 

None  of  these  were  printed  in  the  first  Folio  1647,  but  all  were  in 
the  second,  1679. 


PASSAGES  FOR  ILLUSTRATION. 

Evadne.  "  Alas,  Amintor,  thinkst  thou  I  forbear 

To  sleep  with  thee  because  I  have  put  on 
A  maiden's  strictness  ?     Look  upon  these  .cheeks, 
And  thou  shalt  find  the  hot  and  rising  blood 
Unapt  for  such  a  vow  !     No  !  in  this  heart 
There  dwells  as  much  desire  and  as  much  will 
To  put  wish'd  act  in  practice  as  e'er  yet 
Was  known  to  woman  :  and  they  have  been  shown 
Both.     But  it  was  the  folly  of  thy  youth 
To  think  this  beauty,  to  what  land  soe'er 
It  shall  be  call'd,  shall  stoop  to  any  second. 
I  do  enjoy  the  best,  and  in  that  height 
Have  sworn  to  stand  or  die.     You  guess  the  man. " 

Maid's  Tragedy,  Act  ii.  Sc.  i.     (BEAUMONT.) 


!66  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Evadne.  "  No,  I  do  not ! 

I  do  appear  the  same,  the  same  Evadne 
Drest  in  the  shames  I  lived  in,  the  same  monster. 
But  these  are  names  of  honour  to  what  I  am  : 
I  do  present  myself  the  foulest  creature, 
Most  poisonous,  dangerous,  and  despised  of  men, 
Lerna  e'er  bred  or  Nilus.     I  am  hell 
Till  you,  my  dear  lord,  shoot  your  light  into  me, 
The  beams  of  your  forgiveness  :  I  am  soul-sick, 
And  wither  with  the  fear  of  one  condemn'd, 
Till  I  have  got  your  pardon." 

Maid's  Tragedy,  Act  iv.  Sc.  i.     (FLETCHER.) 


Cler<  mont.  "  They  are  both  brave  fellows, 

Tried  and  approved  :  and  I  am  proud  to  encounter 
With  men  from  whom  no  honour  can  be  lost. 
They  will  play  up  to  a  man  and  set  him  off. 
Whene'er  I  go  to  the  field,  Heaven  keep  me  from 
The  meeting  of  an  unflesh'd  youth  or  coward. 
The  first  to  get  a  name  comes  on  too  hot ; 
The  coward  is  so  swift  in  giving  ground, 
There  is  no  overtaking  him  without 
A  hunting  nag,  well-breath'd  too." 

Little  French  Lawyer,  Act  i.  Sc.  2.     (MASSINGER.) 

Cleremont.       ' "  Colour'd   with   smooth    excuses.     Was't  a 

friend's  part, 

A  gentleman's,  a  man's  that  wears  a  sword 
And  stands  upon  the  point  of  reputation, 
To  hide  his  head  then  when  his  honour  call'd  him, 
Call'd  him  aloud  and  led  him  to  his  fortune  ? 
To  halt  and  slip  the  collar  ?     By  my  life 
I  would  have  given  my  life  I'd  never  known  thee  ! 
Thou  hast  eaten  canker-like  into  my  judgment 
With  this  disgrace,  thy  whole  life  cannot  heal  again." 

Little  French  La^vyer,  Act  ii.  Sc.  3.     (FLETCHER.) 


PASS  A  GES  FOR  ILL  USTRA  T1GN.  1 67 

Antonio.  "  Give  me  that  face 

And  I  am  satisfied,  upon  whose  shoulders 
So  e'er  it  grows.     Juno,  deliver  us 
Out  of  this  amazement !  beseech  you,  goddess, 
Tell  us  of  our  friends  !     How  does  Ismeria? 
And  how  does  Isabella?     Both  in  good  health 
I  hope  as  you  yourself  are." 

Maid  in  the  Mill,  Act  iv.  Sc.  i.     (Row LEY.) 

Antonio.  "  Oh  'tis  a  spark  of  beauty  ! 

And  where  they  appear  so  excellent  in  little 
They  will  but  flame  in  great.     Extension  spoils  'em. 
Marline,  learn  this  !  the  narrower  that  our  eyes 
Keep  way  unto  our  object,  still  the  sweeter 
That  comes  unto  us  ;  great  bodies  are  like  great  countries, 
Discovering  still,  toil  and  no  pleasure  finds  'em." 

Maid  in  the  Mill,  Act  i.  Sc.  2.     (FLETCHER.) 


Sophia.         "  Alas,  my  son,  nor  Fate  nor  Heaven  itself 
Can  or  would  wrest  my  whole  care  of  your  good 
To  any  least  secureness  in  your  ill ! 
What  I  urge  issues  from  my  curious  fear, 
Lest  you  should  make  your  means  to  scope  your  snare  : 
Doubt  of  sincereness  is  the  only  mean 
Not  to  incense  it,  but  corrupt  it  clean." 

Rollo,  Act  iii.  Sc.  i.     (?  MIDDLETON.) 

Sophia.          "  Oh  my  blest  boys,  the  honour  of  my  years, 
Of  all  my  cares  the  bounteous  rewarders  ! 
Oh  let  me  thus  embrace  you,  thus  for  ever 
\Vithin  a  mother's  love  lock  up  your  friendship  ! 
And  my  sweet  sons  once  more  with  mutual  twinings 
As  one  chaste  bed  begot  you,  make  one  body  ! 
Blessings  from  Heaven  in  thousand  showers  fall  on  you  ! " 

Rollo,  Act  ii.  Sc.  3.     (FLETCHER.) 


168  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Philippo.  "Appeal  to  Reason  : 

She  will  reprieve  you  from  the  power  of  grief 
Which  rules  but  in  her  absence :  hear  me  say 
A  sovereign  message  from  her,  which  in  duty 
And  love  to  your  own  safety  you  ought  hear. 
Why  do  you  strive  so?     Whither  would  you  fly  ? 
You  cannot  wrest  yourself  away  from  care  : 
You  may  from  counsel :  you  may  shift  your  place 
But  not  your  person  :  and  another  clime 
Makes  you  no  other." 

LavJs  Pilgrimage,  Act  v.  Sc.  4.     (SHIRLEY.) 

Philippo.  "  For  my  sister 

I  do  believe  you  :  and  so  near  blood  has  made  us, 
With  the  dear  love  I  ever  bore  your  virtues, 
That  I  will  be  a  brother  to  your  griefs  too. 
Be  comforted  'tis  no  dishonour,  sister, 
To  love  nor  to  love  him  you  do  :  he's  a  gentleman 
Of  as  sweet  hopes  as  years  :  as  many  promises 
As  there  be  growing  truths  and  great  ones. 

Theodosia.  Oh,  sir  ! " 

Love's  Pilgrimage,  Act.  i.  Sc.  2.     (FLETCHER.) 


Dorothea.  "  Be  nigh  me  still,  then  ! 

In  golden  letters  I'll  set  down  that  day 
That  gave  thee  to  me.     Little  did  I  hope 
To  meet  such  worlds  of  comfort  in  thyself, 
This  little  pretty  body  :  when  I  coming 
Forth  of  the  temple  heard  my  beggar  boy, 
My  sweet-faced  godly  beggar-boy,  crave  an  alm=;, 
Which  with  glad  hand  I  gave,  with  lucky  hand  ! 
And  when  I  took  thee  home,  my  most  chaste  bosom 
The  thought  was  filled  with  no  hot  wanton  fire, 
But  with  a  holy  flame  mounting  still  higher 
On  wings  of  cherubims  than  it  did  before." 

Virgin  Martyr.  Act  ii.  Sc.  I.     (DEKKLR.) 


PA SSA  GES  FOR  ILL  USTRA  TION.  1 69 

Dorothea.  "  Even  thy  malice  serves 

To  me  but  as  a  ladder  to  mount  up 
To  such  a  height  of  happiness,  where  I  shall 
Look  clown  with  scorn  on  thee  and  on  the  world : 
When  circled  with  true  pleasures  placed  above 
The  reach  of  death  or  time  'twill  be  my  glory 
To  think  at  what  an  easy  price  I  bought  it. 
There's  a  perpetual  spring,  perpetual  youth  : 
No  joint-benumbing  cold  or  scorching  heat. 
Famine  nor  age  have  any  being  there. 
Forget  for  shame  your  Tempe  !     Bury  in 
Oblivion  your  feign'd  Hesperian  orchards  !  " 

Virgin  Martyr,  Act.  iv.  Sc.  3.     (MASSINGER. ) 


Charalois.     "  And  though  this  country,  like  a  viperous 

mother 

Not  only  hath  eat  up  ungratefully 
All  means  of  thee  her  son,  but  last  thyself, 
Leaving  thy  heir  so  poor  and  indigent 
He  cannot  raise  thee  a  poor  monument 
Such  as  a  flatterer  or  a  usurer  hath  : 
Thy  worth  in  every  honest  breast  builds  one, 
Making  their  friendly  hearts  thy  funeral  stone." 

Fatal  Dowry,  Act  ii.  Sc.  I.     (FIELD.) 

Charalois.  "  I  but  attended 

Your  lordship's  pleasure.     For  the  fact  as  of 
The  former,  I  confess  it,  but  with  what 
Base  wrongs  I  was  unwillingly  drawn  to  it, 
To  my  few  words  there  are  some  other  proofs 
To  witness  this  for  truth.     When  I  was  married, 
For  then  I  must  begin,  the  slain  Novall 
Was  to  my  wife  in  way  of  our  French  courtship 
A  most  devoted  sen-ant." 

Fatal  Dowry,  Act  v.  Sc.  2.     (MASSINGER.) 


1  70  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Simonides.  "  By  my  troth,  Sir 

I  partly  do  believe  it  :  conceive,  Sir, 
You  have  indirectly  answered  my  question. 
I  did  not  doubt  the  fundamental  ground 
Of  law  in  general  for  the  most  solid  : 
But  this  particular  law  that  me  concerns, 
Now  at  the  present,  if  that  be  firm  and  strong 
And  powerful,  and  forcible,  and  permanent, 
I  am  a  young  man  that  has  an  old  father. 

Act  i.  Sc.  I.     (ROWLEY.) 


Simonides.          "  Know  then,  Cleanthes,  there  is  none  can  be 
A  good  son  and  bad  subject  ;  for  if  princes 
Be  called  the  people's  fathers,  then  the  subjects 
Are  all  his  sons,  and  he  that  flouts  the  prince 
Doth  disobey  his  father  :  there  you're  gone. 

I  say  again,  this  act  of  thine  expresses 
A  double  disobedience  ;  as  our  princes 
Are  fathers,  so  they  are  our  sovereigns  too, 
And  he  that  doth  rebel  'gainst  sovereignty 
Doth  commit  treason  in  the  height  of  degree. 
And  now  thou  art  quite  gone." 

Old  Law,  Actv.  Sc.  i.     (MIDDLETON.) 

The  above  passages  have  been  taken  at  random  from  the  authors 
quoted  under  the  following  limitations  :  — 

1.  For  every  pair  of   authors  that  wrote  together  in  the  plays 
considered  in  this  paper,  two  corresponding  quotations  are  given. 

2.  These  pairs  of  quotations  are  in  each  instance  taken  from  the 
same  play  and  from  speeches  of  the  same  personage  :  in  order  to 
insure  more  accurate  comparison.     They  are  also  as  near  as  may  be 
of  the  same  length. 


METRICAL  TESTS.  ;7i 


POSTSCRIPT  I.— ON  "  HENRY  VIII." 

In  order  to  determine  the  question  of  the  date  of  the  Shakespeare 
part  of  this  play,  so  as  to  settle  the  difference  between  Mr.  Speclding 
and  Professor  Elze,  I  have  subjected  the  Shakespeare  and  Fletcher 
portions  to  metrical  tests  :  with  the  following  results  : — 

Shakespeare.     Fletcher. 

Total  number  of  lines 1146  1467 

Number  of  rhyme  lines    ......  6  10 

,,         ,,     short  lines 19  27 

,,         „     Alexandrines 23  8 

,,         ,,     double  endings 380  863 

Proportion  of  double  endings  to  blank  verse  1:3  1:17 

It  is  manifest  that  Mr.  Spedding  is  right,  and  Professor  Elze 
wrong.  The  rhyme-test  here,  as  always,  is  decisive ;  in  the  Shake 
speare  part  there  are  only  six  rhyme  lines,  and  these  rhymes  all  three 
accidental.  The  date  of  the  Shakespeare  work  is  thus  determined 
as  the  very  latest — as  late,  at  least,  as  the  Tempest  and  Winter's 
Tale,  as  Mr.  Spedding  says.  All  the  other  metrical  peculiarities 
agree  with  this. 

It  will  also  be  seen  in  my  paper  on  Beaumont,  Fletcher,  and 
M&ssinger,  that  Fletcher  did  not  work  in  conjunction  with  other 
authors  than  Beaumont  till  1613.  The  only  exception  apparent  is 
Tfie  Two  Noble  Kinsmen  ;  but  although  the  Shal<  espeare  part  of  this 
play  was  earlier  than  1613  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the 
Fletcher  part  is.  This  gives  another  instance  of  the  consistency 
obtained  in  all  our  theories  by  careful  application  of  the  rhyme- 
test. 

[Is  it  not  a  probable  conjecture  that  Shakespeare  originally  wrote 
a  complete  play;  that  part  of  the  MS.  was  burnt  in  the  Globe  fire 
of  1613  ;  that  Fletcher  was  employed  to  re- write  this  part ;  that  in 
doing  this  he  used  such  material  as  he  recollected  from  his  hearing 
of  Shakespeare's  play?  This  would  account  for  the  superiority  of 
his  work  here  over  that  elsewhere. — F.  G.  F.  Jan.  1876.] 


1 73  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

POSTSCRIPT  II. 
ON  "THE  TWO  NOBLE  KINSMEN." 


This  play  has  been  already  so  conclusively  shown  to  be  a  ioint 
production  of  Shakespeare  and  Fletcher,  and  the  portion  written 
by  each  author  has  been  so  accurately  assigned,  that  I  should  not 
have  thought  it  necessary  to  re-open  the  question,  were  it  not  that 
every  instance  in  which  the  results  of  critical  examinations  based  on 
different  grounds  can  be  obtained,  is  valuable,  not  only  as  to  the 
immediate  end  in  view,  but  also  as  a  test  of  the  worth  and  power  of 
the  methods  employed.  So  in  this  instance  ;  if  the  examination  as 
to  authorship  based  on  considerations  of  an  aesthetic  nature,  coincides 
with  that  based  on  metrical  criticism,  we  shall  have  not  only  an 
enormously  strong  addition  to  the  evidence  of  Fletcher's  share  in 
this  work,  but  also  a  remarkable  example  of  the  value  of  metrical 
tests  in  determining  authorship.  It  is  for  the  latter  reason  that  I 
now  proceed  to  give  the  results  of  metrical  examination  of  this  play 
of  The  Two  Noble  Kinsmen.  I  may  add  that  having  had  to  work 
in  a  small  country  village,  with  no  library  within  reach,  and  my 
whole  critical  apparatus  consisting  of  the  Folio  reprint,  Mrs.  Clarke's 
"Concordance,"  Dyce's  "Beaumont  and  Fletcher,"  and  Sidney 
Walker's  Notes,  my  results  were  obtained  quite  independently  of 
previous  investigators,  whose  essays  I  had  never  seen. 

To  come  to  the  point,  then  :  In  this  play  there  are  two  prose 
scenes,  Act  ii.  Sc.  la ;  Act  iv.  Sc.  3.  Both  these  belong  to  the 
underplot.  In  my  paper  on  Fletcher  I  have  shown  that  Fletcher 
never  wrote  prose  in  any  of  his  plays.  I  should  therefore  assign 
these  to  Shakespeare.  Mr.  Hickson  has  given  strong  reasons  for 
the  same  course,  on  other  considerations. 

Looking  next  to  the  number  of  rhymes,  we  find  no  aid  as  to  dis 
criminating  these  authors.  Except  in  the  masque,  there  are  only 
five  in  the  whole  play  :  two  in  the  parts  we  assign  to  Shakespeare  ; 
three  in  the  Fletcher  parts.  Not  only  does  this  agree  with  Fletcher's 
usual  practice,  but  it  enables  us  to  say  with  confidence  that  Shake- 


METRICAL   TESTS. 


173 


speare's  part  of  this  play  was  written  as  late  as  1610  A.D.  :  as  only 
in  The  Tempest  and  Winter's  Tale  do  we  find  that  he  had  given  up 
rhymes  to  anything  like  such  an  extent :  even  in  the  Roman  plays 
we  find  twenty  rhymes  in  a  play. 

From  the  number  of  Alexandrines,  we  obtain  no  aid  whatever. 
There  are  three  in  the  Shakespeare  parts,  six  in  the  Fletcher. 

From  the  number  of  lines  of  one,  two,  or  three  measures,  we  also 
obtain  no  aid  :  there  are  forty-one  in  the  Shakespeare  parts,  twenty- 
seven  in  the  Fletcher.  But  the  number  of  double  endings  and  of 
incomplete  lines  of  four  measures,  which  are  the  most  important 
metrical  means  of  distinguishing  between  these  writers,  will  require 
tabulation  in  extenso. 


TABLE    (SHAKESPEARE). 


.      Act. 

Scene. 

No.  of 
Lines. 

Double 
Endings. 

Lines  of 
4  feet. 

Proportion  of 
lines  with 
Double  Endings* 

I.     . 

I 

20Q 

51 

I  in  4-1 

2. 

116 

37 

— 

I         3'I 

3- 

100 

37 

— 

I         27 

4- 

49 

12 

— 

I         41 

5- 

6 

— 

— 

III.     . 

122 

36 

— 

i       3  '4 

2. 

38 

9 

— 

i      4-2 

V.    . 

I. 

173 

50 

i       3'5 

3- 

46 

42 

i       3'5 

4- 

147 

47 

I 

i       31 

Total  . 

— 

1124 

321 

I 

i  in3'5 

t 

This  Table  contains  all  the  scenes  assigned  to  Shakespeare,  except 
the  two  prose  scenes  which  are  certainly  his.  I  no\v  give  a  similar 
Table  for  the  other  parts. 


174 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 
TABLE     (FLETCHER). 


Act. 

Scene. 

No.  of 
Lines. 

Double 
Endings. 

Lines  of 
4  feet. 

Proportion  of    | 
lines  with 
Double  Endings. 

II.     . 

lb. 

275 

I58 

I 

in  17 

2. 

82 

33 

3 

2'2 

3- 

33 

18 

2 

1-8 

4- 

64 

45 

I 

I'4 

5- 

39 

23 

— 

17 

III.     . 

3- 

53 

32 

— 

1-6 

4 

20 

ii 

— 

1-9 

5- 

107 

51 

2 

2'I 

6. 

308 

192 

3 

1-6 

IV.    . 

i. 

15° 

61 

4 

2-5 

2. 

156 

73 

2 

2'0 

V.     . 

2. 

III 

64 

I 

17 

Total  . 

- 

I39S 

771 

19 

i  in  i'8 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  metrical  evidence  confirms  the  results  of 
the  higher  criticism  in  the  strongest  manner.  The  average  number 
of  double  endings  in  the  Shakespeare  parts  is  exactly  that  of  the 
latter  part  of  his  career  (4th  period,  time  of  Winter's  Tale)  •  the 
number  in  the  Fletcher  part  exactly  agrees  with  that  deduced 
in  my  paper  on  Fletcher  from  all  his  undoubted  works.  In  one 
scene  only  (Act  iv.  Sc.  I)  does  his  average  fall  as  low  as  2 -5  ; 
and  in  this  scene  there  is,  I  think,  some  Shakespeare  material  (not 
much)  used  by  him  in  the  jailer's  speeches.  Moreover,  the  imper 
fect  four-measure  lines  occur  in  the  Fletcher  parts  in  the  proportion 
of  15  to  I  in  the  Shakespeare  parts.  There  is,  therefore,  not  only 
the  strongest  confirmation  of  the  conclusions  of  the  best  critics  as  to 
this  play,  but  also  the  firmest  ground  for  confidence  in  our  metrical 
arguments.  In  every  case  when  examination  careful  enough  for 
firm  conclusions  has  been  previously  given,  our  results  are  found  in 
agreement  with  them  ;  while,  at  the  same  time,  we  have  in  the  ex 
amination  of  metres  an  instrument  far  more  powerful,  because  more 
exact  and  more,  scientific,  than  any  other  that  has  ever  been  brought 
to  bear  on  subjects  of  this  nature. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ON '"THE  TAMING  OF  THE   SHREW. 
(Read  April  24,  1874.) 

THERE  is  something  in  the  first  aspect  of  this  play  so  different 
from  the  generality  of  Shakespeare's  work  as  to  have  long  since 
excited  suspicion  as  to  its  authorship.  Mr.  Hallam,  for  instance, 
quotes,  apparently  with  approval,  Mr.  Collier's  opinion  that  Shake 
speare  had  nothing  to  do  with  any  of  the  scenes  in  which  Katherine 
and  Petruchio  are  not  introduced.  In  support  of  this  opinion  many 
general  considerations  may  be  urged ;  e.g.  : — 

1.  It  does  not  occur  in  Meres's  list ;   and,  as   Meres   mentions 
every  undoubted  play  that  is  at  all  likely  to  have  been  written  by 
Shakespeare  before    1598,    and  even  includes    Titus  Andronicus, 
which  has  been  given  up  by  many  critics  whose  opinions  are  6f 
importance  on  these  questions,  it  is  very  unlikely  that  he  should 
have  omitted  this  one,  and  this  only. 

2.  This  is  the  only  instance  of  a  play  w;th  an  Induction,  so  as 
to  form  a  play  within  a  play,  in  all  Shakespeare's  work  ;  and  this 
Induction   is   most   clumsily  managed  :   there  is  no  provision   for 
getting  Sly  off  the   stage.      Shakespeare   could  never  have  been 
guilty  of  this  blunder,  especially  as  the  old  play,    The  Taming  of 
a  Shrew,  winds  up  satisfactorily  in  this  respect. 

3.  There  is  no  other  comedv  of  Shakespeare's,  except  the  Merry 
Wives,  in  which  there  is  not  a  Duke  or  King  ;  and  in  which  all  the 


176  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

characters  are  taken  from  the  middle  classes.     The  tone  of  this 
work  is  quite  sui  generis  in  this  respect. 

4.  As  Hazlitt  remarks :   "This  is  almost  the  only  one  of  Shake 
speare's  comedies  which  has  a  regular  plot  and  downright  moral." 
I    would   rather  omit   the    "almost,"    and  add   that  no  work    of 
Shakespeare's  is  so  narrow  in  feeling,  so  restricted  in  purpose,  so 
unpleasing  in  general  tone. 

5.  This  play  was  made  a  special  object  of  ridicule  by  Fletcher 
in  his  Woman'1  s  Prize,  or  the  Tamer  Tamed ;  the  date  of  this  latter 
play  is  uncertain,  but  it  lies  between  1616  and  1621,  probably  nearer 
the  former  date  than  the  latter.     Now,  would  Fletcher  have  chosen 
for  ridicule  a  work  by  his  friend,  whom  he  admired  and  respected, 
and  that,  too,  within  three  or   four  years  at  most  of  his  friend's 
death,  not  long  after  he  had  been  remodelling  Henry   VIII..,  and 
working  wirh   him    in   The  Two   Noble  Kinsmen  ?     But   we  have 
much  stronger  arguments  than  these  general  ones  ;  to  which  we 
now  pass  on. 

I. — Argument  from  Metrical  peculiarities. 

The  irregular  lines   in  this  play   fall   into    several   well-defined 
classes. 

1.  There  are  lines  deficient  by  a  whole  measure  or  foot. 
Examples  : — 

i.  i,  51.  I  pray  you,  sir,  is  it  your  will. 

ii.  I,  259.  Go,  fool,  and  whom  thou  keeps':,  command. 

ii.  i,  300.  I'll  see  thee  hang'd  on  Sunday  first, 

iii.  2,  185.  Hark,  hark,  I  hear  the  minstrels  play, 

iii.  2,  233.  My  household  stuff,  my  field,  my  barn, 

iv.  i,  164.  'Tis  burnt,  and  so  is  all  the  meat, 

iv.  4,  46.  The  match  is  made,  and  all  is  done. 

v.  2,  66.  Let's  each  one  send  unto  his  wife. 

2.  There  are  lines  deficient  by  a  syllable  in  some  part  of  the  line 
marked  A  in  the  following  examples: — 

i.  i,      14.   Vincentio's  son  brought  up  in  Florence  * 

2.    190.   No  ;  sayV  me  so  A  friend  ?     \Vhatcountryman? 


OJV  THE  TAMING  OF  THE  SHREW.  177 

i.  2,  251.    Sir,  let  me  be  so  bold  as  ask  A  you. 

ii.  I,  73.  Beccare  !  you  are  marvellous  A  forward, 

iii.  2,  168.  What  said  the  wench  when  A  he  rose  again? 

iv.  i,  124.   Where  be  these  knaves  ?     What  no  man  at  A  door. 

iv-  3>  3°-  Why,  then,  the  mustard  A  without  the  beef, 

iv.  3,  62.   Lay  forth  the  gown  !     What  news  with  you,  Sir  A  ? 

iv-  4>  33-   No  worse  than  I  A  upon  some  agreement, 

iv.  4,  34.  Me  shall  you  find  ready  and  willing  A  . 

iv.  4,  55.  Then  at  my  lodging,  an  it  like  you  A  . 

3.  There  are  lines  in   which  one  syllable   constitutes  the   first 
measure. 

Examples  : — • 

i.  I.     48.   Gentlemen,  importune  me  no  farther, 
i.  i,     73.   Well  said,  master  !     Mum,  and  gaze  your  fill. 
i.  i,     74.   Gentlemen,  that  I  may  soon  make  good. 
i.  i,     90.  Gentlemen,  content  ye  !     I'm  resolved. 
i.  2,   1 60.  O  this  learning,  what  a  thing  it  is  ! 
i.  2,   161.   O  this  woodcock,  what  an  ass  it  is  ! 
i.  2,   198.  Will  he  woo  her?     Ay,  or  I  will  (He,  F.)  hang  her. 
i,  2,  247.  What !  this  gent'man  will  out-talk  us  all. 
ii.  i,   109.   Sirrah,  lead  these  gent'men  to  my  daughters. 

If  the  Globe  arrangement  be  taken,  the  line  is  still  worse,  viz.; — 
To  my  daughters  and  tell  them  both. 

ii.  I,   202.  No  such  jade  as  you,  if  me  you  mean, 
iii.  2,     89.   Come,  where  be  these  gallants?     Who's  at  home? 
iii.  2,     92.  Were  it  better  I  should  rush  in  thus  ? 

[Lines  130  and  132  have  both  been  plausibly  emended.     I  therefore 
do  not  quote  them.] 

iv.  I,  150.  Out,  you  rogue  !      You  pluck  my  foot  awry, 

iv.  I,  163.  What's  this?     Mutton?     Ay.     Who  brought  it ?     I. 

iv.  2,  1 20.  Go  with  me  to  clothe  you  as  becomes  you. 

iv.  4,  2.  Ay,  what  else,  and  but  I  be  deceived, 

iv.  4,  71.  Come,  Sir,  we  will  better  it  in  Pisa. 

v.  2,  38.  How  likes  Gremio  these  quick  .witted  folks  ? 

12 


178  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

v.  2,     40.  Head  and  butt  :  a  hasty-witted  body. 
v.  2,     93.  Not  quoted  ;  pronounced  "  wor'se"  (r  vocal). 
Ind.  2,   1 14.  Madam  wife,  they  say  that  I  have  dream'd. 

4.  There   are    lines    of    six    measures,    with   the   first  measure 
monosyllabic. 

Examples  : — 

iv.  i,  153.   Where's  my  spaniel,  Troilus  ?     Sirrha,  get  you  hence  ! 
iv.  2,       4.  Sir,  to  satisfy  you  in  whal  I  have  said. 
iv.  2,     n.  Quick  proceeders,  marry  !     Now  tell  me,  I  pray, 
iv-  2>     33-  Never  to  marry  with  her,  though  she  would  entreat. 

(ist  foot  2  syll.  but  no  caesura.) 
i.  2,   194.  O  Sir,  such  a  life,  with  such  a  wife,  were  strange. 

5.  The  doggerel  lines  are  chiefly  of  four  measures  in  each  line. 

Examples : — 

i.  i,  68.   Hush,  master,  here's  some  good  pastime  toward  ! 

The  wench  is  stark  mad  or  wonderful  fro  ward, 
i.  2,   ii.  Villain,  I  say,  knock  me  at  the  gate ; 

And  rap  me  well,  or  I'll  knock  your  knave's  pate. 
i.  2,   16.  Faith,  sirrha,  an  you'll  not  knock  I'll  ring  it, 

I'll  try^  how  you  can  sol  fa  and  sing  it. 

The  doggerel  in  Love's  Labour's  Lost,  Comedy  of  Errors,  &c.,  has 
either  five  or  six  measures  in  each  line;  and  lines  like  these  of 
four  measures  occur  nowhere  else  in  Shakespeare. 

6.  There  are  many  rhymes  of  one  or  two  measures  in  each  line 
introduced  in  the  midst  of  the  dialogue. 

Examples  : — 

i.  I,     79.   Put  ginger  in  the  eye, 

An  she  knew  why. 
iii.  I,     83.  Nay,  by  S.  Jamy, 

I  hold  you  a  penny, 
A  horse  and  a  mon 
Is  more  than  one, 
And  yet  not  many. 


ON  THE  TAMING  OF  THE  SHREW.  179 

iv.  I,       6.  Little  pot, 

And  soon  hot. 

iv.  4,   IOI.  And  so  may  you,  Sir; 
And  so  adieu,  Sir  ! 

These  peculiarities  of  metre  are  enough  of  themselves  to  show 
that  the  greater  part  of  this  play  is  not  Shakespeare's.  On  the 
lines  that  are  deficient  by  a  syllable  or  a  measure  I  do  not  lay  great 
stress,  since  similar  instances  occur,  though  in  much  smaller  number 
and  in  corrupted  passages  only,  in  Shakespeare's  undoubted  plays. 
But  when  we  find  over  20  lines  in  which  the  first  measure  consists 
of  one  syllable;  and,  on  looking  into  the  other  plays,  find  that  12 
instances  at  most  can  be  alleged  from  the  whole  of  them,  and  that 
these  12  are  in  every  instance  explicable  on  other  principles,  then 
the  fact  that  the  metrical  scheme  of  this  play  differs  entirely  from 
the  Shakespearian,  becomes  manifest.  In  fact,  the  average  of  such 
lines  in  Shakespeare  is  (if  none  of  them  be  corrupt,  which  is 
extremely  unlikely)  less  than  one  in  two  plays. 

The  peculiar  anapaestic  doggerel  lines  with  four  measures,  and 
the  frequent  occurrence  of  short  rhymes  in  proverbial  or  quasi- 
proverbial  sayings  in  the  dialogue,  confirm  the  conclusion  reached 
above.  Still  more  does  the  occurrence  of  lines  of  six  measures,  the 
first  one  being  monosyllabic  :  not  one  instance  of  such  a  line  can 
be  adduced  from  the  undoubted  plays. 

The  frequent  contraction  of  the  word  "Gentlemen"  into  "  Gent'- 
men  "  in  this  play  is  also  noticeable ;  it  occurs, 

i.  2,  219.  Gent'men,  God  save  you  !     If  I  may  be  bold, 

ii.  I,  47.  I  am  a  gent'man  of  Verona,  Sir. 

ii.  I,  328.  Faith,  gent'men,  now  I  play  a  merchant's  part, 

ii.  i,  343.  Content  you,  gent'men  :  I'll  compound  this  strife, 

iii.  I,  185.  Gent'men  and  friends,  I  thank  you  for  your  pains. 

i.  2,  247.  What !  this  gent'man  will  out-talk  us  all. 

ii.  I,  109.  Sirrah,  lead  these  gent'men  to  my  daughters  ! 

II.— Argument  from  the  use  of  Latin  quotations  and  classical 
allusions. 

Latin  quotations  are  introduced  in  Henry  VI.,  Titus  Andronicus, 
the  first  two  acts  of  Pcricles>  the  parts  of  Timon  which  I  have 

12—2 


i8o  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

shown  elsewhere  not  to  be  Shakespeare's,  and  in  this  play.  In  the 
whole  34  of  Shakespeare's  undoubted  plays,  only  one  Latin  quotation 
occurs,  namely,  that  in  Love's  Labour's  Lost,  Fauste  precor,  &c. 
There  are  18  in  the  spurious  plays. 

The  manner  of  introducing  classical  allusions  is  not  Shakespearian. 

Compare 

i.  I,   173.   "  I  saw  sweet  beauty  in  her  face, 

Such  as  the  daughter  of  Agenor  had, 
That  made  great  Jove  to  humble  him,"  £c. 
with 

M.  V.,  iii.  2,  244.  "  We  are  the  Jasons,  we  have  won  the  fleece." 
as  fair  typical  instances. 

So, 

i.  i,  159.  "  as  secret  and  as  dear 

As  Anna  to  the  Queen  of  Carthage  was. " 

This  manner  of  introducing  such  comparisons  is  found  in  Henry 
VI.,  3rd  part,  often ;  but  never  in  Shakespeare's  undoubted  plays. 
For  example,  Henry  VI.,  (3)  v.  2,  19  : — 

"  As  Ulysses  and  stout  Diomede, 
With  slight  and  manhood  stole  to  Rhesus  tents, 
And  brought  from  thence  the  fatal  Thracian  steed, 
So  we,"  &c. 

N.B.  "Lying'st  knave  in  Christendom,"  Induction,  2,  25,  is 
taken  from  2  Henry  VI.,  ii.  i. 

But  the  most  remarkable  and  conclusive  phenomenon  has  yet  to 
be  noticed  :  all  the  above  peculiarities — the  lines  with  monosyllabic 
initial  measures,  the  classical  allusions,  the  doggerel  rhymes, — all 
alike  disappear  in  certain  portions  of  the  play,  notably  in  the  last 
scenes  of  the  4th  and  5th  acts,  and  in  portions  of  previous  scenes, 
e.g.  of  iv.  3 ;  ii.  r.  But  these  parts  of  the  play  are  those  in  which 
Katherine  and  Petruchio  are  on  the  stage  together  :  they  are  just 
the  parts  which  any  critical  reader  would  pick  out  as  far  superior  to 
the  rest;  they  are,  in  fact,  the  very  salt  of  the  whole.  I  feel 


ON  THE  TAMING  OF  THE  SHREW.  181 

justified  therefore  in  concluding  that  the  only  characters  in  this  play 
which  have  Shakespeare's  handiwork  in  them  are  the  two  principal 
ones,  Katherine  and  Petruchio ;  and  that  to  quote  mis  play  in  proof 
or  illustration  of  any  peculiarities  of  Shakespeare's  metrical  system, 
or  otherwise,  is  decidedly  unsafe.  Dr.  Abbott,  for  instance,  seems 
to  have  formed  some  erroneous  notions  of  the  metrical  system  of 
Shakespeare,  from  relying  too  much  on  the  douotful  plays,  if  one 
may  judge  by  the  number  of  times  he  quote?  them  to  support  his 
theories.1  It  also  follows  that  the  early  date  assigned  to  this  play, 
chiefly  founded  on  its  inferiority,  need  not  be,  and,  as  1  think,  is 
not  accurate.  In  fact,  nothing  is  more  dangerous  than  assigning 
dates  to  authors'  works  by  their  supposed  excellence  of  execution, 
or  the  contrary.  Nothing  is  more  safe  than  a  conclusion  founded 
on  the  manner  of  work,  where  the  author  shows  development  of 
style  in  his  productions ;  nothing  less  sure  than  inferences  from  the 
matter,  or  the  relative  value  of  it. 

Thus  far,  then,  our  work  has  been  destructive  ;  but  I  feel  bound 
to  give  a  theory  (at  any  rate)  plausible  as  to  the  composition  of  the 
play.  Now,  first  I  would  notice,  that  although  it  is  certainly  in 
ferior  to  Shakespeare's  comedies  of  the  Second  Period,  the  inferiority 
does  not  consist  in  immaturity,  but  in  comparative  want  of  genius. 
It  is  the  work  of  a  second-rate  author  at  his  best,  not  of  our  greatest 
author  in  his  youth.  Any  one  who  reads  it  without  a  preconceived 
notion  that  it  is  Shakespeare's,  will,  I  am  certain,  agree  as  to  this 
point.  Now,  remembering  how  this  notion  of  inferiority  being 
necessarily  associated  with  early  date  has  led  critics  astray,  inducing 
them  to  group  Titus  Andronicus,  Pericles,  and  Two  Gentlemen  of 
Verona,  as  productions  of  the  same  period,  although  three  plays 
more  different  in  style,  in  handling,  and  in  metre  could  not  be 
found,  I  will  not  say  in  Shakespeare,  but  in  all  the  Elizabethan 
drama  ;  remembering  this,  let  us  throw  aside  all  prejudice,  and  look 
into  the  metre  of  the  scenes  that  I  believe  are  Shakespeare's,  espe 
cially  the  last  in  the  play.  We  shall  find  that  the  percentage  of 
double  endings  in  these  scenes,  the  number  of  rhymes,  and  the  general 
tone  of  the  rhythm  as  to  caesura  and  stopped  lines,  coincide  with 

1  Since  I  wrote  the  above,  my  attention  has  been  called  to  the  fallowing  words 
in  Dr.  Abbott's  Shakespearian  Grammar,  Par.  505  :  "the  frequent  recurrence  of 
these  lines  in  the  Taming  of  the  Shrew  will  not  escape  notice,"  recognising  the 
difference  between  this  play  and  Shakespeare's  geueril  style. 


1 82  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL, 

the  plays  at  the  end  of  the  Second  Period,  with  As  You  Like  It  and 
Muck  Ado  about  Nothing:  and  point  to  a  date  of  1602.  Now,  in 
the  Taming  of  the  Shrew  there  is  a  line 

"  This  is  the  way  to  kill  a  wife  with  kindness," 

which  distinctly  refers  to  Heywood's  play  of  A  Woman  Killed  with 
Kindness,  which  dates  1602.  I  would  therefore  assign  the  Taming 
of  the  Shrew  to  1602,  and  explain  its  form  in  some  such  way  as  this. 
It  was  written  by  some  one x  on  the  model  of  the  older  play,  and 
generally  in  a  satisfactory  manner ;  but  the  ending  being  found  un 
satisfactory,  Shakespeare  was  desired  to  furnish  some  alterations, 
which  he  did  ;  but  the  playwright  who  interwove  these  in  the  drama 
cut  out  the  ending  of  the  play  as  it  stood,  together  with  the  end  of 
the  Induction,  not  noticing  that  Sly  was  then  left  undisposed  of; 
and  the  ending  in  Shakespeare's  scene  was  so  satisfactory,  that  it 
was  not  found  advisable  to  meddle  with  it  afterwards.  This  will 
explain  the  absence  from  Meres's  list,  and  all  the  other  phenomena 
which  appear  at  first  so  inexplicable.  I  might  adduce  other  argu 
ments  to  confirm  the  above  ;  for  instance,  the  extreme  unlikelihood 
that  Fletcher  should  in  1618,  or  thereabouts,  choose  a  play  to 
ridicule  that  had  been  published  at  least  twenty-five  years,  if  the 
ordinary  theory  is  correct ;  or  the  much  stronger  argument,  that  if 
there  is  any  truth  in  metrical  tests,  there  is  no  place  whatever  in 
which  this  play  can  be  introduced  into  any  scheme  of  development 
of  Shakespeare's  metrical  system.  The  number  of  rhymes  would 
place  it  at  the  end  of  the  First  Period,  after  Midsummer  Night's 
Dream  and  Romeo  and  Jidiet ;  but  its  other  metrical  peculiarities, 
as  noticed  above,  would  not  fit  into  any  part  of  the  plays  of  any 
period. 

I  may  add  that  if  this  theory  be  the  right  one — and  I  feel  rather 
confident  it  is — it  brings  the  date  of  the  play  just  to  the  time  when 
Shakespeare's  mind  was  busied  in  re-organizing  his  Twelfth  Night, 
and  other  works,  previously  to  his  turning  his  attention  from  Comedy 
to  Tragedy,  to  which  he  devoted  all  his  energy  up  to  the  last  year 
of  his  dramatic  life. 

[i  In  my  opinion,  Thomas  Lodge.— F.  G.  F.,  Jan.  1876.] 


ON  THE  TAMING  OF  THE  SHREW.  183 

In  order  finally  to  impress  on  the  memory  the  differences  of  style 
in  the  Shakespeare  parts  of  this  play  and  in  the  other  portions, 
compare  the  following  passages,  the  most  characteristic  I  can  find  in 
the  play : — • 

'•  Fie,  fie,  unknit  that  threat'ning  unkinde  brow, 
And  dart  not  scornfull  glances  from  those  eies, 
To  wound  thy  Lord,  thy  King,  thy  Governour. 
It  blots  thy  beautie  as  frosts  doe  bite  the  mead, 
Confounds  thy  fame,  as  whirlewinds  shake  faire  budds, 
And  in  no  sence  is  meete  or  amiable. 
A  woman  mou'd  is  like  a  fountaine  troubled, 
Muddie,  ill-seeming,  thicke,  bereft  of  beautie, 
And  while  it  is  so,  none  so  dry  or  thirstie, 
Will  daigne  to  sip,  or  touch  one  drop  of  it." 

Act  v.  Sc.  i.     (SHAKESPEARE.) 

"  Tranio,  since  for  the  great  desire  I  had 
To  see  faire  Padua,  nurserie  of  Arts, 
I  am  arriu'd  from  fruitfull  Lombardie, 
The  pleasant  garden  of  great  Italy, 
And  by  my  father's  loue  and  leaue  am  arm'd 
With  his  good  will  and  thy  good  companie, 
My  trustie  seruant,  well  approu'd  in  all, 
Here  let  us  breath  and  haply  institute 
A  course  of  learning  and  ingenious  studies." 

Act  i.  Sc.  i.     (Not  SHAKESPEARE.) 

"  Oh,  monstrous  arrogance  : 
Thou  lyest,  thou  thred,  thou  thimble, 
Thou  yard,  three-quarter,  half-yard,  quarter,  naile, 
Thou  Flea,  thou  Nit,  thou  winter  cricket  thou  : 
Brau'd  in  mine  owne  house  with  a  skeine  of  thred  : 
Away,  thou  rag,  thou  quantitie,  thou  remnant, 
Or  I  shall  so  bemete  thee  with  thy  yard 
As  thou  shalt  think  on  prating  while  thou  liu'st." 

Act  iv.  Sc.  3.     (?  SHAKESPEARE.) 


184  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

"  Hor.  Sir,  a  word  ere  you  go. 

Are  you  a  sutor  to  the  Maid  you  talke  of,  yea  or  no? 

Tra.  And  if  I  be,  Sir,  is  it  any  offence  ? 

Gre.  No  :  if  without  more  words  you  will  get  you  hence. 

Tra.  Why.  Sir,  I  pray,  are  not  the  streets  as  free 
For  me  as  for  you  ? 

Gre.  But  so  is  not  she. 

Tra.  For  what  reason,  I  beseech  you  ? 

Gre.  For  this,  Sir,  if  you'll  know, 

That  she's  the  choise  loue  of  Signior  Gremio. " 

Act  i.  Sc.  2.    (Not  SHAKESPEARE.) 

"  For  'tis  the  minde  that  makes  the  bodie  rich, 
And  as  the  sunne  breakes  through  the  darkest  clouds, 
So  honor  peereth  in  the  meanest  habit. 
What,  is  the  Jay  more  precious  than  the  Larke, 
Because  his  feathers  are  more  beautifull  ? 
Or  is  the  Adder  better  than  the  Eele, 
Because  his  painted  skin  contents  the  eye  ? 
Oh  no,  good  Kate  ;  neither  art  thou  the  worse 
For  this  poore  furniture  and  meane  array. " 

Act  iv.  Sc.  3.     (Not  SHAKESPEARE.) 

"  Be  she  as  foul  as  was  Florentius  loue, 
As  old  as  Sibell,  and  as  curst  and  shrow'd 
As  Socrates'  Zentippe,  or  a  worse  ; 
She  moues  me  not,  or  not  remoues  at  least 
Affections  edge  me  in.     Were  she  as  rough 
As  are  the  swelling  Adriaticke  seas, 
I  come  to  wiue  it  wealthily  in  Padua. 
If  wealthily,  then  happily  in  Padua." 

Act  i.  Sc.  2.    (Not  SHAKESPEARE.) 

"  Such  dutie  as  the  subject  owes  the  Prince, 
E'en  such  a  woman  oweth  to  her  husband  : 
And  when  she  is  froward,  peeuish,  sullen,  soure, 
And  not  obedient  to  his  honest  will, 


ON  THE  TAMING  OF  THE  SHREW. 


185 


What  is  she  but  a  foul,  unbending  Rebell, 

And  gracelesse  Traitor  to  her  louing  Lord? 

I  am  ashamed  that  women  are  so  simple 

To  offer  warre  when  they  should  kneele  for  peace, 

Or  seek  for  rule,  supremacie,  and  sway, 

When  they  are  bound  to  serue,  loue,  and  obay." 

Act  v.  Sc.  2.    (SHAKESPEARE.) 

[P.  S.  The  lists  formerly  given  in  this  paper  of  peculiar  words  were 
only  preliminary  to  my  edition  of  Henry  VI. ;  in  which  the  whole 
question  of  "once-used"  words  will  be  thoroughly  discussed,  and 
the  method  of  using  them  in  discriminating  authorship  laid  down  in 
detail] 

Hereupon  follows  my  division  of  The  Taming  of  the  Shrew  into 
Shakespearian  and  non- Shakespearian  portions,  with  the  results  of 
the  rhyme-test  as  applied  to  each.  Nothing  more  is,  I  think, 
needful  to  confirm  Dr.  Farmer's  theory  as  to  the  authorship,  and 
Mr.  Collier's  as  to  the  date,  of  this  play. 


METRICAL  TABLE. 


SHAKESPEARE. 

Total 
Lines. 

Verse 
Lines. 

Rhyme 
Lines. 

Ratio  of 
Rhyme  to  Verse. 

ii.  I,  168—326.... 
iii.  2,  a.  c  
iv.  I,  .. 

I56 

233 

224 

156 

I87 
I  O2 

2 

6 

£ 

17 

V,  

198 

159 

6 

26-5 

5»  • 

78 

78 

TQ'C 

V.  2,    I  —  I75  

175 

175 

10 

\r\ 

Total  

1064 

857 

35 

24 

i86 


S2-IA  KESPEA  RE  MANUAL. 


SECOND  AUTHOR. 

Total 
Lines.' 

Verse 
Lines. 

Rhyme 
Lines. 

Ratio  of 
Rhyme  to  Verse. 

i    I               .... 

2O 

227 

18 

12-6 

2                  

282 

2^0 

CI 

5 

ii    i    a.  c.  

All 

247 

14 

I7-6 

iii.  I.  ... 

02 

74 

12 

6-1 

2,  129—150  ... 
iv.  2.    .        

21 
1  2O 

21 
1  2O 

2 

8 

10-5 

1C 

4  

IOQ 

70 

6 

I  VI 

V     I 

I  ^s 

•2-2 

18 

1-8 

2,    176  —  189.... 

14 

14 

H 

i 

Total  

1449 

IC65 

143 

7  '4 

The  Induction  (not  Shakespeare's)  is  rhymeless,  evidently  with 
intention,  just  as  the  play  in  Hamlet  is  rhymed  :  to  distinguish  the 
play  within  the  play.  The  rhyme-ratio  of  rhyme  to  verse,  I  to  24  ; 
that  is,  of  rhyme  to  blank,  i  to  23 ;  places  this  play  in  1602  : 
exactly  where  I  anticipated  it  would  come,  for  other  reasons  :  it 
comes  at  the  extreme  end  of  the  Second  Period  along  with  Twelfth 
Night  and  As  You  Like  It.  (See  my  paper  on  Twelfth  Night.) 
The  difference  of  the  ratios  in  the  Shakespeare  and  other  parts  of 
the  play  (7*4  and  24)  is  so  great  as  to  distinctly  show  the  value  of 
the  rhyme-test  in  determining  authorship  when  properly  used. 

[P.S.  Since  this  paper  was  written,  I  have  seen  reason  to  enlarge 
the  hypothesis  I  proposed  in  it  to  the  following  purport  : — The 
original  Taming  of  a  Shrew  was  written  by  Shakespeare  and 
Marlowe  in  conjunction  for  L.  Pembroke's  company  ;  Shakespeare 
writing  the  prose  scenes  and  Marlowe  the  verse.  In  1600  The 
Whole  Contention,  Hamlet,  Titus  Andronicus,  and  The  Taming  of 
a  Shrew,  became  the  property  of  the  Chamberlain's  men,  all  having 
formerly  belonged  to  Pembroke's.  Shakespeare  re-wrote  his  own 
part  of  the  Taming  of  a  Shrew,  and  Lodge  re-wrote  Marlowe's ; 
hence  our  present  play  The  learning  of  the  Shrew.  Shakespeare  also 
re-wrote  Hamlet  (perhaps  his  own  part  only  at  first,  Lodge  helping 
him  by  re-writing  Marlowe's  for  the  first  Quarto)  ;  he  also  touched 
(slightly)  the  other  plays.  All  this  was  done  in  1601-2.  See  my 
paper  on  Henry  VI.,  "  Macmillan's  Magazine,"  Nov.  1875. — 
F.  G.  F.,  Jan.  1876.] 


CHAPTER  V. 
ON    "TIMON   OF  ATHENS." 

PART  i.    (1874,) 
(Read  May  8,  1874.) 

SYMPSON,  Knight,  and  others  have  held  that  this  play  is  not 
entirely  the  work  of  Shakespeare  :  but  they  have,  so  far  as  I  know, 
all  proceeded  on  the  hypothesis  that  Shakespeare  took  up  an  older 
work  of  an  inferior  writer,  and  founded  on  it  our  present  play,  by 
retouching,  rewriting,  and  interpolating  new  scenes.  The  object 
of  the  present  paper  is  to  show  that  the  nucleus,  the  original  and 
only  valuable  part  of  the  play,  is  Shakespeare's  ;  and  that  it  was 
completed  for  the  stage  by  a  second  and  inferior  hand. 

Before  going  into  details  as  to  metre,  &c.,  I  will  examine  the 
scenes  of  the  play  in  order  :  In  Act  i.  Sc.  I,  I  find  nothing  that 
we  can  reject  except  the  prose  parts,  1.  186 — 248,  and  1.  266 — 283. 
The  former  of  these  is  exactly  in  the  same  style  as  other  prose  talk 
with  Apemantus.  which  we  shall  presently  see  must  be  rejected : 
it  is  bald,  cut  up,  and  utterly  unlike  the  speeches  of  the  same 
personages  in  the  other  parts  of  the  same  scene  ;  and  above  all, 
it  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  plot,  and  does  not  advance  the 
story  a  step  :  the  latter  bit  is  clearly  parenthetical :  after  Timon 
has  said,  "  Let  us  in  ! "  one  of  the  rest  who  entered  with  Alcibiades 
says,  "Come,  shall  we  in?  and  taste  L.  Timon's  bountie?"  and 
after  a  little  conversation,  he  and  his  friend,  another  of  the  rest,  go 
in  together.  So  I  think  Shakespeare  arranged  it  :  his  alterer 


!S8  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

empties  the  stage  of  all  but  Apemantus,  who  stays  in  order  to 
"  drop  after  all  discontentedly  like  himself"  in  the  next  scene  :  but 
as  there  was  a  bit  of  Shakespeare  to  be  used  up  (and  we  shall  see 
that  he  could  not  afford  to  lose  a  line,  for  reasons  to  be  given 
hereafter),  the  alterer  brings  in  two  extra  Lords  to  talk  to  Apemantus, 
so  that,  after  all,  Apemantus  has  no  opportunity  of  leaving  the  stage 
discontentedly  like  himself.  This  is  too  clumsy  for  Shakespeare, 
whether  doing  his  own  work,  or  vamping  another  man's.  The 
prose  therefore  in  this  scene  I  reject :  the  verse,  which  all  hangs 
together,  I  retain :  it  is  Shakespeare's  certainly  ;  for  instance — 

"  All  those  which  were  his  fellowes  but  of  late, 
Some  better  than  his  valew,  on  the  moment 
Follow  his  strides,  his  Lobbies  fill  with  tendance, 
Raine  Sacrificiall  whisperings  in  his  eaer, 
Make  Sacred  euen  his  styrrop,  and  through  him 
Drinke  the  free  Ayre." 

Act  i.  Sc.  2,  on  the  other  hand,  has  not  a  trace  of  Shakespeare 
in  it.  Yentigius  (who  is  called  Ventidius  in  the  Shakespeare  part 
of  the  play)  offers  to  repay  the  5  talents  advanced  by  Timon,  and 
tells  of  the  death  of  his  father.  This  is  certainly  not  known  to 
the  author  of  the  last  part  of  Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  where  the  information 
as  to  Ventidius's  father  is  given  again,  but  no  allusion  is  made  to 
Ventidius's  offer.  Timoti  quotes  hackneyed  Latin  :  the  whole 
scene  is  inferior,  and  leaves  the  story  unadvanced,  and  it  contains 
the  first  mention  of  Lords  Lucius  and  Lucullus,  of  whom,  with 
their  worthy  colleague  Sempronius,  there  is  no  notice  in  the 
original  part  of  the  play.  The  steward  also,  or  at  any  rate  some 
one  who  talks  very  like  the  steward  of  the  second  author's  scenes, 
is  here  called  Flavius,  and  here  only.  But  in  Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  Flavius 
is  given  by  Shakespeare  as  the  name  of  one  of  Timon's  servants 
who  is  not  the  steward.  As  to  the  poor  humour,  poorer  metre, 
and  wretched  general  style  of  this  scene,  I  need  say  nothing  :  it 
is  manifest  on  a  mere  cursory  reading,  but  I  give  a  specimen  of 
\\\t  poetry,  the  best  I  can  find. 

"  He  commands  vs  to  pro  wide,  and  giue  great  gnifts, 
and  all  out  of  an  empty  Coffer : 


ON  TIMON  OF  ATHENS.  189 

Nor  will  he  know  his  Purse,  or  yeeld  me  this, 

To  shew  him  what  a  Begger  his  heart  is, 

Being  of  no  power  to  make  his  wishes  good. 

His  promises  flye  so  beyond  his  state, 

That  what  he  speaks  is  all  in  debt ;  he  owis  for  every  word  ; 

He  is  so  kind  that  he  now  pays  interest  for  't, 

His  Land's  put  to  their  Bookes." 

However  fine  this  may  be,  it  is  certainly  not  in  the  style  of 
Shakespeare,  or  of  the  preceding  scene. 

But  in  Act  ii.  Sc.  I  we  come  on  the  genuine  play  again  : — 

"For  I  dofeare, 

When  every  Feather  stickes  in  his  own  wing, 
Lord  Timon  will  be  left  a  naked  gull, 
Which  flashes  now  a  Phoenk." 

There  is  the  true  ring  in  this. 

Act  ii.  Sc.  2  is  also  genuine,  except  the  prose  part,  1.  46 — 131, 
and  195 — 204.  When  Timon  has  demanded  an  explanation  of 
the  steward,  and  the  steward  has  desired  the  duns  to  cease  their 
importunity  till  after  dinner,  he  adds  to  them,  "Pray  you  walk 
neere  !  Fie  speak  with  you  anon  ; "  and  straightway  gives  the 
explanation  desired  :  but  the  playwright  who  improved  the  drama 
wanted  Apemantus  to  talk  nonsense  to  the  Page  and  Fool  of  a 
harlot  (unknown  in  the  rest  of  the  piece) :  so  he  makes  the  steward 
say,  "  Pray  draw  neere  ! "  and  go  out  with  Timon,  apparently  to 
have  out  their  explanation.  Caphis  and  Co.  do  not  draw  neere, 
but  stop  to  talk  to  Apemantus.  When  we've  had  enough  of  that, 
in  come  Timon  and  the  steward,  who  again  says,  "  Pray  you  walk 
neere,"  which  the  creditors  do  this  time,  and  Timon  and  the 
steward  go  on  with  their  talk  as  if  they  had  never  left  the  stage 
to  say  anything  outside.  This  prose  part  must  be  accepted  or 
rejected  along  with  the  prose  in  Act  i.  Sc.  I. 

The  other  smaller  bit  is  also  evidently  an  insertion.  Timon  is 
going  to  try  his  friends  :  he  calls  for  Flavius  and  Servilius,  his 
servants  ;  they  come  ;  he  says  he  will  despatch  them  severally  : 
accordingly,  he  tells  one  to  go  to  Sempronius  the  other  to  Ventidius. 
But  the  second  author,  having  already  in  a  previous  scene  intro- 


igo  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

duced  Lords  Lucius  and  Lucullus  by  name,  now  adds  Sempronius 
to  them,  increases  the  number  of  servants  to  three,  sends  them  off 
to  these  three  Lords,  and  leaves  the  messages  to  the  Senators  and 
Ventidius  for  the  steward. 

Note  also  that  he  sends  to  each  of  these  friends  for  50  talents  a 
piece  :  but  I  do  not  enter  on  the  question  of  the  moneys  in  this  part 
of  my  paper.  It  is  sufficient  here  to  mention  that  the  verse  part  of 
the  scene  is  pure  Shakespeare.  No  one  else  could  have  written  it. 
The  "  drunken  spilth  of  wine,"  the  "one  cloud  of  Winter  showres, 
These  flyes  are  coucht,"  the  "halfe-caps  and  cold  mouing  nods, 
They  froze  me  into  silence, '"'  bear  the  lawful  stamp  of  his  mintage. 

But  next  come  three  short  scenes  in  which  we  find  the  three 
servants,  -Flaminius,  Servilius,  and  Anonymus,  applying  to  Lords 
Lucius,  Lucullus,  and  Sempronius,  in  detail ;  but  the  most  dramatic 
situation  of  all,  the  application  of  the  steward  (Flavins,  according 
.to  this  writer)  to  Ventigius,  is  not  given,  only  alluded  to.  In  these 
scenes  there  is  not  a  spark  of  Shakespeare's  poetry,  not  a  vestige 
of  his  style  ;  and  they  are  inseparably  tied  up  with  the  prose 
bit  in  Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  which  we  have  just  rejected.  As  a  specimen 
of  style,  take  the  following,  arranged  to  show  the  monotony  of 
the  pauses  : — 

"  Why,  this  is  the  worlds  soule  ; 

And  iust  of  the  same  peece 

Is  euery  Flatterers  sport. 

Who  can  call  him  his  Friend, 

That  dips  in  the  same  dish  ?  " 

And  in  Act  iii.  Sc.  4,  where  the  creditors  again  dun  Timon,  there 
is  no  trace  of  Shakespeare.  Timon  gets  in  a  vulgar  passion  ;  he 
bids  to  a  banquet  the  three  apocryphal  Lords,  Lucius,  Lucullus, 
and  Sempronius  ;  the  rest  of  the  scene  is  taken  up  with  the  talk 
of  the  creditors'  servants,  who  can  rhyme  much  more  easily  than 
the  best  educated  personages  in  the  Shakespeare  part  of  the  play, 
and  are  thus  far  poetic,  if  not  dramatic.  I  need  give  no  specimen 
of  their  speeches  :  they  speak  the  same  dialect,  and  use  the  same 
rhetoric,  as  all  the  characters  of  the  second  author ;  any  speech 
of  any  one  might  be  spoken  by  any  other,  so  far  as  the  language 
and  form  of  expression  are  concerned.  It  will  suffice  to  give  a 


ON  TIMON  OF  ATHENS.  191 

bit  from  the  Alcibiades  of  the  next  scene,  which  is  one  wholly  by 
the  vamper  : — 

"  Why  do  fond  men  expose  themselues  to  Battell 
And  not  endure  all  threats  ?     Sleepe  vpon  't, 
And  let  the  Foes  quietly  cut  their  Throats 
Without  repugnancy  ?     If  there  be 
Such  Valour  in  the  bearing,  what  make  wee  abroad  ?  " 

I  am  tired  of  reiterating  that  these  scenes  by  author  the  second  add 
nothing  to  the  progress  of  the  play. 

But  I  must  notice  the  difference  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
servants  here  and  in  Act  ii.  Sc.  2.  In  the  earlier  scene  the  only 
ones  present  are  Caphis  and  the  servants  of  Isidore  and  Varro  ;  in 
the  latter  there  are  Lucius,  Titus,  Hortensis,  Philotus,  and  Varro's 
two  men  (unnecessary  doubling,  a  sure  sign  of  inferiority)  ;  and  it 
is  expressly  stated  in  the  stage  direction  that  all  Timon's  creditors 
are  present.  This  scene  cannot  have  emanated  from  the  same  hand 
as  the  former ;  but  the  former  agrees  with  other  portions  of  the 
Shakespeare  part  of  the  play,  the  latter  scene  does  not.  Compare, 
for  instance,  Act  ii.  Sc.  I.  "To  Varro  and  to  Isidore,"  and  a  little 
further  on,  "  Caphis  hoa  !"  which  exhausts  the  Shakespearian  list. 
But  to  pass  on. 

In  Act  iii.  Sc.  6  Timon's  speech  is  certainly  Shakespeare's  ; 
for  example  : — 

"This  is  Timons  last. 

[He]  Who  stucke  and  spangled  you  with  Flatteries, 
Washes  it  off,  and  sprinkles  in  your  faces 
Your  reeking  viilany." 

An  inferior  author  would  not  have  thought  of  the  flattery  Timon 
had  used  to  his  false  friends,  but  of  their  adulations  to  him,  and 
would  have  written 

"  Spangled  with  your  flatteries." 

But  the  rest  of  the  scene  is  certainly  not  Shakespeare's.  It  is  a 
muddle.  There  seem  to  be  two  Lords  on  the  stage  at  first  (taken 
from  the  two  in  Act  i.  Sc.  i),  whom  Timon  calls  "  gentlemen  loth  ": 
the  other  Lords  who  speak  after  must  be  part  of  his  "attendants"  ; 


I92  SPIAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

there  are  senators  who  don't  speak  at  all.  Timon  throws  warm 
water  at  them,  which  apparently  freezes  before  it  reaches  them, 
so  that  they  feel  it  on  their  bones,  and  are  pelted  with  stones, 
like  the  guests  in  the  old  Timon  play,  which  Shakespeare,  I  feel 
sure,  never  read. 

From  this  point  onward  I  shall  notice  only  the  added  portions. 
The  Shakespeare  parts  are  not  only  his,  but  his  of  his  best  style  ;  so 
distinctively  his  that  any  one  with  ears  as  good  as  an  ordinary 
schoolboy's  will  recognise  them  at  once.  In  Act  iv.  Sc.  2  the 
soliloquy  of  Flavius,  lines  29 — 50,  is  not  Shakespeare's.  It  is  in 
the  rhythm  of  the  second  playwright,  and  is  inseparably  connected 
with  Act  iv.  Sc.  3,  1.  463 — 543,  which  is  certainly  an  added  part. 
I  am  ashamed  to  say  that  I  rejected  most  carelessly  the  whole  of 
this  scene  in  my  original  paper  in  1868.  My  present  opinion  Mr. 
Tennyson  has  confirmed. 

The  next  piece  to  be  omitted  is  Act  iv.  Sc.  3,  1.  292 — 362, 
which  is  written  in  the  same  chopt-up  prose  as  the  Apemantus- 
parts  which  we  have  omitted  before  ;  it  also  interferes  with  the 
sense.  Timon  says,  "  Gold  sleeps  here,  and  does  no  hired  harm  ; 
here  is  the  truest  use  for  gold."  Apemantus  answers,  "Thou  art 
the  cap  of  all  the  fools  alive."  But  our  cobbling  playwright  makes 
him  answer,  "Where  liest  o'  nights,  -  Timon  ?"  and  we  are  ex 
pected  by  the  supporters  of  Mr.  Knight's  theory — or  other  similar 
theories— to  believe  that  in  this,  and  the  many  other  instances 
pointed  out  above,  Shakespeare,  working  up  an  old  play,  has  left 
all  these  gross  and  clumsy  sutures  unclosed  !  But  above  all,  in 
this  bit  Apemantus  tells  Timon — "Yonder  comes  a  poet  and  a 
painter."  They  talk  for  60  lines,  and  then  enter — Banditti !  more 
talk  with  Banditti  63  lines,  and  then  enter — Steward  !  more  talk 
(80  lines),  and  then  at  last  enter  "poet  and  painter!"  To  avoid 
this,  modern  editors  make  the  curtain  fall  when  the  steward  goes 
out  j  but  this  makes  matters  worse  ;  the  poet  and  painter  must  be 
then  "coming  yonder,"  not  only  while  that  interminable  talk  goes 
on,  but  while  the  curtain  is  down  :  imagine  this  to  be  Shakespeare's 
arrangement !  But  suppose  the  curtain  does  not  fall  ?  Then  the 
poet  and  painter  enter  as  the  steward  goes  out :  and  one  of  the  first 
things  they  tell  us  is  that  "Vw  said  he  gave  unto  his  steward  a 
mighty  sum."  No,  as  the  play  stands,  the  curtain  must  fall  in  the 


ON  TIMON  OF  A  TURNS.  193 

middle  of  a  scene,  and  the  poet  and  painter  wait  yonder  all  the 
while.  This  point  alone  settles  the  question  of  the  present 
arrangement  being  Shakespeare's. 

But  cut  out  the  prose  parts  in  these  scenes,  or  this  scene  rather, 
and  all  is  right.  Omit  1.  292—362 ;  1.  398—413  ;  1.  453— 543  ; 
and  Act  v.  Sc.  I,  1.  I — 57-  ^n  this  scene  we  also  omit  the  talk 
with  the  steward,  which  is  aesthetically  contrary  to  the  whole  drift 
of  the  play.  Had  Timon  been  convinced  that  there  was  one  "just 
and  comfortable  man,"  he  would  have  ceased  to  be  misanthropes, 
and  would  not  have  concluded  his  interview  with — 

"  Ne'er  see  thou  man,  and  let  me  ne'er  see  thee.* 
In  style  also  it  agrees  with  our  botcher. 

"  O  you  Gods  ! 

Is  yon'd  despis'd  and  ruinous  man  my  Lord  ? 
Full  of  decay  and  fayling  ?     Oh  Monument 
And  wonder  of  good  deeds  euilly  bestow'd  ! 
What  an  alteration  of  Honor  has  desp'rate  want  made  ?  " 

This,  and  the  like  all  through  !     Enough. 

But  I  must  warn  the  reader  in  comparing  these  passages  with 
Shakespeare  to  take  them  as  they  stand  in  the  Folio,  before  they 
have  been  Poped  and  Theobalded  and  Walkered,  into  somewhat  of 
a  pseudo-Shakespearian  form.  The  only  other  bit  I  would  reject 
is,  Act  v.  Sc.  "3,  where  the  Soldier  who  can't  read,  reads  an 
Epitaph  which  is  not  written,  and  gives  us  the  most  useless  and 
superfluous  information  of  his  own  afterwards.  Thus  much  then 
for  the  division  I  make  of  the  play  between  the  writers.  I  spare 
the  reader  any  comment  of  mine  on  the  unity  of  the  Shakespeare 
work  so  separated  ;  it  is  printed  by  itself  in  The  New  Shakspere 
Society's  Transactions :  if  he  wants  to  feel  the  dislocated  corduroy 
road  one  has  to  travel  over  in  reading  the  other  writer's  work  by 
itself,  it  is  a  slight  task  to  mark  his  work  in  any  edition  of  the 
play  as  generally  printed,  and  read  it  separately. 

But  I  have  only  done  one  part  of  my  work.  I  have  next  to 
show  how  this  curious  treatment  of  a  play  of  Shakespeare's  came 
to  be  adopted.  His  share  of  the  play  was  written  undoubtedly  about 


I94  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

1606.  Delius  places  it  with  Pericles  rightly.  The  rhyme  test 
places  it  there  also.  But  I  believe  that  Timon  differs  from  other 
plays  in  not  being  finished  in  Shakespeare's  lifetime  at  all,  though  I 
do  not  advance  this  as  certain,  but  as  probable  only.  The  play  is 
printed  in  the  Folio  next  to  Romeo  and  Juliet,  and  is  paged  80,  81, 
82,  and  then  81,  82  over  again;  then  83,  &c.,  to  98;  then  follow 
a  leaf  unpaged,  with  the  actors'  names  printed  on  one  side,  and 
Julius  Casar.  Now  the  play  of  Troylus  and  Cressida,  which  is 
not  mentioned  at  all  in  the  Index  ('  Catalogue')  of  the  Folio,  is 
paged  79  and  80  in  its  2nd  and  3rd  pages,  and  was  evidently 
intended  at  first  to  follow  in  its  proper  place  as  the  pendant  or 
comparison  play  to  Romeo  and  Juliet.  But  as  this  play  was 
originally  called  "  The  History  of  Troylus  and  Cressida"  (so  in 
the  Quarto  Edition),  and  as  there  is  really  nothing  tragical  in  the 
main  bulk  of  it,  it  was  doubted  if  it  could  be  put  with  the  Tragedies, 
so  the  editors  of  the  Folio  compromised  the  matter  by  putting  it 
between  the  Histories  and  Tragedies,  and  not  putting  it  at  all  in 
the  Catalogue,  though  they  still  retained  their  first  title  for  it  as 
*'  The  Tragedie  of  Troylus  and  Cressida."  This  space,  then,  of  pp. 
80—108,  which  would  have  just  held  the  Troylus  and  Cressida, 
being  left  unfilled,  it  became  necessary  to  fill  it.  But  if,  as  I  con 
jecture,  some  of* the  following  plays  from  Julius  Ccssarto  Cymbeline 
were  already  in  type,  and  had  been  printed  off,  there  was  nothing 
to  fall  back  on  but  Pericles  and  the  unfinished  Timon.  I  have 
given  reasons  in  my  paper  on  Pericles  for  believing  that  the  editors 
would  not  have  considered  it  respectful  to  Shakespeare's  memory 
to  publish  the  Pericles ;  they  therefore  took  the  incomplete  Timon, 
put  it  into  a  playwright's  hands,  and  told  him  to  make  it  up  to  30 
pages.  Hence  the  enormous  amount  of  padding  and  bombast  in 
his  part  of  the  work  :  hence  the  printing  of  prose  cut  up  into 
short  lines  as  if  it  were  verse,  which  is  a  very  common  characteristic 
of  spurious  or  otherwise  irregular  editions  :  hence  the  Dumas 
style  of  dialogue  so  frequent  in  the  Apemantus  parts :  hence  the 
hurry  that  left  uncorrected  so  many  contradictions,  and  unfilled  so 
many  omissions.  The  hypothesis  is  bold  even  to  impudence  ;  but 
it  accounts  for  the  phenomena,  and  no  other  can  I  find  that  will. 

Having,  then,  laid  down  as  certain  the  division  of  the  play,  and 
the  assignment  of  the  nucleus  to  Shakespeare ;  and,  as  probable, 


ON  TIMON  OF  ATHENS,  195 

the  manner  in  which  the  play  came  to  be  so  composed,  we  come 
to  the  more  difficult  question  still — Who  was  the  second  author  ? 
The  ratio  of  rhyme  to  blank  verse,  the  irregularities  of  length  (lines 
with  four  accents  and  initial  monosyllabic  feet),  number  of  double 
endings,  &c.,  agree  with  only  one  play  of  all  that  I  have  analysed 
(over  200),  viz.  The  Revenger's  Tragedy.  But  I  am  doubtful  as  to 
pressing  this  argument  very  strongly,  unless  we  give  up  (as  I  am 
quite  ready  to  do)  the  notion  of  the  play  being  finished  in  1623, 
as  The  Revenger's  Tragedy  was  written  in  1607.  The  evidence  of 
general  style,  however,  appears  to  me  strongly  to  confirm  the  con 
jecture  that  Cyril  Tourneur  was  the  second  author.  If  we  could 
find  out  the  date  of  his  death,  it  might  help  to  determine  the 
question  as  to  when  his  part  was  written  :  but,  so  far  as  I  know, 
there  is  no  reason  whatever  why  he  should  not  have  written  it  in 
either  1608  or  in  1623. 

This  bit  seems   to  me  exactly  in  the  metre  of  Shakespeare's 
recaster : — 

"In  the  morning 

When  they  are  up  and  drest,  and  their  mask  on, 
Who  can  perceive  this  save  that  eternal  eye, 
That  sees  thro'  flesh  and  all     Well,  if  any  thing  be  damn'd, 
It  will  be  twelve  o'clock  at  night,  that  twelve  will  never  'scape." 
Revenger's  Tragedy,  p.  322  (Dodsley's  edition). 

Tourneur  quotes  Latin  too  : — 

"  Curae  leves  loquuntur,  majores  stupent." 
He  writes  in  the  Dumas  dialogue  : — 

"  Duke.  My  teeth  are  eaten  out. 
Vind.  Had'st  any  left  ? 
Hip.  I  think  but  few. 
Vind.  Then  those  that  did  eat  are  eaten. 
Duke.   O  my  tongue  !"  &c.  (p.  354.) 

Sometimes  there  is  a  whole  page  like  this. 

Here  again  is  a  bit  in  the  style  of  metre  we  want : — 

*'  'Tis  well  he  died  ;  he  was  a  witch. 

And  now,  my  lord,  since  we  arc  in  for  ever, 

13—2 


ig6  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

The  work  was  ours  which  else  might  have  been  slipt, 

And,  if  we  list,  we  could  have  nobles  dipt, 

And  go  for  less  than  beggars  :  but  we  hate 

To  bleed  so  cowardly  :  we  have  enough, 

I'  faith  we're  well,  our  mother  turn'd,  our  sister  true, 

We  die  after  a  nest  of  dukes,  adieu."  (P.  384.) 

But  with  less  than  extracting  the  whole  play,  I  cannot  expect 
to  produce  conviction  on  this  point ;  and  I  have  already  taken  as 
much  space  as  can  be  afforded  now.  I  subjoin  the  numerical  data 
for  the  metrical  examination  of  The  Revenger's  Tragedy  as  near  as  I 
can  count  them  in  such  a  badly  printed  edition  as  we  yet  have. 

Total  No.  of  lines,  over  2400. 
No.  of  rhyming  lines  exactly  460. 

double  endings      „      443. 

Alexandrines  ,,  22. 
Deficient  and  short  lines  about  125. 

For  the  data  of  the  metre  of  Timon,  and  other  arguments  derived 
from  the  sums  mentioned  (50  talents,  &c. ),  and  similar  statistical 
matters,  I  refer  to  Part  II.  of  this  paper,  which  contains  nothing 
opposed  to  my  present  views  except  that  I  have  transferred  since 
three  prose  bits  from  and  one  verse  bit  to,  Shakespeare.  This 
Part  II.  is  reprinted  as  it  stood  in  1869,  for  reasons  given  in  the 
note  on  its  first  page.  The  additional  matter  given  in  this  Part  I. 
formed  part  of  my  first  essay  on  the  subject,  which  was  remodelled 
into  the  present  form  of  Part  II.  at  the  request  of  Mr.  P.  A. 
Daniel  in  1868. 

I  have  only  to  add  that  the  essential  part  of  this  paper  is  the 
proof  that  the  Shakespeare  part  of  this  play  was  written  before  the 
other  part  :  the  theory  how  this  came  to  be  done  is  accessory  and 
unimportant.  If  any  one  likes  to  believe  as  I  did  in  1869  that  the 
unfinished  play  of  Shakespeare  was  given  to  another  theatre  poet  to 
finish  in  1607,  he  is  welcome  to  his  belief :  he  avoids  some  diffi 
culties  and  incurs  others.  But  that  Knight's  theory  as  held  by 
Delius,  &c.,  is  untenable,  I  hold  to  be  proven  :  the  un- Shakespearian 
parts  were  certainly  the  latest  written. 


ON  TIMON  OF  ATHENS.  197 

ON   "TIMON  OF  ATHENS."1 

PART  ii.     (1869.)     [Reprinted  verbatim.} 
(Read  May  8,   1874.) 

THIS  question  is  so  intricate,  and  involves  considerations  of  so 
many  kinds,  that  I  shall,  for  the  purpose  of  nuking  the  argument 
clear,  pursue  a  somewhat  irregular  course  in  its  arrangement.  1 
shall  first  submit  to  the  reader,  in  a  tabular  form,  the  results  that  I 
have  arrived  at  after  a  careful  and  prolonged  investigation  of  the 
question.  This  Table  is  grounded  on  an  examination  of  every  line 
of  the  play,  one  by  one,  as  regards  the  metre  ;  on  a  specific  analysis 
of  the  plot  with  regard  to  the  bearing  of  each  scene  or  portion  of  a 
scene  on  every  other ;  and  on  a  minute  examination  of  the  Folio  of 
1623  with  regard  to  the  printing  and  spelling  of  proper  names,  stage 
directions,  &c.,  which  have  been  altered  by  modern  editors,  without 
authority  and  on  (I  think)  insufficient  grounds.  The  first  portion  of 
the  subjoined  table  shows  in  parallel  columns  the  parts  of  the  play 
which  I  believe  to  be  undoubtedly  Shakespeare's,  and  those  which  I 
assign  to  a  second  author :  the  other  portion  gives  a  metrical  analysis 
of  the  lines  assigned  to  each. 

It  will  be  observed  that  I  have  divided  the  Scenes  into  five  dis 
tinct  portions,  other  than  the  Act-and-Scene  division ;  and  have 
marked  these  A,  B,  C  D,  E,  F.  This  arrangement  I  believe  to  be 
that  which  Shakespeare  intended  for  his  Act-divisions ;  but,  at  pre 
sent,  I  wish  it  to  be  regarded  only  as  a  convenient  arrangement  for 
purposes  of  reference  in  this  discussion. 

1  This  paper  was  written  in  1868  by  Mr.  Fleay,  and  sent  in  1869  to  Mr.  W.  G. 
Clark,  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  the  senior  of  the  joint-editors  of  the  Cam 
bridge  Shakspere.  In  his  rooms  it  remained  till  yesterday,  when  his  friend, 
Mr.  W.  Aldis  Wright,  took  it  out  and  posted  it  to  me.  It  reached  me  this 
morning,  Wednesday,  April  8,  1874,  and  I  post  it  at  once  to  Mr.  Childs,  to  print 
for  The  New  Shakspere  Society's  Transactions.  This  course  is  taken  because 
Mr.  Fleay  heard  in  1870  that  a  German  critic  had  published  a  paper  for  the 
German  Shakspere  Society,  in  which  he  took  a  similar  view  of  Timon  to  that 
which  Mr.  Fleay  had  before  taken.  The  German  critic's  views  may,  after  all,  be 
very  different  from  those  expressed  in  the  present  paper  ;  but  Mr.  Fleay  wishes, 
in  any  case,  to  avoid  the  charge  of  plagiarism. — F.  J.  FURNIVALL. 


I98  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

SHAKESPEARE.  UNKNOWN. 


Act. 

Scene. 

Line. 

i 

Act.     i 

i 

Scene. 

Line. 

A 

I. 

z 

1-293 

A 

L 

2 

1-257 

B 

II. 

i 

3 

i-35 
i-i93 

205-242 

B 

II. 
III. 

2 

2 
3 

4 

194-204 

1-66 
1-94 
1-42 
1-119 

Dc 

III. 
IV. 

6 

i 

1-131 
1-41 

C 
B 

IV. 

5 

2 

1-117 
1-50 

E 

V. 

3 

I 

1-291 
353-398 
4M-453 

50-118 

E 

v- 

3 

1 

292-362 
399-413 

454.543 
1-50 

F 

3 
4 

119-231 
1-17 

1-85 

F 

1     . 

3 

I-IO 

METRICAL  TABLE. 


| 

i 

J  i  1 

Prose. 

Blank. 

So 

i 

Prose. 

Blank 

3    :    E 

bo    ^ 

1 

& 

JJ  1  .e 

I.  i 

*58 

208 

25 

2 

I.  2 

64 

126 

21 

36 

II.  i 

31 

2 

2 

II.  2 

ii 

2 

*8s 

133 

8 

6 

III.  I 

49 

ii 

3 

2 

IIT.  6 

*in 

12 

2 

6 

2 

58 

3° 

2 

4 

IV.  i 

33 

2 

6 

3 

8 

*9 

9 

6 

IV.  3 

339 

28 

2 

4 

18 

78 

12 

8 

V.  i 

2 

162 

14 

I 

6 

2 

Ut 

14 

4 

3° 

10 

4 

77 

4 

4 

v  1 

!l  i  " 

9 

18 

254 

1009 

86 

36 

V  •  I 

3 

4°  ! 
|   5 

i 


4 
4 

• 

339 

441    75  j  122 

*  But  see  Part  I.— F.  G.  FLKAY. 


ON  T1MON  OF  A  THENS.  199 

It  will  conduce  to  ease  of  comprehension,  if  we  begin  with  the 
latter  divisions ;  as  the  difficulties  in  the  end  of  the  play  are  easier 
to  examine  than  the  early  ones.  We  commence,  therefore,  with  F. 

In  F,  there  is  only  one  passage  at  all  doubtful ;  the  rest  coheres, 
is  in  one  style  ;  and  that  style  is  certainly  Shakespeare's.  The 
doubtful  piece  is  Act  v.  Sc.  3.  The  objections  are  : 

F.— I.  Lines  3,  4, 

"  Timon  is  dead,  who  hath  out-lived  his  span  : 
Some  beast  read  this  !     There  does  not  live  a  man," 

must  be — in  spite  of  the  alteration  of  read  into  reared,  as  proposed 
by  Warburton — intended  for  Timon's  epitaph.  In  this  case  we 
have  a  soldier,  who  "cannot  read"  (1.  6),  first  reading,  and  then 
taking,  in  wax,  an  inscription,  which,  in  Sc.  4,  turns  out  to  be  quite 
different. 

F.— 2.  The  "  Soldier  "  of  this  scene  is  the  "  Messenger  "  of  Sc.  4. 
This  would  be  of  little  importance,  but  as  it  is  (as  we  shall  see)  only 
one  instance  of  several  in  this  play  of  a  like  kind,  the  cumulative 
weight  of  the  whole  becomes  considerable. 

F. — 3.  The  last  four  lines,  telling  us  that  Alcibiades  ("our  cap 
tain"),  an  aged  interpreter,  young  in  days,  makes  the  fall  of  Athens 
the  mark  of  his  ambition,  which  fact  we  knew  scenes  ago,  cannot  be 
Shakespeare's. 

E. — From  Act  iv.  Sc.  3  to  Act  v.  Sc.  I,  1.  118,  must  be  in  one 
scene.  There  is  no  possibility  of  a  break  in  the  Acts,  unless  a  very 
awkward  one  at  "Exit  Alcibiades"  (as  arranged  by  modern  editors); 
for,  as  the  text  stands,  Apemantus  (iv.  3,  1.  356)  sees  the  poet  and 
painter  coming  ;  and  the  curtain  cannot  be  allowed  to  fall  without 
their  presenting  themselves.  In  the  Folio  there  is  no  division  into 
Acts  or  Scenes.  I  imagine  the  inordinate  length  of  the  scene,  and 
the  extreme  shortness  of  Act  v.,  are  the  chief  reasons  for  the  modern 
division.  In  this  division  (£)  the  omissions  fall  into  two  sections  : 

(1)  The  Steward  part.     ("  Flavins"  is  an  altei-ation  of  the  editors.) 

(2)  The  prose  portions  with  Apemantus,   Banditti,    and   Poet   and 
Painter. 


-oo  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

(i)  I  leave  till  I  treat  of  D«     (2)  includes  : — 

iv.  3,  I.  292,  "where  liest,"  &c.,     to  iv.  3,  1.  362,  "  Apemantus." 
iv.  3, 1.  399,  "where  should,"  &c.,  to  iv.  3,  1.  413,  "  know  him." 
iv.  3,  1.  454,  "Has  almost,"  &c.,  to  iv.  3,  1.  463,  "true." 
v.  i,  1.  i,  "As  I."  to  v.  3,  1.  50,  "the  turn." 

Now  these  are  by  no  means  to  be  objected  to  as  prose:  there  is 
plenty  of  prose  in  the  Shakespeare  part  of  this  play  :  though  not,  I 
think,  prose  so  utterly  different  in  feeling  from  all  the  rest  of  the 
scene,  as  in  this  instance.  The  objections  are  : 

E. — 1.  iv.  3,  292,  &c.,  is  parenthetical.  "  Where  liest  o'  nights  ?  " 
is  no  answer  to  "here  it  [gold]  sleeps  and  does  no  hired  harm."  But 
f '  thou  art  the  cap  of  all  the  fools  alive  "  fits  well. 

E. — 2. 1.  356.  A  poet  and  painter  are  announced  as  in  sight ; 
they  do  not  come  in  for  nearly  200  lines  ;  but  Banditti  and  Flavius, 
who  apparently  are  not  in  sight,  come  first. 

E. — 3-  Timon's  long  prose  speech,  1.  329 — 349,  is  utterly  unlike 
any  other  speech  of  his  in  the  play,  and  bears  strong  marks  of  in 
ferior  writing. 

E.— 4.  The  Banditti  have  heard  it  "noised"  that  Timon  has  gold : 
not  from  Apemantus,  who  has  only  left  the  stage  one  line  since  ; 
therefore,  from  Alcibiades  or  the  women.  Apemantus  threatens  to 
spread  the  rumour,  and  does  not ;  the  women  do  not  threaten,  and 
do  spread  the  rumour.  This  is  very  clumsy. 

E. — 5-  In  v.  I,  which  is  certainly  a  continuation  of  the  same  scene, 
the  poet  and  painter  have  not  only  heard  the  rumour,  but  they  know 
exactly  all  Timon's  visitors:  Alcibiades,  the  women,  the  "soldiers," 
and  the  steward  who  has  just  left  the  stage  ;  they  only  know  "'tis 
said,"  however,  so  they  did  not  see  him  go.  We  avoid  Scylla,  cer 
tainly,  by  allowing  the  curtain  to  fall  at  the  end  of  iv.  3.  But 
Charybdis  is  then  inevitable.  The  poet  and  painter  must  have  been 
coming,  and  in  sight,  all  through  Sc.  3,  from  1.  356  to  the  end,  and 
U'hile  the  curtain  is  down. 

E. — 6.  Phrynia  and  Timandra  are  called  Phry;«V<rand  Timan</>//0. 
This  is  one  among  several  instances,  tending  to  show  that  the  second 
author  worked  on  a  badly-written  MS.  of  Shakespeare's  portion. 


ON  TIMON  OF  ATHENS.  201 

E- — 7.  The  whole  style  of  these  parts  is  mean  and  poor;  reading 
E  without  them,  and  then  any  of  these  portions,  the  discrepancy  is 
at  once  manifest.  Note  specially  the  couplets  in  v.  I,  43 — 49,  which 
are  thoroughly  unlike  Shakespeare. 

Next,  take  the  two  Steward  bits,  iv.  2,  and  iv.  3,  463  to  end.  I 
shall  mark  the  objections  to  these,  D. 

D- — I.  The  style  of  these,  and  especially  the  metre,  is  utterly 
unlike  anything  in  the  other  plays  of  Shakespeare.  It  is  marked  by 
great  irregularity,  many  passages  refusing  to  be  orthodox,  even  under 
torture ;  it  abounds  in  rhymes,  in  emphatic  and  unemphatic  passages 
alike ;  the  rhymes  are  often  preceded  by  incomplete  lines  ;  one  of 
the  rhyming  lines  is  frequently  imperfect  or  Alexandrine.  This 
style  was  introduced  by  Webster,  and  followed  by  Tourneur,  who 
are  the  chief  masters  therein.  It  has  some  considerable  power  in 
these  authors'  own  class  of  subjects — the  horrible — as  in  the  Dutchess 
of  Malfy,  or  The  Revenger's  Tragedy  ;  but  is  utterly  unsuitable  here. 
Where  the  Steward  enters  in  the  genuine  parts,  viz.  ii.  2,  and  v.  I, 
the  style  is  very  different. 

D-— 2.  iv.  3,  476.     Has  for  he  has. 

Exactly  the  same  reasoning  applies  to  C  (iii.  5). 

C-  D ,  I  reject  on  internal  evidence  of  style  and  metre ;  see  the 
Metrical  Table,  and  also  the  general  considerations  at  the  end  of  this 
essay. 

Our  next  batch  B  (ii.  I — iii.  5)  is  the  most  difficult  of  all. 

B- — i.  In  the  genuine  parts  of  the  play, 

£     s.    d. 

i.    I,     95      )  Ventidius  borrows  5  talents  I  1218  in     o 

ii.   2,   235-8  1  Same  amount  is  "instant  due"  \ 

i.   I,   141         Lucilius's  dowry  is  3  talents  722     5     o 

ii.   I,  1-3         Timon  owes  25,000  (pieces?)  4062  10    o(?) 

ii.  2,  208         Proposes  to  borrow  1000  talents  (?)  245,750    o    o 
iii.  6,     23        Has  asked  of  a  Lord  1000  pieces  162  10    o(?) 

In  the  other  parts, 

ii.   2,  201      i  Timon  sends  to  Lords  for  50  talents  12,187  10    o 
iii.    I,     19      (  N.B.  There  3  sums  of  this  amount, 
iii.  2  ;  13,  26,  41.      "  So  many  "  talents  are  mentioned. 


202  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

£      s.  a. 

ill  2,     43     $$oo  talents  (?)  1,340,625     o  o 

or  if  we  read  50, 500  121,875     o  o 

iii.  4,     28     Due  to  Varro,  3000  crowns  487  10  o 

iii.  4,29,96  Due  to  Lucius,  5000  crowns  812  10  o 

iii.  4,     94     Due  to  Titus,  50  talents  12,187  10  o 

iii.   I,     46     Lucullus  offers  Flaminius  3  solidares. 

The  Attic  talent  is  243/.  15^.  od.',  the  largest  silver  coin  in  Greece 
was  the  tetradrachm  (y.  3</.) ;  I  have  taken  this  for  the  "  crowns  " 
and  "pieces."  The  value  of  silver  (Greek  standard  coinage)  has,  of 
course,  much  diminished  ;  but  15  talents  was  reckoned  a  fair  fortune 
for  the  elder  Demosthenes  to  leave  his  son  ; — the  sum  of  150  talents, 
for  which  Timon  sends  to  the  Lords,  viz.  36,562^  los.  od.,  is,  of 
course,  absurd  :  still  more  so  is  the  simultaneous  application  of  the 
creditors  for  such  discrepant  sums  (iii.  4,  30).  Five  thousand  crowns 
(8oo/.)  is  said  to  be  "much  deep"  yet  another  creditor  demands 
)2,ooo/.  If  it  be  said  the  sums  are  indefinite,  and  not  Greek 
money  at  all,  I  answer  that  this  may  be  true  for  the  second  writer, 
but  not  for  Shakespeare  ;  for  he  clearly  drew  part  of  his  account 
from  Lucian,  who  distinctly  mentions  all  the  Greek  moneys — the 
drachma,  the  mina,  and  the  talent. 

The  "so  many"  talents  of  iii.  2,  and  the  "fifty-five  hundred" 
in  the  same  scene,  look  like  the  work  of  a  man  who  had  some  mis 
givings  as  to  his  previous  amount  of  50  talents  ;  but  was  finally  too 
hurried  to  remember  to  alter  it.  Note,  in  iii.  2,  no  amount  is  given. 

The  thousand  talents  (more  than  a  quarter  of  a  million  sterling) 
in  ii.  2,  is  in  any  case  absurd.  I  would  read  1000  pieces,  believing 
talents  to  have  come  in  after  the  second  writer  had  inserted  ii.  2,  201, 
to  make  the  amount  demanded  of  the  senators  larger  than  that  from 
a  private  lord.  The  senators,  however,  are  mere  usurers.  Timon 
owes  two  of  them  9000  in  ii.  i,  and  usury  is  an  accusation  brought 
against  them  by  Alcibiades  in  iii.  5,  108.  Neither  does  the  "joint 
and  corporate  voice  "  mean  that  they  acted  as  the  senate;  but  simply 
that  they  were  unanimous  in  refusing  Timon's  request,  viz.  of  1000 
pieces  each  ;  as  we  learn  from  iii.  6,  23.  With  this  emendation,  all 
in  the  genuine  parts  is  clear,  and  the  amounts  are  reasonable ;  in  the 
other  parts  we  have  a  mass  of  inconsistency. 


ON  TIMON  OF  ATHENS.  203 

B- — 2.  The  only  creditors  of  Timon  in  the  Shakespeare  part  of  the 
play,  are,  Caphis's  master,  Varro,  and  Isidore.  In  the  other  parts 
they  are  Varro,  Lucius,  Titus,  Hortensius,  and  Philotus. 

B. — 3-  The  lords  Lucullus,  Lucius,  and  Sempronius  occur  in  L  2, 
ii.  2  (rejected  part),  iii.  I,  2,  3,  and  4,  but  never  in  the  genuine 
parts.  They  are  not  the  same  as  the  lords  in  i.  2  (who  seem  to  be 
meant  for  the  same  as  those  in  i.  i),  but  I  imagine  are  intended  to 
be  three  of  the  lords  in  iii.  5  (Ventidius  being  the  other),  seeing 
that  they  and  "  Ullorxa  "  (?  Ventidius)1  have  been  bidden  by  Timon, 
iii.  4,  112  ;  and  that  they,  as  well  as  the  lords  in  iii.  6,  have 
been  asked  for  loans.  But  this  is  incompatible  with  the  suppo 
sition  of  these  parts  and  iii.  6  being  by  one  writer.  He  would 
certainly  have  given  the  names  in  iii.  6  as  well  as  in  all  the  other 
scenes. 

B, — 4.  Ventidius  in  i.  I,  and  ii.  2,  is  spelled  Ventidius  or  Ven- 
tiddius  ;  in  ii.  I,  and  iii.  3,  Ventigius  or  Ventidgius.  I  think  this 
points  to  the  same  conclusion  as  E  6. 

B. — 5.  The  servants  of  the  dunning  scene,  ii.  2,  agree  with  the 
names  of  the  masters  in  ii.  i  ;  but  not  with  those  of  iii,  4.  See 

B2. 

B. — 6.  Flaminius  and  Servilius,  Timon's  servants,  occur  only  in 
connection  with  Lucius  and  Co.  ;  never  in  the  Shakespeare  parts, 
where  the  servants  are  all  anonymous — just  as  the  senators,  lords, 
or  friends  are. 

B. — 7.  Great  poverty  of  invention  is  shown  in  iii.  2,  38—41,  which 
repeats  iii.  I,  16 — 21. 

B.  — 8.  In  ii.  2,  20,  the  writer  knows  the  Greek  days  for  paying 
debts,  the  yovp.rii'ia,  and  surely  he  would  know  the  Greek  money 
too. 

B. — 9.  In  ii.  2,  there  is  a  servant  called  Flavius,  who  talks  very 
like  the  steward  in  iii.  4,  iv.  2,  and  iv.  3,  though  not  so  like  the 
steward  of  ii.  2  and  v.  I.  He  has  however  been  identified  with  the 
steward  by  the  modern  editors,  and  perhaps  by  the  second  writer ; 
but  if  so,  it  must  have  been  an  afterthought,  as  in  ii.  2,  194,  he 

1  [I  have  since  tried  to  show  that  Ullorxa  is  a  misprint  for  "  all  luxors,"  Tour- 
neur's  favourite  expression. — F.  G.  F.,  January,  1876.] 


204  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

is  summoned  by  Timon  "  Within  there  !  Flavins!  Servilius !"  The 
editors,  against  all  metre,  but  determined  to  perform  the  impossible 
feat  of  making  the  play,  as  it  stands,  self- consistent,  alter  Flavius  to 
Flaminius.  I  feel  sure  that  the  third  servant  in  iii.  3,  was  originally 
meant  to  be  Flavius.  The  stage  direction  in  ii.  2,  is  "Enter  3  Ser 
vants."  I  fancy  the  original  reading  was  "  Within  there  !  Flavius, 
Servilius,  Flaminius  ! "  but  after  the  second  writer  had  altered  the 
Steward  into  Flavius,  he  struck  out  the  name  in  iii.  3,  and  meant 
to  do  so  in  ii.  2,  but,  in  his  hurry,  struck  out  the  wrong  name.  He 
seems  very  fond  of  the  number  three ;  he  has  3  strangers,  3  lords, 
twice  3  creditors,  &c. 

A-  I  reject  i.  2,  on  the  same  grounds  as  iii.  5,  iv.  2,  &c.  See 
D  i  also. 

A. — I.  The  hack  Latin  quotation,  "Ira  furor  brevis  est,"  is  not 
at  all  in  Shakespeare's  style.  We  find  similar  ones  in  Henry  VI., 
Taming  of  the  Shrew,  Titus  Andronicus ;  but  where  in  Shake 
speare  ? 

A- — 2.  Ventidius  offers  to  return  the  5  talents  lent  by  Timon 
(i.  2,  I — 8)  in  consequence  of  coming  into  his  inheritance  ;  yet  in 
the  end  of  ii.  2,  Timon  tells  us  this  latter  fact  over  again,  without 
any  allusion  to  Ventidius's  offer  in  i.  2.  This  is  not  like  Shake 
speare's  work. 

A- — 3«  Apemantus,  sometimes  misprinted  Apermantus  in  other 
scenes,  is  so  all  through  this  one  ;  this  again  looks  as  if  the  MS.  of 
Shakespeare  was  badly  written  :  it  quite  deceives  the  second  writer, 
and  occasionally  the  printer. 

I  have  now  given  a  number  of  reasons  why  each  of  the  passages 
in  the  second  column  of  our  table  is  not  by  Shakespeare.  Let  us 
next  cqnsider  some  points  which  affect  the  whole  play. 

I.  The  play  is,  in  its  present  state,  unique  among  Shakespeare's 
for  its  languid,  wearisome  want  of  action.  This  renders  it  one  of  the 
least  read  of  all  his  works.  But  this  fault  is  due  entirely  to  the  pas 
sages  which  I  assign  to  the  second  writer,  not  one  of  which  adds 
anything  to  the  development  of  the  plot,  for  they  are  in  every 


ON  TIMON-  OF  A  THE  MS.  205 

instance  mere  expansions  of  facts  mentioned  in  the  genuine  parts  of 
the  play.  Thus  the  germ  of — 

i.  2         is  in  i.  i,  270,  &c., 

of  iii.  I — 3     ,,     ii.  2,  192, 

of  iii.  4  „     ii.  2, 

of  iii.  5  ,,     iii.  6,  6 1, 

and  the  added  parts  of  iv.  and  v.  are  merely  padding  to  fill  out  the 
deficiency  in  quantity.  The  Shakespeare  part  is  complete  in  itself, 
and  never  flags  at  all. 

II.  The  whole  of  the  brief  account  in  Plutarch  is  contained  in 
the  Shakespeare  parts ;  which  also  have  the  two  allusions  to  Lucian's 
dialogue,  viz.  the  beating  out  the  Poet  and  Painter,  and  "Plutus 
the  god  of  gold  is  his  steward,"  i.  I,  287. 

III.  The  rhythm  of  the  two  portions  of  the  play  differs  in  every 
respect.     The  Shakespeare  parts  are  in  his  third  style  (like  Lear}, 
with  great  freedom  in  the  rhythm,  some  4  and  6  syllable  lines,  some 
Alexandrines  with  proper  caesuras,  and  rhymes  where  the  emphasis 
is  great,  at  the  end  of  scenes,  and  occasionally  of  speeches  in  other 
places.      The  other  parts  have  irregularities,  both  in  defect  and  ex 
cess,  of  every  possible  kind.      There  are  lines  of  8  and  9  syllables, 
Alexandrines  without  csesura,  imperfect  lines  in  rhyming  couplets, 
broken  lines  preceding  rhymes,  and  other  peculiarities,  not  one  of 
all  which  is  admitted  in  Shakespeare's  rhythmical  system,    i.  2,  end, 
is  one  of  many  instances  of  intolerably  bad  rhythm  : — 

I'll  lock  thy  heaven  from  thee. 

O  that  men's  ears  should  be 

To  counsel  deaf,  but  not  to  flattery  ! 

One  point  in  the  metre  may  appear  clearer  if  expressed  statistically. 
In  the  Shakespeare  parts  the  proportion  of  blank  verse  to  rhyme  is  as 
280  to  10 ;  in  the  other  parts  as  36  to  10 ;  in  other  words,  there  are 
proportionally  8  times  as  many  rhymes  in  the  latter  as  in  the  former. 

IV.  If,  as  I  suppose,  the  second  writer  worked  on  an  unfinished 
play  of  Shakespeare's,  his  additions  ought  to  be  more  or  less  frag 
mentary,  and  Shakespeare's  should  contain  the  main  plot.     If,  as 
some  have  conjectured,  the  converse  was  the  case,  we  ought  to  have 


2o6  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

converse  results.  Now  our  first  column  appears  to  me  to  contain  the 
complete  story,  and  to  have  been  intended  by  Shakespeare  to  be  read 
as  follows  : — 

I.  Act.  Timon's  prosperity,  i.  I  of  present  play. 
II.     ,,     Debts  and  Duns,  ii.  I    2,  of  present  play. 

III.  „     Farewell  to  Athens,  iii.  6,  iv.  I,  of  present  play. 

IV.  „     Cave  life,  iv,  3  (part),  v.  I  (i— 118),  of  present  play. 
V.     ,,     Death  and  indirect  revenge  through  Alcibiades,  V.    I 

(119 — 231) ;'  v.  2  ;  v.  4  ;  of  present  play. 

In  I.  I  have  already  pointed  out  on  what  portions  of  the  genuine 
work  the  other  is  founded  ;  the  fragmentary  nature  of  the  spurious 
work  can  only  be  appreciated  on  continuous  reading. 

V.  In  the  Cambridge  edition  the  following  notice  is  given  : — 

"  Timon  of  Athens  was  printed  for  the  first  time  in  Folio,  1623." 
It  "occupies  21  pages,  from  80  to  98  inclusive,  81  and  82  being 
numbered  twice  over.  After  98  the  next  page  is  filled  with  the 
actors'  names,  and  the  following  page  is  blank.  The  next  page, 
the  first  of  Julius  Ccesar,  is  numbered  109,  and  instead  of  beginning, 
as  it  should,  signature  ii.,  the  signature  is  kk.  From  this  it  may  be 
inferred  that  for  some  reason  the  printing  of  Julius  Casar  was  com 
menced  before  that  of  Timon  was  finished.  It  may  be  that  the  MS. 
of  Timon  was  imperfect,  and  that  the  printing  was  stayed  till  it 
could  be  completed  by  some  playwright,  engaged  for  the  purpose. 
This  would  account  for  the  manifest  imperfections  at  the  close  of  the 
play.  But  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  the  printer  came  to  mis 
calculate  so  widely  the  space  required  to  be  left. 

*.'  The  well-known  carelessness  of  the  printers  of  the  Folio,  in 
respect  of  metre,  will  not  suffice  to  account  for  the  deficiencies  of 
Timon.  The  original  play,  on  which  Shakespeare  worked,  must 
have  been  written,  for  the  most  part,  either  in  prose  or  in  very 
irregular  verse." — CAMBRIDGE  EDITORS. 

On  this  I  have  to  observe,  that  if  there  is,  in  supposing  the 
printer  miscalculated  the  space  to  be  left,  a  difficulty  on  my  hypo 
thesis,  the  difficulty  is  certainly  not  lessened  by  supposing  that  the 
whole  of  the  play  was  in  the  printer's  hands  from  the  first.  In  no 


ON  TIMON  OF  A  THENS. 


207 


other  instance  do  the  printers  give  a  whole  leaf  to  the  actors'  names  ; 
in  only  one  other  do  they  give  a  whole  page  ;  and  they  never  insert 
the  actors'  names  at  all,  except  for  the  purpose  of  filling  a  blank 
space.1  This  looks  as  if  the  writer  or  printer  were  hard  up  for  mate 
rial  ;  which  is  confirmed  by  the  way  in  which  the  prose  is  printed 
(in  the  second  writer's  part  only),  as  irregular  verse ;  so  as  to  fill  a 
third  more  space  than  it  would  otherwise. 

I  append  a  List  of  the  Actors  for  reference  : — 


IN  SHAKESPEARE'S  PART.  SECOND  WRITER. 

2  Timon.  Lucius. 

*  Apemantus.  Lucullus. 

*  Alcibiades.  Sempronius. 

*  Ventidius.  Flaminius. 

*  Steward.  Flavius. 

3  Poet.  Servilius. 

3  Painter.  3  Strangers. 

3  Thieves.  Titus. 

Jeweller.  Hortensius. 

Merchant.  Philotus. 

Athenian.  Cupid. 

Lucilius.  Amazons. 

Caphis.  Soldier. 

Varro's  servant. 

Isidore's  servant. 

4  Lords, 
'Page. 
<  Fool. 

Phyrnia. 

Timandra. 

Messenger. 

N.B. — The  leaf  with  the  actors'  names  in  the  Folio  is  not  paged, 
so  as  to  hide  the  fact  of  10  pages  being  missed. 

1  But  see  Part  I.— F  G.  FLEAY. 

2  These  are  common  to  both  Shakespeare  and  the  second  writer. 

3  These  have  been  touched  up  by  the  second  writer. 

4  But  see  Part  I.— F.  G.  Fi.KAV. 


208  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

VI.  Finally.  On  any  one  who  really  cares  to  form  a  well- 
grounded  opinion  as  to  this  question,  I  would  urge  this  practical 
test :— Read  the  parts  of  the  play  in  our  first  column  by  themselves, 
and  the  other  parts  by  themselves  ;  and  see  whether  the  flavour  left 
by  them  is  the  same  in  both  cases.  I  abstain  from  any  comparison 
of  passages  here,  because  any  one  who  really  is  interested  in  the 
matter  can  easily  make  them  for  himself ;  and,  moreover,  I  know  by 
experience,  that  if  I  put  passages  side  by  side  to  compare  the 
rhythm,  some  readers  will  immediately  fancy  it  is  the  relative 
excellence  of  the  quotations  which  is  in  question.  And  herein  lies 
one  of  the  greatest  hindrances  to  the  advance  of  criticism  in  this 
country.  People  look  at  a  handwriting,  and  say,  "  This  is  not 
Smith's  ;  he  writes  better  than  that."  They  read  a  play,  and  say, 
"This  must  be  Shakespeare's,  it  is  so  good."  The  expert  knows 
that  men  write  sometimes  well  and  sometimes  badly;  but  that  in  the 
handwriting  and  the  poem,  alike,  there  is  a  character  or  style  which 
cannot  deceive.  In  this  case  I  address  myself  to  the  expert,  and 
have  no  doubt,  whatever,  of  the  verdict. 


CHAPTER    VI. 
ON    "PERICLES." 
(Read  May  8,   1874.) 

WITH  regard  to  the  authorship  of  this  play,  we  may,  I  think,  take 
it  at  once  for  granted,  that  the  first  two  Acts  are  not  by  Shakespeare. 
It  has  been  so  long  admitted  by  all  critics  of  note  that  this  is  the 
case,  that  it  cannot  be  worth  while  to  go  over  the  evidence  again 
in  detail.  In  order,  however,  to  •  extinguish  any  lingering  doubt,  I 
give  the  metrical  evidence  ;  which  will,  at  the  same  time,  show  how 
much  more  easily  and  certainly  this  result  would  have  been  arrived 
at  had  this  method  of  investigation  been  earlier  adopted.  The  play 
consists  of  verse  scenes,  prose  scenes,  and  the  Gower  chorus.  Con 
sidering  at  present  only  the  first  of  these  three  parts,  we  shall  find 
so  marked  a  difference  between  the  first  two,  and  last  three,  Acts, 
as  to  render  it  astonishing  that  they  could  ever  have  been  supposed 
to  be  the  work  of  one  author. 

COMPARATIVE  TABLE. 

Acts  i.,  ii.  Acts  iii.,  iv.,  v. 

Total  No.  of  lines     ...  835  827 

No.  of  rhyme  lines     .    .     .  195  '4 

No.  of  double  endings    .    .  72  106 

No.  of  Alexandrines .     .     .  5  13 

No.  of  short  lines      ...  71  9^ 

No.  of  rhymes  not  dialogue  8  16 

The  differences  in  the  other  items  are  striking,  and  of  themselves 
conclusive:   but   the    difference   of  the   numbers   of  rhymes,    the 

14 


210  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

proportion  being  14  in  the  one  part  to  I  in  the  other,  is  such  as  the 
most  careless  critic  ought  to  have  long  since  noticed.  With  regard 
to  this  main  question,  then,  there  can  be  no  doubt :  the  three  last 
Acts  alone  can  be  Shakespeare's  ;  the  other  part  is  by  some  one  of  a 
very  different  school.  But  we  have  minor  questions  of  some  interest 
to  settle.  The  first  of  these  is,  Who  wrote  the  scenes  in  the  brothel, 
Activ.,  Sc.  2,  5,  6?  I  say  decidedly,  not  Shakespeare;  for  these 
reasons  :  These  scenes  are  totally  unlike  Shakespeare's  in  feeling  on 
such  matters.  He  would  not  have  indulged  in  the  morbid  anatomy 
of  such  loathsome  characters ;  he  would  have  covered  the  ulcerous 
sores  with  a  film  of  humour,  if  it  were  a  necessary  part  of  his  moral 
surgery  to  treat  them  at  all — and,  above  all,  he  would  not  have 
married  Marina  to  a  man  whose  acquaintance  she  had  first  made  in 
a  public  brothel,  to  which  his  motives  of  resort  were  not  recommend 
atory,  however  involuntary  her  sojourn  there  may  have  been.  A 
still  stronger  argument  is  the  omission  of  any  allusion  in  the  after- 
scenes  to  these  three.  In  one  place,  indeed,  there  seems  to  be  a 
contradiction  of  them.  The  after-account  of  Marina,  which  is 
amply  sufficient  without  the  prose  scenes  for  dramatic  purposes,  is 
given  thus  : — 

"  We  haue  a  maid  in  Metiline 

She  with  her  fellow  maides  [is]  now  upon 
The  leauie  shelter  that  abutts  against 
The  Island's  side."— Act  v.  Sc.  i. 

I  cannot  reconcile  this  with 

"  Proclaim  that  I  can  sing,  weave,  so  we,  and  dance, 
And  [I]  will  undertake  all  these  to  teach." — Act  iv.  Sc.  6. 

Nor  with 

"  Pupils  lacks  she  none  of  nobler  race, 
Who  pour  their  bounty  on  her :  and  her  gain 
She  gives  the  cursed  bawd" — Act  v.,  Gower. 

But  if  these  scenes  are  not  Shakespeare's  (and  repeated  examina 
tion  only  strengthens  my  conviction  that  they  are  not),  the  clumsy 
Gower  chorus  is  not  his  either.  And  this  brings  us  to  the  only 
hypothesis  that  explains  all  the  difficulties  of  this  play.  The  usual 


ON  PERICLES.  211 

hypothesis  has  been  that  Shakespeare  finished  a  play  begun  by  some 
one  else  :  that  is,  that  he  deliberately  chose  a  story  of  incest, 
which,  having  no  tragic  horror  in  it,  would  have  been  rejected  by 
Ford  or  Massinger ;  and  grafted  on  to  this  a  filthy  story,  which, 
being  void  of  humour,  would  even  have  been  rejected  by  Fletcher. 
This  arises  from  the  fallacy  which  I  noted  in  a  previous  paper, 
caused  by  the  inveterate  habit  of  beginning  criticism  from  the  first 
pages  of  a  book,  instead  of  from  the  easiest  and  most  central  stand 
point.  The  theory  which  I  propose  as  certain,  is  this : — Shakespeare 
wrote  the  story  of  Marina,  in  the  last  three  acts,  minus  the  prose 
scenes  and  the  Gower.  This  gives  a  perfect  artistic  and  organic 
whole  :  and,  in  my  opinion,  ought  to  be  printed  as  such  in  every 
edition  of  Shakespeare :  the  whole  play,  as  it  stands,  might  be 
printed  in  collections  for  the  curious,  and  there  only.  But  this 
story  was  not  enough  for  filling  the  necessary  five  acts  from  which 
Shakespeare  never  deviated  ;  he  therefore  left  it  unfinished  :  and 
used  the  arrangement  of  much  of  the  later  part  in  the  end  of 
Winter's  Tale,  which  should  be  carefully  compared  with  this  play. 
The  unfinished  play  was  put  into  the  hands  of  another  of  the  "poets" 
attached  to  the  same  theatre,  and  the  greater  part  of  the  present 
play  was  the  result ;  this  poet  having  used  the  whole  story  as  given 
in  Gower  and  elsewhere. 

It  is  somewhat  confirmatory  of  this  theory  that  the  play  was  not 
admitted  into  the  first  Folio ;  nor  published  before  1623,  except  in 
Quarto,  first  by  Gosson,  then  by  Pavier,  whose  dealings  in  scarcely 
anything  but  surreptitious  editions  are  so  conspicuous.  It  is  difficult 
to  understand  how  such  poetry  as  is  contained  in  the  Shakespeare 
part  of  this  play  could  have  been  neglected,  had  there  not  been  some 
reason  for  the  editors  of  the  Folio  to  leave  it  out  of  their  edition  ; 
either  some  tradition  of  Shakespeare's  disgust  at  the  way  in  which 
his  work  had  been  completed,  or  some  strong  feeling  that  its  publi 
cation  in  their  authorized  edition  would  be  no  credit  to  its  author. 
One  thing  is  certain,  that  it  was  absolutely  neglected  by  Shakespeare 
himself :  no  play  of  his,  however  carelessly  printed,  has  its  text  in 
so  wretched  a  condition ;  nor  has  the  way  in  which  modern  editors 
have  arranged  its  verse — which  is  for  the  most  part  printed  as  prose 
in  the  old  editions — been  much  more  creditable  to  them  than  the 
disarrangement  of  it  was  to  the  older  editors. 

J4— 2 


212  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

In  confirmation  for  the  general  conclusions  arrived  at  above,  I 
may  add  a  few  isolated  considerations.  In  the  list  of  the  actors' 
names,  Boult,  Bawd,  and  Pander  are  omitted :  now  these,  and  these 
only,  are  the  additional  characters  introduced  in  the  brothel  scenes 
in  the  fourth  act.  This  looks  very  much  as  if  these  scenes  had  been 
an  after-thought  added  when  the  rest  of  the  play  had  been  already 
arranged.  Couple  with  this  the  fact  that  the  Gower  parts  in  Acts 
iv.,  v.,  in  which  these  scenes  are  alluded  to,  are  in  lines  of  five 
measures,  and  not  of  four,  as  those  in  the  earlier  acts  are :  observe, 
also,  that  these  scenes,  though  far  from  reaching  to  Shakespeare's 
excellence,  are  certainly  superior  to  anything  in  the  first  two  acts,  so 
far  as  mere  literature  is  concerned,  and  it  will  be  almost  certain  that 
three  authors  were  concerned  in  this  play.  The  first  author  wrote 
the  first  two  acts,  and  arranged  the  whole  so  as  to  incorporate  the 
Shakespeare  part.  The  second  wrote  the  five-measure  Gower  parts 
and  the  brothel-scenes  in  Acts  iv.,  v.,  in  order  to  lengthen  out  the 
play  to  the  legitimate  five  acts.  Even  as  it  stands  the  play  is  far 
shorter  than  any  play  of  Shakespeare's  ;  and  it  was  probably  in 
order  to  make  up  for  the  want  of  poetic  invention  that  the  long 
dumb-show  performances  were  introduced  into  the  Gower  parts.  It 
is  scarcely  possible  to  test  the  prose  in  the  same  way  as  we  can  the 
verse  in  these  scenes  ;  but  even  the  little  verse  we  have  of  the  second 
writer's  will,  I  think,  be  enough  to  confirm  my  theory.  Not  that 
the  prose  in  Act  iv.  is  like  that  in  Acts  i.,  ii. ;  but  that  the 
differences  are  not,  by  any  test  I  have  yet  devised,  capable  of 
tabulation.  I  give  specimens  of  the  verse,  for  comparison. 

I. — Shakespeare.     His  first  piece  in  the  play: — 

"  Thou  God  of  this  great  vast,  rebuke  these  surges^ 
Which  wash  both  heauen  and  hell ;  and  thou  that  hast 
Upon  the  windes  commaund,  bind  them  in  Brasse, 
Hauing  [rejcall'd  them  from  the  deep.     O  still 
Thy  deafning,  dreadmll  thunders  :  gently  quench 
Thy  nimble  sulphirous  flashes." — Act  iii.  Sc.  I. 

II. — Author  of  brothel  scenes: — 

"  Neither  of  these  are  so  bad  as  thou  art, 
Since  they  do  better  thee  in  their  command  ; 


ON  PERICLES.  213 

Thou  hold'st  a  place  for  which  the  painedst  fiend 

In  hell  would  not  in  reputation  change  : 

Thou  art  the  damned  doorkeeper  to  every 

Cusherel  that  comes  enquiring  for  his  Tib : 

To  the  cholerick  fisting  of  every  rogue 

Thy  ear  is  liable :  thy  food  is  such 

As  hath  been  belcht  on  by  infectious  lungs." — Act  iv.  Sc.  6. 

III. — Arranger  of  whole  piece: — 

"  Yet  cease  your  ire,  you  angry  Stars  of  heaven, 
Wind,  Rain,  and  Thunder :  Remember  earthly  man 
Is  but  a  substance  that  must  yield  to  you  : 
And  I,  (as  fits  my  nature, )  do  obey  you. 
Alas,  the  Seas  hath  cast  me  on  the  Rocks, 
Washt  me  from  shore  to  shore,  and  left  my  breath 
Nothing  to  think  on  but  ensuing  death : 
Let  it  suffice  the  greatnesse  of  your  powers 
To  have  bereft  a  Prince  of  all  his  fortunes, 
And  having  thrown  him  from  your  wat'ry  grave, 
Here  to  have  death  in  peace  is  all  he'll  crave." — Act  ii.  Sc.  I. 

These  three  styles  are  about  as  different  as  any  can  be ;  but 
still  further  to  distinguish  the  non-Shakespearian  writers,  let  us 
compare  their  rhyming-verse. 

I. — Writer  of  brothel  scenes  : — 

"  And  Pericles,  in  sorrow  all-devourd, 
With  sighes  shot  through,  and  biggest  teares  o'reshow'r'd, 
Leaves  Tharsus  and  again  imbarks,  he  sweares 
Never  to  wash  his  face  nor  cut  his  haires, 
He  puts  on  Sackcloth  and  to  Sea  he  beares, 
A  tempest  which  his  mortall  Vessell  teares. 
And  yet  he  rides  it  out.     Now  take  we  our  way 
To  the  Epitaph  for  Marina  writ  by  Dionizia, 
The  fairest,  sweetest,  and  best  lies  here, 
Who  withered  in  her  spring  of  year  : 
She  was  of  Tyrus  the  King's  Daughter, 
On  whom  foule  death  hath  made  this  slaughter : 


2i4  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Marina  was  she  call'd,  and  at  her  birth 

Thetis,  being  proud,  swallow'd  some  part  of  th'  earth  : 

Therefore  the  earth,  fearing  to  be  o'reflow'd 

Hath  Thetis  birth-childe  on  the  heav'ns  bestow'd, 

Wherefore  she  does  &  swears  she'll  never  stint, 

Make  raging  Battry  vpon  shores  of  flint." — Gczver,  Act  iv. 

Before,  however,  comparing  this  with  passages  from  Acts  i.  and 
ii.,  consider  the  monstrous  theory  which  all  the  best  critics,  except 
Sidney  Walker,  have  hitherto  held.1  Delius,  for  instance,  in  his 
preface  to  his  translation  of  Pericles  (in  Bodenstedt's  edition),  says 
that  "the  original  Composer  of  this  Drama,  later  on  withdrew  in 
favour  of  his  co-worker  Shakespeare — so  to  say,  allowing  himself 
to  be  eclipsed."  Imagine  Shakespeare  in  his  best  period  allowing 
this  stuff  to  stand  in  a  play  over  which  he  had  the  full  control !  It 
is  impossible.  Shakespeare  certainly  never  had  any  management 
or  arrangement  of  the  play :  he  only  contributed  the  Marina  story, 
which  ]  have  tried  to  separate  and  restore  to  him.  Read  that  by 
itself :  then  turn  to  any  of  the  ether  portions,  and  see  how  you  like 
the  flavour  !  But  to  return  to  our  comparison.  Take  from  Act  ii., 
Gower,  this  bit ;  note  its  affected  and  obsolete  form,  and  see  whether 
it  is  by  the  same  hand  as  the  last-quoted  bit,  which  is  almost  modern 
in  form  and.  arrangement : — 

"  By  many  a  dearne  and  painfull  pearch 
Of  Pericles,  the  carefull  search, 
By  the  four  opposing  Coignes, 
Which  the  world  together  joynes, 
Is  made  With  all  due  diligence, 
That  horse  and  saile,  and  high  expence, 
Can  steed  the  quest.     At  last  from  Tyre, 
Fame  answering  the  most  strange  enquire, 
To  th'  Court  of  King  Simonides, 
Are  Letters  brought,  the  tenour  these." 

1  Walker  held  the  theory  of  three  authors,  and  rightly  divided  the  play ;  but 
was  certainly  wrong  in  fixing  on  Dekker  as  the  third  man.  I  did  not  know  this 
when  I  wrote  the  text. 


ON  PERICLES,  215 

And  with  the  Epitaph  compare 

The  Riddle  (Act  i.  Sc.  i). 

"  I  am  no  Viper,  yet  I  feed 
On  mother's  flesh  which  did  me  breed : 
I  sought  a  husband,  in  which  labour 
I  found  that  kindnesse  in  a  father. 
Hee's  father,  sonne,  and  husbande  mild, 
I  Mother,  Wife,  and  yet  his  child. 
How  they  may  be,  and  yet  in  two, 
As  you  will  live,  resolve  it  you. " 

Surely,  we  may  conclude  that  there  were  three  authors.  But  who 
were  they  ? 

The  original  manager  and  supervisor  of  the  whole  work  was,  as 
Delius  says,  George  Wilkins  :  he  made  the  play  as  far  as  he  wrote 
it,  from  Twine's  novel :  he  calls  it  "  a  poore  infant  of  my  braine  ; " 
he  plumes  himself  on  the  arrangement  of  the  Gower  choruses  as  his 
own  invention.  In  this,  Delius  is  undoubtedly  right ;  and  to  his 
preface  I  refer  for  further  information  on  the  matter.  In  confirm 
ation,  however,  of  this  theory,  I  give  an  analysis  of  the  metre  of 
the  only  play  of  G.  Wilkins  which  we  possess —  The  Miseries  of  In- 
forced  Marriage, — which  will  be  found  to  coincide  very  closely  with 
that  of  Acts  i.,  ii.,  of  Pericles  given  above,  and  which  is  more  like 
it  than  that  of  any  other  play  among  the  hundreds  I  have  tabulated. 
There  are  in  that  play  526  rhyming  lines,  155  double  endings,  15 
Alexandrines,  102  short  lines,  14  rhyming  lines  of  less  than  five 
measures,  and  a  good  deal  of  prose,  which,  seeing  that  the  play  is 
about  three  times  the  length  of  the  first  two  acts  of  Pericles,  gives  a 
marvellously  close  agreement  in  percentage. 

The  second  author  was,  I  think,  unquestionably  W.  Rowley.  I 
have  not  just  now  access  to  complete  plays  of  this  author  in  verse, 
but  comparison  of  the  prose  with  that  of  A  Match  at  Midnight,  and 
of  the  verse  with  that  of  the  plays  he  wrote  in  conjunction  with 
Fletcher  and  Massinger,  assures  me  absolutely  of  the  truth  of  this 
conjecture.  Indeed,  if  I  had  complete  plays  of  his  in  verse  here, 
the  quantity  of  verse  in  the  Pericles  by  Rowley  is  too  small  to  build 
a  tabulation  on.  One  peculiarity  of  his  woik,  however,  gives  us  a 


T. 
':-:  r 


.:  5   i_-~:    f    !;,::.:-_     _:  J.   $;'  :s   :  -    1.- 

:      -?—  -'-:-    V- 

.:::  i  .77  -77  '•   :_r  -----  -.    :  :~  Lir   r  "  :    -.:  :  - 

;-:  ^    "    :    -  "     r  7  -:    -      -:     :    -  :..-:.       .-.        _     ^  -   .  -  e< 

-  -                _  _-;    -f.    -.  -  -.    -    ^    :_:..:.:  ^  _;_i    - 


:  .:    :   :  :tz      :  r.  '_•  r     -:     ::.:.!.:    -; 
ir    :;      i     I    i^  :    :_:^:.      .r:    i_  :  ::    :' 

—  -  ::;::    ."-  1  :  ?    I  "":*_  .-:::  f  —  1_-    ;  ..tr_  ^._i  "   -^  1  1    :     , 

.     :    ~~   r^.      7.7:          -':'.     -~.--.r-/.      --'_-.. 

_"-.-.  •        :     :    _".  -    7       ~-    ^7  -_•  .     :  ••    77..    -    :  .' 

•   /     •-"       ::-:~"      7  ":  .-  ~^  .     .;   -_  --_:-_-  ;;    :    :  :  .-  -  --;. 

~~:  iz.^       :_^    r  "f:r   i_--     :.-::--  --  ;  s  .\  i!ir  .  .—.-    : 

::::;-  :.-_r 


rr    :;    ?  :.-.^:  --  ;^;  r  r 

:      -         -      '  '      '-"--:    .    _i    ;  :  z   --  :\    z    ~    !i 
T:  :.       -   -  :.-i:    -  ::..:-7---e  nj.   J  •  -..-  ™  7.7.  —  :  7-irL     - 
:  ;r    :~  -   ;  :  e~    :;    r  -  -  ;  -  -~  :  L      --.  ---:  J^r  -    -;"  I-.  :  v.ty  i 
--1  -'-  —  -  :-;  .  -_  i  -  ;  :  ;.-        I-{  ::;  ^  i  ;  :  .;"  '•'  '    '.    -  -  .  — 


;_  i  —  t      if  ::  i  :     --  ;  — i  :".  :~ 
""::-.  in-:  7-  .~r:  ~  .  .-_    -.     :       :-i_-  j    .  :    .1 
""" .:.:  i-jz.  _ '_  -^  -     ^:  _    i_-r   :.-  ~-  v     :^i"^ 

-  '.      —  — :    ~^~^  -    ~~ '    -_I_1I     .  -.  '.      ".  ;~    ~_  ;    Z     ' 

A  n_l±.   :^r.ilr.  r:-:lf.   1.11  ^_  :.:rLjr  7: 

I   -:n  :  -  /  :  .-:  — -i  : :   il.  ;  =  -  -    in  :  !_:-:/  __ 

-i  :'ir  _:  i ;  : :  7_  rr  tr. ; ;  -•  T  ~   _   _  - 


PERICLES.  217 

it     Excepting  the  two  passages  fbttowmg,  I  can  find  no  portions 

.:•'-.-:'.-•         ,'.rz:-'.-.   -^    : .  ;  -  ;t  ;  :_'  v.-r  r. -.-  il 

"  A  gentleman  of  Tyre,  his  name  Pericles,  Ms  education  been  in 
-------     :.-.!-.-..  I:    •.:..-..-:      -r:.-.  .-.-:.---.:.-:     •-.:.  I.  --:.-."•/-•- 

-y---  I.-.!  .-.-.::.-.:  '-::-.  .-.-.-;-.  •_:..-._:  ::-';  -.  ::•:.'-.  '-..--.  .:-/:  ;: 
and  men,  and  after  shipwreck  thrown  upon  that  shore."  (p.  32.) 
Compare  Act  iL  Sc.  3,  L  81,  Sue. 

"Poor  inch  of  nature! 
Tlxra  art  as  ruddy  welcome  to  the  world 
As  ever  princess1  babe  was, 
And  hast  as  chiding  a  nativity, 
As  fire,  air,  earth,  and  water  can  afford  thee."  (p.  44.) 

Compare  Act  Hi.  Sc.  I,  L  31,  &c. 

Mr.  Collier  says,  "though  it  would  be  easy  to  maffipty  proofs,  1 
shall  pursue  this  point  no  farther."     He  quotes  every  syllable  m 

•V.:M.-  ::"  iis  -.Jr.-:'.:-.  : .:.  1  v.t:;  :  -:;-.-r-  ::.-.:  :__-  ::  :.  :  :  - 
only  samples  of  a  large  stock  kept  behind  in  reserve.  So,  in  his 
endeavour  to  show  that  Edward  I1L  is  emtirdy  written  by  Shake- 
srt-re.  lr  _-:v^  i  :'--.-.-  :~:  ---.-.  _-_-.  --:_:-  --',-_-__:-.  LI  :V:~  "r 
small  portion  (2|  scenes)  that  Shakespeare  did  really  write  in  that 
-:; .-.-.  -..  ir.i  :r.tr.  :ell=  u=  :  i;  :r.e~  :::!•=  -  ".i-  i:  r.-.i "•:-.-:•.-:  -7  -  :  -: 
he  (Mr.  CoDier)  might  "quote  die  whole  Quarto,"  that  "the  three 
Ii-:  i::i  irt  ill  :.-;_;:-:  -  i±  :--  -I-.iI.;f=:tir.i-  t-t:r/  ".i 
Tigoor,r  <Scc.  &c.  In  the  saiae  way  Mr.  Collier  qootes  from  Wiiins. 
"Ifi  as  you  say,  my  lord,  yon  are  the  gorernor,  let  not  yonr  andioritf, 
which  should  teach  yon  to  rule  others,  be  the  means  to  make  you 
:. .  -  _' '  . :  r.  _.":..:  . :  :  r  . " .- : . :  7  '.'.  ~ ".  _ "  i  ~  .  t  ;  ~.  ~ .  -  _~  - :  :  - 
y  iti:t-:.  ".I  -:  r  ::yi  :  ;  .:  '.I;-:  ;,  It:  -::  7:—  L;t  :-  r 
your  birth  a  bastard:  If  it  were  thrown  upon  yon  by 
good  that  opinion  was  the  cause  to  make  you.  great,1 
seven  lines  which  continue  in  the  same  style,  and  adds,  "If  these 
thoughts  and  this  language  be  not  the  thoughts  and  the  language  of 
Shakespeare,  I  am  much  mistaken,  and  I  have  read  him  to  fittte 
purpose.11  I  should  be  sorry  to  say  Mr.  Caffier  had  read  Shakespeare 
to  little  purpose,  as  he  (above  most  critics)  has  done  for  us  excellent 
service ;  but  I  reckon  this  view  of  Wilkins  s  novel  as  one  of  the 


2i8  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

The  fact  is,  that  Wilkins  in  his  novel  and  in  his  play  (Miseries 
of  Inforced  Marriage]  has  many  blank-verse  lines  in  the  midst  of 
his  prose,  and  not  lines  only,  but  passages.  I  here  give  some  from 
his  novel : — 

1.  "  He  did  not  well  so  to  abuse  himself, 

To  waste. his  body  there  with  pining  sorrow."  (p.  19.) 

2.  "  That  this  their  city,  who  not  two  summers  younger 

Did  so  excel  in  pomp  and  bore  a  state 

Whom  all  her  neighbours  envied  for  her  greatness."  (p.  21.) 

3.  "  Before  help  came,  up  came  the  fish  expected, 

But  proved  indeed  to  be  a  rusty  armour."  (p.  28.) 

4.  "  Begging  this  armour  of  the  fishermen, 

And  telling  them,  that  with  it  he  could  show 
The  virtue  he  had  learn' d  in  arms,  and  tried 
His  chivalry  for  their  princess  Thaisa."  (p.  29.) 

5.  "  Vengeance,  with  a  deadly  arrow,  drawn 

From  forth  the  quiver  of  his  wrath, 

Prepared  by  lightning,  and  shot  on  by  thunder, 

Hit,  and  struck  dead 

These  proud  incestuous  creatures  where  they  sat, 

Leaving  their  faces  blasted,  and  their  bodies 

Such  a  contemptful  object  on  the  earth 

That  all 

Those  eyes  but  now  with  reverence  lookt  upon  them, 

All  hands  that  served  them,  and  all  knees  adored  them, 

Scorn'd  now  to  touch  them,  loath'd  now  to  look  upon  them, 

And  disdained  now  to  give  them  burial."  (p.  33.) 

6.  "  Ay,  traitor, 

That  thus  disguised  art  stolen  into  my  court 

With  witchcraft  of  thy  actions  to  bewitch 

The  yielding  spirit  of  my  tender  child. 

Which  name  of  traitor  being  again  redoubled 

Pericles  then  instead  of  humbleness 

Seemed  not  to  forget  his  ancient  courage."  (p.  38). 


ON  PERICLES.  219 

7.  "  Equals  to  equals,  good  to  good  is  joined, 

This  not  being  so,  the  barrin  of  your  mind 
In  rashness  kindled  must  again  be  quenched 
Or  purchase  our  displeasure."  (p.  40.) 

8.  "I  have  read  of  some  Egyptians 

Who  after  four  hours'  death  (if  man  may  call  it  so) 
Have  raised  impoverish!  bodies  like  to  this 
Unto  their  former  health."  (p.  48.) 

9.  "  First  what  offence  her  ignorance  had  done 

(For  wittingly  she  knew  she  could  do  noi^e) 
Either  to  him  that  came  to  murder  her 
Or  her  that  hired  him."  (p.  57.) 

10.    "  Lady,  for  such  your  virtues  are,  a  far 

More  worthy  style  your  beauty  challenges. 

I  hither  came  with  thoughts  intemperate, 

Foul  and  deform'd  the  which  your  pains 

So  well  hath  laved  that  they  are  now  white, 

Continue  still  to  all  so,  and  for  my  part 

Who  hither  came  but  to  have  paid  the  price, 

A  piece  of  gold  for  your  virginity, 

Now  give  you  twenty  to  relieve  your  honesty. 

It  shall  become  you  still 

To  be  even  as  you  are  a  piece  of  goodness, 

The  best  wrought  up  that  ever  Nature  made, 

And  if  that  any  shall  enforce  you  ill 

If  you  but  send  for  me  I  am  your  friend."  (p.  66.) 

n.    "  But  sorrows'  pipes  will  burst  have  they  not  rest."  (p.  71.) 

These  passages  occur  in  all  parts  of  the  story,  and  quotations  can 
be  multiplied  of  them:  but  these  already  given  would  be  too  nume 
rous,  were  it  not  that  I  wished  to  show  that  they  not  only  occur  in 
the  parts  of  the  novel  corresponding  to  the  Wilkins,  Rowley,  and 
Shakespeare  parts  of  the  play  indiscriminately,  but  also  in  passages 
of  pure  narrative,  as  well  as  in  the  speeches  of  the  characters.  In 
fact  they  are  inseparable  from  Wilkins's  style,  and  very  often  his 


220  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

prose  is  in  better  iambic  rhythm  than  his  verse  is.     This  entirely 
upsets  Mr.  Collier's  argument  on  the  passage, 

"  His  blood  was  yet  untainted,  but  with  the  heat 
Got  by  the  wrong  the  king  had  offered  him, 
And  that  he  boldly  durst,  and  did  defy  himself, 
His  subjects,  and  the  proudest  danger  that 
Either  tyranny  or  treason  could  inflict  upon  her." 

As  to  which  Mr.  Collier  says, 

"  Would  the  above  have  got  so  readily  into  blank  verse  if  it  had 
not  in  fact  been  so  originally  written,  and  recited  by  the  actor  when 
Pericles  was  first  performed  ?  " 

I  should  not  indeed  have  thought  it  necessary  to  have  noticed 
these  views  of  Mr.  Collier's,  were  it  not  that  both  Mommsen  and 
Delius  have  been  misled  by  them :  which  is  surprising,  as  both  of 
them  have  excellent  ears  for  rhythm. 

There  are,  however,  other  more  important  points  in  this  Wilkins 
novel  that  demand  our  attention  ;  for  instance,  the  difference  in  his 
treatment  of  the  rhyming  documents  in  the  play.  The  riddle  which 
occurs  in  the  part  he  wrote  himself  he  quotes  in  exactly  the  same 
form :  but  the  inscription  on  Thaisa's  coffin  he  alters  thus  : — 

' '  If  ere  it  hap  this  chest  be  driven 
On  any  shore  or  coast  or  haven, 
I,  Pericles,  the  prince  of  Tyre 
(That,  losing  her,  lost  all  desire), 
Intreat  you  give  her  burying, 
Since  she  was  daughter  to  a  king, 
This  gold  I  give  you  as  a  fee  ; 
The  gods  requite  your  charity  ! " 

As  he  has  put  in  his  novel  the  four  lines  of  undoubted  Shakespeare 
quoted  above, — "Thou art  as  rudely  welcome, " &c. , — he  must  have 
had  Shakespeare's  work  before  him  when  he  wrote  the  novel,  and 
this  inscription  must  therefore  have  been  altered  to  show  how 
much  better  he  could  do  it  himself.  I  do  not  think  his  attempt  a 


ON  PERICLES.  221 

success.  In  like  manner  he  has  altered  Rowley's  epitaph  on  Marina 
into 

"  The  fairest,  sweetest,  and  most  best,  lies  here, 
Who  wither'd  in  her  spring  of  year. 
In  Nature's  garden,  though  by  growth  a  bud, 
She  was  the  chiefest  flower,  she  was  good. " 

Had  he  written  this  himself  originally,  he  would  have  done  it,  as 
he  has  all  the  rhymes  in  his  part  that  are  not  dialogue,  in  octo 
syllabics. 

But  his  crowning  achievement  is  the  song  he  quotes  from  Twine, 
given  to  Marina,  and  which  Delius — if  I  understand  him  rightly — 
takes  to  be  the  same  that  Shakespeare  intends  her  to  sing  : — 

"  Among  the  harlots  foul  I  walk, 

Yet  harlot  none  am  I ; 
The  Rose  among  the  thorns  doth  grow, 

And  is  not  hurt  thereby  : 
The  thief  that  stole  me  sure  I  think 

Is  slain  before  this  time  ; 
A  Bawd  me  bought,  yet  am  I  not 

Denied  by  fleshly  crime. 
Nothing  were  pleasanter  to  me, 

Than  parents  mine  to  know ; 
I  am  the  issue  of  a  king, 

My  blood  from  kings  doth  flow. 
In  time  the  Heavens  may  mend  my  state, 

And  send  a  better  day  ; 
For  sorrow  adds  unto  our  griefs, 

But  helps  not  any  way. 
Shew  gladness  in  your  countenance, 

Cast  up  your  cheerful  eyes, 
That  God  remains  that  once  of  nought 

Created  earth  and  skies." 

The  treatment,  then,  of  these  lyrics  strongly  confirms  our  con 
clusion  as  to  the  share  WilkinsJiad  in  writing  the  play,  and  so  does 
the  exact  similarity  of  the  style  of  his  verse-prose  to  that  of  the 


222  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

prosaic  verse  of  the  drama :  that  he  should  have  expanded  and 
given  more  detail  in  the  prose  work  is  only  natural ;  as,  for  instance, 
in  giving  Thaisa's  letter  to  her  father  in  full :  there  is  not,  however, 
the  slightest  pretext  for  foisting  any  of  the  novel  into  the  play.  On 
the  contrary,  some  of  the  alterations  are  essentially  undramatic.  For 
example,  the  following  passage,  which  Delius  praises,  is  very  inferior 
to  the  treatment  in  the  play  (Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  end) :  "But  Cerimon,  who 
best  knew  that  now,  with  anything  to  discomfort  her,  might  breed 
a  relapse  which  would  be  unrecoverable,  intreated  her  to  be  cheer'd ; 
for  her  Lord  was  well,  and  that  anon  when  the  time  was  more 
fitting,  and  that  her  decayed  spirits  were  repaired,  he  would  gladly 
speak  with  her. "  Is  Thaisa  a  petulant  baby,  then,  to  be  coaxed  and 
petted  into  reason?  And  again  :  in  Act  v.  Sc.  I,  Pericles,  accord 
ing  to  Wilkins,  strikes  Marina  on  the  face  !  His  Marina  certainly 
deserves  any  punishment  for  her  detestable  song  ;  but  Shakespeare's 
Pericles  is  a  gentleman  and  a  father. 

A  much  more  important  matter,  however,  is,  that  when  Pericles 
in  the  novel,  in  obedience  to  Diana,  tells  the  story  of  his  life,  he 
gives  all  the  events  that  happened  at  Antioch  and  Pentapolis  in  full, 
the  riddle  and  the  tournament,  and  all  the  rest  of  it.  None  of  this 
occurs  in  the  play  :  Shakespeare  carefully  confines  Pericles's  speech 
to  the  events  that  concerned  his  sole  subject,  the  life  of  Marina.  A 
stronger  argument  that  his  work  was  not  founded  on  Wilkins's  play, 
but  done  previously  and  independently,  one  cannot  well  have  :  and 
in  like  manner  afterwards  in  the  same  scene  in  the  novel,  Thaisa 
aludes  to  Pericles  having  been  her  schoolmaster;  Shakespeare  has 
not  this  allusion  :  and  finally,  the  novel  ends  with  Pericles  burning 
the  Bawd,  Marina  rewarding  the  Pander,  Pericles  rewarding  the 
fisherman,  stoning  Cleomenes  and  Dion,  and  succeeding  to  the 
kingdom  of  Antioch,  all  of  which  is  foreign  to  the  Shakespeare  play. 
In  fact,  the  shifts  that  critics  who  hold  the  common  opinions  as  to 
this  play  are  reduced  to,  are  strong  arguments  in  favour  of  my  views. 
Delius,  for  instance,  is  obliged  to  make  such  assumptions  as  these  : 
I.  That  the  abundance  of  material  compelled  the  author  of  the  play 
to  introduce  Gower  and  the  dumb-show  business  : — the  fact  being, 
that  the  play  is  an  unusually  short  one,  and  that  there  was  abundance 
of  space  for  all  that  Wilkins  wanted  to  introduce  :  his  poverty  of 
invention  was  the  only  drawback  to  his  doing  so.  2.  That  in  Act  v. 


ON  PERICLES.  223 

Sc.  3,  some  of  Wilkins's  work  is  retained  and  patched  up  by  Shake 
speare  :  why,  he  could  have  re-written  it  with  half  the  trouble  of 
cobbling  up  Wilkins.  3.  That  in  the  Epilogue  and  five-foot  Cower 
part,  Shakespeare  imitated  Wilkins  !  The  author  of  Lear  imitated 
the  author  of  the  Miseries  of  Injorced  Marriage!  It  is  true  he 
couldn't  keep  up  the  imitation,  and  the  real  Shakespeare  shows  in 
the  dialogue.  4.  Finally,  that  the  Gower  in  Act  v.  is  like  Prospers 
Epilogue :  and  that  Wilkins  wrote  the  parts  of  Timon  that  are  not 
Shakespeare's.  1  say  nothing  in  reply  to  this  :  I  can  only  admire, 
and  conclude  with  one  little  piece  of  lower  criticism,  that  the 
author  of  "she  was  rather  a  deserving  bed-fellow  for  a  prince, 
than  a  play- fellow  for  so  rascally  an  assembly"  (p.  62  in  the 
novel),  was  probably  author  also  of  the  first  chorus  in  the  play, 

"  To  seek  her  as  a  bed-fellow, 
In  marriage  pleasures  play-fellow." 


CHAPTER   VII. 
ON  "ALL'S  WELL  THAT  ENDS  WELL." 

WHETHER  this  be  the  same  play  as  Love's  Labours  Won  is 
doubtful :  that  it  has  a  better  title  to  be  considered  so  than  any 
other  extant  play  of  Shakespeare  is  certain,  and  has  been  abun 
dantly  shown  by  others.  I  confess  that  I  feel  little  interest  in  the 
question,  as  it  cannot  from  any  data  at  present  in  our  possession 
be  settled  satisfactorily.  All  that  we  are  here  concerned  with  is  the 
demonstrable  fact  that  it  contains  portions  written  at  a  much  earlier 
date  than  the  completed  work.  At  the  time  of  its  completion 
Shakespeare  had  introduced  the  free  manner  of  his  third  period — 
that  of  the  Tragedies  ;  was  using  many  Alexandrines  and  short 
lines  ;  was  indulging  freely  in  double  endings  ;  and  in  the  greater 
part  of  this  play  was  comparatively  sparing  in  the  use  of  rhymes. 
There  are  however  portions  of  the  play  which  are  quite  in  his  earliest 
style;  i.e.  in  the  continuous  rhyming  manner  of  Lovers  Labour's 
Lost,  and  in  a  few  instances  we  find  also  alternate  rhymes  and  even 
stanzas.  These  parts  are  indubitably  of  a  much  less  matured  time  ; 
and  indicate  that  the  play  is  founded  on  an  earlier  draft.  I  now 
proceed  to  give  a  list  of  these  portions. 

I. — Act  i.  Sc.  I,  last  14  lines  in  rhyme,  forming  a  speech  of 
Helen's,  perfectly  appropriate  to  her  position  and  feeling  at  the 
moment,  but  in  no  way  connected  with  or  necessitated  by  the 
context. 

II, — Act  i.  Sc.  3,  1.  134 — 142  ;  an  eight-line  stanza,  spoken  by 
the  Countess  ;  pure  youthful  poetry,  not  dramatic  j  not  required  in 
the  scene  or  connected  with  the  context. 


ON  ALL'S  WELL   THAT  ENDS  WELL.  225 

TIT. — Act  ii.  Sc.  I.  1.  132 — end  ;  71  lines  in  continuous  rhyme, 
quite  different  in  general  tone  from  the  rest  of  the  play,  but  forming 
an  essential  part  of  the  action. 

IV. — Act.  ii.  Sc.  3,  1.  78 — in,  contains  20  lines  in  rhyme 
exactly  like  III.,  with  some  prose  bits  of  Lafeu's  introduced  at  a 
later  date  in  the  completed  play. 

V. — Same  scene,  1.  131 — 151,  in  rhyme  ;  20  lines  exactly  of  the' 
same  character  as  the  preceding. 

VI. — Act  iii.  Sc.  4.  Helen's  letter  in  form  of  sonnet.  This 
sort  of  composition  does  not  quite  die  out  till  the  end  of  Shake 
speare's  Second  Period,  but  it  is  very  rare  in  that  period  and  never 
appears  in  the  Third;  I  assign  this  therefore  to  the  early  play. 

VII. — Act  iv.    Sc.   3.      The  same  remarks  apply  to  Parolles' 

letter. 

VIII. — Act  v.  Sc.  3.  1.  60 — 72,  a  rhyming  passage  of  the 
same  character  as  III.  IV.  V.  So  lines  291 — 294;  301 — 304; 
314 — 319  ;  325 — 340,  indicate  by  frequent  rhymes  that  they  are 
debris  of  former  play  used  in  the  rebuilding. 

To  my  mind  this  metrical  evidence  of  itself  is  conclusive  ;  but  if 
any  one  doubts  let  him  read  the  passages  tabulated  above  and  notice 
the  total  difference  of  manner  and  feeling  in  them  from  the  rest  of 
the  play;  the  way  in  which  the  sense  is  concluded  in  each  couplet, 
often  in  each  line  ;  the  grammatical  structure  of  the  sentences  ;  and 
I  think  that  his  poetic  feeling  will  convince  him  if  his  judgment  on 
the  evidence  dp  not. 

I  need  only  notice  further  that,  of  the  above  passages,  I.  II.  VI. 
VII.  are  clearly  poetic  bits  retained  in  the  complete  play  for  the 
sake  of  their  poetic  worth  ;  III.  IV.  V.  VIII.,  the  dramatic  bits  are 
almost  entirely  from  the  speeches  of  Helen  and  the  King ;  whose 
characters  appear  to  have  been  more  completely  conceived  in  the 
original  play  than  the  minor  personages,  and  to  have  required  less 
alteration. 

There  are  no  doubt  many  other  boulders   from   the  old  strata 


226  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

imbedded  in  the  later  deposits,  e.g.  the  end  of  Act  iv.  Sc.  2,  &c.  ; 
but  only  in  a  special  consideraion  of  this  play  would  it  be  possible 
to  trace  out  every  line  of  this  character.  Enough  has,  I  hope,  been 
given  to  show  the  truth  of  our  main  proposition,  and  I  now  leave 
the  further  prosecution  of  the  question  to  those  who  are  investigating 
the  problem,  What  was  the  original  form  of  Lavfs  Labour  'j  Won  ? 
or  if  needful  to  some  future  paper  of  my  own. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
ON    "TWELFTH    NIGHT.' 


IN  order  to  examine  into  the  question  of  the  date  of  Twelfth  Night 
it  is  first  necessary  to  consider  the  structure  of  the  plot.  There 
are  two  distinct  plots  in  it,  as  in  Troylus  and  Cressida  there  are 
three.  In  Shakespeare's  usual  practice,  where  there  are  two  plots 
in  a  play,  as  in  Lear,  they  are,  even  when  derived  from  distinct 
sources,  so  interwoven  that  it  is  impossible  to  disentangle  one  of 
them  and  present  it  separately.  But  this  is  not  the  case  in  the  two 
plays  mentioned  above.  Just  as  the  story  of  Troylus'  love  is 
separable  from  that  of  Ajax's  pride  and  Achilles'  wrath,  so  is  the 
story  of  Viola,  the  Duke  and  Olivia,  separable  from  that  of  Malvolio, 
Sir  Toby  and  Maria.  Wherever  this  is  the  case,  one  of  three 
conclusions  must  be  drawn  :  either  the  play  has  been  written  at 
two  periods  (as  I  think  is  the  case  here);  or  by  two  authors, 
which  is  not  the  case  here  ;  or  it  is  an  inferior  piece  of 
work,  which  is  also  not  the  case  here.  The  characters  that  belong 
to  what  I  consider  the  early  part  of  the  play  are,  the  Duke, 
Sebastian,  Antonio,  Viola,  Olivia,  Curio,  Valentine,  and  the 
Captain.  The  part  of  the  play  in  which  they  enter  is  I.  i.  ii.  iv.  v. 
(part)  ;  II.  i.  ii.  iv. ;  III.  i.  (part),  iii.  iv.  (part)  ;  IV.  i.  (part),  iii.; 
V.  i.  This  can  be  cut  out  so  as  to  make  a  play  of  itself  entirely 
independent  of  the  other  characters,  which  is  the  infallible  sign  of 
priority  of  composition. 

This  part  of  the  play  is  full  of  the  young,  fresh,  clear  poetry  of 
Shakespeare's  early  time,  the  time  of  Midsummer  Nighfs  Dream, 
his  first  period.  The  other  part  is  that  of  the  man  of  the 
world,  the  satirist  ;  kindly  and  good  humoured,  but  still  the  satirist. 

15—2 


228  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

All  this  latter  part  is  added  by  Shakespeare  himself;  it  i*  from  the 
same  mint  as  Falstaff  and  his  companions,  the  same  as  Pistol  and 
Parolles.  For  the  play  of  All's  Well  that  Ends  Well  in  like 
manner  divides  into  two  parts.  The  part  taken  from  the  novel  is 
early,  and  perhaps  contains  in  it  all  that  remains  of  Love's  Labour 's 
Won.  The  characters  of  the  Countess,  Parolles,  and  the  Clown, 
are  Shakespeare's  additions,  like  Sir  Toby  Belch,  Sir  Andrew 
Aguecheek,  Fabian,  Maria,  Feste,  and  Malvolio  ;  and  as  I  have 
stated  in  the  examination  of  that  play,  they  are  additions  of  a  later 
time.  In  both  these  plays,  too,  the  early  part  has  been  revised  ; 
and  All's  Well  has  been  nearly  rewritten,  so  that  the  old  play  has 
been  broken  up,  and  only  pieces  of  it  can  be  recognised  as  boulders 
embedded  in  the  later  strata ;  in  Twelfth  Night,  the  stratification 
has  not  been  disturbed  ;  only  the  surface  has  been  denuded  and 
scratched  a  Lttle,  and  some  new  material  has  been  deposited  here 
and  there. 

The  first  indication  I  have  found  of  this  date  is  in  II.  iv. 

"  Now,  good  Cesario,  but  that  piece  of  song, 
That  old  and  antique  song,  &c. 
Come,  but  one  verse  ;  " 

where  Viula  was  evidently  intended  to  be  the  singer  :  (compare  I. 
ii,  56  : 

"  Thou  shall  present  me  as  a  euntichio  him  : 
It  may  be  worth  thy  pains  :  for  2  can  sing 
And  speak  to  him  in  many  sorts  of  music.}" 

This  is  from  the  first  draft ;  but  in  the  revised  play  Curio  makes 
the  strange  answer  (in  prose,  as  all,  or  nearly  all,  the  latter  work  is 
in  this  drama),  "He  is  not  here  that  should  sing  it;"  and  the 
Duke  says,  "  Who  was  it  ?"  forgetting  the  singer  he  had  heard  the 
night  before.  He  afterwards  points  out  the  special  character  of  the 
song  (1.  44 — 48)  to  Cesario,  who  had  also  heard  it,  and  who  had 
just  been  asked  to  sing  it ;  all  this  I  think  could  not  have  been 
written  at  one  time. 

But  external  proof  as  to  the  date  of  this  play  we  unfortunately 
have  none,  except  as  to  its  final  completion  and  production  before 
1602  ;  and  its  character  in  style  is  not  pronounced  enough  to  fix  the 
date  of  any  portion.  I  feel  certain  myself  that  the  prose  part  is  of 


ON  TWELP  TH  NIGH T.  22g 

the  same  time  as  As  You  Like  It  and  Much  Ado  about  Nothing:  and 
that  the  verse  part  is  a  revision  of  earlier  work  done  quite  at  the 
beginning  of  the  Second  Period  ;  but  for  this  I  rely  rather  on  the 
many  subtle  undefinable  links  between  it  and  the  other  plays  of  that 
date  than  on  such  broad  facts  as  we  have  here  room  for.  The  com 
munity  of  origin  with  The  Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona  pointed  out  by 
Karl  Simrock  in  1833  is,  however,  a  strong  ground  for  presump 
tion,  and  we  shall  find  that  the  metrical  evidence  gives  important 
confirmation. 

We  have  next  to  assign  some  plausible  theory  why  just  at  this 
period,  1594-5,  Shakespeare  should  have  written  nothing  but  un 
finished  fragments  of  plays  if  my  theory  be  true,  and  that  too  in  so 
many  instances :  Troylus  and  Cressida,  The  Two  Getit/c/nen,  Twelfth 
Night,  being  all  begun  and  left  unfinished  at  this  date,  just  at  the 
end  of  his  First  Period,  after  which  a  great  and  important  change 
takes  place  in  his  style.  Exactly  the  same  thing  takes  place  at 
the  end  of  his  Third  Period,  when  he  begins  and  leaves  unfinished 
the  plays  of  Pericles  and  Timon  ;  at  the  end  of  his  Fourth  Period, 
when  he  begins  and  leaves  unfinished  The  Two  Nolle  Kinsmen  and 
Henry  VIII.  At  the  end  of  his  Second  Period,  it  is  true,  we 
have  not  a  like  phenomenon,  no  plays  having  been  begun  and  left 
unfinished  at  that  time  ;  but  on  the  other  hand,  the  plays  of  Twelfth 
Night,  The  Taming  of  the  Shrew,  and  All's  Well  that  Ends  Wdl 
were  either  revised  or  completed  in  1601-2. 

There  are  periods  in  all  organic  growth  when  secretion  is  lessened 
for  a  time,  and  all  the  forces  of  the  organism  are  busy  in  assimila 
tion  :  there  are  also  periods  when  assimilation  ceases  for  a  time, 
and  all  the  forces  are  occupied  in  laying  up  new  stores  for  future 
development.  Such  periods  I  hold  these  dividing  epochs  in  Shake 
speare's  style  to  have  been.  From  his  external  life  we  are,  as  it 
seems  to  me,  able  to  connect  these  epochs  with  some  of  those  great  joys 
and  sorrows  which  leave  their  permanent  marks  on  men  for  good  or 
evil.  Hallam  has  noticed  the  cynical  turn  of  his  mind  during  his 
Third  Period  ;  others  have  conjectured  that  the  plays  of  the  Fourth 
Period  were  produced  in  rest  and  retirement ;  and  I  think  in 
passing  from  the  First  to  the  Second  Period  we  may  see  a 
change  from  the  dreams  of  youth  to  the  sad  realities  of  the  world. 
The  sorrows  of  Love 's  Labour 's  Lost,  Midsummer  Night's  Dream, 


230  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

and  The  Comedy  of  Errors  are  unreal,  and  excite  no  deep  feeling  in 
us  ;  even  Romeo  and  Juliet'*-  and  Richard  II.,  though  they  move  our 
pity,  do  so  only  because  in  them  passion  is  disappointed  or  calamity 
rashly  incurred.  We  are  sorry  for  the  events,  and  wish  they  had 
been  otherwise  ;  but  Math  the  actors  in  the  dramas  we  have  no  deep 
individual  sympathy  such  as  we  feel  at  the  very  beginning  of  the 
Second  Period  with  the  passionate  agony  of  Constance,  the  Christian 
resignation  of  Antonio,  or  the  logical  though  extreme  vengeance 
of  Shylock.  We  have  passed  from  the  youthful  hnd  of  dreams,  from 
the  youthful  impulses  of  passion,  from  the  youthful  view  of  history 
as  a  spectacle  or  a  romance,  to  a  world  in  which  men  and  women 
have  duties  to  perform  and  tasks  to  accomplish.  Romeo  and  Julkt 
are  severed  by  remorseless  fate,  but  Portia  and  Bassanio  by  the 
stern  call  of  duty  ;  Richard  II.  suffers  for  making  a  mistake  in 
banishing  Bolingbroke,  but  John  for  his  crimes  towards  his  nephew 
raid  his  country.  Between  these  periods  come  the  unfinished  plays 
in  which  the  first  unfaithfulness  in  friendship  (Proteus),  the  first 
infidelity  in  woman  (Cressida),  the  first  uncomplaining  submission  to 
unknown  and  therefore  unrequited  love  (Viola),  are  to  be  found  in 
Shakespeare's  plays.  And  just  at  this  period  there  are  in  his  out 
ward  life  enough  of  sorrows  yet  visible  to  us  to  account  for  this. 
In  1593  Marlowe,  with  whom  he  had  certainly  been  closely  con 
nected,  was  taken  away  by  death ;  in  1595  Hamnet,  his  only  son, 
was  most  likely  sickening,  to  die  in  the  early  part  of  the  next  year. 
Henceforth  his  method  of  work  changed,  his  poetry  is  mingled  with 
prose  to  an  extent  previously  -unknown  ;  the  jingle  of  rhyme  is  for 
the  most  part  abandoned  for  the  sterner  cadence  of  a  rhymeless 
rhythm  ;  a  change  of  style  is  initiated  which  ceased  not  till  the  end  of 
work  came  with  the  night  in  which  no  man  can  work.  During  this 
anxious  time  no  wonder  that  he  could  finish  nothing.  He  could 
publish  the  already  finished  Lucreece  ;  but  the  realities  of  life  would 
allow  no  completeness  to  the  fevered  incoherent  creations  of  the 
fancy.  After  his  son  had  been  taken  away  from  him,  then  he  could 
buckle  himself  to  the  work  before  him,  and  do  it  with  his  might. 
It  may  be  that  without  this  sorrow  we  should  have  had  no  Cordelia. 
In  the  same  way  I  connect  the  ends  of  his  Second  and  Third 

*  But  this  play  I  now  think  is  founded  on  one  by  George  Ptele.     (Sept.  1875.) 


ON  TWELFTH  NIGHT.  231 

Periods  with  the  deaths  of  his  father  and  of  his  youngest  brother, 
Edmund,  the  actor. 

But  if  I  say  all  that  I  wish  to  say  on  this  subject  this  paper  will 
be  interminable.  I  must  come  to  the  metrical  tests,  and  see  if  they 
confirm  or  refute  my  theory.  I  much  regret  that  in  these  early 
plays  we  have  to  depend  on  the  rhyme-test  almost  alone  ;  the 
weak-ending  test,  by  which  I  separated  all  Massinger's  work  from 
Fletcher's,  and  which  I  have  used  for  all  the  Third  and  Fourth 
Periods  for  Shakespeare,  is  inapplicable  to  his  first  two  periods,  and 
the  caesura-test  is  not  yet  worked  out.  I  have  no  doubt  that  nearly 
all  the  peculiarities  of  the  secondary  dramatists  can  ultimately  be 
traced  to  Shakespeare,  and  their  rank  may  almost  be  assigned  by 
the  peculiarity  of  metre  that  each  assimilated  from  his  storehouse  : 
that,  for  instance,  Jonson's  use  of  the  extra- middle  syllable  at  a 
pause,  Fletcher's  double-ending,  and  Massinger's  weak-ending,  were 
all  adopted  from  Shakespeare's  later  time ;  while  Dekker's,  Tour- 
neur's,  and  Webster's  rhymes  are  all  reproductions  of  his  early 
system  though  in  a  comparatively  awkward  and  mistaken  manner. 
Will  some  one  volunteer  to  count  the  caesuras  ?  I  have  done  one 
man's  share  of  counting. 

The  part  of  Twelfth  Night  that  contains  the  Viola  story  compre 
hends  nearly  all  the  verse  part;  and  as  there  is  none  of  the  Malvolio 
and  Aguecheek  part  in  verse  except  17  lines  of  V.  i.  280 — 323,  we 
may  take  the  rhyme-ratio  of  the  whole  play  (minus  these  17  lines) 
or  112  :  876 — 17,  or  112  :  859,  or  I  :  7-5,  as  that  required  for  our 
purpose.  But  it  is  impossible  in  those  cases  when  an  author  has 
partly  rewritten  his  early  sketch,  as  is  clearly  the  case  in  these  two 
plays,  to  ascertain  what  part  of  the  early  work  has  been  cancelled  ; 
and  therefore  we  must  not  press  the  rhyme-ratio  too  strictly.  This 
will  apply  still  more  to  All's  Well  that  Ends  Well.  In  Troylus  and 
Cressida,  on  the  other  hand,  the  old  work  was  almost  untouched,  and 
we  can  draw  more  exact  conclusions.  In  the  present  plays  I  am 
quite  content  to  find  that  the  results  I  arrive  at  from  totally  different 
reasoning  are  entirely  confirmed  by  the  rhyme-test  :  and  on  all 
grounds  alike  I  conclude  that  the  original  draft  of  the  story  of  Viola 
was  made  about  the  date  of  1594- 


CHAPTER  IX. 
ON  "TROYLUS  AND  CRESSIDA. 


THIS  play  of  Troylus  and  Cressida  differs  from  all  others  of  which 
I  have  as  yet  made  special  analyses,  in  having  been  composed  at 
three  distinct  periods:  begun  in  1594-6;  continued  shortly  after  ; 
finished  about  1606-7.  And  here  I  desire  again  to  repeat  that  I 
by  no  means  wish  my  inferences  as  to  any  date  to  be  regarded  as 
final  until  each  play  has  been  separately  studied  :  my  table  is  only 
a  first  approximation,  which  will  aid  in  obtaining  a  second  and  I 
hope  a  truer  one.  I  also  wish  that  any  use  of  exact  dates  may  not 
be  looked  on  as  meant  to  serve  any  further  purposes  than  distinct 
ness  and  brevity :  thus,  when  I  say  this  play  was  begun  in  1594, 
£c.,  what  I  mean  is  this,  that  it  was  begun  at  the  end  of  Shake 
speare's  First  Period,  as  I  arrange  his  plays,  after  Richard  II. 
and  before  The  Merchant  of  Venice;  that  it  was  continued  a  year  or 
two  later  ;  that  it  was  finished  after  the  great  Tragedies  and  before 
the  Roman  plays :  but  I  by  no  means  pretend  that  any  play,  or 
group  of  plays,  may  not  be  slipped  up  or  down  in  the  scale  a  year 
or  two,  provided  the  relative  order  be  retained. 

This  being  premised,  I  proceed  with  the  exposition  of  my  theory 
as  to  this  play.  I  hold,  then,  that  there  are  three  plots  interwoven, 
each  of  which  is  distinct  in  manner  of  treatment,  and  was  composed 
at  a  different  time  from  the  other  two.  There  is  first  the  story  of 
Troylus  and  Cressida  which  was  earliest  written,  on  the  basis  of 
Chaucer's  poem  :  next  comes  the  story  of  the  challenge  of  Hector  to 
Ajax,  their  combat,  and  the  slaying  of  Hector  by  Achilles,  on  the 


ON  TROYLUS  AND  CRESSIDA.  233 

basis  of  Caxton's  Three  Destructions  of  Troy:  and  finally,  the  story 
of  Ulysses'  stratagem  to  induce  Achilles  to  return  to  the  battle-field 
by  setting  up  Ajax  as  his  rival,  which  was  written  after  the  publica 
tion  of  Chapman's  Homer,  from  whom  Thersites,  a  chief  character 
in  this  part,  was  taken.  If  this  theory  be  true,  the  Troylus  story 
ought  to  split  off  tolerably  clean  from  the  other  two,  and  unless  in 
passages  interpolated  at  the  same  time  as  the  after-additions  were 
made,  not  to  contain  any  allusions  to  them  :  the  second  story  in  like 
manner  should  contain  no  allusions  to  the  third  ;  but  it  may  or  may 
not  to  the  first.  Let  us  examine  the  play  as  to  its  arrangements. 
The  passages  containing  the  Troylus  story  are  : — 

Act.  Scene.  Line. 

I.  I,   1-107.  (Troylus  and  Pandarus.) 

I.  2,   1-321.  (Pandarus  and  Cressid. ) 

III.  i,   1-160.  (Pandarus,  Paris,  and  Helen.) 

III.  2,  all.  (Pandarus,  Troylus,  and  Cressid.) 

III.  3,   1-33.  (Calchas,  Agamemnon.) 

IV.  I,  all.  (^Eneas,  Paris,  Diomed.) 

IV.  2,  all.  (Troylus,  Cressid,  Pandarus,  ^neas.) 

IV.  3,  all.  (Paris,  Troylus.) 

IV.  4,   1-141.  (Pandarus.  Cressid,  Troylus,  Diomed.) 

IV.  5,   12-53.  (Cressid,  Diomed,  Grecian  Generals.) 

*V.  2,  ?  (Cressid,  Diomed,  Troylus,  Ulysses.) 

V.  3,  97-115  (Troylus,  Pandarus.) 

In  no  part  of  this  story  is  there  the  slightest  overlapping  of  the 
other  stories,  except  in  the  asterised  scene  where  Ulysses  enters, 
and  in  IV.  v.  277-293;  V.  i.  89-93;  v-  iv-  20-24;  V.  v.  1-5; 
V.  vi.  I -ii;  which  bits  also  involve  Ulysses,  Diomed,  and 
Troylus. 

We  shall  treat  of  these  presently :  but  putting  them  aside  for  a 
moment,  I  would  ask  any  one  who  wishes  to  analyse  the  play  to 
examine  this  story  by  itself,  and  see  whether  he  thinks  it  written  in 
Shakespeare's  best  style.  I  will  give  the  metrical  evidence  in  tables 
for  all  three  parts  at  the  end  of  this  paper :  but,  apart  from  all 
statistics,  is  there  not  something  about  such  a  passage  as  this  quite 
inconsistent  with  the  hitherto  usually-received  theory  of  the  play 


234  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

—  that    it  belongs  (except  a  doubtful   passage  or  two  at  the  end) 
altogether  to  Shakespeare's  Third  or  Fourth  Period  ? 

"  Tell  me,  Apollo,  for  thy  Daphne's  love 
What  Cressid  is,  what  Pandar,  and  what  we  ? 
Her  bed  is  India,  there  she  lies  a  peavl ; 
Between  our  Ilium,  and  where  she  resides, 
Let  it  be  called  the  wild  and  wandering  flood  ; 
Ourself  the  merchant ;  and  this  sailing  Pandar 
Our  doubtful  hope,  our  convoy,  and  our  bark." — Act  i.  Sc.  I. 

Is  it  not  written  just  in  the  same  mode  as  — 

"  In  one  little  body 

Thou  counterfeitst  a  bark,  a  sea,  a  wind  : 
For  still  thy  eyes  which  I  may  call  the  sea 
Do  ebb  and  flow  with  tears  ;  the  bark  thy  body  is 
Sailing  in  this  salt  flood ;  the  winds,  thy  sighs,"  &c. 

Romeo  and  Juliet.  Act  iii.  Sc.  5? 

or  the  passage  in  Richard 77. ,  Actv.  Sc.  5,  which  is  too  well  known 
to  need  quoting  at  length,  beginning, 

"  For  now  hath  Time  made  me  his  numb'ring  clock." 

or, 

"  her  sunny  locks 

Hang  on  her  temples  like  a  golden  fleece  j 
Which  makes  her  seat  of  Belmont  Colchos'  strand, 
And  many  Jasons  come  in  quest  of  her." 

Merchant  of  Venice ;  Act  i.  Sc.  2. 

This  is  not  the  style  of  the  later  plays  ;  nor  is 

"  Buried  this  sigh  in  wrinkle  of  a  smile." — I.  I,  38  ; 

nor  the  prose  of  Pandarus's  speeches  :   but  I  need  not  multiply 
quotations,  the  book  is  in  everyone's  hands. 

For  my  own  part,  I  cannot  read  this  Troylus  part  without 
being  reminded — in  its  conceits,  its  dirty  jokes,  the  peculiar  turn 
of  its  comparisons,  the  flow  of  its  metre,  the  unstayed  youthful- 
ness  of  its  ideas,  and  the  sensuous  passionateness  of  its  love — of 
the  companion  play  of  Romeo  and  Juliet.  For  whatever  may  be 


ON  TROYLUS  AND  CRESS  W  A.  235 

thought  of  the  other  plays  of  Shakespeare  that  I  would  class  together 
as  twin  productions  of  his  genius,  I  hold  that  nothing  can  be  more 
certain  than  that  the  two  plays  of  Friendship  which  contain  the 
stories  of  faithful  Antonio  and  faithless  Proteus  were  meant  as 
pendants  to  each  other  ;  and  that  the  two  plays  of  youthful  pission, 
with  the  stories  of  "True  and  Faithful  Juliet"  and  "False  and 
Faithless  Cressid,"  were  also  meant  as  pendants.  Try  the  experi 
ment  ;  prepare  your  ear  by  reading  straight  off  a  couple  of  Acts  of 
Borneo  and  Juliet,  and  then  read  this  Troylus  story  without  a  word 
of  the  other  parts  of  the  play,  as  far  as  Act  iv.  Sc.  4,  and  I 
confidently  await  the  verdict. 

But  we  must  pass  on  to  the  second  story,  that  of  Hector.     This 
is  contained  in  the  following  parts  : — 
Act.  Scene.  Line. 

I.    I,   108-119.         (./Eneas  and  Troylus.) 
I.   3,  213-309.         (./Eneas  and  Agamemnon.) 
II.   2,  all.  (Priam,  Hector,  Troylus,  Paris,  Helenus, 

Cassandra. ) 

III.  i,   161-172.         (Paris,  Helen.) 

IV.  4,   142-150.         (Paris,  ^Eneas.) 
IV.  5,   1. 1 1.  (Grecian  Generals.) 

IV.   5,   54-276.  (Hector,  ./Eneas,  Greeks,  &c.) 

*V.    i,  all.  (except  Thersites  and  Patroclus  part.) 

V.  3,   1-97.  (Hector,  Andromache,  Cassandra,  Priam, 

Troylus.) 

V.   5,   i — end  of  play — (Troylus's  last  speech,  &c.) 
(But  Sc.  7,  8,  9,  and  perhaps  Epilogue,  probably  spurious.)1 

1  The  spurious  part  of  the  last  Act  is  probably  dtbris  from  Dekker  and  Chettle's 
Troylus  and  Cressida,  written  in  1592,  and  reproduced  in  a  revised  form  as 
Agamemnon  in  1599.  If  anY  one  doubts  that  such  an  amalgamation  of  plays  by 
different  authors  could  take  place  let  him  refer  to  The  Tragedy  of  Ccesar  and 
Pornpey,  by  Chapman,  Act  ii.  Scene  i,  which  is  clearly  not  a  piece  of  the  play, 
but  the  remains  of  an  old  play  of  the  same  title  acted  in  1594  at  the  Rose.  It 
alludes  to  the  Knack  to  Know  a  Knave,  published  in  the  same  year,  1594,  and 
acted  two  years  earlier.  There  are  other  instances  of  this :  I  hope  the  French 
scene  in  Henry  ^.  between  Alice  and  Katharine  is  one  of  them.  At  any  rate, 
no  play  should  be  edited  without  careful  consideration  of  all  evidence  obtainable 
as  to  other  plays  on  the  same  subject.  The  play  entered  in  the  Stationers'  books 
in  1602  for  publication  was  probably  Shakespeare's,  not  including  the  Achilles' 
story ;  it  could  not  have  been  Dekker  and  Chettle's,  as  they  did  not  write  for 
the  Chamberlain's  company.  It  may  have  been,  however,  partly  made  up  from 
their  play  in  the  catastrophe,  as  the  Quarto  Hamlet  was  from  the  early  Hamlet  of 
1588-9.  Editors  have  been  misled  in  this  matter  by  not  noticing  that  the  1602 
entry  was  of  a  play  belonging  to  the  Chamberlain's  men. 


236  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

This  part  of  the  play,  which  contains  everything  connected  with 
the  war,  with  Hector's  challenge  to  Ajax,  with  his  combat  with  him, 
with  his  final  encounter  with  Achilles,  and  his  death,  was,  in  my 
opinion,  added  to  the  early  sketch  of  Troylus'  loves  (which  was  not 
enough  to  make  a  five-act  play),  not  long  after  the  writing  of  the 
first  part. 

The  style  of  this  second  part  is  more  advanced  than  the  first ; 
but  not  so  much  so  as  many  of  the  Second  Period  plays.  It  reminds 
us  most  of  The  Merchant  of  Venice  or  JoJin.  It  also  in  parts  has  an 
echo  of  Marlowe,  just  as  we  might  expect,  if  I  am  right  as  to  its 
date  of  composition.  See  my  edition  of  Henry  VI. l 

For  instance  : — 

"  Is  she  worth  keeping?  why  she  is  a  pearl 

Whose  price  hath  launched  aboz>e  a  thousand  ships 

And  turned  crowrfd  kings  to  merchants. 

If  you'll  avouch  'twas  wisdom  Paris  went, 

As  you  must  needs,  for  you  all  cried  *  Go,  go  : ' 

If  you'il  confess  he  brought  some  noble  prize, 

As  you  must  needs,  for  you  all  clapt  your  hands, 

And  cried  'Inestimable,'  why  do  you  now 

The  issue  of  your  proper  wisdoms  rate?"  &c. — Act  ii.  Sc.  2. 

Compare  with  the  first  three  of  these  lines  Marlowe,  Faust — 

"  Was  this  the  face  that  launched  a  thousand  ships 
And  burnt  the  topless  towers  of  Ilium  ?  " 

I  must  also  notice  that,  according  to  Theobald,  the  Margarelon 
of  Act  v.  Sc.  5  and  Act  v.  Sc.  7,  with  the  Sagitfary  of  Act  v. 
Sc.  5,  are  derived  from  Caxton's  Three  Destructions  of  Troy:  accord 
ing  to  Malone,  the  Knights,  Act  iv.  Sc.  5,  1.  158,  are  from  the 
same  source.  All  these  references  are  from  the  Hector  story :  which 
confirms  my  opinion  that  that  is  an  integral  and  separable  part  of 
the  play.  I  have  not  seen  the  above-named  story-book,  nor 
Lydgate's  poem  on  this  subject :  Lad  I  had  an  opportunity  of  doing 
so,  I  should  probably  have  had  something  to  add  to  what  I  have 
here  stated  :  as  it  is,  I  must  be  content  at  present  to  give  the 
evidence  derivable  from  the  materials  at  my  command.  I  cannot 

*  Unfortunately  still  in  MS.  (Sept.  1875). 


ON  TROYLUS  AND  CRESSIDA.  237 

omit,  however,  one  little  confirmation  of  my  theory  that  lies  on 
the  surface.  In  Act  i.  Sc.  2,  Hector  goes  to  the  field  and  fighis. 
In  Act  i.  Sc.  3,  after  this,  we  find  him  "  grown  rusty  in  the  lor.g- 
continued  truce."  Surely  these  passages  were  not  written  at  the 
same  period. 

Of  course  this  Hector  part  will  not  read  as  complete  in  itself  as 
the  Troylus  story  does,  inasmuch  as  it  had  to  be  fitted  on  to  it :  it 
is,  however,  wonderfully  near  completeness,  taking  all  circumstances 
into  account. 

The  third  story  is  contained  in 

Act.  Scene.  Lire. 

I.  3,   i -2 1 2.  (Ulysses,  Nestor,  Agamemnon.) 

I-  3.  3IO-392-  (Ulysses,  Nestor.) 

II.   I,  all.  (Ajax,  Thersites,  Achilles,  Patroclus.) 

II.   3,  all.  (     Ditto     ditto     and  Greek  Generals.) 

III.  3,  34-316.  (Ulysses,  Achilles,  Thersites,  Patroclus,  &c.) 

IV.  5,  277-293.  (Ulysses,  Troylus.) 

V.   i,  all.  (Thersites  and  Patroclus.) 

V.  2,  all.  (     Ditto  ditto.     ) 

V.  4,  all.  (Thersites,  &c.) 

In  this  part,  and  this  only,  we  have  the  style  of  Shakespeare's 
third-fourth  manner  in  metre  ;  in  word-coining ;  in  metaphor,  in 
development  of  character.  I  need  not  dwell  on  this,  it  is  the 
extreme  palpability  of  this  fact  that  has  caused  all  this  play  to  be 
usually  assigned  to  the  date  of  1608,  or  thereabouts  :  what  has  not 
been  seen  is,  that  these  characters  do  not  run  through  the  whole 
play,  but  only  this  Achilles  and  Thersites  part.  I  must,  however,  say 
a  few  words  on  the  alterations  Shakespeare  must  have  made,  if  he 
wrote  this  play  in  the  way  I  say  he  did. 

It  will  have  been  noticed  that  I  asterised  some  parts  of  the 
Troylus  story.  This  is  the  reason.  These  parts  are  in  their  present 
shape  evidently  remodelled  in  the  last  revision.  Ulysses's  speeches 
are  clearly  in  the  latest  manner.  The  scene  between  Diomed  and 
Cressida,  however,  if  Troylus,  Ulysses,  and  Thersites  are  cut  out, 
falls  into  regular  metre  rather  more  than  the  scene  as  it  stands  does : 
and  is  in  the  earliest  style.  I  think  it  is  part  of  the  first  Troylus 
sketch :  I  am  sure  that  Cressida's  rhymed  soliloquy  is.  Readers  of 


238  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Chaucer  will  remember,  that  Troylus  in  his  version  discovers 
Cressida's  faithlessness  by  finding  a  brooch  in  a  cloak  he  wins  from 
Diomed  in  battle.  I  believe  that  Shakespeare  followed  Chaucer, 
as  his  only  authority,  in  his  first  sketch,  and  so  did  not  take  Troylus 
to  the  Greek  tents  at  all :  this  scene  being  given  between  Diomed 
and  Cressida  only  to  show  that  Troylus's  suspicion  from  the  brooch 
was  a  true  one.  But  finding  afterwards  how  easily  he  could  make 
him  see  instead  of  susptct  by  sending  him  with  Hector  to  the  Greek 
tents,  he  cut  out  the  fighting  scene  and  the  brooch,  and  put  in  the 
additions  to  this  scene.  So  we  explain  all  the  difficulty  under  this 
head.  The  other  asterised  bits  are  all  of  the  Third  Period,  put  in  to 
match  the  new  version  of  this  scene.  There  are  other  little  links  too 
minute  to  note  here,  which  I  should  point  out  in  editing  the  play. 

But  there  is  one  point  noticed  by  the 'Cambridge  Editors  that  so 
strongly  confirms  my  theory,  that  I  must  give  it  in  full  It  will  be 
seen  from  the  tables  given  above  that  the  Troylus  story  ends  at  Act 
v.  Sc.  3,  the  Hector  story  at  the  end  of  the  present  play :  while  the 
final  additions  as  to  Ajax,  Ulysses,  &c.,  are  all  inserted  in  the 
previously  existing  parts,  and  do  not  reach  to  the  end  ;  either  as  we 
have  it  now,  or  as  it  existed  in  either  of  the  two  earlier  stages.  Now 
Shakespeare  would  not  in  all  probability  write  even  so  incomplete 
a  sketch  as  the  Troylus  story  without  contriving  an  end  for  it  and 
writing  this  end.  This  is  the  practice  of  all  great  writers,  as  far 
as  we  can  trace  their  manner  of  work  :  and  we  find  it  exemplified 
in  Twelfth  Night,  the  only  other  play  of  Shakespeare  composed  in 
the  same  way  as  this  one,  at  two  distinct  periods :  the  end  there  is 
clearly  of  the  early  work.  We  ought,  therefore,  to  find  some  trace 
of  the  first  ending  of  the  Troylus  story,  if  anywhere,  at  the  close  of 
Act  v.  Sc.  3.  Of  course  Shakespeare  may  have  obliterated  it,  but 
if  he  has  not,  it  can  be  only  looked  for  where  the  love  story  is 
closed.  Now  exactly  at  that  point  we  read  in  the  Folio  three 
lines, 

"  Pan.  Why  but  hear  you  ? 
Troy.   Hence,  brother  lackey,  ignomy  and  shame, 

Pursue  thy  life  and  live  aye  with  thy  name ; " 

which  three  lines  are  evidently  meant  for  the  original  end  of  the 
play,  as  they  occur  again  just  before  Pandarus's  final  epilogue.  The 


ON  TROYLUS  AND  CRESSIDA.  239 

occurrence  of  these  lines  in  both  these  places  cannot  be  explained 
by  supposing  a  second  author  for  the  last  scenes  :  for  Act  v.  Sc.  5, 
and  Act  v.  Sc.  10,  which  occur  after  the  first  insertions  of  them  in 
Act  v.  Sc.  3,  are  undoubtedly  Shakespeare's,  although  the  piece 
from  the  entrance  of  "  one  in  sumptuous  armour "  (Act  v.  Sc.  6),  to 
the  end  of  Act  v.  Sc.  9,  is  of  dubious  authenticity,  and  perhaps  the 
Pandar  epilogue.  I  do  not,  however,  discuss  this  question  here. 
It  is  of  more  importance  to  our  present  subject  to  see  if  the  metrical 
tests  will  bear  out  our  previous  conclusions.  And  before  giving 
statistics,  I  must  observe  that  the  use  of  these  tests  seems  to  be 
misunderstood  even  by  those  who  have  used  them  as  supporting 
their  views ;  or  are  using  them  to  obtain  conclusions  on  disputed 
points.  I  lay  down,  therefore,  some  canons  of  method  relating  to 
them. 

I. — No  conclusion  can  be  drawn  from  an  insufficient  number  of 
instances.  This  number  varies  with  the  test.  A  dozen  instances  of 
weak-ending  in  a  page  of  ordinary  8vo.  would  stamp  a  play  at  once 
as  Massinger's ;  but  to  any  conclusion  drawn  from  less  than  1,000 
lines  as  to  number  of  rhymes  or  double -end  ings  I  should  attach 
very  little  value. 

II. — Tables  of  ratios  must  not  be  used  without  considering  the 
positive  amounts  of  the  numbers  from  which  the  idtios  are  calculated : 
thus,  in  comparing  The  Tempest  with  Winter  s  Tale,  the  ratios  of 
rhymes  to  blank  verse  lines  come  out  as  I  :  729  and  I  :  infinity 
respectively.  This  looks  like  an  enormous  difference,  but  it  means 
only  that  there  is  one  rhyming  couplet  in  The  Tempest  and  none  in 
Winter's  Tale.  No  conclusion  could  be  based  on  such  a  ground. 
Again,  in  The  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor  the  addition  of  one  rhyme 
would  alter  the  proportion  from  I  :  22  to  I  :  20,  so  that  if  anyone 
unacquainted  with  Shakespeare's  metre  were  to  count 

"  Fear  you  not  that !     Go,  get  us  properties 
And  tricking  for  our  fairies," 

as  a  rhyme,  he  would  displace  the  position  of  the  play  considerably 
hi  the  table.  It  is  clear  that,  in  plays  chiefly  prose,  conclusions 
cannot  be  drawn  from  these  tests  in  cases  where  the  numbers  are 
close  together. 


240  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

III. — Cases  where  the  author  adopts  a  manner  or  metre  quite 
contrary  to  his  usual  custom  cannot  be  determined  by  them.  Thus 
Fletcher's  Faithful  Shepherdess  can  no  more  be  compared  with  his 
other  plays  than  Beauiront's  Masque  can  with  his  :  nor  can  Ben 
Jonson's  Masques  or  even  his  Sad  Shepherd  be  included  in  any 
argument  as  to  his  general  metrical  peculiarities.  Midsummer 
Night's  Dream,  on  the  other  hand,  which  is  not  different  in  any 
respect  of  handling  from  Shakespeare's  other  early  plays,  cannot  be 
so  excepied. 

IV. — No  conclusion  can  be  drawn  from  any  peculiarity  of  style 
that  was  consciously  or  deliberately  adopted  by  an  author,  so  far  as 
the  chronology  of  his  works  is  concerned  :  thus,  no  result  could  be 
gathered  from  the  number  of  lines  with  double-endings  in  Fletcher, 
as  he  clearly  from  the  very  first  chose  this  manner  of  style.  That 
he  chose  it  is  clear  from  its  entire  absence  in  the  Faith  fttl  Shepherdess, 
although  never  missing  for  a  moment  in  the  succeeding  plays,  as  far 
as  they  are  Fletcher's. 

On  the  other  hand,  this  kind  of  peculiarity  is  the  most  valuable 
for  determining  authorship.  Hence  the  extreme  ease  of  separating 
the  Fletcher  parts  of  Henry  VIII.  and  The  Two  Noble  Kinsmen : 
the  Wilkins  or  Tourneur  parts  of  7imon,  the  Wilkins  parts  of 
Pencles.  Hence  also  the  enormous  difficulty  of  separating  the  dif 
ferent  authors  in  the  three  parts  of  Henry  VI.  That  this  problem 
can  be  solved  I  hope  to  show ;  but  I  say  confidently  that,  though 
I  believe  I  have  fully  solved  it,  yet  any  attempt  at  solution  by 
metrical  tests  alone,  as  far  as  such  methods  are  yet  published,  must 
utterly  fail.  In  fact,  all  the  men  after  Shakespeare  clearly  adopted 
deliberately  what  I  may  call  a  metrical  humour :  Fletcher,  his 
double-endings  ;  Massinger,  his  weak  ones,  and  his  full-complement 
lines  ;  Dekker,  his  numerous  rhymes  scattered  in  the  dialogue  ; 
Middleton,  his  triple  endings,  such  as— 

"  As  wild  and  merry  as  the  heart  of  innocence" 

(\vhich  must  be  carefully  distinguished  from  Alexandrines) ;  and  so 
on  for  the  rest.  But  the  earlier  men,  Marlowe,  Greene,  Peele,  &c., 
who  formed  the  first  blank-verse  school,  all  wrote  in  the  same  hard, 
inflexible  monotone,  that  deterred  Shakespeare  from  at  first  giving 


ON  TROYLUS  AND  C RE  SSI  DA.  241 

up  rhyme,  which  he  dropped  only  when,  and  in  exact  proportion  as, 
his  blank-verse  became  freer,  less  subject  to  such  arbitrary  rules 
as  Puttenham's,  and  consequently  more  dramatic.  That  he  did 
this  unconsciously  I  am  certain  :  for  whenever  a  piece  of  his  old 
work  was  good  enough  in  other  respects,  he  never  altered  it  for 
metrical  reasons  in  his  subsequent  revises  :  hence  the  possibility 
of  such  a  paper  as  this  present,  in  which  we  shall  presently  see 
that  one  can  recognise  his  early  work  by  the  glitter  of  the  early 
rhymes. 

This  same  principle  compels  us  to  exclude  from  calculations  for 
determining  the  date  of  Shakespeare's  plays  all  such  cases  as  the 
inner  play  in  Hamlet,  the  masque  in  The  Tempest,  the  fairy  scene  in 
The  Merry  Wives  (which  is  really  an  inserted  play  as  much  as  the 
Hamlet  one),  for  in  all  these  the  different  rhyming  treatment  was 
clearly  adopted  deliberately  beforehand,  in  order  to  differentiate  this 
part  of  the  work  from  the  rest ;  it  did  not  grow  up  in  the  author's 
mind  spontaneously,  while  Ihe  actual  writing  was  going  on,  as  an 
emphatic  rhyme  in  the  middle  or  even  at  the  end  of  a  scene  did  : 
it  was  a  preconceived  limitation,  not  an  unforeseen  development. 
Similar  remarks  apply  to  Pistol's  iambics,  which  are  an  essential 
part  of  his  original  conception. 

V. — The  test  chosen  must  be  suited  to  the  special  author  or  special 
case  treated  of.  Thus  the  weak-ending  test  is  infallible  for  separating 
Fletcher's  work  from  Massinger's.  It  is  only  of  use  in  Shakespeare 
for  the  later  periods  of  his  plays.  The  number  of  rhymes  will 
separate  Dekker  from  late  Shakespeare ;  but  the  manner  of  their 
introduction  would  have  to  be  noted  in  separating  Dekker  from 
early  Shakespeare.  To  use  rhymes  as  a  test  in  any  of  Ben  Jonson's 
work  would  be  a  waste  of  labour,  while  his  triple  endings,  the  one 
characteristic  which  distinguishes  him  from  all  dramatists  but 
Middleton,  should  be  carefully  worked  out  in  any  question  concern- 
ing  his  metre. 

VI. — Metrical  tests  should,  unless  in  special  cases,  not  be  used  in 
the  initiatory  stages  of  investigation.  The  chemist  will  understand 
me  at  once  when  I  say  they  are  to  be  used  as  characteristic  and  not 
as  class  tests.  All  questions  as  to  authorship,  date,  &c.,  should  be 

16 


242  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

approximately  determined  on  other  grounds,  and  then  the  metrical 
test  should  be  applied  to  each  portion  to  see  if  the  separation  of 
unlike  parts  is  complete.  Thus  in  dividing  The  Witch  of  Edmonton 
amongst  its  three  authors,  I  first  exairined  the  plots  and  separated 
the  scenes  belonging  to  each;  then  I  looked  to  the  treatment  of 
character,  the  style,  and  what  are  called  the  aesthetic  tests  :  I  found 
these  agree  with  the  former  division  ;  then  applied  my  metrical  tests 
to  each  portion,  and  found  my  conclusions  in  all  respects  confirmed 
and  finally  approved.  But  in  dividing  The  Maid  in  the  Mill  between 
Fletcher  and  Rowley,  after  separating  the  plots,  I  found  the  metrical 
tests  distinctly  contradicting  the  division  for  the  first  Act :  I  had  to 
try  back,  and  make  a  new  hypothesis  of  change  of  work  between 
the  contributors,  and  then  all  agreed  with  the  metrical  tests — and 
the  work  was  done.  So,  again,  in  Shakespeare,  I  put  forth  in  the 
year  1874  a  chronological  table  of  Shakespeare's  plays.  This  was 
founded  on  such  knowledge  as  I  then  had  of  other  evidences  as  con 
firmed  by  my  test  of  proportion  of  rhymes  in  verse  scenes  to  number 
of  blank- verse  lines ;  since  that  time  I  have  seen  occasion,  as  this 
chapter  shows,  to  change  the  place  of  Troylus  and  Cressida  by  assign 
ing  it  to  three  periods  instead  of  two.  This  division  is  not  based  on 
metrical  grounds  :  I  only  use  the  metre  to  confirm  my  conclusions  ; 
but  if  the  metre  were  to  contradict  my  conclusions  drawn  from  other 
grounds,  I  should  throw  up  the  whole  theory  and  try  again.  So  I 
have  found  occasion  to  transfer  the  place  of  Cymbeline  from  before 
Lear,  Hamlet,  and  Othello,  to  after  them  ;  and  to  leave  a  much 
greater  margin  for  the  date  of  Macbeth :  but  in  neither  case  do  the 
metrical  tests  contradict  these  changes,  for  the  proportions  for  the 
first-named  plays  are  so  close,  I  :  30,  and  I  :  31,  that  I  cannot 
attach  importance  to  them,  and  the  place  of  Macbeth  must 
stand  undetermined  by  me  till  we  come  to  the  chapter  on  that 
subject. 

These  tests  are  infallible  when  used  with  due  precaution,  but 
useless  otherwise.  The  chemist  will  understand  me  again  when  I 
say  that  disturbing  elements  must  be  eliminated  before  characteristic 
tests  are  applied ;  and  that  specific  results  are  not  to  be  expected 
from  tests  not  characteristic.  I  may  some  day  make  a  tabular 
scheme  of  my  tests  drawn  up  in  the  same  form  as  chemical  tables 
for  the  laboratory,  as  a  guide  for  future  inquirers  in  these  matters. 


OAT  TROYLUS  'AND  CRESS1DA.  243 

VII. — Tests  must  be  applied  singly,  but  interpreted  jointly. 
Descriptions  of  all  peculiarities  of  any  author  or  any  work,  given 
together,  are  comparatively  useless.  The  dividing  tests  must  first  be 
carefully  determined  for  each  case,  and  used  one  at  a  time.  If  they 
give  the  same  results,  then  the  characteristic  tests  should  be  applied 
one  by  one  till  all  have  been  tried  ;  and  if  any  one  fails,  the  whole 
analysis  must  be  repeated  on  a  different  arrangement.  In  fact, 
whatever  is  true  of  chemical  testing  is  true  mutatis  mutandis  in  this 
kind  of  testing  also. 

VIII. — Mathematical  deductions  from  the  doctrine  of  chances 
and  inferences  from  one  set  of  numerical  results  to  another  are 
most  valuable,  and  to  be  applied  whenever  possible.  For  instance, 
Dr.  Abbott's  deduction  from  Mr.  Simpson's  numerical  statement,  that 
2,700  words  in  Shakespeare  occur  in  Uvo  plays  each  and  in  no  others 
— to  the  effect  that  four  words  only  are  to  be  expected  as  peculiar  to 
any  given  pair  of  plays — is  most  valuable  as  well  as  ingenious.  I 
found  it  of  the  greatest  use  in  dividing  Henry  VI. 

IX. — The  accuracy  of  our  present  texts  must  be  considered. 
Some  of  Fletcher's  plays  are  in  such  a  mutilated  and  incorrect  state 
that  it  is  impossible  to  determine  how  many  Alexandrines,  &c.,  aie 
in  them.  A  great  part  of  The  Scornful  Lady,  printed  as  prose  even 
in  Mr.  Dyce's  edition,  is  distinctly  verse.  Much  Snakespeare  verse 
in  Pericles  is  printed  as  prose  in  the  early  editions.  It  is  clear  that 
any  tabulations,  or  deductions  of  numerical  character  in  such  cases 
as  these,  depend  entirely  for  their  value,  in  the  first  place,  on  the 
editor's  arrangement  of  the  text.  Thus,  any  exact  critical  conclu 
sions  from  stopped  lines  or  weak-endings  derived  from  the  received 
rext  in  Pericles,  I  assert  meo  fericu  'o  to  be  worthless. 

X. — We  must  adopt  every  scientific  method  from  other  sciences 
applicable  to  our  ends.  From  the  mineralogist  we  must  learn  by 
long  study  to  recognise  a  chip  of  rock  at  once  from  its  general 
appearance  ;  from  the  chemist,  to  apply  systematic  tabulated  tests  to 
confirm  our  conclusions  ;  from  both,  to  use  varied  tests — tests  as  to 
form,  as  for  crystals, — tests  as  to  material,  as  for  compounds  ;  from 
the  botanist  we  must  learn  to  classif}',  not  in  an  empirical  way,  but 

16-2 


244 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


by  essential  characters  arranged  in  due  subordination  ;  finally,  from 
the  biologist  we  must  learn  to  take  into  account,  not  only  the  state 
of  any  writer's  mind  at  some  one  epoch,  but  to  trace  its  organic 
growth  from  beginning  to  end  of  his  period  of  work  :  remembering 
that  we  have  often  only  fossils,  and  even  fragments  of  fossils,  to  work 
from,  when  our  object  is  to  restore  the  whole  living  animal.  When 
these  things  are  done  systematically  and  thoroughly,  then,  and  then 
only,  may  we  expect  to  have  a  criticism  that  shall  be  free  from 
shallow  notions  taken  up  to  please  individual  eccentricities  :  a  criti 
cism  that  shall  differ  from  what  now  too  often  goes  under  that  name, 
as  much  as  the  notions  on  the  determining  causes  of  the  relations 
between  wages  and  capital  differ  in  the  mind  of  a  Stuart  Mill  and 
that  of  a  Trades- Union  delegate. 

METRICAL  TABLE.1 


(I) 

Troylus  Story. 
72 
607 
I  :8'4 

(2) 
Hector  Story. 
58 
798 
I  :  13-6 

(3) 
Ajax  Story. 
16 
873 
i  :  54'5 

Rhyme  lines. 
Verse  lines. 
Ratio. 

If,  then,  our  rhyme-test  is  true, 

(1)  was  written  between  first  and  second  periods,  nearer  the  first 
than  the  second  ; 

(2)  between  first  and  second  periods,  nearer  the  second  than  the 
first; 

(3)  between  third  and  fourth  periods,  nearer  the  fourth  than  the 
third.2 

But  these  are  exactly  our  conclusions  from  aesthetic  and  other 
grounds.  The  rhyme-test  gives  reliable  results  as  usual  when  used 
as  a  characteristic  test. 

1  This  division  in  no  way  contradicts  that  published  by  me  in  The  Academy. 
It  only  carries  the  analysis  a  step  further.     I  first  separated  the  Troylus  story ; 
this  separation  I  published  in  that  paper.     I  now  separate  the  Hector  story. 
The  arguments  that  prove  one  prove  the  other. 

2  No  ;  nearer  the  third  than  the  fourth.    See  Professor  Ingram's  excellent 
paper  (Sept.  1875). 


CHAPTER  X. 
ON    "MACBETH." 

WERE  it  not  that  I  have  the  high  authority  of  the  Cambridge 
editors  to  countenance  me  in  my  main  theory  of  this  play,  I  should 
almost  fear  to  produce  it :  the  popular  idea  that  this  is  not  only  one 
of  the  most  powerful,  but  also  one  of  the  most  perfect  works  of 
Shakespeare,  must  necessarily  raise  so  strong  a  prejudice  in  the 
minds  of  my  readers  against  so  bold  a  hypothesis  as  I  shall  have  to 
lay  before  them,  that  it  will  be  in  most  cases  difficult  even  to  obtain 
a  hearing,  much  more  a  candid  consideration  of  it.  And  if  difficult, 
as  I  know  by  several  years'  experience  it  is,  to  get  a  hearing  for 
their  hypothesis  as  they  present  it,  it  will  be  far  more  so  when  pushed 
to  the  greater  extent  that  appears  to  me  inevitable.  The  general 
statement  is  this  :  Macbeth  in  its  present  state  is  an  altered  copy  of 
the  original  drama,  and  the  alterations  were  made  by  Middleton. 
I  commence  by  a  condensed  statement  of  the  arguments  of  Messrs 
Clark  and  Wright. 

1.  The  stage  directions  in  III.  v.  33,  Sing  within,  Come  away, 
Come  away,  &*c.;  and  IV.  i.  43,  Musicke  and  a  Song,  Black  Spirits, 
Jb-Y.,  refer  to  two  songs  given  in  full  in  Middleton's  Witch. 

2.  The  Witch  and  Macbeth  have  points  of  resemblance,     (a)    As 
Hecate  says  of  Sebastian,  "I  know  he  loves  me  not,"  so  Hecate  says 
of  Macbeth,  "  He  loves  for  his  own  ends,  not  for  you."     (b)  In  the 
Witch,   "For  the  maid-servants  and  the  girls  o'  th'  house,  I  spiced 
them  lately  with  a  drowsy  posset  : "  in  Macbeth,  "  I  have  drugged 


246  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

their  pos?ets."  (<r)  In  the  Witch,  Hcc.,  "Come,  my  sweet  sisfers, 
Jet  the  air  strike  our  tune  :  "  in  Macbdh,  "  I'll  charm  the  air  to  give 
a  sound."  (d)  In  the  Witch,  "  The  innocence  of  sleep  :"  in  Macbeth, 
"The  innocent  sleep."  (e)  In  the  Witch,  "There's  no  such 
thing  :  "  in  Macbeth  the  same  words.  (/)  In  the  Witch,  "I'll  rip 
thee  down  from  neck  to  navel :  "  in  Macbeth,  "  He  unseamed  him 
from  the  nave  to  the  chaps."  And,  they  add,  there  are  other 
passages. 

3.  The  witches  in  the  two  plays  are  strongly  alike,  though  Hecate 
in  one  is  a  spirit,1  and  in  the  other  an  old  woman. 

4.  There  are   parts  of  Macbeth  not  in   Shakespeare's  manner  : 
namely — 

(a}  I.  ii.  Slovenly  in  metre,  bombastic ;  1.  52,  53,  not  consistent 
with  I.  iii.  72,  73,  112,  &c.  Shakespeare  would  not  send  a  severely 
wounded  soldier  with  news  of  victory. 

I.  iii.  I — 37.     Not  in  Shakespeare's  style. 

II.  i.  61.     "  Words  to  the  heat  of  deeds  too  cold  breath  gives." 
Too  feeble  for  Shakespeare. 

II.  iii.  Porter's  part.     "Low,   written  for  the  mob  by  another 
hand."— Coleridge.1 

III.  v.  Not  in  Shakespeare's  manner. 

IV.  i.  I — 38.    Masterly,  but  doubtful  :  falls  off  in  1.  39 — 47. 

III.  v.  13.  "  Loves  for  his  own  ends.'*  But  Macbeth  hates 
them  :  calls  them  "  secret,  black,  and  midnight  hags." 

III.  v.  125 — 152.     Cannot  be  Shakespeare's. 

IV.  iii.  140 — 159.    Interpolation  :  probably  before  a  Court-repre 
sentation. 

V.  ii.  Doubtful. 

V.  v.  47—50.     Weak  tag  :  unskilful  imitation. 

V.  viii.  32.  "  Before  my  body  I  throw  my  war-like  shield."  In 
terpolation. 

*  I  do  not  agree  with  this, 


ON  MACBETH.  247 

V.  viii.  last  40  lines.  Two  hands  clearly.  Double-stride  direc 
tion.  "  Fiend-like  queen  "  dispels  the  pity  excited  for  Lady  Mac 
beth  :x  "  by  self  and  violent  hands  "  raises  the  veil  dropped  over  her 
fate  with  Shakespeare's  fine  tact. 

III.  ii.  54,  55.     Interpolation. 

Play  probably  interpolated  after  Shakespeare's  withdrawal  from 
theatre  [not  earlier  than  1613]. 

Their  opinion  as  to  I.  i.  is  doubtful.  They  also  decline  giving 
opinion  as  to  date  of  the  Witch. 

The  above  is,  I  hope,  a  fair  abstract  of  their  views  :  what  I  shall 
try  to  do  is  to  carry  them  out  still  farther,  and  to  support  them  with 
new  arguments. 

[Here  followed  in  the  first  issue  of  this  chapter  a  discussion  on  the 
Porter's  speech  in  Act  ii.  Sc.  3.  As  this  rough  and  incorrect  draft 
was  never  intended  for  publication,  I  have  -withdrawn  it.  There  was 
in  it  one  blunder  which  even  now  I  wish  to  set  right. 

The  singular  words  "everlasting  bonfire"  have  been  misunder 
stood  by  the  commentators.  A  bonfire  at  that  date  is  invariably 
given  in  the  Latin  Dictionaries  as  equivalent  to  pyra  or  rogus;  it  was 
the  fire  for  consuming  the  human  body  after  death  :  and  the  hell-fire 
differed  from  the  earth-fire  only  in  being  everlasting.  This  use  of  a 
word  so  remarkably  descriptive  in  a  double  meaning  (for  it  also 
meant  feu  de  joie:  see  Cotgrave)  is  intensely  Shakespearian.3  I  do 
not  however  say  that  this  speech  is  unaltered  Shakespeare  :  I  only 
leave  out  all  discussion  of  it  as  not  bearing  on  my  main  argument, 
and  coming  into  unnecessary  collision  with  opinions  worthy  of  great 
respect  even  if  one  differs  from  them.]3 

Taking,  then,  for  granted  that  one  of  the  two  plays,  the  Witch 
and  Macbeth,  was  copied  from  the  other  in  certain  parts,  it  is  im 
portant  to  consider  if  there  is  any  evidence  which  was  the  earlier. 
Some  external  evidence  that  we  have  favours  the  view  that  the  Witch 
was.  Middleton  says  in  his  dedication,  "  Witches  are  ipso  facto  by 
the  law  condemned  :  and  that  only,  I  think,  hath  made  her  lie  so 

1  I  do  not  agree  with  this. 

2  Compare  also  All's  Well  that  Ends  Well,  iv.  5,  "They'll  be  for  the  flowery 
way  that  leads  to  the  broad  gate  and  the  great  fire." 

3  This  passage  between  brackets  was  inserted  in  September  1874. 


248  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

long  in  an  imprisoned  obscurity."  It  seems  from  this  at  first  sight  as 
if  the  play  had  been  written  long  before  the  dedication,  and  the  dedi 
cation  had  been  written  soon  after — (in  King  James  the  First's  first 
year,  1603) — the  laws  against  witches  had  been  confirmed.  But  the 
words  will  bear  another  interpretation,  and  we  cannot  build  on  this. 
Malone  gave  up  this  opinion  in  favour  of  the  other,  that  Macbeth 
was  the  earlier :  nor  do  I  see  how  the  coincidences  of  expression 
pointed  out  by  Clark  and  Wright  are  to  be  explained  otherwise,  as 
several  of  these  occur  in  parts  undoubtedly  Shakespeare's :  and  he 
would  not  imitate  Middleton.  In  this  view  the  Cambridge  editors 
coincide.  This  point  being,  then,  probably  determined,  the  question 
arises,  Could  Middleton  have  altered  this  play  after  1613,  and  yet 
have  written  the  Witch  after  that?  Certainly;  for  he  continued 
writing  till  1624 ;  and  there  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  all  his 
plays  written  for  the  King's  company  date  between  1615  and 
1624. 

I  next  pass  to  the  consideration  of  the  nature  of  these  witches. 
In  Holinshed  we  find  that  "  Macbeth  and  Banquo  were  met  by  iij 
women  in  straunge  and  ferly  apparell  resembling  creatures  of  an 
elder  world  :  "  that  they  vanished :  that  at  first  by  Macbeth  and 
Banquo  "  they  were  reputed  but  some  vayne  fantasticall  illusion," 
but  afterwards  the  common  opinion  was  that  they  were  "eyther  the 
weird  sisters  that  is  ye  Goddesses  of  destinie,  or  else  some  Nimphes 
or  Feiries  endewed  with  knowledge  of  prophesie  by  their  Nicroman- 
ticall  science."  (Act  ii.  Sc.  2.)  But  in  the  part  corresponding  to 
IV.  i.  Macbeth  is  warned  by  "  certain  wysardes  "  to  take  heed  of 
Macduff :  but  he  does  not  kill  him,  because  "  a  certain  witch  whom 
he  had  in  great  trust  "  had  given  him  the  two  other  equivocal  predic 
tions.  Now  it  is  to  me  incredible  that  Shakespeare,  who  in  the 
parts  of  the  play  not  rejected  by  the  Cambridge  editors  never  uses 
the  word,  or  alludes  to  witches  in  any  way,  should  have  degraded 
"ye  Goddesses  of  destinie  "  to  three  old  women,  who  are  called  \>y 
Paddock  and  Grimalkin  (their  incubi  or  familiars),  sail  in  sieves,  kill 
swine,  serve  Hecate,  and  deal  in  all  the  common  charms,  illusions, 
and  incantations  of  vulgar  witches.  The  three  who  "look  not  like  the 
inhabitants  o'  th*  Earth  and  yet  are  on't ;"  they  who  "can  look  into 
the  seeds  of  Time  and  say  which  grain  will  grow; "  they  .who  "seem 
corporal,"  but  "melt  into  the  air"  like  "  bubbles  of  the  Earth  :  " 


ON  MACBETH.  249 

the  "  weyvvard  sisters"  who  "make  themselves  air"  and  have  "more 
than  mortal  knowledge  "  are  not  beings  of  this  stamp.  Were  it  for 
this  reason  only,  Act  I.  Sc.  i,  Sc.  iii  1.  1—37,  and  III.  v.  (in  which 
the  servants  of  Hecate  are  identified  with  the  three  beings  who  meet 
Macbeth  in  I.  ii.)  must  be  rejected.  Shakespeare  may  have  raised 
the  wizard  and  witches  of  the  latter  parts  of  Holinshed  into  the 
weird  sisters  of  the  former  parts  ;  but  the  converse  process  is  impos 
sible.  I  shall  recur  to  this,  but  want  first  to  dispose  of  Hecate. 
The  Hecate  of  III.  v.  and  IV.  i.  occurs  nowhere  else  in  Shakespeare. 
Even  in  this  play  the  "pale  Hecate"  whose  " offerings  witchcraft 
celebrates,"  the  "black  Hecate  who  summons  the  beetle  to  ring 
night's  yawning  peal,"  is  the  classical  Hecate,  the  mistress  of  the 
lower  world,  arbiter  of  departed  souls,  patroness  of  magic,  the  three 
fold  dreadful  Goddess  :  so  she  is  in  Midsummer  Night's  Dream,  in 
Lear,  in  Hamlet.  "Triple  Hecate's  team,"  "The  mysteries  of 
Hecate  and  the  night,"  "with  Hecate's  ban  thrice  blasted,"  are  the 
phrases  we  meet  with  there :  in  this  play  she  is  a  common  witch,  as 
in  Middleton's  play  (not  a  spirit,  as  the  Cambridge  editors  say) ;  the 
chief  witch  :  who  sails  in  the  air  indeed  ;  all  witches  do  that :  but  a 
witch  ;  rightly  described  in  the  stage  direction  :  Enter  Hecate  and 
the  other  three  "witches. 

I  must  here  in  parenthesis  ask  how  the  usual  theory  can  be  made 
consistent  with  this  stage  direction  ?  The  three  witches  are  already 
on  the  stage  ;  the  other  three  must  mean  the  weird  sisters  who 
appear  in  I.  iii.  to  Macbeth  in  the  Shakespeare  part  of  the  play, 
and  are  identified  with  the  Middleton  witches  in  I.  iii.  32.  They 
are  quite  distinct  from  the  Shakespeare  witches  of  IV.  i.  The 
attempts  made  to  evade  the  evidence  of  this  stage  direction  as  being 
a  blunder  should  be  supported  by  instances  of  similar  blunders  : 
instances  where  characters  already  on  the  stage  are  described  as 
entering  :  omissions  of  such  directions  are  easy  to  understand :  their 
insertion  without  cause  is  unexplained,  and  I  think  inexplicable. 
Then  this  un- Shakespearian  Hecate  does  not  use  Shakespearian  lan 
guage  :  there  is  not  a  line  in  her  part  that  is  not  in  Middleton's  worst 
style  :  her  metre  is  a  jumble  of  tens  and  eights  (iambic,  not  trochaic 
like  Shakespeare's  short  lines)  like  some  of  the  Gower  choruses  in 
Pei-icles,  a  sure  sign  of  inferior  work  ;  and  what  is  of  most  import 
ance,  she  is  not  of  the  least  use  in  the  play  in  any  way  :  the  only 


250  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

effect  she  produces  is,  that  the  three  fate-goddesses  who  in  the  introduc 
tion  of  the  play  were  already  brought  down  to  ordinary  witches,  are 
lowered  still  further  to  witches  of  an  inferior  grade  with  a  mistress 
who  "  contrives  their  charms  "  and  is  jealous  if  any  "  trafficking  " 
goes  on  in  which  she  does  not  bear  her  part.  She  and  her  songs, 
and  the  speech  in  IV.  i.  125 — 132,  which  is  certainly  hers,  although 
all  the  editors  assign  it  to  First  Witch,  are  all  alike  not  only  of  the 
earth  earthy,  but  of  the  mud  muddy.  They  are  the  sediment  of 
Middleton's  puddle,  not  the  sparkling  foam  of  the  living  waters 
of  Shakespeare. 

Thus  far,  then,  my  results  coincide  with  the  Cambridge  editors': 
I  reject  I.  i.  and  I.  iii.  I — 37  ;  III.  v.  and  IV.  i.  39—44.  But  now 
we  must  face  the  real  difficulty.  What  are  the  witches  of  IV.  i.  ? 
are  they  the  "weird  sisters,"  fairies,  nymphs,  or  goddesses?  or  are 
they  ordinary  witches  or  wizards,  as  we  should  expect  from  the  nar 
rative  in  Holinshed,  and  entirely  distinct  from  the  three  mysterious 
beings  in  I.  iii.?  I  hold  the  latter  view.  In  order  to  support  it,  it 
will  be  necessary  to  show  that  they  are  not  weird  sisters  in  the  higher 
sense  :  to  give  a  hypothesis  as  to  how  they  got  confused  with  them  : 
to  try  to  present  some  idea  of  Shakespeare's  intentions  regarding 
them.  Now  Act  IV.  Sc.  i.  I — 47  is  admittecj  by  all  critics  to  be 
greatly  superior  to  the  corresponding  passage  h\I.  iii.  I — 37.  Clark 
and  Wright  hold  it  to  be  Shakespeare,  except  the  Hecate  bit.  I 
agree  with  them  ;  but  then  I  cannot  identify  these  witches  with  the 
Nornse  of  I.  iii.  38 — 80.  The  witches  in  Act  IV.  are  just  like 
Middleton's  witches,  only  superior  in  quality.  They  are  clearly 
the  originals  from  whom  his  imitations  were  taken.  Their  charms 
are  of  the  sort  popularly  believed  in.  Their  powers  are  to  untie  the 
winds,  lodge  corn,  create  storms,  raise  spirits,  but  of  themselves 
they  have  not  the  prophetic  knowledge  of  the  weird  sisters,  the  all- 
knowers  of  Past,  Present,  Future ;  they  must  get  their  knowledge 
from  their  masters,  or  call  them  up  to  communicate  it  themselves. 
Nor  do  they  call  themselves  weird  sisters,  although  the  three  in  I.  iii. 
(early  rejected  part)  do  so  ;  their  knowledge  is  from  the  pricking  of 
their  thumbs  ;  they  are  submissive  to  the  great  King  who  calls  them 
Jilthy  hags,  secret,  black,  and  midnight  hags ;  the  oracles  their 
masters  are  ambiguous,  delusive  :  those  of  the  weird  sisters  were 
pithy,  inevitable ;  the  witches  are  of  the  middle  ages,  a  growth  of 


Oti  MACBETH. 


251 


the  popular  superstitions  ;  the  Nornse  are  of  the  old  Aryan  mytho 
logy,  and  worthy  of  their  parentage.  But  however  strongly  I  may 
feel  this  difference  between  the  supernatural  beings  of  I.  iii.  (latter 
part)  and  IV.  i. ; — and  I  think  that  anyone  who  can  read  these  two 
scenes  divested  of  old  associations  and  prejudice  will  agree  with  me  ; 
— however  sure  I  may  feel  that  Shakespeare  could  not  have  given  up 
the  "destiny  goddesses"  of  his  authority  for  this  play  so  as  to  lower 
them  to  the  wizards  and  witches  of  Macbeth's  later  time,  there  is  a 
great  stumbling-block  in  our  way.  In  III.  iv.  133,  and  IV.  i.  136, 
Macbeth  calls  the  witches  of  IV.  i.  "  the  weird  sisters."  It  is  true 
that  he  has  called  them  filthy  hags,  that  he  describes  them  as  riding 
on  the  air,  that  he  is  surprised  that  Lennox  did  not  see  them  pass  by 
him,  that  they  may  have1  left  the  stage  in  the  ordinary  way,  while 
Macbeth  was  in  a  reverie  :  that  he  never  alludes  to  them  afterwards 
as  he  so  often  does  to  the  real  "weird  sisters,"  but  only  mentions 
"  the  spirits  "  or  "the  fiend."  All  this  is  true  ;  but  if  my  theory  be 
true  also,  those  two  passages  must  be  explained.  This  is  a  real 
difficulty,  and  I  cannot  satisfactorily  solve  it  at  present.  III.  iv.  133 
I  think  is  an  insertion  of  Middleton's,  and  in  IV.  i.  136  the  original 
reading  may  have  been,  Saw  you  the  sister  witches?  or  something  like 
this  :  but  I  don't  think  the  text  has  here  been  tampered  with  :  I  can 
only  conjecture  that  Shakespeare  made  a  slip,  or  intended  Macbeth, 
who  was  thinking  of  the  original  prophecy,  to  make  one.  I  do  not 
think  the  difficulty  weighty  enough  to  support  the  common  view  of 
itself,  but  I  admit  its  importance. 

I  next  pass  to  a  matter  of  an  entirely  different  nature.  The  Cam 
bridge  editors  have  pointed  out  some  instances  of  rhyming  tags  so 
weak  in  this  play  that  they  cannot  admit  them  as  Shakespeare's 
work.  I  desire  to  add  to  the  number  of  such  exceptionable 
rhymes.  For  instance,  I.  iv.  48 — 53.  Macbeth  has  "  humbly  taken 
his  leave,"  and  been  dismissed  by  the  king.  While  going  out  he 
soliloquizes  thus  : — 

"  The  Prince  of  Cumberland  !    That  is  a  step 
On  which  I  must  fall  down,  or  else  o'er-leap  : 
For  in  my  way  it  lies.     Stars,  hide  your  fires  ! 
Let  not  light  see  my  black  and  deep  desires  : 

»  I  feel  certain  on  this  point.  The  stage  direction,  vanish  with  HECATE,  is 
Middleton's. 


252  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

The  eye  wink  at  the  hand  :  yet  let  that  be 
Which  the  eye  fears,  when  it  is  done,  to  see." 

During  this,  Banquo  has  been  praising  him  to  Duncan  in  words  not 
reported  to  us.  Then  Duncan  goes  on,  "True,  worthy  Banquo," 
&rc.  This  is  not  like  Shakespeare  :  but  is  just  such  an  attempt  at 
being  like  Shakespeare  as  I  should  expect  Middleton  to  write. 
Note  specially  the  weakness  of  the  italicized  words,  and  of  the 
next  line.  The  play  has  evidently  been  cut  down  at  this  point 

In  II.  iii.  end  : 

"  there's  warrant  in  that  theft 
Which  steals  itself,  when  there's  no  mercy  left." 

This  is  too  weak  and  thin  for  Shakespeare  to  emphasize,  and  the 
ending  of  II.  iv.  is  worse  : 

"  Ross.  Well,  I  will  thither. 

Macd.      Well,  may  you  see  things  well  done  them !  Adieu  ! 

Lest  our  old  robes  sit  easier  than  our  new. 
Ross.       Farewell,  father. 
Old  M.  God's  benison  go  with  you,  and  with  those 

That  would  make  good  of  bad,  and  friends  of  foes." 

Delete  both  couplets,  which  are  bad,  especially  the  last. 

IV.  i.  end  : 

"  No  boasting  like  a  fool ; 
This  deed  I'll  do  before  this  purpose  cool," 

is  wretched.     See  how  the  passage  reads  without  it  : 

"give  to  the  edge  of  the  sword 
His  wife,  his  babes,  and  all  unfortunate  souls 
That  trace  him  in  his  line.     But  no  more  sights  ! 
Where  are  these  gentlemen?" 

In  V.  i.  end  : 

"  Doctor.  So,  good-night  : 

My  mind  she  has  mated,  and  amazed  my  sight. 
I  think,  but  dare  not  speak." 

Omit  second  line  of  couplet. 


ON  MACBETH.  253 

In  V.  ii.  the  invitation  "to  pour  in  our  country's  purge  as  many 
drops  of  us  as  are  needed  to  dew  the  sovereign  flower  and  kill  the 
weeds  "  is  unlike  Shakespeare. 

V.  iii.  end,  after  Macbeth's  emphatic  declaration  : 

"  I  will  not  be  afraid  of  death  and  bane, 
Till  Birnam  forest  come  to  Dunsinane," 

the  Doctor's  washy  sentiment, 

"  Were  I  from  Dunsinane  away  and  clear, 
Profit  again  should  hardly  draw  me  here," 

is  surely  out  of  place.  Why  should  our  sympathy  with  Macbeth  be 
interrupted  by  the  Doctor's  private  sentiments  ? 

V.  iv,  end : 

"The  time  approaches, 
That  will  with  due  decision  make  us  know 
What  we  shall  say  we  have,  and  what  we  owe  : 
Thoughts  speculative  their  unsure  hopes  relate  ; 
But  certain  issue  strokes  must  arbitrate." 

cannot  surely  be  Shakespeare's. 

V.  vi.  end : 

"  Make  all  our  trumpets  speak;  give  them  all  breath^ 
Those  clamorous  harbingers  of  blood  and  death." 

This  tautology  cannot  be  Shakespeare's ;  besides,  the  whole  senti 
ment  is  too  weak  for  the  situation. 

In  a  few  of  these  I  may  have  missed  some  inner  aesthetic 
meaning  which  is  too  deep  for  my  comprehension ;  but  the  number 
of  them  is  far  too  great  for  me  to  be  wrong  in  all.  I  conclude 
therefore  that  Middleton  altered  the  endings  of  many  scenes  by 
inserting  rhyming  tags  :  whether  he  cut  anything  out  remains  to 
be  seen. 

The  next  point  I  notice  is,  that  the  account  of  young  Siward's 
death  and  the  unnatural  patriotism  of  his  father,  which  is  derived 


254  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

from  Holinshed's  history  of  England,  and  not  of  Scotland  like  the 
rest  of  the  play,  is  a  bit  of  padding  put  in  by  Shakespeare  after 
finishing  the  whole  tragedy ;  this  shows  great  haste  in  its  composi 
tion  :  to  my  mind  the  story  is  not  nearly  so  well  told  as  in  Henry  of 
Huntingdon,  and  spoils  the  denouement,  which  would  be  decidedly 
better  if  the  first  whom  Macbeth  combated  turned  out  to  be  the 
fated  warrior  not  born  of  woman.  But  this  leads  us  to  a  much  larger 
and  more  important  point  :  the  number  of  characters  in  this  play 
who  only  appear  for  a  scene  or  two  and  then  are  heard  of  no  more. 
In  the  27  scenes  (20  in  Folio,  28  in  modern  editions)  there  are 
only  8  in  which  new  characters  are  not  introduced  ;  a  phe 
nomenon  unexampled  in  all  the  dramas  I  have  read.  Some  of 
these — Fleance,  Donalbain,  MacdufPs  wife,  the  Scotch  Doctor — 
are  real  aids  to  the  story ;  but  others  are  not  as  it  now  stands. 
For  example  : — 

The  severely-wounded  captain  in  I.  ii.,  who  mangles  his  metre  so 
painfully,  I  surrender  at  once  to  the  Cambridge  editors  as  Middle- 
ton's.  In  all  probability,  however,  this  scene  replaces  one  of  Shake- 
spe?ve's;  one  of  whose  lines,  at  least, 

"  The  multiplying  villanies  of  nature,'* 

seems  to  be  still  left  in  it  as  it  now  stands.  In  this  scene  Ross 
comes  in  afterwards,  and  is  sent  to  Macbeth  to  greet  him  with  his 
new  title  ;  he  says,  "7'11  see  it  done."  Lennox  also  is  present,  not 
Angus.  Ross  and  Angus  take  the  message  to  Macbeth  in  I.  iii. 
where  Angus  speaks  10  lines,  and  then  disappears  till  V.  ii. ; 
he  there  has  7  lines  to  repeat  ;  so  that  he  has  17  in  all.  He  is 
not  of  the  slightest  use  in  the  play.  Lennox  could  have  done  his 
work  better  in  I.  iii.  on  account  of  his  after  connection  with 
Macbeth  :  V.  ii.  is  not  wanted  at  all.  I  think,  therefore,  that 
Middleton  has  cut  down  Angus's  part  in  the  original  play  by 
omitting  scenes  in  which  he  appeared. 

This  shows  that  the  play  has  been  greatly  abridged  for  acting 
purposes. 

Hecate  we  have  already  discussed. 

The  Cambridge  editors  have  pointed  out  the  double  stage- 
direction,  Exeunt  fighting;  and  Enter  fighting,  Macbeth  d;aiL 
(Compare  the  double-ending  of  Troylus  and  Cressida.) 


ON  MACBETH.  255 

We  have  yet  to  consider  III.  iv.  130— to  end.     The  metre  of 
"  And  betimes  I  will  to  the  weird  sisters  ; " 

the  poverty  of  thought  in 

"  For  mine  own  good 
All  causes  shall  give  way  :  I  am  in  blood 
Stept  in  so  far,  that,  should  I  wade  no  more, 
Returning  were  as  tedious  as  go  o'er  : 
Strange  things  I  have  in  head  that  will  to  hand, 
Which  must  be  acted  ere  they  will  be  scann'd ;  " 

the  putting  this  long  tag  in  Macbeth's  mouth  when  he  is  so  be 
wildered  that  he  answers  Lady  Macbeth's — 

"  You  lack  the  season  of  all  natures,  sleep  " — 
by 

11  Come,  we'll  to  sleep," 

are  all  marks  of  inferior  work,  and  make  me  sure  that  this  part  has 
been  worked  over  by  Middleton. 

There  is  a  passage  in  IV.  i.  that  has  been  worked  over  in  a  similar 
way.     After  the  speech  of  the  third  apparition  Macbeth  says, 

"  That  will  never  be. 
Who  can  impress  the  forest,  bid  the  tree 
Unfix  his  earth-bound  root  ?     Sweet  bodements,  good  ! 
Rebellious  dead,  rise  never  till  the  wood 
Of  Birnam  rise,  and  our  high-placed  Macbeth 
Shall  live  the  lease  of  nature,  pay  his  breath 
To  time  and  mortal  custom." 

"  Our  high-placed  Macbeth  "  cannot  be  said  by  Macbeth  himself:  it 
must  be  part  of  a  speech  of  a  witch.  "  Sweet  bodements  !  "  looks 
also  like  Middleton,  and  the  whole  bit  is,  in  my  opinion,  a  fragment 
of  HtcatJs  inserted  by  him.  "  Rebellious  dead  "  seems  to  me  an 
allusion  to  Banquo's  ghost,  misplaced  by  Middleton.  If  we  read 
*'  Rebellion's  head  "  it  seems  a  mistaken  interpretation  of  the  armed- 
head  apparition  :  in  any  case,  it  is  not  Shakespeare.  And  I  have  no 
doubt  a  minute  examination  may  detect  still  more  traces  of  Middle- 
ton  :  but  in  an  essay  of  this  kind  more  detail  would  be  wearisome. 


255  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Enough  is  given  for  my  purpose  to  make  it  likely  that  Middleton 
was  a  recaster  of  the  play,  not  a  joint  author. 

Before  giving  my  theory  as  to  this  play,  and  the  metrical  confir 
mations  of  it,  I  had  better  perhaps  add  a  Table  of  the  parts  I  do 
believe  to  be  Shakespeare's. 

SHAKESPEARE.  MIDDLETON. x 

I.     i.   (Witches). 
I.     ii.  (altered) 

iii.   i — 37.  (Witches), 

iii.  38—146. 

iv.  •  rhyme-tag. 
v. 
vi. 
vii. 

II.      i.  rhyme-tag, 
ii. 

iii.  *  rhyme-tag, 

iv.  *  rhyme-tag. 
III.     i. 

ii.  rhyme-tag. 

iii. 

iv.  bit  at  end. 

III.  v.  (Hecate), 
vi. 

IV.     i.  Hecate  and  *  6-line  bit  and  *tag. 
ii. 

iii.  140—158  (touching  for  evil). 

V.     i.  *  one  line. 

ii.  (altered)                                     rhyme-tag, 

iii.  *  rhyme-tag, 

iv.  *  rhyme-tag. , 

v.  rhyme-tag, 

vi.  *  rhyme-tag, 

vii.  *  rhyme-tag.  —(1.  12  &  13). 

viii.  (altered) 

1  The  part  assigned  by  me  to  Middleton,  but  not  by  the  Cambridge  editors,  is 
not  30  lines  in  all  ;  I  have  asterised  it  in  the  table.— F.  G.  F. 


ON  MACBETH.  257 

This  is  an  instance  in  which  such  editions  as  I  have  given  in  the 
Transactions  of  the  New  Shakspere  Society  of  Marina  (Pericles) 
and  Timon  would  be  worthless.  Middleton  certainly  did  not  con 
fine  himself  to  adding  to  Shakespeare's  work  :  he  also  re-modelled, 
re-wrote,  and  made  large  excisions.  We  ought  to  have  an  edition 
of  this  play  in  two  types  :  the  presumed  alterations,  and  additions  of 
Middleton's  being  in  a  smaller  type  than  the  rest,  so  that  the  better 
and  more  important  portion  might  be  read  by  itself. 

I  now  give  my  theory  as  to  the  composition  of  the  play.  It  was 
written  by  Shakespeare  during  his  Third  period  :  I  think  after  Hamlet 
and  Lear  (see  M  alone)  ;  so  that  its  date  was  probably  1606. 
Metrical  evidence  is  of  no  use  in  determining  the  date  :  as  we  can 
not  tell  how  Middleton  altered  the  play,  or  how  much  he  omitted,  except 
that  the  weak-ending  test  is  not  opposed  to  Malone's  date.  At 
some  time  after  this,  Middleton  revised  and  abridged  it  :  I  agree 
with  the  Cambridge  editors  in  saying  not  earlier  than  1613.  There 
is  a  decisive  argument  that  he  did  so  after  he  wrote  the  Witch, 
namely,  that  he  borrows  the  songs  from  the  latter  play,  and  repeats 
himself  a  good  deal.  It  is  to  me  very  likely  that  he  should  repeat 
himself  in  Macbeth,  and  somewhat  improve  on  his  original  concep 
tion,  as  he  has  done  in  the  corresponding  passages  :  and  yet  be 
unable  to  do  a  couple  of  new  songs,  or  to  avoid  the  monotony  of 
introducing  Hecate  in  both  plays  (Hecate  being  a  witch  in  both,  re 
member).  I  can  quite  understand  a  third-rate  man,  who  in  all  his 
work  shows  reminiscences  of  others,  and  repetitions  of  Shakespeare, 
being  unable  to  vary  such  conceptions  as  he  had  formed  on  the 
subject.  I  believe  that  Middleton,  having  found  the  groundlings 
more  taken  with  the  witches,  and  the  cauldron,  and  the  visions  in 
IV.  i.  than  with  the  grander  art  displayed  in  the  Fate  goddesses  of 
I.  iii.,  determined  to  amalgamate  these,  and  to  give  us  plenty  of  them. 
Hence  the  witches  call  themselves  weird  sisters  in  the  lyric  part 
of  I.  iii.:  hence  the  speech  of  Macbeth,  "I  will  to-morrow  to  the 
weird  sisters,"  &c.  I  believe  also  the  extra  fighting  in  the  last 
scenes  was  inserted  for  the  same  reason.  But  finding  that  the  magic 
and  the  singing  and  the  fighting  made  the  play  too  long— for  a  play 
of  that  kind  cannot  be  endured  to  the  length  of  an  ordinary  tragedy 
of  Shakespeare's— he  cut  out  large  portions  of  the  psychological 
Shakespeare  work,  in  which,  as  far  as  quantity  is  concerned,  this 

17 


258  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

play  is  very  deficient  compared  with  the  three  other  masterpieces  of 
world-poetry,  and  left  us  the  torso  we  now  have.  That  the  taste  of 
the  mob  is  of  the  nature  I  assign  to  it,  is  evident  enough  from  the 
way  this  play  is  put  on  the  stage  now.  I  am  not  play-goer  enough 
to  say  how  often  it  has  been  represented  in  my  time  without  still 
further  additions  from  Middleton's  lyrics  and  Locke's  music,  but  I 
think  it  cannot  be  very  often.  To  hide  the  excisions,  Middleton  put 
on  tags  at  the  places  where  he  made  the  scenes  end  :  and  to  my  think 
ing,  if  any  one  will  compare  the  endings  of  the  scenes  where  Shake 
speare  has  left  them  without  tags  with  those  where  I  have  tried  to 
show  that  Middleton  put  them  in,  he  will  find  that  there  is  a  great 
difference  in  the  completeness  of  the  scenes.  Or  try  another 
experiment  :  cut  off  the  tags  from  the  scenes  where  Shakespeare 
put  them  and  those  where  Middleton  put  them ;  a  similarly 
decisive  result  will  be  felt.  It  is  impossible  to  show  this  in  a 
paper  :  if  I  were  doing  an  edition  of  the  play  with  the  oppor 
tunity  of  summing  up  the  aesthetic  of  each  scene  at  the  end  of  it  as 
I  went  on,  I  am  certain  I  could  make  it  manifest  :  not  to  mention 
many  smaller  details  I  cannot  stay  to  discuss  here,  such  as  the 
stage  direction  in  IV.  i.  about  Banquo's  carrying  the  glass.  But 
I  must  stay  to  protest  against  the  modern  way  of  altering  and 
inserting  stage  directions  ad  libitum  ;  it  has  thrown  back  our  criti 
cism  twenty  years.  I  could  not  myself  stir  in  this  matter  till  I 
obtained  reprints  of  Folio  and  Quartos,  which  I  could  not  for  many 
years,  for  reasons  I  need  not  dwell  on  here.  I  do  not  think  we 
should  do  well  in  issuing  mere  reprints  only,  but  no  alteration  even 
in  popular  editions  should  be  made  without  being  marked  by  brackets 
or  italics,  or  some  warning  that  there  is  an  alteration  :  unless  in 
correction  of  mere  printers'  errors,  or  in  arranging  the  lines,  or 
in  punctuation. 

We  now  come  to  the  metrical  evidence.  From  the  nature  of  the 
interpolations  in  the  rhymes,  &c.,  our  usual  tests  are  not  attainable. 
Fortunately  there  are  others  that  are.  I  give  first,  then, 


ON  MACBETH. 


259 


TABLE  OF  SHAKESPEARE'S  PLAYS  ARRANGED  ACCORDING  TO 
THEIR  LENGTH. 


Anthony  and  Cleopatra, 
Hamlet, 
Richard  III., 
Cymbeline, 
2  Henry  IV., 
Troylus  and  Cressida, 
Coriolanus, 
Othello, 
Henry  V., 
Lear, 
i  Henry  IV., 
2  Henry  VI., 
Merry  Wives, 
Romeo  and  Juliet, 
All's  Well,  &c., 
As  You  Like  It, 
3  Henry  VI., 
Much  Ado,  &c., 
Measure  for  Measure, 
Love's  Labour's  Lost, 

3964 
3924 
3599 
3448 
3437 
3423 
3392 
3324 
3320 
3298 
3170 
3032 
3018 
3002 
2981 
2904 
2904 
2823 
2809 
2789 

Winter's  Tale, 
(  Henry  VIII., 
(  Two  Noble  Kinsmen, 
Merchant  of  Venice, 
I  Henry  VI., 
Twelfth  Night, 
Taming  of  Shrew, 
Richard  II., 
King  John, 

2758 
2754 
2734 
2705 
2693 
2684 
2671 
2644 
2553 

Titus  Andronicus, 

2525 

*Julius  Caesar, 
*Pericles, 
*Timon, 
Mid.  Night's  Dream, 
*Tempest, 
Two  Gent,  of  Verona, 
*Macbeth, 
Comedy  of  Errors, 

2440 
2^86 
2358 
2217 
2068 
2060 

1993 
1770 

Average, 
Average  to  the?  dark  line, 

2857-5 
3000 

From  this  table  we  see  that  all  the  last  eight  plays  fall  into  two 
classes.  One  class  consists  of  three  early  plays  which  were  pro 
duced  before  Shakespeare  had  learnt  his  work  as  a  playwright, 
however  much  he  excelled  already  as  a  poet.  The  other  is  composed 
of  five  plays,  four  of  which  were  finished  or  altered  by  some  other 
poet,  as  I  have  myself  tried  to  show,  and  Mr.  Staunton  has  satisfac 
torily  accounted  for  the  fifth  (The  Tempest].  It  cannot  be  accident 
that  five  plays1  thus  altered  should  fall  among  the  eight  shortest  of 
the  total  series  of  38. 

The  chance  of  such  an  event  is  I  in  8962  J  :  there  must  be  a  cause. 
One  possible  cause  is  assignable.  We  know  from  comparing  the 
Quartos  and  Folio  of  Lear,  Hamlet,  Othello,  Richard  HI.,  &c.,  that 


1  The  two  plays  finished  by  Fletcher  do  not  fall  under  this  category. 
are  of  Fletcher's  average  length. 

17-2 


They 


26o  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

the  acting  plays  were  often  shorter  than  the  written  ones  :  we  know 
also  that  many  of  Shakespeare's  plays  as  we  have  them  could  not 
well  be  performed  in  the  customary  tzvo  hours  (see  Prologues  to 
Henry  VIII.,  and  Romeo  and  Juliet}  :  we  know  also  that  in  modern 
times  his  plays  are  invariably  shortened  for  representation.  What 
then  more  likely  than  that  Macbeth  and  Julius  Ccssar  should  have 
been  shortened  on  account  of  their  prolixity,  and  that  the  alterer 
should  have  overshot  his  mark  ?  This  is,  however,  merely  conjec 
ture  :  whatever  the  cause,  the  fact  remains  the  same :  the  guess  is 
merely  offered  till  a  better  be  proposed  or  further  evidence  obtained. 
Next  I  give 

TABLE   OF  RHYME-TAGS   IN   SHAKESPEARE. 

No.  Scenes        No.  Scenes  No.  tag 

in  play.  with  tags.  rhymes. 

Love's  Labour's  Lost,  948 
Mids.  Night's  Dream,  (cannot  be  calculated  :  whole  scenes  rhyme). 

Comedy  of  Errors,  II  9  19 

Romeo  and  Juliet,  24  12  29 

Richard  II.,  19  13  28 

Two  Gent,  of  Verona,  a.  10  4  7 

£.10  I  i 

Troylus  and  Cressida,  24  15  27 

Twelfth  Night,  18  12  26 

Richard  III.,  25  II  13 

Merchant  of  Venice,  20  13  19 

John,  1 6  fi  14 

1  Henry  IV.,  19  9  12 

2  Henry  IV.,  19  8  12 
Henry  V.,  23  13  14 
Much  Ado,  17  3  13 
Merry  Wives,  23  3  3 
As  You  Like  It,  22  8  16 
Taming  of  Shrew,  12  8  16 
All's  Well,  23  14  22 
Measure  for  Measure,  17  7  10 
Hamlet,  20  14  15 
Othello,  15  8 


ON  MACBETH.  2^ 

No.  Scenes  No.  Scenes  No.  tag 

in  play.  with  tags.  rhymes 

Lear,  26  9  I3 

Macbeth,  28  21  33 

Cymbeline,  27  n  r6 

Pericles,  a.  98 

"      *•  II  4  4 
Timon,  a.                                        766 

»     *•  10  8  12 

Coriolanus,  29  2  4 

Julius  Caesar,  1 8  4  5 

Anthony  and  Cleopatra,  42  4  5 

Two  Noble  Kinsmen,  a.  n  i  j 

>»            >>              ^  II  I  i 

Tempest,                                          9  I  i 

Winter's  Tale,  15  o  o 

Hen.  VIII.  (all  Fletcher's  tags),   17  4  5 

Titus  Andronicus,  14  3  3 

1  Henry  VI.,  27  13  14 

2  Henry  VI.,  24  8  '9 

3  Henry  VI.,  28  10  14 

On  the  other  uses  to  be  made  of  this  table  this  is  not  the  place  to 
dwell  :  I  wish  only  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  in  this  play  more 
scenes  end  with  tags  than  in  any  other  play  in  Shakespeare  :  that 
the  number  of  tag-rhymes  is  also  greater  than  in  any  other  play,  in 
cluding  his  very  earliest.  In  other  words,  that  at  a  time  when  he 
had  given  up  the  use  of  rhyme  in  great  measure  (for  all  critics  admit 
this  for  his  Third  period),  in  that  part  of  the  play  where  the  super 
natural  is  not  introduced,  he  has  on  the  common  theory  used  more 
than  twice  as  many  tag-rhymes  as  he  has  used  in  any  play  subsequent 
to  The  Merchant  of  Venice :  and  these  for  the  most  part,  as  Clark 
and  Wright  have  so  justly  pointed  out,  of  the  baldest  and  most  feeble 
description.  If  the  difference  were  small,  it  might  be  explained  per 
haps  from  the  nature  of  the  play  ;  but  such  a  difference  is  only 
explicable  on  the  hypothesis  of  a  second  writer  :  the  conclusion  we 
have  reached  on  other  grounds. 


CHAPTER  XL 
ON   "JULIUS   C^SAR." 

MY  theory  as  to  this  play  is  so  unlike  anything  hitherto  advanced 
that  I  shall  begin  by  stating  it ;  so  that  the  startled  reader  may 
have  it  in  his  power  to  shut  the  book  at  once,  if  the  hypothesis 
seems  to  him  too  absurd  to  be  entertained.  I  believe  that  this 
play  as  we  have  it  is  an  abridgment  of  Shakespeare's  play,  made  by 
Ben  Jonson.  I  will  first  give  a  number  of  reasons  for  my  belief  that 
the  common  theory  cannot  be  true,  and  then  enter  into  details  as  to 
my  own. 

1.  The  name  Anthony  is  a  very  favourite  one  with  Shakespeare  : 
it  occurs  in  Much  Ado  about  Nothing,  Love's  Labour 's  Lost,  Macbeth, 
Henry  V,,  Richard  III.,  Romeo  and  Juliet,  and  Anthony  and  Cleo 
patra  :   in   all  tjiese  seven  plays  it  is  always  spelt  Anthony,   or 
Anthonie,    with   an  h ;    but  in  this  play  invariably   Antony  or 
Antonie,  without  one.     So  Ben  Jonson  always  rejects  the  h  ;  see 
Catiline,  especially,  passim. 

2.  The  number  of  participles  in  -ed,  with  the  final  syllable  pro 
nounced,  is  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  other  plays,  especially  the 
latter  ones.     I  have  not  had  time  to  count  them,  but  it  is  clear 
on  merely  reading  the  play.     Examples  :  plunged,   vexed,   trans 
formed. 

3.  I.  ii.        "To-morrow,  if  you  please  to  speak  with  me 

I  will  come  home  to  you  :  or  if  you  will 
Come  home  to  me,  and  I  will  wait  for  you," 


ON  JULIUS  C^ESAR.  263 

Home  =  to  thy  house,  chez  toi  :  never  used  by  Shakespeare  where 
the  subject  of  the  sentence  is  in  the  first  person  ;  but  Jonson, 
Catiline,  Ill.i. : 

"  I'll  come  home  to  you.     Crassus  would  not  have  you 
To  speak  to  him  fore  Quintus  Catulus." 

4.  II.  iii.  "  Quality  and  kind  "  not  found  elsewhere  in  Shakespeare. 
He  has  "quality  and  brain,"    "quality  and  name,"  not   "kind." 
Jonson,  Every  Man  in  his  Humour,  II.  i. : 

"  Spirits  of  our  kind  and  quality." 

5.  The  phrase  "bear  me  hard,"  occurs  three  times  in  this  play  ; 
in  I.  ii.;  II.  i.;  III.  i.,  not  elsewhere  in  Shakespeare.     But  Jonson, 
Catiline,  IV.  v. : 

"  Ay,  though  he  bear  me  hard, 
I  yet  must  do  him  right." 

Bear  hard  occurs  in  I  Henry  IV.,  and  hard  forbear  in  Othello,  but 
in  a  different  sense  from  that  in  this  place. 

6.  The  number  of  short  lines  in  this  play,  where  no  pause  is  re 
quired,  is  very  great,  and  seems  to  point  to  the  fact  that  it  has  been 
greatly  abridged  for  the  purpose  of  representation.     Example  : 

II.  i.     "He  says  he  does,  being  then  most  flattered. 
Let  me  work  ! 
For  I  can  give  his  humour  the  true  bent." 

II.  i.     "  Since  Cassius  first  had  whet  me  against  Caesar 
I  have  not  slept. 
Between  the  acting  of  a  dreadful  thing,"  &c. 

II.  i.     "  And  by-and-by  thy  bosom  shall  partake 

The  secrets  of  my  heart. 

All  my  engagements  I  will  construe  to  thee,"  &c. 

III.  i.  "  Thy  master  is  a  wise  and  vaKant  Roman, 

I  never  thought  him  worse. 

Tell  him  so  please  him  come  unto  this  place,"  &c. 


264  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

III.  ii.  "Cassius,  go  you  into  the  other  street 
And  part  the  numbers. 
Those  that  will  hear  me  speak  let  'em  stay  here  ! " 

These  are  exactly  like  the  metrical  forms  assumed  in  the  surrepti 
tious  issues  of  the  first  Quartos  of  Hamlet  and  Romeo  and  Juliet, 
but  extremely  unlike  Shakespeare's  manner  in  his  complete  works. 
I  have  intentionally  taken  the  instances  from  the  middle  of  con 
tinuous  speeches  ;  but  the  imperfection  more  usually  occurs  at  the 
end  of  a  speech,  as  excisions  are  more  frequently  made  from  ends 
of  speeches  than  from  the  middle  of  them. 

7.  Mr.    R.   Simpson  has  noticed  that  this  play  bears  the  same 
relation  to  the  tragedies  that  The  Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona  does  to 
the  comedies  as  to  "once-used"  words  (once-used  in  his  sense). 
This  is  just  what  would  happen  if  Jonson  edited  the  play.     For  his 
dislike  to  "  strange  words  "  and  his  satire  on  Marston  for  inventing 
them,  see  Act  V.  Sc.  I  of  The  Poetaster,  where  Crispinus  vomits  his 
linguistic  inventions  after  the  emetic  administered  by  Horace. 

8.  Shakespeare  and  Jonson  probably  worked  together  on  Sejanus 
in  1602-3.      He  having  helped  Jonson  then  in  a  historical  play, 
what  more  likely  than  that  Jonson  should  be  chosen  to  remodel 
Shakespeare's   Ccesar,  if  it  needed  to  be  reproduced  in  a  shorter 
form  than  he  gave  it  originally  ?    And  for  such  reproduction  (after 
Shakespeare's  death,    between    1616   and    1623),   to   what  author 
would  such  work  of  abridgment  have  been  entrusted  except  Shake 
speare's  critical  friend  Jonson  ?    Fletcher  would  have  enlarged,  not 
shortened. 

9.  We  know  that  rival  theatres  and  rival  publishers  in  the  Eliza 
bethan  times  frequently  brought  out  plays  on  the  same  subject  close 
on  each  other's  heels.      Thus  the  old  play  of  Leir  was  republished 
when  Shakespeare's  Lear  was  produced  :    The  Danish  Tragedy  and 
Hoffmaris  Tragedy -were  run  in  opposition  to  Hamlet:  The  Taming 
of  the  Shrew  was   a  rival  piece   to  Patient  Grissel,    The    Woman 
Killed   with    Kindness,    and   probably   Dekker's   Medicine  for    a 
Curst  Wife :  Grissel,  and  the  Woman  Killed  having  come  out  first, 
the  Shrew  being  then  set  up  in  rivalry,  and  the  last-named  piece  being  a 


ON  JULIUS  C^ESAR.  265 

retaliation  for  this  opposition.  But  this  practice  is  too  well  known 
to  require  illustration.  Is  it  not,  then,  highly  probable  that  this 
play,  produced  about  1601  originally,  should  be  revived  in  1607,  the 
date  of  L.  Stirling's  Julius  Ccesar  and  of  "Cesar's  Revenge,  or  the 
Tragedy  of  Cesar  and  Pompey"  called  in  the  running  title  '*  The 
Tragedy  of  Julius  Cesar"  or  if  it  were  produced  in  1607,  as 
Mai  one  believes  it  was,  that  the  other  play  was  then  published 
in  rivalry  to  it  ?  In  any  case,  I  think  it  likely  that  some  production  or 
reproduction  was  at  that  date,  and  another  after  Shakespeare's 
death  with  Jonson's  alterations. 

10.  There  is  a  strange  feeling  about  the  general  style  of  this  play  ; 
which  is  not  the  style  of  Jonson :  but  just  what  one  would  fancy 
Shakespeare  would  become  with  an  infusion  of  Jonson.    I  do  not  give 
passages  here  ;  as  I  look  on  the  printing  of  long  extracts  from  books 
in  every  one's  hands,  except  for  cases  for  comparison,   as  useless 
and  wasteful.     I  prefer  relying  on  the  taste  and  judgment  of  those 
who  will  take  the  trouble  to  read  the  play  and  judge  for    them 
selves. 

11.  There  is  a  quarrelling  scene  in  the  Maid's  Tragedy  imitated 
from  the  celebrated  one  between  Brutus  and  Cassius;  just  in  the  same 
way  as  Philaster  is  imitated  from  Cymbeline.     The  Maid's  Tragedy 
was  probably  produced  in  1608-9,  the  7ear  before  Philaster.     It  is 
therefore  not  improbable  that  Julius  Ctesar  was  reproduced  a  year 
or  two  before  1609,  or  at  any  rate  some  three  years  earlier  than  Cym- 
beline,  that  is,  in  1607,  just  as  Shakespeare's  Fourth  period  began. 

12.  Act  I.  Sc.  2.      "  Chew  upon  this  ;  "  no  such  expression  else 
where  in  Shakespeare.     Compare  the  use  of  ' '  work  upon  that  now" 
passim  in  Eastward  Ho,  of  which  Jonson  was  one  of  the  authors. 

13.  Act  II.  Sc.  I.     "  Scorning  the  base  degrees 

By  which  he  did  ascend." 

The  word  degrees  never  used  by  Shakespeare,  as  meaning  "stairs," 
but  always  of  " steps,"  metaphorical ;  as  we  use  "gradually  "  now. 
But  in  Sejanus  we  have  : 

"  Whom  when  he  says  lie  spread  on  the  degrees." 


266  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

14.  "And  turn  pre-ordinance  and  first  decree 

Into  the  lane  of  children,"  (Act  III.  Sc.  I.) 

where  lane  means  narrow  conceits.     Compare  Staple  of  News  : 

"  A  narrow-minded  man  !  my  thoughts  do  dwell 
All  in  a  lane." 

I  do  not  know  an  instance  of  such  a  usage  in  any  other  author. 

15.  V.  v.  "  His  life  was  gentle,  and  the  elements 

So  mixt  in  him  that  Nature  might  stand  up 
And  say  to  all  the  world,  '  This  was  a  man.' " 

Compare  Cynthia's  Revels,  II.  iii.  "  A  creature  of  a  most  perfect 
and  divine  temper  :  one  in  whom  the  humours  and  elements  are 
peaceably  met  without  emulation  of  precedency  "  (acted  in  1600). 
Surely  Shakespeare  did  not  deliberately  copy  Jonson  :  but  if  he 
wrote  before  him,  Julius  Ccesar  must  come  before  1601  into  the 
time  of  the  historical  plays.1 

16.  Jonson  was 'in  the  habit  of  altering  plays,  e.g.  he  altered  and 
adapted  Jeronymo  by  Kyd  ;  and  his  share  of  work  in  The  Widow, 
Eastward  Ho,  and  other  plays,  \vas  evidently  of  the  supervising  and 
trimming  kind,   as  the  main  execution  of  nearly  every  scene  is 
clearly  traceable  to  the  other  writers. 

We  now  come  to  an  important  argument : 

In  a  celebrated  passage  in  the  Discoveries  of  Ben  Jonson,  we 
read  :  "I  remember,  the  players  have  often  mentioned  it  as  an 
honour  to  Shakespeare,  that  in  his  writing  (whatsoever  he  penned) 
he  never  blotted  out  a  line.  My  answer  hath  been,  Would  he  had 
blotted  a  thousand.  Which  they  thought  a  malevolent  speech.  I 
had  not  told  posterity  this  but  for  their  ignorance  who  chose  that 
circumstance  to  commend  their  friend  by,  wherein  he  most  faulted, 
and  to  justify  mine  own  candour  :  for  I  loved  the  man  and  do 
honour  his  memory  on  this  side  idolatry  as  much  as  any.  He  was, 

1  This  agrees  with  the  date  of  allusion  discovered  by  Mr.  Halliwell ;  but  the 
paucity  of  rhymes,  number  of  short  lines,  and  brevity  of  the  play  are  conclusive 
as  to  its  not  having  been  produced  in  its  present  state  at  that  date.  It  has  been 
abridged  by  some  one  for  theatrical  representation :  if  not  by  Jonson,  then  by 
some  one  else. — F.  G.  F. 


ON  JULIUS  CAESAR.  267 

indeed,  honest,  and  of  an  open  and  free  nature  j  had  an  excellent 
phantasy,  brave  notions,  and  gentle  expressions  :  wherein  he  flowed 
with  that  facility,  that  sometimes  it  was  necessary  he  should  be 
stopped  :  Sufflaminandus  erat,  as  Augustus  said  of  Haterius.  His 
wit  was  in  his  own  power,  would  the  rule  of  it  had  been  so  too. 
Many  times  he  fell  into  those  things,  could  not  escape  laughter  :  as 
when  he  said  in  the  person  of  Caesar,  one  speaking  to  him,  '  Caesar, 
thou  dost  me  wrong.'  He  replied,  'Caesar  did  never  wrong,  but 
with  just  cause,'  and  such  like;  which  were  ridiculous.  But  he 
redeemed  his  vices  with  his  virtues.  There  was  even  more  in  him 
to  be  praised  than  to  be  pardoned." 

It  is  clear  from  this  passage  (i)  that  a  line  in  Julius  C<zsar,  as  it 
originally  stood,  has  been  altered  from  its  first  form  as  quoted  by 
Jonson  into  ("  Caesar,  thou  dost  me  wrong,"  being  omitted  !) 

"Know,  Caesar  doth  not  wrong,  nor  without  cause 
Will  he  be  satisfied." 

(2)  That  this  alteration  had  been  made  in  the  acting  copy,  pub 
lished  in  Folio  in  1623  ;  though  Jonson's  statement  of  its  being  an 
alteration  was  not  published  till  after  his  death  in  1637. 

(3)  That  Jonson  gives  this  as  one  of  "  many "  instances.      We 
cannot  now  find  these  in   Shakespeare's  works :   but  it  is  a  fair 
inference  that  other  similar  corrections  have  been  made. 

(4)  These  alterations   were  not   commonly  known  : *   such  an 
opportunity  for  what  our  forefathers  called  "merry  jests"  would 
never  have  been  lost  :  we  should  have  had  traces  of  them  in  con 
temporary  writing. 

We  have,  then,  a  play  in  which  one  error  at  least  (perhaps  many) 
has  been  corrected  ;  and  an  author  to  whom  this  correction  (or 
these  corrections)  was  privately  known  :  a  play  in  which  there  is  a 
deficiency  of  some  thousand  lines  as  compared  with  the  others  of 
the  same  class  by  the  same  author ;  and  a  critic  who  desired  that  the 
author  in  his  writing  had  blotted  a  thousand  :  a  play  remarkable 
for  speeches  ending  on  the  second  or  third  beat  of  an  incomplete 


Yet  the  distinct  allusion  in   The  Staple  of  News  (Induction),  "  Cry  you 
cy,  you  never  did  wrong  but  with 
to  this  alteration  at  any  rate  was  wel 


mercy,  you  never  did  wrong  but  with  just  cause,"  shows  that  in  1625  an  allusion 
to  this  alteration  at  any  rate  was  well  understood.— F.  G.  F. 


268  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

line,  and  one  known  alteration,  with  others  to  be  presumed,  which 
introduces  this  peculiarity  contrary  to  the  author's  usual  manner  :  a 
play  with  various  peculiar  phrases  and  usages  of  words  ;  and  the 
same  critic-authoi  in  whose  works  these  peculiar  words  and  phrases 
are  found.  Add  to  these  considerations  the  spelling  of  Antony,  the 
use  of  words  in  -ed,  the  small  number  of  once-used  words,  and  the 
probability  that  these  two  writers  had  worked  together  in  Sejanus^ 
and  I  think  there  is  a  case  made  out  that  the  play  of  Julius  Caesar 
as  we  have  it  was  corrected  by  Ben  Jonson  :  whether  it  had  been 
produced  by  Shakespeare  in  1600  in  a  different  form  or  not.  If 
it  had,  all  questions  of  early  allusion  are  accounted  for :  and  it 
would  be  written  by  him  as  a  continuation  of  the  series  of  Histories 
immediately  after  Henry  V.,  to  which  play  the  general  style  of 
Julius  C&sar  seems  to  me  more  like  than  to  any  other  work  of 
Shakespeare :  also  the  pronunciation  of  the  final  -eds  would  be 
accounted  for,  as  this  is  more  frequent  in  Henry  IV.  and  V.  than 
in  any  other  plays  next  to  Ccesar. 

It  is  fair  also  to  consider  what  would  probably  have  been  Ben 
Jonson's  conduct  supposing  he  had  revised  this  play.  Would  he 
have  made  any  allusion  to  it  such  as  that  in  The  Staple  of  News 
quoted  in  the  note  on  the  preceding  page  ?  We  may  judge  of  this 
by  a  parallel  instance.  We  know  that  he  made  alterations  in  Kyd's 
Hieronymo  is  Mad  again,  or  Spanish  Tragedy.  Accordingly,  in 
the  Induction  to  Cynthia? s  Revels  Jonson  alludes  indirectly  to  the 
alterations  he  had  made.  Another,  he  says,  swears  down  all  that 
sit  about  him  "  that  the  old  Hiei'onymo,  as  it  was  first  acted,  was  the 
only,  best,  and  judiciously  penned  play  of  Europe."  This  is  just 
such  an  indirect  allusion  as  I  have  pointed  out  to  the  passage  in 
Julius  Ccesar  in  The  Staple  of  News  ;  and  so  far  agrees  with  what 
may  be  expected  on  my  theory. 

Again,  the  speech  of  Polonius  (Hamlet,  iii.  2),  "I  did  enact 
Julius  Caesar  :  I  was  killed  in  the  Capitol :  Brutus  killed  me," 
seems  to  me  to  allude  to  Shakespeare's  play  :  "played  once  in  the 
University,"  it  may  be  :  but  if  so,  by  a  regular  company,  not  by  the 
students.  But  if  this  allusion  is  to  Shakespeare's  play,  it  distinctly 
points  to  an  acting  of  Caesar's  part  by  an  inferior  player  ;  which 
would  give  us  a  reason  for  the  ill  success  of  the  piece  at  its  first 
production.  Hamlet's  speech,  "It  was  a  brute  part  of  him  to  kill 


ON  JULIUS  CAESAR.  269 

so  capital  a  calf  there.  Be  the  flayers  ready  ?  "  so  strongly  con 
trasts  Polonius  with  the  good  actors,  that  he  must,  I  think,  be 
referring  to  some  actual  performer.  May  not  the  play  that  was 
"  caviare  to  the  general,  that  pleased  not  the  million  "  allude  to  the 
same  failure  ?  It  can  hardly  refer  to  Sejanus  acted  in  1603,  as  it 
occurs  in  the  first  draft  of  Hamlet,  which  was  acted  probably  in 
1602,  and  printed  certainly  in  1603. 

Of  course,  as  I  hold  the  alterations  in  this  play,  like  those  in 
Macbeth,  to  have  taken  place  principally  at  the  ends  of  speeches, 
and  specially  at  the  ends  of  scenes,  the  proportion  of  rhymes  has 
been  too  seriously  interfered  with  for  our  tables  to  be  of  any  use  by 
way  of  comparison  with  other  plays  of  Shakespeare.  The  increased 
number  of  tags  in  the  Middleton  part  of  Macbeth  put  in  to  hide  the 
alterations,  and  the  diminished  number  of  rhymes  in  Julius  Ccesar 
caused  by  Jonson's  abbreviations,  alike  interfere  with  the  direct  ap 
plication  of  the  rhyme-test.  But  to  it  indirectly  I  owe  the  fact  of  my 
attention  being  called  to  the  very  unusual  characteristics  of  both 
these  plays. 

It  may  be  well  here  to  say  a  few  words  on  the  relation  of 
metrical  tests  to  "  higher  "  criticism.  If  the  peculiarities  of  a  writer 
are  regarded  as  matters  of  chance  or  arbitrary  choice,  it  is  absurd 
to  take  them  as  a  basis  of  investigation  :  but  they  are  not  so  :  in 
every  writer  there  are  tricks  of  style  and  of  metre  which  unknown 
to  himself  pervade  all  his  work  :  the  skill  of  the  critic  lies,  first  in 
selecting  those  which  are  really  characteristic,  and  establishing  their 
existence  by  adequate  proof :  then  in  tracing  their  gradual  develop 
ment  or  decay  :  and  finally  in  showing  their  connection  with  each 
other  and  with  the  higher  mental  characters  out  of  which  they 
spring,  and  to  which  they  are  inseparably  attached.  The  first  part 
of  this  task  I  have  approximately  accomplished  for  Shakespeare  ; 
the  latter,  and  far  more  difficult  one,  I  have  also  attempted  and  shall 
publish  in  due  course.  I  only  here  desire  to  record  that  I  have  not 
worked  mechanically  in  this  matter  :  and  that  I  have  studied  the 
psychology  of  Shakespeare  quite  as  diligently,  and  I  hope  as 
accurately,  as  I  have  the  statistical  phenomena  which  are  its  out 
come  and  indication.  As  yet  I  have  given  only  a  diagnosis  for 
individual  authors  and  for  individual  plays,  so  as  to  classify  and 


270  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

form  a  basis  for  higher  investigations.  The  anatomy  of  each,  and 
the  comparative  physiology  of  dramatic  authors  as  a  class,  have  yet 
to  be  given,  and  then  the  crowning  work,  the  life  history  of  our 
greatest  men,  as  shown  in  their  writings,  their  dynamical  psychology, 
will  become  possible,  which  (with  all  deference  to  the  meta 
physical  critics  who  have  wasted  their  great  acumen  by  beginning  at 
the  wrong  end)  it  has  not  yet  been  and  could  not  yet  be. 


NOTE  ON  "TWO  GENTLEMEN  OF  VERONA." 

[No  result  of  my  investigations  appears  to  have  been  so  unfavour 
ably  received  as  the  date  I  have  assigned  to  The  Two  Gentlemen  of 
Verona.  Professor  Ward,  for  instance  (a  most  judicious  and  accurate 
critic),  expresses  himself  strongly  adverse  to  it.  Yet  on  carefully 
examining  his  own  views  he  seems  substantially  to  agree  with  me. 
I  as  well  as  he  believe  that  The  Two  Gentlemen  was  anterior  to  our 
present  versions  of  Love' s  Labour' s  Lost,  Midsummer  Night' s  Dream, 
and  Richard  II. — that  is  to  say,  to  the  revised,  emended,  altered, 
augmented  versions  published  by  Shakespeare  ;  just  as  I  believe 
King  John,  as  we  have  it,  to  have  been  anterior  to  the  revised 
Richard  II.  But  in  speaking  of  the  dates  of  production  of  plays, 
I  speak  of  their  original  performance,  not  their  subsequent  alteration 
for  the  press  or  for  a  second  run  at  the  theatres.  No  one,  as  far  as 
I  know,  when  discussing  the  date  of  The  Merry  Wives  of  Windsor 
ever  speaks  of  the  Folio  version  (probably  made  1605),  but  of  the 
first  sketch  as  in  the  Quarto  (probably  made  1598).  There  is  little 
doubt  that  all  Shakespeare's  plays  were  amended  in  this  way.  We 
know  it  to  be  true  of  a  large  proportion  of  them. 

It  may  be  well,  however,  in  order  to  clear  up  this  point,  to  show 
here  the  relation  that  his  alterations  bear  to  the  Quarto  editions, 
All  Quartos  (with  the  possible  exception  of  Quarto  I  of  Romeo  and 
Juliet}  issued  up  to  the  date  of  1600  were  authorized,  and  in  my 
opinion  superintended,  by  Shakespeare  himself.  All  after  1600  were 
unquestionably  surreptitious.  The  dividing  point  is  found  in  the 
entry  of  August  4,  where  As  You  Like  //,  Henry  V.,  and  Much  Ado 


NOTE  ON  TWO  GENTLEMEN  OF  VERONA.     271 

about  Nothing,  appear  without  name  of  enterer.  At  the  beginning 
of  the  register  is  a  rough  note  that  these  three  plays  were  "  to  be 
stayed ; "  As  You  Like  It  was  apparently  stayed  accordingly.  Henry 
V.  appeared  afterwards  in  a  surreptitious  edition  of  Pavier's ;  but 
Much  Ado  was  allowed  and  published  by  the  firm  who  had  hitherto 
published  all  the  other  authorized  Quartos  of  the  histories.  For 
what  reason  they  did  not  also  publish  the  other  comedies  does  not 
appear.  But  this  we  know  :  that  excepting  the  surreptitious  Henry 
V.  every  play  printed  in  Quarto  before  1600  was  admitted  as  an 
authentic  copy  by  the  Folio  editors.  For  even  in  the  case  of  Richard 
///.,  whoever  made  the  Folio  alterations  made  them  on  a  copy  of 
the  third  Quarto,  and  in  all  other  cases  they  used  this  Quarto  as 
copy  to  reprint  from.  In  every  case  then  of  Quartos  issued  up  to 
1600  we  may  depend  on  having  Shakespeare's  authorized  version  of 
the  play.  Now  it  is  very  singular  that  the  list  of  such  authorized 
Quartos  coincides  in  extent  of  time  precisely  with  Meres'  list  of  plays 
up  to  1 598,  if  we  admit  Mr.  Brae's  identification  of  Much  Ado  with 
Love's  Labour's  Won;  and  had  The  Comedy  of  Error s,1  The  Two 
Gentlemen  of  Verona*  and  King  John*  been  edited,  the  two  lists 
would  have  been  identical,  play  for  play.  But  as  these  were  not 
re-written,  we  must  expect  them  to  appear  immature  and  out  of 
chronological  position  when  compared  with  the  other  plays  that  had 
the  advantage  of  adaptation  in  accordance  with  Shakespeare's  more 
matured  experience. 

F.  G.  FLEAY,  January  I,  1876.] 


«  These  three  plays,  it  will  be  observed,  fall  among  the  last  nine  in  the  Table, 

P-  *59- 


CHAPTER   XII, 


PERSONAL   SATIRE   COMMON   ON   THE   OLD 
ENGLISH   STAGE. 

IT  has  long  been  known  that  in  certain  instances,  such  as  the 
quarrel  between  Jonson,  Marston,  and  Dekker,  the  Elizabethan 
playwrights  represented  individual  characters  on  the  stage  under 
fictitious  names.  Thus  Jonson  in  his  Poetaster  ridiculed  Marston  as 
Crispinus  and  Dekker  as  Demetrius  ;  Marston  in  his  What  You 
Will  indicated  himself  by  Lampatho  Doria,  and  Jonson  byQuadratus  ; 
Dekker  in  his  Satiromastix  retaliated  on  Jonson  under  the  character 
of  Horace.  But  the  extent  to  which  this  "  taxing  of  private  parties  " 
was  carried  has  never  yet  been  fully  recognised.  It  has  always 
been  supposed  that  such  instances  as  are  mentioned  above  are 
exceptional :  that  the  absence  of  private  satire  is  as  marked  as  that 
of  political  allusions  ;  that  just  as  any  hint,  however  slight,  to  the 
effect  that  the  government  of  the  country  was  mismanaged  was 
instantly  repressed,  and  the  players  of  the  obnoxious  drama  silenced, 
so  abuse  directed  towards  individuals  was,  either  by  the  authority  of 
the  Chamberlain  or  the  influence  of  public  opinion,  generally 
banished  from  the  stage.  I  am  however  prepared  to  show  that  in 
various  plays  the  characters  of  private  persons  were  attacked,  their 
works  ridiculed,  incidents  of  their  career,  true,  or  supposed  to  be  so, 
held  up  for  animadversion,  and  personalities  generally  indulged  in 
that  could  hardly  be  rivalled  on  the  Athenian  stage  or  in  the 
lowest  class  of  modern  newspapers. 

Among  these  plays  one  is  conspicuous  ;  and  as  it  has  lately  been 
introduced  into  Dodsley's  Collection,  and  has  been  prolific  in  errors 


PERSONAL  SATIRE.  273 

through  the  prevalent  habit  of  taking  Malone's  dicta  as  proven 
without  further  investigation,  it  specially  commends  itself  to  our 
notice.  This  play  is  called  Wily  Beguiled.  Its  plot  is  very  simple. 
The  hand  of  Lelia  the  heroine,  daughter  of  Gripe  the  usurer,  is 
sought  by  three  suitors,  Sophos  a  scholar,  Churms  a  lawyer,  and 
Peter  Plodall  a  farmer's  son.  The  last  of  these  is  favoured  by 
Gripe  because  he  has  land  and  is  rich ;  the  scholar  is  forbidden 
his  house  on  account  of  his  poverty  :  and  the  lawyer  seeks  to  further 
his  own  ends  while  pretending  to  assist  Gripe  in  his.  Fortunatus, 
Lelia's  brother,  who  has  been  away  in  the  wars,  returns  in  the  nick 
of  time  to  frustrate  Churm's  plans  and  procure  the  marriage  of 
Sophos  with  Lelia.  Peter  Plodall  is  discomfited  as  well  as 
Churms,  and  his  hireling  Robin  Goodfellow,  who  has  attempted  to 
frighten  Sophos  in  a  devil's  accoutrements,  comes  in  for  a  good 
thrashing.  There  is  also  an  underplot,  in  which  a  match  takes  place 
between  Peg  Pudding  the  daughter  of  Lelia's  nurse,  and  Will  Cricket 
the  son  of  one  of  old  PlodalFs  tenants.  I  will  now  try  to  show  that 
these  characters  have  all  special  satirical  significations,  and  that 
under  this  plot  events  then  recent  are  figured  and  caricatured.  First 
then,  who  is  Churms  the  "  Wily  "  lawyer  who  is  "  Beguiled"  in  this 
play?  He  describes  himself  thus.  "I  have  been  at  Cambridge  a 
scholar,  at  Cales  a  soldier,  and  now  in  the  country  a  lawyer,  and  the 
next  degree  shall  be  a  coney  catcher."  This  at  once  points  to  Thomas 
Lodge,  who  after  taking  his  degree  served  in  the  army,  travelled,  and 
became  a  member  of  Gray's  Inn.  But  on  looking  into  the  Prologue 
all  uncertainty  is  removed  :  for  in  it  "  Prologue  "  having  ascertained 
from  the  placard  on  the  curtain  that  the  play  to  be  performed  is 
Spectrum,  "  a  looking-glass,"  which  he  characterises  as  a  history 

"  Of  base  conceits  and  damned  roguery, 
The  very  sink  of  hell-bred  villany," 

bids  a  "Juggler"  tell  the  players'  fiery  poet  that  "before  I  have  done 
with  him  I'll  make  him  do  penance  on  a  stage  in  a  calf-skin."  The 
Juggler  then  "conveys"  Spectrum  away,  and  Wily  Beguiled  stands 
in  its  place.  Prologue  then  says, 

"  Go  to  that  barm-froth  poet  and  to  him  say, 
He  quite  hath  lost  the  title  of  his  play  ; 

18 


274  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

His  calf-skin  jests  from  hence  are  quite  exiled  : 
Thus  once  you  see  that  Wily  is  Beguiled" 

This  identifies  Wily  with  the  author  of  The  Looking  Glass  for 
London  which  was  chiefly  written  by  Lodge,  Robert  Greene  having 
also  a  hand  in  it,  and  at  the  same  time  prepares  us  to  find  in  Wily 
Beguiled  a  mirror  held  up  if  not  to  Nature,  yet  to  the  theatrical  events 
of  the  time.  The  "calf-skin  jests"  allude  to  the  I4th  scene  of  the 
Looking  Glass,  where  "  a  man  in  devil's  attire  "  is  beaten  by  Adam  : 
a  wretched  scene.  This  is  parodied  in  the  beating  of  Robin  in  our 
play,  while  he  is  in  like  manner  dressed  in  calf-skin  to  represent  a 
fiend. 

Having  then  identified  the  knavish  lawyer  with  Lodge,  we  naturally 
expect  to  find  other  dramatic  authors  among  the  characters.  Some 
of  these  are  easy  to  identify  :  for  example,  this  passage, 

"For  Sophos  let  him  wear  the  willow  garland, 
And. play  the  melancholy  malcontent, 
And  pluck  his  hat  down  in  his  sullen  eyes," 

at  once  shows  that  Sophos  is  Marston  the  author  of  the  Malcontent : 
the  very  name  Robin  Goodfellow  identifies  that  character  with 
Henry  Chettle,  whose  play  under  that  title  was  produced  in  1602. 
Fortunatus  in  like  manner  is  Dekker,  the  author  of  Old  Fortunatus, 
1595.  The  Dutch  cobbler  mentioned  in  the  play  I  shall  show  by 
and  by  to  be  Michael  Drayton :  Tom  Shoemaker,  "  who  was 
constable  of  the  town,"  is  I  think  Thomas  Middleton  ;  the  gentleman- 
usher  similarly  alluded  to  must  of  course  be  Chapman  ;  and  youn^ 
Plodall  the  low-born  peasant,  the  slow  lout,  is  I  fear  Ben  Jonson, 
whose  tardiness  in  producing  the  promised  Apology  for  the  Poetaster 
is  also  alluded  to  in  the  words  "  as  long  as  Hunks  with  the  great 
head  has  been  about  to  show  his  little  wit  in  the  second  part  of  his 
paltry  poetry." 

Next  as  to  the  female  characters.  I  have  ascertained  by  induction 
from  several  plays  of  this  class,  that  when  a  lover  indicates  a  dramatic 
author,  his  mistress  signifies  the  company  of  players  for  whom  he 
writes,  her  father  is  the  manager  of  the  company,  and  marriage 
signifies  his  binding  himself  to  write  for  them.  Lelia  in  this 
instance  must  be  the  Prince's  (or  Admiral's  if  before  1602)  company 


PERSONAL  SA  TIRE.  275 

acting  at  the  Fortune  :  this  is  confirmed  by  such  allusions  as  when 
the  Nurse  says  of  Lelia's  favour  to  Sophos, 

"  Sir',  you  may  see  that  Fortune  is  your  friend." 
Old  Gripe  will  consequently  be  Henslow  (or  Alleyn)  the  manager. 

Before  proceeding  further  in  the  identification  of  these  characters, 
it  will  be  necessary  to  ascertain  the  date  of  the  play.  Now,  whether 
I  am  right  or  not  in  my  interpretation  of  the  plot,  some  of  the 
allusions  are  certain,  and  fix  a  limit  of  date  before  which  the  play 
could  not  have  been  written.  Old  Fortunatus  was  written  in  1595, 
published  in  1600  ;  The  Shoemaker's  Holiday,  in  which  the  character 
of  the  "  Dutch  cobbler"  occurs,  was  produced  in  1600  ;  the  Poetaster 
was  acted  in  1601,  printed  in  1602  \Robin  Goodfellow  was  written  in 
1602  ;  the  Gentleman  Usher  was  printed  in  1606,  probably  written  in 
1602  ;  and  the  additions  to  the  Malcontent  as  acted  by  the  King's 
company  were  published  in  1604  and  acted  probably  in  1603  ;  for  in 
the  Introduction  there  is  distinct  allusion  to  the  reproduction  of 
Jeronymo  by  the  Admiral's  company  in  1601-2.  I  fix  the  date  of 
Wily  Beguiled  then  in  1602-3  >  f°r  as  it  treats  of  the  engagement  of 
Marston  by  the  Admiral's  or  Prince  s  company,  it  must  have  been 
anterior  to  the  production  of  his  Malcontent  by  the  King's ;  and  it 
must  have  been  subsequent  to  the  dates  of  the  plays  just  mentioned 
that  were  produced  in  1602.  The  most  likely  date  is  the  establish 
ment  of  the  Prince's  company  in  1603.  Jonson,  who  is  ridiculed  in 
the  play,  finally  left  the  Admiral's  company  in  the  latter  part  of  1602, 
and  his  Sejanus  was  produced  at  the  King's  in  1603. 

Now  we  can  explain  the  underplot.  As  old  Plodall  must  be  the 
manager  of  the  Globe  company  (Burbage),  his  tenants  will  be  the 
occupiers  of  the  Blackfriars  theatre — viz.  the  Children  of  the  Chapc-l 
who  rented  that  theatre  of  him  till  1601-2  :  they  were  then  turned 
out,  and  the  house  afterwards  let  at  a  higher  rent,  probably  to  the 
Children  of  the  Revels.  But  this  is  just  the  story  of  the  play.  Old 
Cricket  (the  manager  of  the  Chapel  Children)  is  turned  out  by  old 
Plodall,  and  Will  Cricket  marries  Gripe's  nurse's  daughter.  This  I 
take  to  mean  that  on  the  dissolution  of  the  company  of  the  Children 
of  the  Chapel,  Will  is  engaged  by  the  Children  of  Paul's  (Peg 
Pudding).  This  latter  company's  manager  may  well  be  called 
the  Nurse.  Chapman,  Dekker,  Webster,  Marston,  Middleton,  all 

18-2 


276  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

tried  their  prentice  hands  at  it,  and  sometimes  simultaneously  at 
the  Admiral's  before  finally  settling  down  to  other  companies.  I  do 
not,  however,  find  Will  Cricket  himself  so  easy  to  identify  :  the  most 
likely  person  is  John  Lyly  :  he  wrote  for  the  Chapel  Children  and 
for  the  Paul's  Children  in  1600-1 ;  he  is  (I  think  unquestionably), 
called  "Willy"  by  Spenser;  and  in  the  play  we  have  "I  Peg 
Pudding  promise  thee,  William  Cricket,  that  I'll  hold  thee  for  mine 
own  sweet  lilly. "  Again,  Cricket's  dancing  is  praised,  and  in  Lyly's 
Maid's  Metamorphosis  Cricket  is  one  of  the  fairies  who  come  in 
dancing.  Names  of  characters  in  their  works  can  be  more  often 
taken  to  indicate  authors  in  these  plays,  and  especially  in  this  one, 
than  any  other  means  of  identification. 

On  the  whole,  then,  the  general  meaning  of  the  play  is 
clear.  It  is  a  celebration  of  the  good  luck  of  the  Fortune 
company  in  getting  Marston  to  write  the  Malcontent  for  them  ; 
a  high  eulogy  on  Dekker,  who  had  just  returned  from  the 
wars  (on  the  stage)  against  the  mighty  potentate  Ben  Jonson  :  a 
general  abuse  of  the  Globe  company,  its  manager  and  its  writers, 
especially  Jonson  and  Lodge  ;  an  exposure  of  the  knavery  of  Lodge 
(real  or  pretended),  and  of  the  bullying  propensities  of  Jonson  and 
his  hireling  Chettle  : x  a  caricature  of  the  style  and  plot  of  Lodge's 
Looking  Glass  and  other  plays.  (Note  by  the  way  that  Chettle  died 
in  May  1603,  which  confirms  our  limit  of  date.)  Under  the  guise  of 
a  love  story  nearly  every  dramatist  of  importance  at  that  time  is 
either  introduced  as  a  character  or  alluded  to  in  the  dialogue.  To 
this,  however,  there  is  one  important  exception.  There  is  no  mention 
of  William  Shakespeare.  But  if  he  is  not  mentioned,  the  whole 
play  is  almost  a  continuous  parody  of  his  writings.  Old  Capulet  is 
the  model  on  which  Gripe  has  been  pourtrayed.  The  Nurse  is 
closely  imitated  from  the  Nurse  of  Juliet.  In  the  I5th  scene  there 
is  a  dialogue  between  Lelia  and  Sophos  taken  from  that  between 
Lorenzo  and  Jessica  in  The  Merchant  of  Venice,  Act.  v.  Sc.  i.  and 
Gripe's  grief  for  the  loss  of  his  daughter  and  his  money  is  imitated 
from  Shylock's.  There  are  also  less  strongly  marked  allusions  to  other 
plays,  but  not  to  any  that  I  can  trace  published  later  than  1600.  I 
have  found  in  plays  of  this  nature  that  Shakespeare  is  very  seldom 

!  Chettle  assisted  Jonson  in  two  plays,  Hot  Anger  soon  Cold,  and  Robert  II* 
King  of  Scotland, 


PERSONAL  SATIRE.  277 

introduced  on  the  stage  ;  only  his  plays,  and  not  he  himself,  are 
generally  alluded  to.  I  believe  the  reason  of  this  to  be  that  he 
scarcely  ever,  if  at  all,  alluded  to  others,  or  introduced  them  as  person 
ages  in  his  own  plays. 

In  several  plays  of  this  satirical  description  produced  by  the 
Admiral's  company,  or  in  early  years  by  Lord  Strange's,  a  recog 
nised  system  of  allegorical  language  was  used.  Thus  a  servant  often 
meant  an  actor;  a  marriageable  young  lady  indicated  a  theatrical 
company ;  the  father  of  the  said  lady  represented  the  company's 
manager ;  her  suitors  were  poets  who  were  seeking  engagements 
to  write  for  the  company  ;  brothers  were  other  poets  already  in 
connection  with  the  theatre  ;  marriage  was  the  agreement  or  hiring 
of  the  poet  to  produce  plays ;  and  so  on.  The  converse  however 
is  not  always  true.  These  engagements  and  characters  are  not 
always  represented  by  the  same  symbols  :  for  instance,  a  poet  is  not 
always  a  suitor  or  brother — he  is  sometimes  a  cobbler;  an  actor  is  occa 
sionally  a  juggler  instead  of  a  servant ;  and  the  like.  It  may  be  worth 
while  to  explain  the  term  "cobbler,"  as  an  instance  of  the  mode  in 
which  this  symbolical  language  arose.  One  name,  or  rather  synonym, 
for  a  mender  of  old  shoes  was  "translator;"  the  same  word 
**  translator "  is  also  used  for  an  adapter  or  patcher,  or  piratical 
reproducer  of  other  men's  plays:  hence  "  cobbler  "  easily  suggests  this 
latter  character  and  is  used  for  it 

It  would  be  inconsistent  with  my  plan  to  give  here  a  detailed 
examination  of  more  than  one  play  :  but  on  account  of  their  connection 
with  the  quarrel  between  Jonson  and  Dekker  and  Marston,  of  which 
Wily  Beguiled  is  a  sequel,  it  may  be  not  out  of  place  to  mention  that 
Dekker's  Shoemaker's  Holiday and  Old  Fortunatus  also  belong  to  the 
series  of  attacks  to  which  Jonson  was  (as  he  tells  us)  subject  for 
three  years  before  he  made  any  retaliation.  In  the  former  of  these 
two  plays  Hans,  the  Dutch  shoemaker,  otherwise  Sir  Rowland  Lacy 
in  disguise,  is  almost  certainly  Michael  Drayton,  whose  nom  de 
plume 'w 'as  Rowland,  who  was  in  the  latter  years  of  Queen  Elizabeth 
one  of  the  poets  attached  to  the  Admiral's  company,  for  which  he 
and  others  wrote  the  play  of  Sir  John  Oldcastle  to  be  run  in  opposi 
tion  to  Shakespeare's  Henry  IV.  Dodger  in  this  same  play  is 
Thomas  Lodge,  and  the  other  characters  can  also  be  identified. 
Dekker  distinctly  points  out  to  us  in  Old  Fortunatus,  that  the 
scene  which  is  laid  in  Cyprus  is  intended  to  treat  of  theatrical  affairs, 


278  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

and  that  the  dramatis  persona  are  actors,  poets,  &c.,  disguised 
under  fictitious  names,  by  speaking  in  his  own  character  of  "other 
Cyprists,  my  poor  countrymen."  Accordingly,  an  examination  of 
the  play  shows  us  that  Fortunatus  is  Christopher  Marlowe  :  his  two 
sons,  Ampedo  the  good  son  and  Andolucio  the  bad  one,  are  George 
Peele  and  Thomas  Lodge:  Shaddow  the  servant  is  Shakespeare,  who 
in  1 595,  the  date  of  this  play,  had  not  yet  printed  any  of  his  works, 
had  not  probably  produced  anything  greater  than  his  Richard  II., 
and  had  not  corrected  his  Loz'es  Labour's  Lost  or  Midsummer 
Nighfs  Dream  into  their  present  shape,  which  no  doubt  is  far 
superior  to  that  of  their  earliest  production.  He  was  certainly  then, 
if  not  as  Dekker  represents  him,  merely  a  shadow  of  his  predecessors, 
yet  nothing  more  than  a  shadow  of  what  he  afterwards  was  to 
become. 

"  No,  no ;  I  am  but  shadow  of  myself. 
You  are  deceived  :  my  substance  is  not  here  : 
For  what  you  see  is  but  the  smallest  part 
And  least  proportion  of  humanity. " 

I  Henry  VI. 

The  "  wishing  cap,"  which  enables  Fortunatus  (Marlowe)  to  trans 
port  himself  to  any  place,  is  the  power  of  imagination  ;  the 
magic  purse,  which  produces  ten  pieces  whenever  the  hand  is  put  in 
it,  shows  the  payments  made  for  the  writing  a  new  play,  namely  ten 
marks,  or  6/.  13^.  ^d.  With  this  clue  to  the  meaning  of  the  play 
the  allusions  to  Lyly,  Falstaff,  Lodge,  &c.,  as  Endymion,  the 
wandering  knight,  the  French  doctor,  &c.,  grow  clear,  and  the 
double  meaning  of  the  whole  plot  becomes  manifest. 

These  plays  then,  along  with  Jonson's  Cynthia's  Revels  z.n&  Poetaster, 
Marston's  What  you  Will,  Dekker's  Satiromastix,  and  others  that 
might  be  used  to  increase  the  list,  may  be  taken  as  fair  samples  of  the 
satirical  and  personally  abusive  comedies  of  the  Elizabethan  time.  I 
say  samples,  because  it  is  plain  that  the  practice  of  thus  assailing  indi 
viduals  on  the  stage  must  have  been  very  common  for  several  reasons. 
In  the  first  place,  we  have  a  large  number  of  such  plays  still  in 
existence.  I  am  prepared  to  show  that  between  1589  and  1607 
there  are  still  remaining  at  least  a  dozen  of  this  personal  character. 
Moreover,  we  must  allow  for  the  transient  and  ephemeral  character 


PERSONAL  SATIRE.  279 

of  such  productions.  Unless  they  were  remarkable  for  the  great 
ability  displayed  in  them,  or  were  particularly  interesting  from  the 
nature  of  the  persons  attacked,  they  would  be  unlikely  to  survive  a 
very  few  years.  Consequently  we  have  probably  now  in  existence  a 
much  smaller  proportion  of  such  plays  than  of  those  of  deeper  and 
more  universal  interest. 

Another  reason  for  believing  them  abundant  is  the  great 
anxiety  shown  by  playwrights  to  defend  themselves  against  the 
imputation  that  they  ever  attack  anybody.  Prologues,  Addresses 
to  the  Reader,  statements  in  the  body  of  the  dramas  themselves, 
are  continually  pressed  into  the  author's  service  to  show  that  he 
is  free  from  blame,  whatever  strange  constructions  Hydra-headed 
Envy  may  put  upon  his  work.  Qui  s'excuse  j  accuse.  In  every 
instance  of  an  apology  of  this  kind  being  prefixed  to  a  play,  1 
have  found  that  careful  examination  shows  that  invidious  accusations 
are  made  against  some  person  or  persons  in  the  work  itself. 

If  then  we  can  ascertain  from  these  "  Envy-plays  "  (I  call  them 
envy  plays  because  Envy  is  invariably  assigned  in  their  Prologues, 
&c,  as  the  cause  of  their  production)  a  series  of  chronologically 
arranged  facts  determining  the  dates  at  which  authors  began  or 
ceased  to  write  for  specific  theatrical  companies,  we  shall  be  able  to 
settle  many  disputed  points  as  to  the  dates  of  production  of  their 
works,  to  supply  many  gaps  in  their  biographies,  to  throw  additional 
light  on  their  personal  characters,  to  add  in  some  respects  to  our 
knowledge  of  their  manners  and  customs,  and  above  all  to  ascertain 
more  accurately  than  from  Commendatory  Verses  or  Dedications,  the 
popular  estimate  that  was  formed  of  our  greatest  men  by  their 
contemporaries,  and  the  amount  of  influence  exercised  by  them. 

One  little  link  in  this  chain  I  have  endeavoured  to  supply  in  this 
chapter.  Many  more  such  links  I  am  ready  to  weld  on  to  it. 
The  one  chosen  to  be  here  put  forth  as  sample  is  selected  merely 
because  it  is  the  easiest  to  detach,  and  being  connected  with  well- 
known  other  links  in  the  Jonson  quarrel,  is  one  not  difficult  to 
recognise  as  like  to  them  in  structure  and  purpose.  Wily  Beguiled 
is  not  however,  in  subject  matter,  one  of  the  most  important  of  the 
Envy  plays  :  which  fact  perhaps  accounts  for  its  allegory  never 
having  been  suspected,  in  spite  of  its  grossly  personal  character  being 
manifest  on  the  surface  in  its  allusion  to  Jonson  as  "Hunks  with 
the  big  head. " 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

ON  THE   ANNALS   OF  THE  STAGE  FROM 
1584  TO  1595. 

[I  WISH  to  specially  acknowledge  the  great  advantage  that  I  have 
derived  from  Mr.  R.  Simpson's  papers  in  writing  this  chapter. 
Although  I  differ  from  most  of  his  conclusions,  it  is  not  too  much 
to  say  that  but  for  his  previous  work  I  should  not  have  been  able  to 
make  this  investigation. — F.  G.  F.] 

The  theatrical  companies  known  to  have  been  regularly  acting  in 
London  from  1584  to  1589  are — I,  The  Lord  Admiral's;  2,  The 
Queen's  ;  3,  The  Lord  Strange's ;  4,  The  Children  of  the  Chapel ; 
5,  The  Children  of  Paul's.  Neither  of  the  Chamberlain's  companies, 
that  is,  the  Earl  of  Sussex's  (1576-1582)  and  the  later  one  of  the 
same  name,  that  is,  Lord  Hunsdon's  (1594-1603),  have  been  traced 
in  the  period  we  are  at  first  concerned  with  (1584-1589).  But  in  1589 
two  companies,  6,  The  Earl  of  Sussex's  ;  7,  The  Earl  of  Pembroke's, 
began  to  attract  their  share  of  public  attention.  These  dates  are 
important  in  our  inquiry.  The  writers  of  plays  who  are  chiefly 
remarkable  were — I,  George  Peele,  who  began  to  write  at  least  as 
early  as  1584,  and  died  in  1596-7;  2,  Robert  Greene,  who  died  in 
1592,  and  who,  as  I  shall  try  to  show,  began  to  write  about  1585  ; 
3,  Christopher  Marlowe,  whose  active  career  began  with  Greene's, 
and  lasted  only  one  year  longer ;  4,  Thomas  Nash,  who  came  to 
London  in  1589 ;  5,  Thomas  Lodge,  who  wrote  with  Greene  about 
1589  ;  6,  Thomas  Kyd,  whose  Jtronymo  dates  at  latest  1588 ;  7, 
"William  Shakespeare.  These  dates  are  also  important  to  us. 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  28i 

Having  laid  down  then  these  data  for  reference,  let  us  proceed  at 
once  to  examine  the  plays  of  The  London  Prodigal  and  Fair  Emm. 
In  the  latter  of  these  plays  two  stories  are  combined.  Firstly, 
William  the  Conqueror  accompanied  by  the  Marquis  Lubeck,  a 
Danish  knight,  visits  Denmark  under  the  name  of  Robert  of  Windsor, 
having  appointed  two  co-regents  to  manage  his  kingdom  during  his 
absence.  His  intention  at  nrst  is  to  woo  Blanche,  the  daughter  of 
the  Danish  king  ;  but  he  falls  in  love  with  Mariana,  a  captive  from 
Sweden,  who  is  betrothed  to  Lubeck.  He  endeavours  to  carry  her 
off ;  but  Blanche  is  substituted  for  her,  masked  and  disguised,  and 
he  fails  in  his  attempt  to  deprive  the  Marquis  of  his  bride.  Sweno's 
invasion  of  England  (which  is  the  only  historical  fact  in  the  play)  is 
attributed  to  his  anger  at  the  loss  of  his  daughter.  William  in  the 
last  act  suddenly,  and  without  explanation,  becomes  "the  Duke 
of  Saxon."  All  this  is  admirably  explained  by  Mr.  Simpson. 
William  the  Conqueror  is  William  Kempe  the  actor,  who  with  a 
troop  of  comedians  visited  the  Danish  Court  in  1586 ;  (three  of  these, 
by  the  bye,  were  afterwards  actors  in  Shakespeare's  plays  in  the 
Chamberlain's  company,  namely,  Kempe,  Brian,  and  Pope  !)  Kempe 
and  one  other,  left  Denmark  in  the  autumn  ;  but  five  of  the  company 
went  to  Saxony.  The  allegory  is  transparent  enough  ;  it  is  certain 
that  William  here  is  not  the  historical  Conqueror ;  he  is  king  over  a 
troop  of  players,  at  first  in  England,  afterwards  in  Saxony.  But  I 
cannot  further  than  this  agree  with  Mr.  Simpson  ;  his  interpretation 
of  Fair  Emm  as  the  Manchester  public  seems  to  me  peculiarly 
unhappy.  Kempe  was  the  head  of  the  Queen's  company,  and  in 
1587,  the  year  after  he  left  England,  we  find  J.  Dutton  and  J. 
Lanham  acting  as  managers  of  that  company  :  surely  these  are  the 
two  regents  left  in  authority  by  the  conquering  Gullielmo.  They 
have  nothing  to  do  with  Manchester,  nor  indeed  with  the  public. 
Fair  Emm  is  the  company  of  the  Queen's  players,  with  whom,  as 
we  shall  see,  the  poets  are  seeking  connection.  We  must  not  look 
for  exact  consistency  in  an  allegory  of  this  kind.  But  before  ex 
plaining  the  second  plot  of  the  play,  I  would  draw  attention  to 
the  way  in  which  this  "  marriage  "  of  an  author  to  a  company  or 
manager  to  his  troop  illustrates  the  allegory  of  the  "marriage"  of 
an  author  to  his  patron  as  exemplified  in  Shakespeare's  Sonnets. 
Lubeck  is  pleading  William's  passion  to  Mariana. 


282  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

"Mar.  But  Lubeck  now  regards  not  Mariana. 

Lub.  Even  as  my  life,  so  love  I  Mariana. 

Mar.  Why  do  you  post  me  to  another  then? 

Lub.  He  is  my  friend,  and  I  do  love  the  man. 

Mar.  Then  will  Duke  William  rob  me  of  my  love. 

Lub.  No  ;  as  his  life  Mariana  he  doth  love. 

Mar.  Speak  for  yourself,  my  lord  ;  let  him  alone. 

Ltib.  So  do  I,  madam ;  for  he  and  I  are  one. 

Mar.  Then  loving  you  I  do  content  you  both. 

Lub.  In  loving  him  you  shall  content  us  both." 

Compare  with  this  Shakespeare's  42nd  Sonnet,  which  seems  to 
give  many  critics  so  much  difficulty  to  explain  allegorically. 

"  If  I  lose  thee  my  loss  is  my  love's  gain  ; 

And  losing  her  my  friend  hath  found  that  loss  ; 
Both  find  each  other,  and  I  lose  both  twain  ; 

And  both  for  my  sake  lay  on  me  this  cross. 
But  here's  the  joy  :  my  friend  and  I  are  one. 
Sweet  flattery:  then  she  loves  but  me  alone." 

Surely  these  two  extracts  will  bear  a  similar  interpretation.  And 
nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  Mr.  Simpson's  explanation  of  the 
former  of  the  two. 

We  must  now  consider  the  second  plot.  In  this  Fair  Emm  is 
wooed  by  three  suitors,  Manville,  Vallingford,  and  Mounteney  ;  by 
pretending  blindness  and  deafness  she  hopes  to  drive  away  the  two 
latter  and  be  married  to  Manville  her  betrothed.  Vallingford,  how 
ever,  is  not  deceived,  and  on  her  hearing  of  Manville's  falseness  in 
carrying  on  a  second  flirtation  with  Elinor  of  Chester,  ultimately 
wins  Fair  Emm.  There  is  also  a  scene  of  coarse  levity  between  her 
and  Trotter,  a  serving-man,  of  whom  more  hereafter.  Mr.  Simpson 
has  rightly  stated  that  Manville  is  Greene ;  but  he  is  certainly  wrong 
in  identifying  Vallingford  with  Shakespeare.  Camden  says  that 
Wallingford  is  Gualt-hen,  "The  old  rampire  or  fort."  But  an  old 
fort  is  a  Peel,  and  under  this  name  that  of  George  Peele  is  as  cer 
tainly  indicated  as  it  is  under  that  of  Pyeboard  in  The  Puritan. 
The  remaining  suitor,  Mounteney,  is  Marley  or  Marlowe.  Fair 
Emm  is  some  theatre  with  which  these  rival  poets  sought  to  be 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  283 

connected  during  Kempe's  absence.  But  the  only  theatrical  com- 
pany  that  Greene  ever  was  connected  with,  as  far  as  we  know,  was 
the  Queen's,  for  which  he  wrote  Orlando,  Friar  Bacon  and  Friar 
Bungay,  and  James  the  Fourth.  These  were  all  written  before 
1589.  But  in  1589  Kempe  had  returned  to  England  and  joined 
Lord  Strange's  company,  with  Pope,  Brian,  &c.  In  1589  at  latest, 
then,  we  must  look  for  the  dissolution  of  Greene's  connection  with 
the  Queen's  company,  and  the  formation  of  a  new  engagement 
between  it  and  George  Peek.  We  shall  see  ultimately  how  exactly 
these  dates  coincide  with  what  we  know  from  other  sources. 

But  there  is  another  play,  The  London  Prodigal,  which  is  un 
doubtedly  by  the  same  hand  as  Fair  Emm.  It  contains  a  line  which 
occurs  also  in  the  latter  play, 

"  Pardon,  dear  father,  my  follies  that  are  past," 

and  is  exactly  of  the  same  tone  through  out  in  metre,  style,  and  general 
handling.  In  it  the  allegory  is  still  clearer.  Flowerdale,  Oliver, 
and  Sir  Arthur  Greenshield  are  suitors  for  the  hand  of  Luce  Spur- 
cock  ;  Flowerdale  obtains  her  by  a  trick  ;  Oliver,  to  whom  she  had 
been  betrothed,  is  discarded,  as  well  as  Sir  Arthur  whom  she  really 
prefers.  Her  sister  Frances,  who  is  determined  to  have  a  husband 
named  Tom,  marries  Tom  Civet ;  her  eldest  sister  Delia  refuses  all 
offers  and  remains  unmarried.  There  is  a  scene  between  Daffodil 
and  Luce  exactly  similar  to,  though  still  plainer  than,  that  between 
Trotter  and  Emm  in  the  former  play.  Flowerdale  after  his  marriage 
with  Luce  ill-uses  her,  robs  Delia,  the  eldest  sister,  and  after  a  short 
career  of  debauchery  is  brought  to  express  a  repentance,  evidently 
insincere,  at  the  close  of  the  play. 

In  this  case  there  is  no  difficulty  in  deciphering  the  personages. 
Flowerdale's  life  combines  the  facts  of  Greene's  public  acts  in  con 
nection  with  the  theatre,  and  of  his  private  ones  in  forsaking  his  wife 
and  living  in  open  adultery  with  a  common  prostitute  ;  his  trickery, 
his  gambling,  and  his  other  vices  are  unsparingly  exposed.  Oliver^ 
"the  Devonshire  man,"  is  certainly  George  Peele,  who  came  from 
that  county.  Under  the  odoriferous  agnomen  of  Tom  Civet  we  can 
easily  recognise  Tom  Kyd.  Daffodil  clearly  means  Lyly,  and  thus 
identifies  the  Trotter  of  the  other  play.  Luce  is  the  Queen's  com- 
pany;  Delia,  the  eldest  sister,  is  the  Admiral's;  and  the  foolish 


284  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Frances  that  of  the  Chapel  Children.  These  Children,  by  the  bye, 
had  been  incorporated  longer  than  the  Admiral's  company  ;  but  this 
slight  discrepancy  is  of  no  consequence  in  so  loose  an  allegory,  and 
may  not  even  be  a  discrepancy  at  all ;  as  their  existence  may  be 
dated  by  the  author  from  the  time  of  their  having  a  fixed  place  for 
their  performances.  Sir  Arthur  Greenshield,  "the  military  officer," 
is  Marlowe,  of  whom  Lieutenant-Colonel  Cunningham  says,  "His 
familiarity  with  military  terms  and  his  fondness  for  using  them  are 
most  remarkable  ;  and  I  make  no  doubt  myself  that  he  was  trailing 
a  pike  or  managing  a  charger  with  the  English  force  a  few  months 
after  that  strange  engine  for  the  brunt  of  war,  the  fiery  keel,  had 
been  hurled  against  Antwerp  bridge."  So  much  for  the  characters. 

The  plot  tells  the  story  of  a  rivalship  between  Marlowe,  Greene, 
and  Peele  for  the  office  of  poet  to  the  Queen's  theatre ;  of  Greene's 
success  ;  of  his  subsequent  forsaking  of  his  engagement  and  defraud 
ing  the  Admiral's  theatre  [Defence  of  Cony- Catching,  1592  : 
"  Master  R.  G.,  would  it  not  make  you  blush  if  you  sold  Orlando 
Furioso  to  the  Queen's  players  for  20  nobles,  and  when  they  were 
in  the  country  sold  the  same  play  to  Lord  Admiral's  men  for  as 
much  more?  Was  not  this  plain  cony-catching,  M.  G.  ?"].  It  tells 
also  of  Kyd's  engagement  with  the  Chapel  Children,  for  whom  he 
wrote  Jeronymo  f  of  a  half-serious  proposition  of  Lyly  to  engage 
with  the  Queen's  company ;  of  the  determination  of  the  Admiral's 
not  to  employ  a  regular  poet  at  all,  but  to  accept  the  best  plays 
they  could  get  from  anyone.  Another  character  in  this  play  is  easily 
identified,  namely,  Weathercock,  that  is,  Thomas  Lodge.  He  was 
an  actor,  a  play-writer  of  tragedy  and  comedy,  a  writer  of  prose 
tracts,  a  student  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  a  soldier  (!)  in  the  expeditions  of 
Clarke  and  Cavendish  ;  a  translator  from  Greek  and  Latin,  a  novelist, 
and  finally,  a  physician.  Rightly  is  he  called  Weathercock.  He 
has,  however,  little  to  do  with  the  plot.  He  is  an  early  suitor  of 
Delia's,  but  rejected  by  her  ;  he  makes  no  proposal  to  any  other  lady 
in  this  play.  Here,  then,  we  have  the  account  of  Greene's  original 
engagement  with  the  Queen's  company  ;  in  Fair  Emm  that  of  his 
rupture  and  the  engagement  of  George  Peele  in  his  stead. 

We  now  turn  to  Greene's  prose  works  for  further  information. 
As  dates  are  all-important  in  this  part  of  our  investigation,  I  must 
say  a  few  words  on  their  chronology,  which  has  never  yet  been 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  285 

entirely  settled.  From  1587  onwards  Greene  adopted  the  fashion 
of  placing  on  his  title-pages  or  elsewhere  in  his  books  a  motto  ; 
which  motto  having  once  discarded,  he  did  not  again  make  use  of. 
Thus  he  prefixed  successively  in 

15870.  Ea  habentur  optima  quse  et  jucunda  honesta  et  utilia. 
1587^-15890.   Omne  tulit  punctum  qui  miscuit  utile  dulci. 
1589^-15900.  Omne  tulit  punctum. 
1590^-15910.  Sero  sed  serio. 
1591^-15920.  Nascimur  pro  patria. 
1592^.   Mallem  non  esse  quam  non  prodesse  patria. 
,,        Felicem  fuisse  infaustum.1 

Any  apparent  exception  to  this  rule  occurs  only  in  books  issued 
or  reprinted  after  Greene's  death. 

Let  us  see  if  from  these  prose  writings  we  can  fix  the  date  of  Fair 
Emm  and  the  London  Prodigal.  The  latter  play  referring  to 
Flowerdale  (Greene)  has  the  line 

"If  e'er  his  heart  doth  turn,  'tis  ne'er  too  late" 

a  distinct  allusion  to  Greene's  Never  Too  Late,  published  in  15900 
(earlier  part  of  the  year  1590),  with  the  motto  Omne  tulit  punctum. 
Hence  this  play  cannot  be  earlier  than  1590^.  Mr.  Simpson  has 
pointed  out  that  in  Greene's  Farewell  to  Folly  (1591^,  motto  Sero  sed 
serio}  Fair  Emm  is  railed  at  as  containing  "blasphemous  rhetoric, 
abusing  of  Scripture,"  &c.  Hence  that  play  cannot  be  later  than 
15910.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  plays  were  produced  at  these 
dates  respectively. 

Now  we  are  able  to  settle  very  nearly  the  dates  of  Greene's  plays  ; 
hitherto  a  desideratum  in  dramatic  history :  James  IV.  is  fixed  in 
1589^-15900  by  its  motto  Omne  tulit  punctum  ;  Friar  Bacon  in 
1588(5-15890,  by  its  motto  Omne  tulit  punctum  qui miscuit utile  dulci  ; 
The  Looking  Glass  for  London  has  been  assigned  to  1589  by  Mr. 
Simpson ;  and  the  only  two  remaining  plays  extant,  Orlando  and 

1  Mr.  Simpson  appears  to  have  been  misled  by  the  date  often  erroneously 
given  to  Menaphon  as  1587,  when  he  says :  "  In  this  year  1587,  Greene  adopted 
a  fresh  motto  or  posy.  His  old  one  was  OMNE  TULIT  PUNCTUM."  Greene 
certainly  does  not  use  this  motto  till  1588,  and  Mr.  Petherham  has  shown  that 
the  date  of  Menaphon  is  1589,  not  1587. 


286  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Alphonsus,  must  have  been,  from  their  immaturity  and  metrical 
peculiarities,  written  before  these  :  one  other,  The  History  of  Job,  is 
lost.  Hence  we  get  our  table  : — 


Alphonsus  .     . 

1585 

Orlando      .     . 

1586     >| 

Friar  Bacon    . 

1587-8 

For  the  Queen's 

James  IV.  .     . 

1589     J 

Company. 

Looking  Glass 

1589-90 

These  dates  are  confirmed  by  the  following  facts: — The  London 
Prodigal,  which  was  written  in  1590,  speaks  of  Greene's  engagement 
?.s  having  been  broken,  but  yet  open  to  renewal.  Fair  Emm  fixes 
the  date  of  the  original  engagement  in  1586,  the  year  of  Kempe's 
visiting  Denmark ;  and  that  of  George  Peele's  engagement  as 
settled  in  1591  early  in  the  year.  Greene  never  wrote  for  the 
Queen's  players  after  1589.  Again,  the  play  of  Locrine,  written  by 
Charles  Tilney  in  1586  (he  was  executed  in  September  1586)  with 
the  help  of  George  Peele,  or  edited  and  finished  by  Peele  after 
Tilney's  death,  contains  quotations  from  Orlando  as  well  as  from 
Alphonsus.  Hence,  as  Bernhardt  has  shown,  1586  is  the  latest 
date  for  Orlando.  The  lines  in  Locrine  coincident  with  those  in 
Peele's  Farewell  to  Sir  John  Norris,  &c.  (1589),  only  show  that  he 
repeated  himself ;  a  common  trick  with  him,  as  Dyce  has  proved  in 
his  notice  of  Alcazar. 

I  now  come  to  Greene's  prose  writings.1  In  1587^,  in  his  intro 
ductory  epistle  to  Penelope's  Web,  he  complains  that  his  "toys  at  the 
Theatre  in  Rome  (London)  had  been  passed  over  with  silence,"  and 
that  "mislike  was  perhaps  shrouded  in  such  patience."  In  1588, 
in  his  Introduction  to  Perimedes  the  Blacksmith,  he  writes  :  "  I  keep 
my  old  course  still  to  palter  up  something  in  prose,  using  mine  old 
posy  still,  Omne  tulit  punctum;  although  lately  two  gentlemen-poets 
made  two  madmen  of  Rome  beat  it  out  of  their  paper  bucklers, 
and  had  it  in  derision  for  that  I  could  not  make  my  verses  fit  upon 
the  stage  in  tragical  buskins,  every  word  filling  the  mouth  like  the 
fa-burden  of  Bow-bell,  daring  God  out  of  heaven  with  that  atheist 

1  For  several  of  these  references  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  Simpson,  who  however 
interprets  them  very  differently. 


OAT  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  287 

Tamburlane,  or  blaspheming  with  the  Mad  Priest  of  the  Sun.  But 
let  me  rather  openly  pocket  up  the  ass  at  Diogenes'  hand  than 
wantonly  set  out  such  impious  instances  of  intolerable  poetry.  Such 
mad  and  scoffing  poets  that  have  poetical  spirits  as  bred  of  Merlin's 
race,  if  there  be  any  in  England  that  set  the  end  of  scholarism  in 
an  English  blank  verse,  I  think  either  it  is  the  humour  of  a  novice 
that  tickles  them  with  self-love,  or  too  much  frequenting  the  hot 
house  (to  use  the  German  proverb)  hath  sweat  out  all  the  greatest 
part  of  their  wits."  The  two  gentlemen  of  Rome  are  the  two  authors 
of  Locrine,  who  derided  Greene's  mottos  by  prefixing  a  Latin  motto 
in  his  style  to  each  of  the  dumb-shows  in  that  mock-heroic  play 
presented  by  Ate  at  the  beginning  of  each  of  its  five  acts ;  the 
madmen  of  Rome  are  of  course  the  actors  who  acted  Phineus  and 
Perseus  in  the  combat  in  the  second  of  these  dumb-shows  ;  all  of 
which  are  parodies  of  the  similar  performances  as  presented  by 
Venus  at  the  beginnings  of  the  acts  of  Greene's  Alphonsus.  The 
allusion  to  Marlowe's  Tamberlane  (1585)  our  earliest  play  in  good 
blank- verse,  is  palpable  ;  not  so  that  to  The  Priest  of  the  Sun.  The 
only  play  known  which  contains  such  a  character  is  The  Looking 
Glass  for  London,  and  it  occurs  in  the  part  written  by  Greene  him 
self.  This  would  incline  one  to  place  that  play  earlier  than  Perimedes^ 
were  it  not  that  Greene  in  other  instances,  as  we  shall  see,  was  in 
the  habit  of  firstly  abusing  other  people's  writings  and  then  copying 
them  ;  a  practice  not  altogether  obsolete.  The  play  he  speaks  of 
is  probably  lost.  His  last  sentence  alludes  to  Peele's  well-known 
profligacy,  which  ultimately  caused  his  death ;  and  to  Marlowe's 
innovation  in  discarding  rhyme,  which  he  had  himself  so  miserably 
failed  to  imitate  in  that  most  stilted  and  topsy-turvy-sentenced  play 
Alphonsus  of  Arragon.  He  calls  it  the  humour  of  a  novice,  because 
in  his  next  play,  James  IV.,  he  meant  to  recur  to  the  use  of  rhyme  ; 
as  he  accordingly  did.  After  1589  he  wrote  no  plays.  The  Looking 
Glass  was  the  play  in  which  "young  Juvenall  (Lodge)  lastly  with 
him  writ  a  comedy."  This  intention  of  abandoning  the  stage  was 
probably  caused  by  his  being  replaced  by  Peele  in  this  year  with 
the  Queen's  company,  as  we  have  seen  above.  It  is  distinctly 
announced  in  his  Mcnaphon  written  in  that  year. 

And  now,  after  this  long  but  necessary  introduction,  we  come  to 
the  notices  of  Shakespeare.     I  must  just  recapitulate  the  state  of 


288  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

stage  matters  in  1589.  Greene  had  retired  from  the  stage;  so  had 
Lyly  (as  shown  by  Malone  in  vol.  ii.  of  the  Variorum  Shakespeare)  • 
Nash  is  just  arriving  in  London ;  Kempe  has  taken  a  post  as 
manager  for  Lord  Strange's  players  ;  this  company  ( just  attracting 
notice)  and  that  of  the  Admiral's  are  prohibited  from  playing  for  a 
brief  space,  in  consequence  of  the  license  they  had  indulged  in  ; 
Marlowe  (as  I  shall  prove)  is  in  consequence  leaving  the  Admiral's 
company  to  join  that  of  Sussex  or  that  of  Pembroke ;  Lodge  goes 
abroad  ;  and  what  Shakespeare  is  doing  I  hope  to  show.  A  most 
eventful  year  for  the  drama ;  probably  the  most  important  of  any 
except  1585. 

In  order  to  understand  the  relations  of  these  poets  to  each  other, 
it  is  necessary  to  bear  in  mind  that  the  anti-Martinist  writers  were 
Greene,  Nash,  Lyly,  and  Kempe ;  of  these  Nash  and  Kempe  are,  so 
to  say,  new-comers  ;  Greene  and  Lyly  are  quondam  poets,  but  these 
four  form  a  distinct  clique  of  their  own  :  there  has  not  been  a  more 
fertile  error  than  that  common  classification  of  Greene,  Peele,  and 
Marlowe  in  one  group,  and  Shakespeare  in  another ;  their  relative 
merit  as  poets  has  blinded  critics  as  to  their  private  relations.  Neither 
Peele,  Marlowe,  nor  Lodge  belong  to  the  same  group  as  Greene ; 
they  are  all  addressed  by  him  as  "  quondam  acquaintance "  in  the 
well-known  passage  of  The  Groatsworth  of  Wit  (1592).  Greene  had 
quarrelled  with  Marlowe  and  Peele  before  1589  ;  perhaps  also  with 
Lodge,  for  the  date  of  The  Looking  Glass  may  be  earlier  than  that 
usually  assigned  to  it ;  and  from  this  date  we  shall  find  that  there  is 
no  friendship  between  him  and  Shakespeare.  So  far  from  Shake 
speare's  being  on  such  terms  with  him  as  to  write  plays  in  conjunc 
tion  with  him,  we  shall  find  distinct  indications  that  this  anti- 
Martinist  set  assumed  also  the  most  hostile  attitude  towards  the  band 
of  friends  which  included  Shakespeare,  Marlowe,  Peele,  and  Lodge. 
I  have  indicated  some  grounds  for  this  opinion  in  my  paper  on 
Shakespeare's  Sonnets.  I  now  proceed  to  give  others  from  Greene's 
writings. 

The  key  to  the  position  lies  in  the  old  play  of  The  Taming  of  a 
Shrew.  No  sound  critic  can  read  this  play  without  seeing  that  the 
scenes  corresponding  to  Act  iv.  Sc.  I,  3,  in  the  The  Taming  of  the 
Shrew,  are  by  the  same  author  as  the  same  parts  of  the  later  play. 
But  Shakespeare  undoubtedly  wrote  these  later  scenes.  Hence  he 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  289 

wrote  the  earlier  ones.  The  verse  part  of  the  early  play  is  by 
Marlowe.  It  contains  many  lines  taken  after  his  custom  (for  he 
shared  this  habit  with  Peele,  witness  his  using  the  celebrated  line, 
"  Make  me  immortal  with  a  kiss"  in  two  separate. plays)  from  his 
other  writings.  It  bears  manifest  marks  of  his  work,  but  not  his 
best  work.  It  is  hurried  and  careless.  Now  this  play  contains  a 
line,  "  Icy  hair  that  grows  on  Boreas'  chin,"  which  is  distinctly 
alluded  to  in  Greene's Mendphon  (1589),  which  has  "White  as  the 
hairs  that  grow  on  Father  Boreas'  chin,"  and  cannot  therefore  be 
later  than  that  year ;  probably  is  not  far  in  date  from  it.  But  in 
1589  Marlowe  was  leaving  the  Admiral's  company  for  the  Earl  of 
Pembroke's ;  and  The  Taming  of  a  Shrew  belonged  to  the  Earl  of 
Pembroke's  company.  It  could  not  then  be  written  before  1589, 
while  Marlowe  belonged  to  the  Admiral's.  We  have  here  then  a 
fixed  date  at  which  Shakespeare  was  writing ;  not  an  important  play 
certainly  ;  only  a  few  prose  scenes  of  humorous  comedy,  composed 
to  oblige  a  friend  who  could  write  the  serious  parts,  but  had  not  a 
particle  of  humour  in  him  ;  not  important  in  itself,  but  very  impor 
tant  to  us  as  giving  us  the  earliest  specimen  extant  of  our  great  poet's 
comic  powers.  But  in  the  same  year,  1589,  and  in  another  part  of 
the  same  volume,  we  find  an  allusion  to  another  play.  In  Nash's 
preface  to  Menaphon  is  an  attack,  too  well  known  to  quote,  on  those 
who  leave  the  trade  of  novtrint  to  which  they  were  born,  and  will 
afford  you  whole  Hamlets  or  handfuls  of  tragical  speeches.  In  the 
record  of  the  performances  at  the  Rose  under  Henslow  these  two 
plays,  Hamlet  and  The  Taming  of  a  Shrew,  occur  side  by  side.  Is 
it  possible  to  avoid  the  inference  that  Shakespeare  (in  conjunction 
with  Marlowe  or  alone)  wrote  this  play  also,  from  which  the  tirst 
Quarto  of  Hamlet,  as  we  know  it,  was  botched  up  with  the  help  of 
pirated  notes  taken  at  the  theatre  by  that  arch- thief  T.  Pavier  ? 
Surely  we  have  here  the  strongest  presumptive  evidence  that  Shake 
speare  wrote  his  first  attempts  at  Tragedy  as  well  as  Comedy  under 
the  tuition  of  his  friend  and  predecessor  Marlowe.  The  further 
history  of  these  plays  confirms  this  suggestion.  The  plays  that  wo 
know  of  as  having  belonged  to  the  Earl  of  Pembroke's  company  are 
TUus  Andronicus,  3  Henry  VI.  (The  True  Tragedy],  The  Taming 
of  a  Shrew,  Edward  II.,  and  probably  the  early  Hamlet.  We  know 
that  all  these  became  the  property  of  the  Chamberlain's  Company, 

19 


2<>o  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

with  the  possible  but  improbable  exception  of  Edward  II.  If,  as 
is  most  likely,  they  all  changed  hands  at  the  same  time,  the  date  of 
the  change  can  be  fixed.  For  at  some  time  in  1600  The  True 
Tragedy  was  in  the  possession  of  the  Earl  of  Pembroke's  men, 
being  printed  with  their  name  on  the  title-page  in  that  year.  Had 
the  Chamberlain's  men  acquired  it  their  name  would  certainly  have 
been  inserted,  as  it  was  in  the  next  edition.  But  at  one  time  in  the 
same  year,  1600,  Titus  Andronicus  was  in  their  possession,  and  their 
name  printed  on  the  title-page,  although  on  turning  the  leaf  we  find 
only  the  names  of  the  players  of  Sussex,  Pembroke,  and  Darby. 
The  transfer  took  place  then  in  1600,  and  accordingly,  if  my  metrical 
tests  be  true,  in  1601  we  find  Shakespeare  re-writing  Hamlet  and 
The  Taming  of  a  Shrew,  as  I  stated  in  my  papers  of  1874,  then 
knowing  nothing  of  this  external  evidence.  Again,  the  first  fruit 
of  Shakespeare's  invention  is  expressly  stated  by  him  to  have  been 
his  Venus  and  Adonis,  which  there  is  independent  evidence  for 
believing  to  have  been  written  in  1588,  and  this  evidence  is  confirmed 
by  Greene's  writing  what  he  calls  "  Sonnets  "  on  that  subject  in  his 
Perirnedes  that  same  year  in  evident  imitation  of  the  metre  and  style 
of  Shakespeare,  after  his  usual  fashion.  Shakespeare  having  begun 
to  write  was  not  the  man  to  give  it  up  ;  but  the  necessities  of  Fortune 
luckily  drove  him  to  writing  for  the  stage  ;  and  from  the  date  of  his 
writing  for  the  stage,  if  not  earlier,  begins  the  enmity  of  Greene, 
who  t>aw  in  him  a  dangerous  rival  with  whom  he  dared  not  com 
pete  ;  and  of  Nash,  whose  natural  spite  sought  for  a  vent  anywhere 
on  anybody ;  and  of  Lyly  (our  pleasant  Willy  dead  of  late),  who 
felt  that  for  his  style  of  Comedy  there  was  no  chance  of  resurrection. 
The  master  had  come ;  the  apprentice  hands  might  give  over  working, 
only  the  makers  possessed  of  genius  akin  to  his  own  felt  no  jealousy, 
and  worked  in  unison  with  him.  Lodge,  Peele,  and  Marlowe  held 
by  him  to  the  last  as  great  minds  always  do.  It  is  only  the  plagiarist, 
the  word-vendor,  and  the  satirist,  who  carp  at  the  creation  which 
they  have  neither  the  power  to  parallel  nor  the  wit  to  understand. 

To  retum  to  Greene's  prose  works.  Mr.  Simpson  has  collected 
the  passages  referring  to  players  in  several  of  his  works.  We 
shall  understand  them  best  by  taking  them  in  inverse  chronological 
order.  In  The  Groatsworth  of  Wit,  1592,  Shakespeare  (for  there  is 
no  doubt  of  his  being  meant  in  the  well-known  passage  in  which  he 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  291 

is  called  a  Shake-scene)  is  described  as  "an  upstart  crow  beautified 
with  our  feathers."  Mr.  Simpson  has  wrongly  identified  with  Shake- 
scene  the  Roscius  in  Never  Too  Late,  1590,  who  is  asked  by  Tully 
(Greene),  "  Art  thou  proud  with  ^Esop's  crow  being  prankt  with  the 
glory  of  other's  feathers?"  and  rightly  with  one  of  "The  upstart 
reformers  of  arts"  in  Nash's  Introduction  to  Menaphon.  These 
upstarts  and  Roscius  again  occur  in  The  Groatsworth  of  Wit. 
Roscius  is  the  author  of  The  Moral  of  Man's  Wit  and  The  Dialogue 
of  Dives;  acts  in  Delfrigus  and  The  King  of  the  Fairies  ;  and  "  for 
seven  years  has  been  absolute  master  of  the  puppets."  The 
" bombasting  of  bragging  blank  verse"  is  also  alluded  to  in  Nash's 
introduction  to  Menaphon,  where  it  clearly  applies  to  Shakespeare 
(an  "idiot  art-master,"  or  self-instructed  gradeless  student),  and  in 
The  Groatsworth  of  Wit,  where  it  also  applies  to  him ;  and  in 
Perimedes,  where  it  refers  to  the  authors  of  Locrine.  Mr.  Simpson 
has  also  tried  to  show  that  the  "vain-glorious  tragedian"  Roscius 
(Kempe),  in  Nash's  introduction  to  Menaphon,  is  the  same  person 
as  Doron  (Lodge) 1  in  the  novel  itself ;  and  consequently  the  same 
as  Mullidor  (Muiey  d'or  =  Golde,  Lodge's  nom  de  plume}  in  Never 
Too  Late  (1590).  The  sum  of  these  discoveries  of  Mr.  Simpson's  is 
that  Shakespeare  is  distinctly  introduced  into  various  works  of 
Greene's,  all  dating  from  1589  to  1592.  He  has,  however,  as  far  as 
I  can  see,  quite  failed  to  discover  any  allusion  to  him  by  Greene  as 
a  writer 2  anterior  to  Menaphon.  And  this  is  just  what  I  should 
have  expected.  Up  to  1589  Greene  had  his  hands  full  in  quarrelling 
with  Marlowe  and  Peele  ;  it  was  not  until  Shakespeare  began  to 
write  as  well  as  act  that  he  turned  his  attacks  on  the  novus  homo, 
and  began  to  exclaim  against  uneducated  upstarts  and  pilfering 
pirates.  This  was,  no  doubt,  part  of  Nash's  plan  of  the  campaign, 
as  was  also  the  new  tone  assumed  by  both  Greene  and  Nash  towards 
Peele  and  Marlowe.  Before  Nash's  appearance  as  an  auxiliary, 
Greene  attacked  both  these  poets;  afterwards  "rare  wits/'  "atlas 
of  poetry,"  "primus  verborum  artijex"  are  among  the  phrases 
applied  to  them  by  this  ingenuous  brace  of  satirists. 

Bearing  in  mind  then  that  "mad  actor  "is  probably  a  name  for 

i  Roscius  is  Kempe  and  Doron  Lodge ;  Mr.  Simpson  thinks  they  both  mean 
Shakespeare.     Note  th.it  the  plays  acted  by  Roscius  are  not  tragedies  but 
*  liut  Shakespeare  may  be  one  of  the  ''  madmen  "  actors  in  PtrtMeJtS. 

IQ — 2 


292  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Shakespeare,  let  us  see  if  can  find  in  this  series  of  romances  any  traces 
of  historical  fact  concerning  him  and  his  fellows,  Kempe  and  Burbage. 
One  fact  is  patent;  the  player  who  had  been  seven  years  the  interpre 
ter  of  the  puppets  in  Never  Too  Late  is  certainly  meant  for  Kempe  ; 
but  date  Greene's  introduction  to  him  when  you  will,  he  could  not 
have  been  seven  years  previously  to  that  in  London ;  in  fact,  seven 
years  is  the  extreme  time  we  can  give  Greene  between  his  leaving 
his  living  (in  1585  at  the  earliest,  the  date  of  residing  on  it  being 
1584)  and  his  writing  this  treatise  in  1592.  And  there  can  be  little 
doubt  that  this  period  of  time  is  so  to  be  interpreted  ;  it  is  frequent 
in  old  plays  and  novels  also,  thus  to  confuse  the  real  writer  with  his 
fictitious  hero,  and  real  events  with  the  imaginary  ones  of  the  poem. 
I  believe  then  that  this  passage  fixes  the  date  of  Greene's  arrival  in 
London  in  1585.  I  do  not  think  we  are  to  look  for  any  works  of 
Shakespeare's  as  indicated  by  the  list,  Delfngus,  King  of  Fairies, 
Moral  of  Man 's  Wit,  and  Dialogue  of  Dives  {Devil  and  Dives). 
These  are  rather  to  be  sought  for  in  Greene's  own  works.  The 
player  is  accused  by  him,  as  I  interpret  the  passage,  of  endeavouring 
to  purloin  other  men's  writings.1  At  any  rate  The  King  of  Fairies 
occurs  in  Greene's  James  IV.,  and  the  dialogue  of  the  Devil  and 
Dives  is  likely  to  be  the  scene  where  the  evil  angel  tempts  the  usurer 
in  The  Looking- Glass  for  London.  But  on  the  other  hand  I  hazard 
a  conjecture  that  since  the  hatred  of  the  actors,  which  Greene  so 
often  shows,  is  focussed  and  intensified  in  his  hatred  of  Shakespeare, 
so  that  we  can  hardly  separate  the  two  in  his  later  writings,  we 
may  believe  it  not  unlikely  that  one  of  the  "paper  bucklerd  mad 
men,"  who  raised  his  wrath  in  acting  Locrine,  was  Shakespeare 
himself.  And  this  is  the  more  likely  seeing  that  in  Fair  Emm  and 
The  London  Prodigal,  one  of  which  was  certainly  written  for  Lord 
Strange's  men  and  the  other  probably,  some  part  would  almost 
inevitably  be  assigned  to  Shakespeare. 

It  may  be  interesting  to  the  reader  to  see  the  kind  of  verse  that 
this  malignant  writer  puts  in  the  mouth  of  the  characters  under 
whose  names  he  hides  his  representations  of  a  friend  of  the  world's 
great  poet,  Lodge.  In  his  Menaphon  there  is  an  eclogue  called 
"  Doron's  joined  with  Carmela's,"  part  of  which  is  here  subjoined. 

1  Lord  Strange's  Company  seem  to  have  acted  plays  belonging  to  the  Queen's 
men,  as  well  as  others  belonging  to  the  Admiral,  in  1592. 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  293 

DORON. 

"  Sit  down,  Carmela  ;  here  are  cobs  for  kings  ; 

Sloes  black  as  jet,  or  like  my  Christmas  shoes  ; 
Sweet  cider  which  my  leathern  bottle  brings ; 
Sit  down,  Carmela ;  let  me  kiss  thy  toes." 

CARMELA. 
"  Ah,  Doron,  ah,  my  heart ;  thou  art  as  white 

As  is  my  mother's  calf  or  brinded  cow. 
Thine  eyes  are  like  the  slow-worms  in  the  night ; 

Thine  hairs  resemble  thickets  of  the  snow. 
The  lines  within  thy  face  are  deep  and  clear, 
Like  to  the  furrows  of  my  father's  wain  ; 
The  sweat  upon  thy  face  doth  oft  appear 

Like  to  my  mother's  fat  and  kitchen  gain. 
Ah,  leave  my  toe  and  kiss  my  lips,  my  love,"  &c.,  &c. 

This  is  about  a  quarter  of  the  eclogue,  of  which  the  reader  probably 
desires  no  more. 

There  are  other  specimens  of  Doron's  verse ;   for  instance,  his 

jig  ; 

"  Through  the  shrubs  as  I  can  crack 
For  my  lambs,  little  ones, 
'Mongst  many  pretty  ones, 
Nymphs,  I  mean,  whose  hair  was  black 
As  the  crow  ; 
Like  tfie  snow 

Her  face  and  brows  shined  I  ween ; 
I  saw  a  little  one, 
A  bonny  pretty  one, 
As  bright,  as  buxom,  and  as  sheen 
As  was  she 
On  her  knee 

That  lulled  the  god,"  &c.,  &c. 

I  cannot  help  here  digressing  to  observe  that  in  Midsummer  Night  V 
Dream,  Act  v.  Sc.  I,  the  true  reading  of 
"  These  lily  lips, 

This  cherry  nose, 
These  yellow  cowslip  cheeks,"  &c. 


294  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

can  be  recovered  from  this  passage ;  for  lips  undoubtedly  read  brows. 
I  believe  that  this  play  in  several  places  alludes  to  Greene  and  his 
writings  ;  in  fact,  Oberon  The  King  of  the  Fairies  seems  to  be  taken 
from  Greene's  James  IV. 

Doron's   only  other    poetical   production  is  his   Description   of 
Samcla  ;  a  short  sample  will  suffice  ; — 

"  Like  to  Diana  in  her  summer  weed 

Girt  with  a  crimson  robe  of  brightest  dye 
Goes  fair  Samela. 

Whiter  than  be  the  flocks  that  straggling  feed, 
When  washt  by  Arethusa  faint  they  He, 
1^  fair  Samela. 

As  fair  Aurora  in  her  morning  grey, 
Deckt  with  the  ruddy  glister  of  her  love 
Is  fair  Samela. 

Like  lovely  Thetis  in  a  calmed  day, 

Whereas  her  brightness  Neptune's  fancy  move 
Shines  fair  Samela,"  &c.,  &c. 

Such  was  the  poetry  of  Lodge  according  to  Greene.  S.  Walker 
and  Dyce,  if  one  may  judge  by  their  emendations,  have  taken  these 
rhymes  as  seriously  meant  for  good  writing.  But  that  they  are  in 
tended  for  burlesque  will  be  evident  if  we  compare  them  with 
Greene's  other  verses  in  the  same  work  ;  for  instance,  with  Sephestids 
exquisite  song,  of  which  I  subjoin  one  verse  : — 

"  Weep  not,  my  wanton  !  smile  upon  my  knee  ; 
When  thou  art  old,  there's  grief  enough  for  thee, 
Mother's  wag,  pretty  boy, 
Father's  sorrow,  father's  joy, 
When  thy  father  first  did  see 
Such  a  boy  by  him  and  me, 
He  was  glad,  I  was  woe  ; 
Fortune  changed  made  him  so  ; 
When  he  left  his  pretty  boy, 
Last  his  sorrow,  first  his  joy." 


ON  THE  AXNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  295 

If  we  refer  to  Greene's  Never  Too  Late,  the  burlesque  is  still 
more  palpable  ;  here  is  Mullidor's  Madrigal : — 

"  Dildido,  dildido,  O  love,  O  love, 
I  feel  thy  rage  rumble  below  and  above. 
In  summer  time  I  saw  a  face, 

Trop  belle  pour  moi,  /ie/as,  helas  ! 
Like  to  a  stoned  horse  was  her  pace, 

Trop  belle  pour  moi  ;  voila  man  trepas. 
Was  ever T  young  man  so  dismay'd  ? 
Her  eyes  like  wax  torches  did  make  me  afraid. 
Thy  beauty,  my  love,  exceedeth  supposes  ; 
Thy  hair  is  a  nettle  for  the  nicest  roses. 

Mon  Dieu,  aide  moi! 
That  I  with  the  primrose  of  my  fresh  wit 
May  tumble  her  tyranny  under  my  feet. 

He  done,  je  serai  un  jeune  roi. " 

This  is  enough,  I  think,  to  show  the  animus  of  the  writer.  From 
the  unpleasing  contemplation  of  such  a  captious  and  perverse  ill- 
feeling,  let  us  turn  to  the  more  genial  task  of  examining  what 
Marlowe  and  Peele  were  doing  during  these  years.  Marlowe,  we 
know,  wrote  the  following  works,  and  almost  certainly  in  the  order 
that  has  been  universally  assigned  to  them,  which  agrees  exactly 
with  that  determined  by  metrical  tests. 

Probable  Certain 

Dates.  Dates. 

1585.  I.  Tamberlane,  part  i. before  1587. 

1586.  2.  Tamberlane,  part  ii before  1587. 

1587.  3.  Faustus. 

1588.  4.  Jew  of  Malta. 

1589.  5.  Massacre  of  Paris (1589^). 

1592.  9.   Edward  II 0592-3)- 

1593.  10.  Dido  (left  unfinished) (1593)- 

In  addition  to  these  it  is  highly  probable  that  he  wrote 

1589.  6.   Taming  of  a  Shrew  (with  Shakespeare). 

1590.  7.   Andronicus about  1 590. 

1591.  8.   Henry  VI.  (with  Peele} before  1592. 

1  i.e.  yeoman. 


2Q6  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

If  we  suppose  that  he  wrote  one  play  a  year  the  chronology  of 
his  works  will  exactly  correspond  with  that  we  have  assigned  to 
Greene's  ;  beginning  with  Tamberlane  in  1585,  and  ending  with 
Dido  in  the  order  of  the  prefixed  figures.  The  wretched  condition 
of  the  text  of  The  Massacre  of  Paris  will  also  be  now  explicable. 

For  as  I  have  stated  above,  the  company  for  which  Marlowe  wrote 
his  first  plays  was  the  Admiral's ;  for  it  he  wrote  all  the  first  five 
in  the  above  list  (with  the  possible,  not  probable,  exception  of  The 
Jew  of  Malta] ;  but  The  Massacre  of  Paris,  which  was  certainly  the 
last  play  he  wrote  before  joining  the  companies  of  Sussex  and 
Pembroke,  must  have  been  produced  after  the  death  of  Henri  III. 
(August  1589),  since  this  incident  forms  part  of  the  plot,  and  it  is 
most  probable  from  the  nature  of  the  play  that  it  was  produced 
almost  directly  after  this  event ;  but  the  Admiral's  company  was 
under  prohibition  in  1589. x  This  play  if  interrupted  by  the  prohibi 
tion  would  remain  incomplete  (it  has  but  three  acts),  and  after 
Marlowe  had  broken  with  that  company  he  would  not  care  to 
complete  it.  As,  however,  we  have  here  not  to  discuss  Marlowe's 
works,  but  only  to  show  that  the  chronology  we  assign  to  his  plays  is 
consistent  with  that  we  have  given  to  Greene's  we  pass  on  to  Peele. 

Peele  in  1584  produced  his  Arraignment  of  Parts- for  the  children 
of  the  Queen's  chapel.  In  subsequent  years  he  wrote  various  plays 
for  some  company  not  mentioned,  which  I  suspect  to  have  been 
Lord  Strange's,  as  no  other  poet  is  mentioned  in  connexion  with 
those  players,  and  each  of  the  other  companies  then  playing  in 
London  had  its  own  poet  attached  to  it.  In  1586  he  perhaps  aided 
C.  Tylney  in  Locrine,  but  more  likely  in  1587  he  edited  and  finished 
that  play  which  ridiculed  Greene's  early  works.  In  1588-9  or  there 
abouts  he  probably  wrote  Alcazar  for  the  Admiral's  company  ;  in 
1590,  after  Greene's  retirement,  as  we  have  seen  reason  to  believe 
above,  he  was  engaged  by  the  Queen's  company,  and  wrote  for 
them  The  Old  Wives'  Tale,  and  probably  The  Troublesome  Reign  of 
King  John  in  the  following  year.  After  this  his  share  in  plays 
assigned  to  Shakespeare  {Richard  III,,  Romeo  and  Juliet,  Henry  VI,) 
has  been  discussed  by  me  elsewhere.  He  may  also  have  written 
part  of  Edward  III,  /  certainly  not  Sir  Clyamon  and  Sir  Clamydes, 
nor  the  older  Leir,  both  of  which  have  been  inconsiderately  assigned 
1  Note  that  1589  ends  at  Easter  1590. 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  297 

to  him.  We  have  no  difficulty  then  in  adjusting  the  chronology 
of  his  works  as  well  as  Marlowe's  to  our  general  scheme.  The  Old 
Wives'  7 ale  is  the  play  that  has  for  us  in  the  present  subject  the 
greatest  interest.  In  Greene's  James  IV.,  the  King  of  the  Fairies, 
who  acts  as  presenter  along  with  Bohan,  a  Scot,  has  called  up  for 
his  amusement  two  boys  of  Bohan's,  who  dance  jigs  for  him,  &c. 
In  the  play  itself,  which  is  supposed  to  be  enacted  for  Oberori's 
delectation,  these  boys  are  actual  Dramatis  Persona,  and  one  of 
them  has  to  be  rescued  from  hanging  by  the  intervention  in  the  play 
of  Oberon,  for  whom  the  play  is  being  performed.  This  gross 
confusion  is  ridiculed  by  Peele  in  his  fairy  tale,  where  he  shows 
Greene  how  a  folkstory  ought  to  be  told,  and  how  such  a  confusion 
can  be  legitimately  introduced.  His  old  woman  begins  to  tell  the 
tale,  and  while  she  is  telling  it,  the  personages  of  the  narration 
come  in  and  continue  the  story — exactly  as  we  often  experience  in 
dreams — when  we  cannot  distinguish  between  the  book  we  are  read 
ing  and  the  vision  we  are  seeing.  Peek's  drama  is  a  real  Midsummer 
Night's  Dream.  His  intention  in  this  exquisite  production  to 
ridicule  Greene  is  unmistakable. 

All  things  then  cohere  and  agree  with  our  main  theory  as  to 
Shakespeare's  life  during- this  period  (1585-1594).  I  have  diligently 
examined  every  source  of  information  within  my  reach  and  have 
concealed  nothing.  As,  however,  in  so  large  a  mass  of  detail  it 
has  been  impossible  for  me  to  avoid  some  confusion  in  exposition 
from  having  to  mingle  arguments  and  facts,  I  will  here  sum  up  in 
a  concise  narrative  the  theatrical  history  of  these  ten  years ;  in  this 
narrative  it  must  be  understood  that  hypothesis  and  proven  fact  are 
mingled ;  the  grounds  of  the  hypothetical  part  being  given  above. 
In  all  other  portions  of  the  chapter  theoretical  statements  are  care 
fully  distinguished  from  authorized  history,  however  strong  the 
evidence  may  be  in  their  favour.  We  come  then  to 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  STAGE  (1585-1594). 

In  the  year  1585  William  Shakespeare,  pressed  by  the  needs  of 
fortune  and  an  increasing  family,  attained  his  majority.  Under  the 
patronage  of  some  great  man,  probably,  who  was  passionately  at 
tached  to  the  stage,  as  were  at  that  time  many  noblemen,  some  of 
whom  even  acted  as  amateurs  gratuitously  in  theatrical  pieces,  he 


298  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

came  to  London  in  1585-6  and  joined  the  company  of  Ferdinando 
Lord  Strange.  At  this  time  John  Lyly  was  well  known  as  a  writer  of 
comedies,  courtly  in  style,  patronized  by  the  Queen,  but  introducing 
in  his  dramas  many  political  and  personal  allusions,  which  had  at 
least  once  got  him  into  trouble.  George  Peele  was  also  well  known 
by  his  Pastoral  of  The  Arraignment  of  Paris,  which  was  in  like 
manner  distinguished  by  palpable  personalities.  Both  these  writers 
had  been  employed  by  boys'  companies  ;  the  latter  by  the  Children 
of  the  Chapel,  the  former  by  the  Children  of  Paul's  as  well.  But  in 
this  year  appeared  a  drama  which  was  the  first  of  a  series  which  were 
to  replace  the  old  comedies  in  prose  or  doggrel,  and  the  old  pastorals 
in  rhyme.  Marlowe  then  produced  his  Tamberlane,  the  first  English 
tragedy  worthy  of  the  name.  In  it  he  modulated  blank-verse,  not 
in  the  stiff  formal  manner  of  Surrey's  Virgil,  or  Sackville  and 
Norton's  Ferrex  and  Perrex,  but  in  a  comparatively  free  and  flowing 
rhythm  such  as  the  necessities  of  stage-dialogue  require.  In  the 
Prologue  to  this  play  he  says  : — 

"  From  jigging  veins  of  rhyming  mother  wits, 
And  such  conceits  as  clownage  keeps  in  pay 
We'll  lead  you  to  the  stately  tent  of  war." 

This  new  vein  was  successfully  struck,  miner  after  miner  tried  it, 
there  was  a  rush  to  the  gold  diggings.  The  first  arrival  was  Robert 
Greene,  who  wrote  his  Alphonsus  of  Aragon  in  direct  rivalry  with 
Tamberlane,  for  Lord  Strange's  (?)  company  ;  it  was  a  dead  failure. 
Not  so  the  second  part  of  Tamberlane,  written  in  1586,  like  the  first 
by  Marlowe  for  the  Admiral's  company.  In  this  year  W.  Kempe, 
one  of  "the  jigging  vein,"  left  England  for  Denrnark,  leaving  the 
Queen's  company  under  the  management  of  Button  and  Lanham. 
They  naturally  sought  for  a  play-writer  who  would  supply  them  with 
tragedies  of  the  new  kind.  Greene  and  Peele  both  offered  for  the 
office,  and  Greene  was  chosen,  and  wrote  his  Orlando  Furioso. 
Peele,  who  was  known  for  the  older  kind  of  drama,  the  Pastoral, 
and  who  had  also  written  a  Scriptural  play,  David  and  Bathsheba, 
perhaps  even  an  historical  one,  Edward  I.,  was  rejected,  and  joined 
Lord  Strange's  (?)  company. 

In  1587  Marlowe  wrote  his  masterpiece,  Doctor  Faustus  ;  Greene 
ridiculed  the  conjuror  in  his  best  play,  Friar  Bacon  ;  Peele,  on  the 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  299 

other  hand,  in  conjunction  with  Charles  Tilney,  had  elaborated  in 
1586,  his  mock-heroic  travesty  of  Locrine  in  ridicule  of  Greene's 
tragedies  of  the  two  preceding  seasons.  In  this  play  Shakespeare, 
or  some  other  actors  of  the  same  company  with  him,  acted ;  and 
excited  Greene's  wrath  by  the  way  in  which  his  mottos,  or  Latin  posies, 
his  "presenters,"  &c.  were  held  up  to  public  derision.  Kyd  mean 
while  was  emulating  Marlowe  in  his  Jeronimo,  and  Lyly  was  going 
on  his  old  road  unmoved  as  yet  by  the  new  theatrical  heresies. 

But  in  1588,  while  Marlowe  was  initiating  a  new  kind  of  comedy 
in  his  Jew  of  Malta,  the  precursor  of  the  Merchant  of  Venice  of 
eight  years  after,  Greene's  indignation  burst  out.  He  saw  that  he 
could  neither  rival  nor  ridicule  successfully  Marlowe's  tragic  or  comic 
power ;  he  determined  to  employ  prose  satire  as  his  vehicle.  In 
his  Perimedes  he  attacked  the  actors  in  and  writers  of  Locrine,  and 
introduced  the  personal  characters  of  Peele  and  Marlowe  into  his 
attack,  accusing  one  of  debauchery,  the  other  of  blasphemy.  At 
the  same  time  finding  his  failure  as  Marlowe's  competitor  to  be 
complete,  he  attempted  competition  with  Peele  in  a  historical  piece, 
James  IV.  Peele  was  not  so  easily  to  be  outdone  ;  he  firstly  took 
his  revenge  on  Greene's  old  tragedies  by  another  mock  heroic 
(entirely  his  own  this  time),  The  Battle  of  Alcazar,  which  he  wrote 
anonymously  for  the  Admiral's  men ;  and  in  the  following  year, 
1589,  ridiculed  James  IV.,  as  we  have  seen  already.  In  15891$ 
Marlowe  began  his  Massacre  of  Paris  for  the  Admiral's  company, 
but  did  not  finish  it ;  that  company  as  well  as  Lord  Strange's  being 
closed  by  authority  for  the  licenses  they  had  used  in  taxing  public 
characters.  That  they  had  taken  great  liberties  is  manifest  from 
what  we  have  seen  as  to  the  plays  Locrine  and  Alcazar.  The  latter 
play  had  ridiculed  Kyd  as  well  as  Greene.  In  consequence  of  this 
Shakespeare  and  Marlowe,  thrown  for  a  while  out  of  employment, 
wrote  in  conjunction  Hamlet  and  The  Taming  of  a  Shrew  for  the 
Earl  of  Pembroke's  company,  Greene,  who  had  called  Thomas 
Lodge  to  his  aid,  wrote  in  1588-9  The  Looking- Glass  for  London, 
and  still  finding  his  dramatic  success  unsatisfactory,  determined  to 
leave  the  stage  altogether  and  betake  himself  to  Prose  Romance,  in 
which  he  was  supreme.  Lyly  followed  suit,  and  along  with  Nash, 
who  had  just  come  to  London,  formed  a  band  of  satirical 
pamphleteers,  who  were  from  the  sixteenth  to  the  nineteenth  century 


300  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

unsurpassed  for  abusive  sarcasm  and  shameless  impudence.  Greene 
was  further  incited  to  this  course  by  the  preference  given  to  Peele  in 
this  year  by  the  Queen's  Company,  for  whom  he  wrote  The  Old  Wives' 
Tale,  a  delicate,  carefully- chiselled  satire  on  his  James  IV.  Shake 
speare  up  to  his  time  had  been  unknown  as  a  dramatic  author ; 
he  was  known  as  a  poet  probably  among  his  friends,  for  he  had 
written  his  Venus  and  Adonis  in  1588.  He  published  nothing  till 
1 593 .  He  was  as  far  as  the  stage  is  concerned  looked  on  merely  as  an 
actor.  But  now  comes  a  great  change.  His  career  begins,  and  al 
though  he  did  not  originate  any  one  kind  of  dramatic  composition, 
it  soon  became  evident  that  he  would  be  a  formidable  rival  in  all. 

In  1590  Marlowe  wrote  Titus  Andronicus  for  the  Earl  of  Sussex's 
men  ;  Shakespeare  for  Lord  Strange's  probably  a  play  (now  lost)  on 
the  same  subject,  and  Peele  The  Troublesome  Reign  of  King  John 
for  the  Queen's.  But  Lord  Strange's  men,  in  spite  of  their  late 
prohibition,  are  producing  the  two  plays  in  which  Greene's  competi 
tions  with  Peele  for  the  favour  of  the  Queen's  company  are  delineated, 
namely,  Fair  Emm  and  The  London  Prodigal.  Here  personal  satire 
on  the  stage  reaches  its  climax.  Greene  is  attacked,  as  he  richly 
deserved,  in  his  personal  character  as  well  as  through  his  published 
writings ;  his  aspersions  on  Marlowe  and  Peele  are  doubly  redoubled 
on  himself.  His  title  to  his  recent  prose  work,  "  Never  Too  Late,"  is 
thrown  back  at  him  with  a  "Physician,  heal  thyself"  kind  of  de 
nunciation.  Greene,  in  a  passion,  next  year  complains  of  Fair  Emm 
in  his  Farewell  to  Folly,  vilifies  its  author,  and  of  all  charges  for 
Greene  the  profligate  ex-parson  to  make,  says  it  contains  abusing 
of  Scripture.  He  is  as  scurrilous  against  him  though  not  as  clever 
as  his  coadjutor  Nash  had  shown  himself  in  his  preface  to  Menaphon 
(1599)  in  his  abuse  of  Shakespeare.  Greene  also  has  attacked  Lodge 
as  a  rustic,  half-educated,  strutting  tragedian,  under  the  characters 
of  Mullidor  in  Never  Too  Late  (1590),  and  Doron  in  Menaphon 
(1589).  Nash  has  accused  Shakespeare  of  being  a  runaway  lawyer, 
a  shifting  companion,  a  would-be  tragedian,  a  botcher  of  blank 
verse,  a  taffaty  fool  decked  with  poet's  feathers,  and  all  the  terms  of 
vituperation  which  could  be  found  in  an  age,  when  that  art  had  only 
been  partially  cultivated.  Meanwhile  Shakespeare  was  quietly  doing 
his  work,  making  money  and  gaining  respect  from  every  one  by 
taking  no  part  in  all  this  controversy. 


ON  THE  ANNALS  OF  THE  STAGE.  301 

In  1591  set  in  a  rage  for  historical  plays;  Marlowe  and  Peele 
united  their  forces  to  produce  The  Contention  of  York  and  Lancaster 
and  The  True  Tragedy  of  the  Duke  of  York,  for  the  Earl  of  Pem 
broke's  company  ;  in  1593  Shakespeare  and  Lodge  (?)  wrote  Edivaid 
III.;  in  the  same  year  Marlowe's  Echvard  II.  was  acted  ;  in  1594 
Peele  began  Richard  III.,  afterwards  finished  and  elaborated  by 
Shakespeare  ;  some  years  before  this  I  Henry  VI.  was  written  by 
Marlowe  and  Lodge,  and  during  the  same  period  (1590-1594)  the 
old  play  of  Ldr  and  The  True  Tragedy  of  Richard  III.  were  written 
by  unknown  writers  for  the  Queen's  players.  But  Greene  did  not 
allow  this  new  turn  of  public  favour  to  grow  up  unassailed.  In  his 
Groatsworth  of  Wit  (1^2}  he  endeavoured  to  detach  the  men  he 
had  so  bitterly  inveighed  against  from  the  novus  homo,  whom  he 
hated  still  more.  With  the  insincerity  usually  to  be  found  in  men  of 
unbridled  tongue  and  unrestrained  passions,  he  put  himself  forward 
as  their  quondam  acquaintance,  and  on  the  ground  of  old  friendship 
endeavoured  to  injure  their  new  and  real  friend  in  their  estimation  : 
and  failed.  The  details  are  familiar  and  need  no  repetition.  Notice, 
however,  how  in  this  work  the  motive  of  his  jealousy  shows  up. 
It  is  the  fact  that  the  player's  "properties"  are  worth  2OO/.  that 
excites  the  wrath  of  this  graceless  spendthrift ;  it  was  the  vain  hope 
to  do  likewise  that  took  him  from  his  former  sphere  to  play-writing. 
Hence  the  abuse  of  Shakespeare  for  leaving  his  previous  profession. 
The  old,  old  story.  And  this  is  the  last  we  have  to  do  with  Robert 
Greene.  He  died  the  same  year ;  he  had  sought  to  separate  friends, 
and  no  friend  stayed  by  him  ;  no  one  by  him  but  the  poor  outcast 
he  had  consorted  with  and  her  husband,  who  saved  him  from  starv 
ing  in  the  street.  Next  year  died  Marlowe  in  a  brawl ;  his  un 
finished  play  Dido  was  completed  by  Nash  for  the  Chapel  Children 
in  1594.  Three  years  after  died  Peele,  diseased  and  unreformed. 
Shakespeare,  the  only  one  of  these  great  rivals  (for  they  were  great), 
then  only  was  beginning  to  show  his  strength.  They  had  all  pre 
ceded  him  in  order  of  development ;  all  to  the  outward  view  had 
excelled  him  ;  but  the  forest  oak  had  withstood  the  frost,  outbraved 
the  lightning,  and  survived  the  canker  that  had  killed  the  more 
symmetrical  rapidly  developed  tropical  palms;  he  and  he  only 
attained  to  the  fulfilment  of  his  natural  powers. 

Not  that  he  was  idle,  however,  during  these  years  between  1590 


302  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

and  1596  ;l  he  had  written  Love's  Labour's  Won  (?),  Lovers  Labour's 
Lost  (afterwards  enlarged  in  1597),  Midsummer  Night's  Dream 
(probably  also  enlarged  afterwards),  The  Comedy  of  Errors,  and 
Richard  IT,  Besides  this  he  had  re-written  The  Two  Gentlemen  of 
Verona  and  King  John,  and  finished,  corrected,  and  partly  re-written 
Richard  III.  and  Romeo  and  Juliet.  Of  these  early  works  of 
Shakespeare  nothing  is  so  noticeable  here  as  this.  During  the  time 
his  friends  were  alive  he  wrote  in  his  own  way ;  he  ignored  Marlowe's 
system  of  rejecting  rhyme,  and  Peek's  mixture  of  comedy  in  his 
torical  plays.  But  when  he  can  no  longer  be  a  rival  to  them,  when 
they  have  left  the  scene  of  competition  and  he  can  no  longer  hurt 
them  even  in  supposition  by  adopting  their  methods,  he  drops  his 
rhymes,  his  doggrel,  his  purely  tragical  histories  unmixed  with  prose, 
and  writes  his  Merchant  of  Venice  to  rival  The  Jew  of  Maha  ;  and 
his  Henry  IV.  to  rival  Edward  I.  From  this  time  to  the  end  of 
his  career  he  uses  the  plots  of  his  predecessors,  their  prose  stories, 
their  characters,  their  metre,  but  he  fuses  all  that  he  takes  from 
them  into  such  a  homogeneous  mass  that  the  alloy  is  transmuted  into 
the  truest  virgin  gold.  No  such  alchemist  as  Shakespeare  is  known 
in  the  annals  of  any  literature. 

Such  is  a  sketch  of  the  history  of  these  missing  portions  of  the 
annals  of  the  stage  as  far  as  we  can  at  present  make  out.  No  doubt 
some  details  are  erroneously  stated,  some  sequences  wrongly  inferred. 
But  the  advantage  to  a  student  of  a  working  hypo  hesis  is  very  great. 
It  gives  definiteness  to  the  grouping  of  a  mass  of  details  otherwise 
indistinguishable ;  it  forms  a  basis  for  future  research  ;  it  relieves 
the  monotony  of  what  would  otherwise  be  a  sandy  expanse  of  life 
less  desert.  And  the  hypothesis  here  presented  has  this  advantage  : 
that  it  is  not  based  on  or  limited  by  the  facts  that  we  know  concern 
ing  Shakespeare  himself.  Every  detail  known  of  his  dramatic 
contemporaries  has  been  ransacked  ;  none  have  been  knowingly 
neglected ;  and  thus  for  the  first  time  a  consistent  narrative  (if  not 
exactly  true  in  every  minutia)  has  been  evolved. 

1  In  1594  Lord  Strange's  men  were  incorporated  with  the  Chamberlain's,  to 
which  company  Shakespeare  henceforth  belongs. 


CHAPTER   XIV. 
ON   "EDWARD  THE  THIRD.' 


THIS  play  consists  of  two  parts— one,  which  forms  the  main  bulk 
of  the  play,  relates  to  the  foreign  wars  of  King  Edward ;  the  other, 
which  consists  of  two  scenes  and  part  of  a  third,  contains  a  narrative 
of  an  attempted  seduction  of  the  Countess  of  Salisbury  by  the  same 
monarch.  These  parts  are  distinctly  different  in  general  style  and 
poetic  power;  so  much  so,  that  none  but  the  dullest  of  prosaic 
readers  could  fail  to  note  the  differences ;  they  are  also  clearly 
separated  by  metrical  characteristics  of  the  most  pronounced  kind. 
They  are  equally  distinguished  by  the  use  or  disuse  of  special  words ; 
and  the  personages  common  to  the  two  portions  of  the  play — for 
example,  the  Black  Prince — have  different  characters  in  those  por 
tions,  and  are  unequally  developed.  In  my  opinion,  the  episode  is 
by  Shakespeare ;  the  main  part  of  the  play  not.  I  will  first  con 
sider  the  episode.  From  the  entrance  of  the  king  in  Act  i.  Sc.  2  to 
the  end  of  Act  ii.  Sc.  2,  this  play  is  not  taken  from  the  chronicles 
of  Holinshed,  but  from  Painter's  Palace  of  Pleasure.  This  is  the 
part  from  which  Mr.  Collier  has  happened  to  select  all  his  quotations 
given  in  the  Athenceum  to  prove  that  the  drama  is  Shakespeare's 
from  end  to  end ;  that  it  is  no  doubtful  play  ;  that  the  three  last  acts 
are  all  conducted  with  true  Shakespearian  energy  and  vigour.  To 
give  the  reader  a  fair  chance  of  judging  on  this  point,  I  give  passages 
from  both  parts  of  the  play. 

• 

*'  Edw.    When  she  would  talk  of  peace,  methinks  her  tongue 
Commanded  war  to  prison  ;  when  of  war, 


304  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

It  waken'd  Cassar  from  his  Roman  grave 
To  hear  war  beautified  by  her  discourse. 
Wisdom  is  foolishness  but  in  her  tongue  ; 
Beauty  a  slander  but  in  her  fair  face  : 
There  is  no  summer  but  in  her  cheerful  looks, 
No  frosty  winter,  but  in  her  disdain." 

Act  ii.  Sc.  i.     (Quoted  by  MR.  COLLIER.) 

"  John.  At  sea  we  are  as  puissant  as  the  force 
Of  Agamemnon  in  the  haven  of  Troy  : 
By  land  with  Xerxes  we  compare  of  strength, 
Whose  soldiers  drank  up  rivers  in  their  thirst : 
Then,  Bayard-like,  blind  overweening  Ned, 
To  reach  at  our  imperial  diadem, 
Is  either  to  be  swallow'd  of  the  waves, 
Or  hackt  apieces  when  thou  com'st  ashore." 

Act  iii.  Sc.  i.     (Not  SHAKESPEARE'S.) 

"  Count.  For  where  the  golden  ore  doth  buried  lye, 
The  ground  undeckt  with  nature's  tapestry, 
Seems  barren,  sere,  unfertile,  fruitless,  dry, 
And  where  the  upper  turf  of  earth  doth  boast 
His  pied  perfumes  and  party-coloured  cost, 
Delve  there,  and  find  this  issue  and  their  pride 
To  spring  from  ordure  and  corruption's  side. " 

Act  i.  Sc.  2.     (SHAKESPEARE'S.) 

"  Cit.  The  sun,  dread  lords,  that  in  the  western  fall, 
Beholds  us  now  low  brought  through  misery, 
Did  in  the  orient  purple  of  the  morn 
Salute  our  coming  forth,  when  we  were  known  ; 
Or  may  our  portion  be  with  damned  fiends. " 

Act  v.  Sc.  i.     (Not  SHAKESPEARE'S.) 

I  might  fill  pages  with  passages  like  these,  but  these,  I  think,  are 
enough  ;  the  difference  is  felt  at  once.  The  second  and  fourth  are 
totally  unlike  Shakespeare ;  the  first  and  third  are  just  what  he 
might  have  written  between  Richard  II.  and  John.  In  the  episode 
we  also  find  expressions  such  as  hugy,  venture,  muster  men,  -via, 


ON  EDWARD  THE  THIRD.  305 

imperator,  encouch,  which  are  either  of  frequent  occurrence  in 
Shakespeare,  or  have  the  true  ring  of  his  coinage  in  them.  We 
find,  moreover,  two  new  characters  introduced  (Derby  and  Audley), 
who  appear  indeed  in  the  after  parts  of  the  play,  but  developed 
after  a  totally  different  fashion  from  the  masterly  sketch  of  their 
first  appearance ;  and  above  all,  we  find  one  character,  Lodowick, 
the  king's  poet-secretary,  introduced  in  the  episode  only,  who  in  a 
play  entirely  from  Shakespeare's  hand  would  certainly  not  have 
dropped  out  of  sight  so  early,  but  have  been  utilised  to  the  very  end. 
The  delicious  pedantry  of  the  man,  whose  attempt  at  verse  consists 
of  the  two  lines, 

"  More  fair  and  chaste  than  is  the  queen  of  shades, 
More  bold  in  constancy  than  Judith  was ; " 

who  talks  in  inversions  : 

'?  Of  what  condition  or  estate  she  is, 
'Twere  requisite  that  I  should  know,  my  Lord  ; " 

who  tells  the  king,  when  inquiring  for  the  above  poem, 
"  I  have  not  to  a  period  brought  her  praise, " 

is  worthy,  if  not  of  the  author  of  Polonius'  advice  to  his  son,  at 
least  of  the  author  of  the  scene  of  Pandarus'  love-song. 

But  it  will  be  objected,  Why  do  you  give  us  these  vague  unscientific 
statements?  Where  be  your  rhyme-tests  and  double  endings? 
Where  your  un-  Shakespearian  words  that  can  be  counted  and 
tabulated  ?  They  are  all  at  hand,  good  reader.  Here  they  are. 

In  the  episode,  the  proportion  of  rhyme-lines  to  verse-lines  is  one 
to  seven ;  in  the  other  parts  of  the  play,  one  to  twenty ;  in  the 
episode,  the  proportion  of  lines  with  double  endings  to  verse-lines 
is  one  to  ten ;  in  the  rest  of  the  play  it  is  one  to  twenty-five.  These 
differences  are  far  too  great  to  allow  the  play  to  have  been  all  written 
by  one  author  at  one  period  ;  and  if  the  play  be  Shakespeare's  work 
throughout,  it  would  be  necessary  to  suppose  that  the  worst  part  of 
the  play  was  written  in  his  later  time,  with  Lear  and  Othdlo ;  or,  if 
I  may  not  be  allowed  to  presume  so  far  on  the  results  of  my  appli 
cations  of  metrical  tests  (though  to  the  development  of  Shakespeare's 
work  they  are,  I  am  certain,  our  surest  guide),  then  I  appeal  to  a 
different  kind  of  evidence  altogether. 

20 


306  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

In  the  main  part  of  this  play  there  are  many  words  used  that 
never  occur  in  undoubted  Shakespearian,  plays,  however  often  certain 
of  them  may  be  found  in  Marlowe  and  other  early  dramatists. 
For  instance,  bonny,  which  occurs  in  I  Henry  VI.  and  3  Henry  VI. , 
but  is  unknown  in  Shakespeare,  occurs  in  Act  i.  Sc.  2  three  times, 
and  bonnier  in  Act  iii.  Sc.  I.  So  the  strange  verb  to  patronage 
occurs  in  Act  iii.  Sc.  3,  and  in  I  Henry  VI.,  never  in  Shakespeare  ; 
horizon  (Act  v.  Sc.  i),  Ave  Caesar  (Act  i.  Sc.  i),  whinyard  (Act  i. 
Sc.  20.),  Bayard  (Act  iii.  Sc.  i),  Nemesis  (Act  iii.  Sc.  i),  martialist 
(Act  iii.  Sc.  3),  plate,  in  the  Spanish  sense  of  silver  (Act  i.  Sc.  2, 
Act  iv.  Sc.  4),  solitariness  (Act  iii.  Sc.  2),  quadrant  (Act  v.  Sc.  i), 
ure  (Act  i.  Sc.  i),  are  all  words  unknown  to  Shakespeare's  vocabu 
lary.  Battle- ray  occurs  in  Act  iii.  Sc.  3,  and  Act  iv.  Sc.  3 ; 
Shakespeare  does  not  even  admit  the  common  form  'ray  for  array, 
while  'rayed  is  found  in  the  part  of  The  Taming  of  the  Shrew  not 
Shakespeare's.  Burgonet,  another  word  in  this  play,  occurs  only 
once  in  Shakespeare  in  a  very  late  play,  Antony  and  Cleopatra, 
while  it  is  found  in  2  Henry  VI.  three  times.  So  the  anomalous 
word  expulsed,  which  we  find  in  2  Henry  VI. ,  but  not  in  Shake 
speare,  will  be  seen  in  Act  iii.  Sc.  2  of  this  play  of  Edward  III.  ; 
and  in  Act  v.  Sc.  I  the  unusual  verb  to  quittance,  as  in  I  Henry  VI., 
but  not  in  Shakespeare.  Cataline  in  The  True  Tragedy  of  the  Duke 
of  York  has  been  replaced  by  Machiavel  in  3  Henry  VI.,  but  remains 
undethroned  in  Act  iii.  Sc.  I  of  our  play. 

But  I  must  not  enlarge  on  this ;  I  must  return  to  our  play.  I 
recommend  anyone  who  has  been  deluded  by  Capell,  or  his  German 
copiers,  or  his  English  reproducers  at  third  hand,  into  the  belief 
that  this  work  is  all  Shakespeare's,  to  read  from  the  entrance  of  the 
King  in  Act  i.  Sc.  2,  to  the  end  of  Act  ii.  by  itself,  and  judge  if 
that  part  be  Shakespeare's,  as  I  say  it  is ;  then  to  stop  awhile,  and 
read  all  the  rest  of  the  play  by  itself,  noting  the  monotonous  thud 
of  the  antique  stop-line  and  the  un-Shakespearian  words  I  have 
given  above,  and  judge  if  any  part  of  that  be  Shakespeare's.  If  he 
say  yes,  he  is  not  one  I  should  care  to  argue  the  point  with,  for  to 
such  a  one  even  the  scientific  metrical  test  would  be  of  no  avail  for 
his  enlightenment.  He  might  even  agree  with  Mr.  Collier  in  say 
ing,  "  I  might  quote  the  whole  quarto,  for  it  is  all  his." 


CHAPTER  XV. 
EXTRACTS  REPRINTED  FROM  THE   "ATHEN^UM." 

To  the  first  of  the  subjoined  letters  on  Action  I  have  only  to  add  that 
Marcus  Antoninus  uses  atnov  in  the  sense  in  which  the  Elizabethans 
used  tSe'a,  namely,  that  of  "form without  matter;  exemplar."  The 
other  letter  requires  no  comment. 

Is  AETION  SHAKESPEARE? 
The  passage  in  Spenser's  Colin  Clouts  Come  Home  Again, 

"  And  there  though  last  not  least  is  Action  ; 

A  gentler  shepherd  may  nowhere  be.  fonTtd  '. 
Whose  Muse  like  his  high  thought's  invention 
Doth  like  himself  heroically  sound," 

was  supposed  to  allude  to  Shakespeare  by  Malone,  on  the  grounds, 
I,  that  Shakespeare  was  called  gentle;  2,  that  his  Muse  was  full  of 
high  thought's  invention ;  3,  that  the  name  Shake-spear  sounds 
heroically.  Mr.  Hales  has  added  a  fourth  argument.  "The  name 
was  adopted  for  its  own  intrinsic  significance,  as  Spenser  interpreted 
it.  He  has  in  his  mind  the  Greek  der6s  ;  and,  seeing  in  the  rising 
Shakespeare  a  poet  whose  imagination  was  to  soar  aloft,  he  styled 
him  The  Eaglet"  To  this  another  argument  may  be  added:  the 
Falcon  in  Shakespeare's  arms  might  be  alluded  to  as  the  Eaglet,  for 
eagles  were  ranked  as  a  species  of  the  genus  Falcon  or  Hawk  in 
Shakespeare's  time.  Thus,  in  the  translation  of  Forney's  Universe 
in  Epitome,  by  A.  Lovell,  we  find  Eagle,  Falcon,  and  Marlin  grouped 
together  under  the  head  of  Birds  for  Hawking ;  and  in  Ryder's 


308  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

Latin  Dictionary,  Eagle,  Falcon,  and  Merlin  expressly  called  Hawks; 
and  under  Falco,  Hawk  and  Falcon  are  given  as  synonymous.  On 
the  other  hand,  Todd,  and,  after  him,  Mr.  Minto,  have  asserted  that 
Action  is  Drayton.  In  support  of  his  claim  it  has  been  urged  that 
Drayton's  assumed  poetical  name,  Rowland,  sounds  more  heroically 
than  Shakespeare,  and  that  Lodge,  in  1596,  a  year  after  Colin  Clout 
was  published,  mentions  Drayton  but  not  Shakespeare,  which  would 
be  strange  if  Spenser  had  already  mentioned  Shakespeare  but  not 
Drayton  :  to  this  I  add,  that  in  Drayton's  Sonnets,  published  in 
1594,  he  calls  one  an  allusion  to  the  Eaglet :  it  begins — 

"When  like  an  eaglet  I  first  found  my  love." 

As  these  pastoral  names  were  often  taken  from  the  writings  of  the 
poet  alluded  to,  Action  may  easily  have  originated  from  this  sonnet. 
Again,  there  is  no  reason  why,  in  1595,  Drayton  should  not  have 
written  and  circulated  in  MS.  one  or  more  of  England's  Heroicall 
Epistles,  published  in  1598,  which  would  account  for  his  "heroically 
sounding  Muse."  But  all  this  depends  on  the  assumption  that  Colin 
Clout  was  written  in  1594-5.  If,  as  Prof.  Moiiey  thinks  (and  I 
agree  with  him),  the  main  part  of  it  was  written  in  1591,  and  this 
verse  was  part  of  that  early  portion,  then  we  have  a  third  claimant, 
Marlow ;  for  his  name  was  written  Marlen  or  Marlin  oftener  than 
Marlow ;  he  is  called  Marlin  in  Beard's  Theatre  of  God's  Judg 
ments  (1597) ;  he  was  entered  at  college  under  this  same  name  in 
1580 ;  he  took  his  degree  as  Marly n  in  1583  ;  and  is  mentioned  as 
Marlyn  as  late  as  Latham's  Falconry  (1618).  By  the  way,  the 
mention  of  this  book  reminds  me  that  Lady  Juliana  Berners  expressly 
calls  the  Eagle  a  kind  of  Hawk.  Now  that  Marlyn  and  Eaglet 
were  considered  as  synonymous,  there  is  proof  in  an  allusion  in 
Petow's  Hero  and  Leander  (a  continuation  of  Maiiow's).  He  says 
of  Marlow : — 

"  Oh  had  that  king  of  poets  breathed  longer, 
Then  had  fair  beauty's  forts  been  much  more  stronger  ; 
His  golden  pen  had  closed  her  so  about 
No  bastard  eaglet 's  quill  the  world  throughout 
Had  been  of  force  to  mar  what  he  had  made." 


EXTRA  C TS  FR OM  THE  "  A  THEN& UM."        309 

Here  Marlyn  the  true  eaglet  is  distinctly  contrasted  with  the  false 
one  ;  so  that  whether  Action  is  Mario w  or  not,  Marlin  is  certainly 
an  eaglet.  That  he  was  a  "  gentle  shepherd  "  is  shown  in  the  quo 
tation  by  Dycefrom  the  New  Metamorphosis,  by  J.  M.  (1660),  where 
he  is  called  "kind  Kit  Mario  w."  That  Marlin  recalling  the  great 
Arthurian  enchanter  "sounds  heroically"  is  clear  enough,  and  we 
know  how  his  verse  was  estimated  as  far  as  his  plays  are  concerned 
by  the  allusions  to  his  "sounding  lines."  It  may  be  said  that 
Spenser  must  have  cut  out  this  notice  on  publishing  in  1595,  because 
Marlow  was  dead :  but  we  do  not  always  do  all  we  ought ;  and 
Spenser  may  have  remembered  to  alter  his  verses  on  Ferdinand 
Lord  Derby,  the  poet's  patron,  and  forgotten^  to  do  so  for  the 
humbler  Marlow.  I  have,  I  think,  fairly  stated  above  the  views 
that  can  be  held  on  Mr.  Hales's  hypothesis,  that  Action  means 
eaglet,  and  shown  that  it  does  not  follow  that  Action  must  mean 
Shakespeare.  I  am  bound  now  to  give  my  own  view.  I  believe 
that  Action  is  not  derived  from  deros,  but  from  crfnos,  as  Malone 
suggested  in  a  note.  For  the  line, — 

"  And  then,  though  last,  not  least  is  Action," 

requires  us  to  read  ^Etion  in  three  syllables,  and  not  Action  in  four. 
I  know  some  scansionists  may  deny  this ;  but  no  poet  will.  And 
again,  who  has  ever  seen  the  word  Action  anywhere  else  in  English 
literature?  Is  the  obscure  Greek  painter  mentioned  in  English 
except  in  classical  dictionaries?  Or  has  any  author  used  it  for 
"eaglet"?  M\\ant  on  the  other  hand,  was  so  common  a  word  in 
Elizabethan  Latin,  that  it  is  given  in  the  Latin  dictionaries  for 
schoolboys.  In  Ryder's  Dictionary,  I  find  'VEtion  afnov  et  setia 
setiorum,  causa  principium  et  origo — an  original!,  beginning,  or  caused 
It  is  much  more  likely,  then,  that  Malone's  derivation  is  right,  than 
that  the  ingenious  conjecture  made  by  Mr.  Hales  is.  But  what  can 
JEtion  mean  as  a  poet's  name?  Is  any  work  of  Shakespeare  or 
Drayton  called  alTiovt  I  think  there  is.  Drayton's  pastoral  name 
for  his  mistress  is  Idea,  toe'a;  Idea  est  eorum  qua  natura  fiunt 
exemplar  aternum.  So  Drayton  calls  his  mistress  the  example  or 
pattern  from  whom  all  other  women  derive  their  excellence  by  par 
ticipating  in  hers.  As  Cooper's  Thesaurus  has  it,  under  Idea, 
"  Pattern  of  all  other  sort  or  kind,  as  of  one  seal  proceedeth  many 


3io  SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 

prints."  But  Drayton  was  not  content  with  a  mere  allusion.  Of  the 
three  works  he  had  published  before  1595,  one  was  called  Idea,  and 
another  Idea's  Mirrour.  What,  then,  more  natural  than  to  indicate 
Drayton  by  yEtion,  the  synonym  for  Idea?  I  conclude  that  the 
interpretation  of  Todd  and  the  derivation  of  Malone  are  the  correct 
ones,  and  that  the  only  point  they  did  not  see  was  that  yEtion  meant 
"The  original,  the  exemplar,  the  first,  though  here  the  last  men 
tioned  ;  the  formal  cause"  So  Giles  Fletcher  uses  Idea  in  Christ 's 
Victory  and  Triumph,  st.  xxxix. — 

"In  midst  of  this  city  celestial, 
Where  the  eternal  temple  should  have  rose, 

Light'ned  th'  Idea  beatifical, 
End  and  beginning  of  each  thing  that  grows" 

Carew  uses  the  word  "cause"  just  in  the  same  way  : — 

"  Ask  me  no  more  where  Jove  bestows, 
When  June  is  past,  the  fading  rose, 
For  in  your  beauty's  orient  deep 
These  flowers,  as  in  their  causes,  sleep." 

If  anyone  objects  to  my  supposition  that  the  Heroicall  Epistles  were 
in  circulation  as  early  as  1595,  I  would  refer  him  to  Dray  ton's 
Address  to  the  Reader.  "  Seeing  these  Epistles  are  now  to  the 
world  made  public,"  &c.,  which  distinctly  implies  that  they  had 
been  written,  and  were  known  to  have  been  written  for  some  time ; 
and  again,  in  the  Catalogue  of  the  Heroical  Loves,  he  says, — 

"  Their  several  loves  since  I  before  have  shown, 
Now  give  me  leave  at  last  to  sing  my  own. " 

This  implies  that  the  Heroicall  Epistles  were  written  before  his  love 
poems  to  Idea,  for  in  no  other  poems  does  he  "sing  his  own  loves." 
But  Idea  and  Idea's  Mirrour  were  published  in  1593  and  1594. 


EXTRA  CTS  FROM  THE  ' '  A  THENCE  UM. "        311 


SHAKESPEARE'S  ARMS. 

So  far  as  I  am  aware,  no  attempt  has  hitherto  been  made  to 
explain  the  charges  in  Shakespeare's  arms.  Yet  from  the  presence 
of  "  spear  "  in  them,  it  is  evident  at  a  glance  that  they  belong  to  the 
class  of  armcs  parlantes,  canting  or  punning  arms.  In  the  original 
instrument  in  the  College  of  Heralds  they  are  thus  blazoned : — "  In 
a  field  of  gould  upon  a  bend  sables  a  speare,  the  poynt  upward, 
headed  argent,  and  for  his  crest  or  cognizance  a  falcon  with  his 
wings  displayed,  standing  on  a  wrethe  of  his  coullers  supporting  a 
speare  armed  hedded  or  stieled  sylver  fyxed  uppon  a  helmet  with 
mantell  and  tassels."  Here  is  the  spear  plain  enough;  but  where 
is  the  shake  ?  In  the  words  I  have  italicized,  I  think.  For  how 
could  the  name,  or  rather  this  part  of  the  name,  be  expressed  in 
the  charge  ?  There  is  no  means  of  representing  shake  but  by  some 
thing  shaking ;  and  no  inorganic  thing  can  be  so  drawn ;  nor 
among  living  creatures  can  I  find  anything  that  can  represent  shaking 
excepting  a  bird  shaking  its  wings  previously  to  flying,  which  can 
heraldically  be  expressed.  The  connection  between  shaking  and 
"with  wings  displayed"  maybe  gathered  from  the  following  con 
siderations.  Lady  Juliana  Berners,  in  her  work  on  Hawking, 
especially  warns  her  readers  never  to  say  of  a  falcon  that  "  she 
shakes,"  but  always  to  say  "  she  rouses."  And  in  accordance  with 
this,  a  bird  shaking  its  wings  in  preparation  to  fly,  that  is  to  say, 
"with  wings  displayed,"  was  often  blazoned  in  the  heraldic  books 
as  rousant.  If  we  refer  to  the  old  dictionaries  we  find  this  con 
firmed  ;  for  instance,  in  Ryder's  Latin  Dictionary,  to  rouse  is  trans 
lated  corusco ;  and  in  referring  to  corusco,  we  find  "Corusco  wcfAAw 
KpaSatvu  vibro,  oculorum  aciem  perstringo.  To  shine,  glisten,  or 
lighten.  To  brandish,  c.  gladium  vel  hastam,  Virg.  to  brandish 
or  shake."  So  that  the  very  word  used  by  our  ancestors  in  Latin 
to  express  the  shaking  of  a  spear  was  also  used  by  them  for  the 
displaying  the  wings  in  heraldry.  It  is,  therefore,  to  me  certain 
that  "Garter  and  Clarencieulx "  in  granting  John  Shakespeare  his 
arms  gave  him  a  canting  bearing,  a  kind  which  is  rightly  said  in 
the  Penny  Cyclopedia  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  frequent  as  well 
as  the  most  ancient  descriptions  of  charges,  and  as  worthy  of  respect 


312 


SHAKESPEARE  MANUAL. 


as  any  other.  The  representation  of  Shake  in  Shakespeare  (not 
Shakspere)  by  a  rousing  falcon  is  confirmed  by  the  arms  of  Crispinus 
or  Cri-spinas  in  the  Poetaster,  "a  face  crying  in.  chief  and  beneath 
it  a  bloody  toe  between  three  thorns  pungent."  Marston,  as  well 
as  Crispinus,  is  here  indicated.  Mars  is  red  or  bloody  (compare 
Mars  ochre)  and  toen  is  toes  :  together  forming  Marston.  Both  puns 
are  equally  ,bad.  So  again  in  Every  Man  out  of  his  Humour 
Sogliardo's  arms,  "On  a  chief  argent  between  two  ann'lets  sable,  a 
boar's  head  proper,"  indicate  Burbage  (Boar-badge) ;  badge 
being  a  ring,  garland,  or  annulet. 


The  following  list  of  managers,  &c.,  will  be  useful  for  reference  : — 

Company.  Managers,  &c. 

Sir  R.  Lane's         ...     Laurence  Button  (1573). 
Sir  R.  Dudley's     ...     James    Burbage,  John   Perkyn,  John    Lan- 
ham,    William  Johnson,    Robert   Wilson 

(1574). 

Earl  Warwick's     ...     Laurence  Dutton,  John  Button  (1576). 
Earl  Barby's  ...     Robert  Brown  (1579). 

Queen's       ...         ...    John  Button,  John  Lanham  (1590). 

Chamberlain's        ...     John    Heminges,    Thomas     Pope    (1597)  ; 

Heminges  alone  (1600). 
Admiral's...  ...     Robert    Shaw,    Thomas    Bownton,    Philip 

Henslow,  William  Allen  (1598). 

Children.  Masters. 

Paul's          Sebastian  Westcott  (to  1586)  ;  Thomas  Giles 

(to  1600)  ;  Edward  Piers. 
Chapel         Richard  Bowyer  (to   1572)  :  John  Honnys 

(to        ?) ;  William  Hunnis. 

Westminster  ...     John  Taylor  (to   1579),  William  Elderton. 

Windsor      ...          ...     Richard  Ferret. 

Merchant  Taylors' . .  v     Richard  Mountcaster. 


THE  END. 


February,  1876. 

A  CATALOGUE  of  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS, 
Published  by  MACMILLAN  and  Co., 
Bedford  Street  ^  Strand^  London. 

CLASSICAL. 

jEschyluS.— -THE  EUMENIDES.  The  Greek  Text,  with  Intro- 
duction,  English  Notes,  and  Verse  Translation.  By  BERNARD 
DRAKE,  M.A.,  late  Fellow  of  King's  College,  Cambridge.  8vo. 
3J.  6d. 

Aristotle.  —  AN    INTRODUCTION    TO    ARISTOTLE'S 

RHETORIC.  With  Analysis,  Notes,  and  Appendices.  By  E. 
M.  COPE,  Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Trinity  Coll.  Cambridge.  8vo.  14^. 

ARISTOTLE  ON  FALLACIES  ;  OR,  THE  SOPHISTICI 
ELENCHI.  With  Translation  and  Notes  by  E.  POSTE,  M.A., 
Fellow  of  Oriel  College,  Oxford.  8vo.  8s.  6d. 

Aristophanes. — THE  BIRDS.  Translated  into  English  Verse, 
with  Introduction,  Notes,  and  Appendices,  by  B.  H.  KENNEDY, 
D.D.,  Regius  Professor  of  Greek  in  the  University  of  Cambridge. 
Crown  8vo.  6s. 

Belcher. — SHORT  EXERCISES  IN  LATIN  PROSE  COM 
POSITION  AND  EXAMINATION  PAPERS  IN  LATIN 
GRAMMAR,  to  which  is  prefixed  a  Chapter  on  Analysis  of 
Sentences.  By  the  Rev.  H.  BELCHER,  M.A.,  Assistant  Master  in 
King's  College  School,  London.  i8mo.  u.  6d.  Key,  is.  6d. 

Blackie.— GREEK  AND  ENGLISH  DIALOGUES  FOR  USE 
IN  SCHOOLS  AND  COLLEGES.  By  JOHN  STUART  BLACKIE, 
Professor  of  Greek  in  the  Univ.  of  Edinburgh.  Second  Edition. 
Fcap.  8vo.  2s.  6d. 

Cicero.  —  THE  SECOND  PHILIPPIC  ORATION,    with 

Introduction  and  Notes.  From  the  German  of  KARL  HALM. 
Edited,  with  Corrections  and  Additions,  by  JOHN  E.  B.  MAYOR. 
M.A.,  Fellow  and  Classical  Lecturer  of  St.  John's  College, 
Cambridge.  Fourth  Edition,  revised.  Fcap.  8vo.  5*. 

THE  ORATIONS  OF  CICERO  AGAINST  CATILINA.      Whh 

Notes  and  an  Introduction.  From  the  German  of  KARL  HALM, 
with  additions  by  A.  S.  WILKINS,  M.A.,  Owens  College,  Man 
chester.  New  Edition.  Fcap.  8vo.  3*.  6J. 


EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 


C  i  cero — continued. 

THE  ACADEMICA  OF  CICERO.  The  Text  revised  and  explained 
by  JAMES  REID,  M.A.,  Assistant  Tutor  and  late  Fellow  of 
Christ's  College,  Cambridge.  Fcap.  8vo.  4*.  6d. 

Demosthenes. — ON  THE  CROWN,  to  which  is  prefixed 

^ESCHINES  AGAINST  CTESIPHON.  The  Greek  Text  with 
English  Notes.  By  B.  DRAKE,  M.A.,  late  Fellow  of  King's 
College,  Cambridge.  Fifth  Edition.  Fcap.  8vo.  $s. 

Ellis.— PRACTICAL  HINTS  ON  THE  QUANTITATIVE 
PRONUNCIATION  OF  LATIN,  for  the  use  of  Classical 
Teachers  and  Linguists.  By  A.  J.  ELLIS,  B.A.,  F.R.S.  Extra 
fcap.  8vo.  45.  6d. 

Goodwin — SYNTAX  OF  THE  MOODS  AND  TENSES  OF 
THE  GREEK  VERB.  By  W.  W.  GOODWIN,  Ph.D.  New 
Edition,  revised.  Crown  8vo.  6s.  6d. 

Greenwood.— THE  ELEMENTS  OF  GREEK  GRAMMAR, 

including  Accidence,  Irregular  Verbs,  and  Principles  of  Derivation 
and  Composition  ;  adapted  to  the  System  of  Crude  Forms.  By 
J.  G.  GREENWOOD,  Principal  of  Owens  College,  Manchester.  Fifth 
Edition.  Crown  8vo.  5-r.  6d. 

Hodgson.— MYTHOLOGY  FOR  LATIN  VERSIFICATION. 
A  brief  Sketch  of  the  Fables  of  the  Ancients,  prepared  to  be 
rendered  into  Latin  Verse  for  Schools.  By  F.  HODGSON,  B.D., 
late  Provost  of  Eton.  New  Edition,  revised  by  F.  C.  HODGSON, 
M.A.  i8mo.  3-r. 

Homer's  Odyssey.— THE  NARRATIVE  OF  ODYSSEUS. 

With  a  Commentary  by  JOHN  E.  B.  MAYOR,  M.A.,  Kennedy 
Professor  of  Latin  at  Cambridge.  Part  I.  Book  IX.— XII.  Fcap. 
8vo.  $s. 

Horace.— THE  WORKS  OF  HORACE,  rendered  into  English 
Prose,  with  Introductions,  Running  Analysis,  and  Notes,  by 
JAMES  LONSDALE,  M.A.,  and  SAMUEL  LEE,  M.A.  Globe  8vo. 
3-r.  6d.  ;  gilt  edges,  4^.  6d. 

THE  ODES  OF  HORACE  IN  A  METRICAL  PARAPHRASE. 
By  R.  M.  HOVENDEN,  B.A.,  formerly  of  Trinity  College,  Cam 
bridge.  Extra  fcap.  8vo.  4^.  6d. 

Jackson. — FIRST  STEPS  TO  GREEK  PROSE  COMPOSI 
TION.  By  BLOMFIELD  JACKSON,  M.A.  Assistant-Master  in 
King's  College  School,  London.  i8mo.  .  is.  6d. 

Juvenal.— THIRTEEN  SATIRES  OF  JUVENAL,    with  a 

Commentary.     By  JOHN  E.  B.  MAYOR,  M.  A.,  Kennedy  Professor 
of  Latin  at  Cambridge.   Second  Edition,  enlarged.    Vol.  I.  Crown 
8vo.     Js.  6d.     Or  Parts  I.  and  II.     Crown  8vo.     3$.  6d.  each. 
"  A   painstaking  and  critical  edition."" — SPECTATOR. 


CLASSICAL. 


Marshall.— A  TABLE  OF  IRREGULAR  GREEK  VERBS 

classified  according  to  the  arrangement  of  Cur  tins'  Greek  Grammar' 
By  J.  M.  MARSHALL,  M.  A. ,  Fellow  and  late  Lecturer  of  Brasenose 
College,  Oxford  ;  one  of  the  Masters  in  Clifton  College.  8vo. 
cloth.  New  Edition,  is. 

Mayor  (John  E.  B.)— FIRST  GREEK  READER.  Edited 
after  KARL  HALM,  with  Corrections  and  large  Additions  by  JOHN 
E.  B.  MAYOR,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  Classical  Lecturer  of  St.  John's 
College,  Cambridge.  New  Edition,  revised.  Fcap.  8vo.  4*.  6d. 

Mayor  (John  E.  B.)— BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  CLUE  TO 

LATIN    LITERATURE.      Edited  after   HiiBNER,   with  Large 
Additions  by  Professor  JOHN  E.  B.  MAYOR.     Crown  8vo.  6s.  6d. 
"An   extremely  useful  volume  that  should  be  in  the  hands  of  all 
scholars. " — ATHENAEUM. 

Mayor  (Joseph  B.)— GREEK  FOR  BEGINNERS.   By  the 

Rev.  J.  B.  MAYOR,  M.A.,  Professor  of  Classical  Literature  in 
King's  College,  London.  Part  I.,  with  Vocabulary,  is.  6d.  Parts 
II.  and  III.,  with  Vocabulary  and  Index,  3^.  6d.,  complete  in  one 
vol.  New  Edition.  Fcap.  8vo.  cloth,  4^.  6d. 

Nixon. — PARALLEL  EXTRACTS  arranged  for  translation  into 
English  and  Latin,  with  Notes  on  Idioms.  By  J.  E.  NIXON, 
M.A.,  Classical  Lecturer,  King's  College,  London.  Part  I. — 
Historical  and  Epistolary.  Crown  8vo.  3*.  6^. 

Peile  (John,  M.A,)— AN  INTRODUCTION  TO  GREEK 

AND  LATIN  ETYMOLOGY.  By  JOHN  PEILE,  M.  A.,  Fellow 
and  Tutor  of  Christ's  College,  Cambridge,  formerly  Teacher 
of  Sanskrit  in  the  University  of  Cambridge.  Third  and  Revised 
Edition.  Crown  8vo.  los.  6d. 

"A  very  valuable  contribution  to  the  science  of  language" — SATURDAY 
REVIEW. 

PlatO.— THE  REPUBLIC  OF  PLATO ,  Translated  into  English, 
with  an  Analysis  and  Notes,  by  J.  LL.  DAVIES,  M.A.,  and  D.  J. 
VAUGHAN,  M.A.  Third  Edition,  with  Vignette  Portraits  of  Plato 
and  Socrates,  engraved  by  JEENS  from  an  Antique  Gem.  iSrno. 
4J.  6d. 

PlautUS.— THE  MOSTELLARIA  OF  PLAUTUS.  With  Notes 
Prolegomena,  and  Excursus.  By  WILLIAM  RAMSAY,  M.A.,  for- 
merly  Professor  of  Humanity  in  the  University  of  Glasgow. 
Edited  by  Professor  GEORGE  G.  RAMSAY,  M.A.,  of  the  University 
of  Glasgow.  8vo.  14^. 

"  The  fruits  of  that  exhaustive  research  and  that  ripe  and  well-digested 
scholarship  which  its  author  brought  to  bear  upon  everything  that  ht 
undertook  arc  visible  throughout."—?^  MALL  GAZETTF. 


A  2 


EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 


Potts,   Alex.    W.,   M.A. — HINTS  TOWARDS  LATIN 

PROSE  COMPOSITION.  By  ALEX.  W.  POTTS,  M.A.,  late 
Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge  ;  Assistant  Master  in 
Rugby  School ;  and  Head  Master  of  the  Fettes  College,  Edinburgh. 
New  Edition,  enlarged.  Extra  fcap.  8vo.  cloth.  35-. 

Roby A  GRAMMAR  OF  THE  LATIN  LANGUAGE,  from 

Plautus  to  Suetonius.      By  H.  J.  ROBY,  M.A.,  late  Fellow  of  St. 

John's  College,   Cambridge.     In  Two  Parts.       Second   Edition. 

Part  I.   containing  : — Book  I.    Sounds.       Book    II.   Inflexions. 

Book  III.  Word-formation.     Appendices.     Crown  8vo.     8s.  6d. 

Part  II. — Syntax,  Prepositions,  &c.     Crown  8vo.     los.  6d. 
lt  Marked  by  the  clear  and  practised  insight  of  a  master  in  his  art.     A 
book  that  would  do  honour  to  any  country." — ATHENAEUM. 

Rust. — FIRST  STEPS  TO  LATIN  PROSE  COMPOSITION. 
By  the  Rev.  G.  RUST,  M.A.  of  Pembroke  College,  Oxford, 
Master  of  the  Lower  School,  King's  College,  London.  New 
Edition.  i8mo.  is.  6d. 

Sallust.— CAII  SALLUSTII  CRISPI  CATILINA  ET  JUGUR- 
THA.     For    Use    in    Schools.      With  copious    Notes.     By   C. 
MERIVALE,  B.D.     New  Edition,  carefully  revised  and  enlarged. 
Fcap.  8vo.     4-y.  6d.     Or  separately,  2s.  6d.  each. 
"  A  very  good  edition,  to  whtih  the  Editor  has  not  only  brought  scholar 
ship  but  independent  judgment  and  historical  criticism." — SPECTATOR. 

Tacitus.— THE   HISTORY   OF  TACITUS    TRANSLATED 
INTO  ENGLISH.      By  A.   J.   CHURCH,   M.A.,   and  W.  J. 
BRODRIBB,  M.A.    With  Notes  and  a  Map.     New  and  Cheaper 
Edition.     Crown  8vo.     6s. 
"A  scholarly  and  faithful  translation  " — SPECTATOR. 

TACITUS,  THE  AGRICOLA  AND  GERMANIA  OF.  A  Revised 

Text,   English  Notes,    and  Maps.     By  A.  J.  CHURCH,  M.A., 

and  W.  J.  BRODRIBB,  M.A.    New  Edition.  Fcap.  8vo.      3^.  6d. 

Or  separately,  2s.  each. 

"  A  model  of  careful  editing,  being  at  once  compact,  complete,  and 

correct,  as  well  as  neatly  printed  and  elegant  in  style" — ATHENAEUM. 

TACITUS.— THE  ANNALS.  Translated,  with  Notes  and  Maps,  by 
A.  J.  CHURCH  and  W.  J.  BRODRIBB.  Crown  8vo.  js.  6d. 

THE  AGRICOLA  AND  GERMANIA.  Translated  into  English 
by  A.  J.  CHURCH,  M.A.,  and  W.  J.  BRODRIBB,  M.A.  With 
Maps  and  Notes.  Extra  fcap.  9vo.  2s.  6d, 

"At  once  readable  and  exact ;  may  be  perused  with  pleasure  by  all,  and 
consulted  with  advantage  by  the  classical  student." — ATHEN^UM. 

TheophrastUS.  —  THE  CHARACTERS  OF  THEO- 
PHRASTUS.  An  English  Translation  from  a  Revised  Text. 


CLASSICAL. 


fn  I.ntr°duTcTtlSn  and  Notes.  By  R.  C.  JEBB,  M.A.,  Public 
Orator  m  the  University  of  Cambridge,  and  Professor  of  Greek  in 
the  University  of  Glasgow.  Extra  fJap.  8vo.  6,.  6d. 

h,™  hZ*?   f?t  a?d  SCh°larly  edUion  °f  a  work  which  m  *™  *** 
been  beset  with  hindrances  and  difficulties,  but  which  Mr.  JebVs  critical 

skill  and  judgment  have  at  length  placed -within  the  grasp  and  compre- 
henswn  of  ordinary  readers.  "—SATURDAY  REVIEW. 

Thnng._works  by  the  Rev.  E.  THRING,  M.A.,  Head  Master 
of  Uppmgham  School. 

A  LATIN  GRADUAL.  A  First  Latin  Construing  Book  for 
beginners.  New  Edition,  enlarged, with  Coloured  Sentence  Maps, 
reap.  8vo.  2s.  6d. 

A  MANUAL  OF  MOOD  CONSTRUCTIONS.    Fcap.  8vo.  u  &/ 

A  CONSTRUING  BOOK.     Fcap.  8vo.     2s.  f>d. 

Thucydides.— THE  SICILIAN"  EXPEDITION.    Being  Books 

VI.  and  VII.  of  Thucydides,  with  Notes.    New  Edition,  revised 

and  enlarged,  with  Map.    By  the  Rev.  PERCIVAL  FROST,  M.A., 

late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge.    Fcap.  8vo.    5.?. 

"  The  notes  are  excellent  of  their  kind.     Mr.  Frost  seldom  passes 

over  a  difficulty,   and  what  he  says  is  always  to  the  A?/«£"— EDU 
CATIONAL  TIMES. 

Virgil. — THE    WORKS     OF    VIRGIL    RENDERED    INTO 

ENGLISH  PROSE,  with  Notes,  Introductions,  Running  Analysis, 

and  an  Index,  by  JAMES  LONSDALE,  M.A.  and  SAMUEL  LEE, 

M.A.     Second  Edition.     Globe  8vo.     3^.  6d.  ;  gilt  edges,  4^.  bd. 

"  A  more  complete  edition  of  Virgil  in  English  it  is  scarcely  possible  to 

conceive  than  the  scholarly  work  before  us." — GLOBE. 

Wright.— Works  by  J.  WRIGHT,  M.A.,  late  Head  Master  of 
Sutton  Coldfield  School. 

HELLENICA  ;  OR,  A  HISTORY  OF  GREECE  IN  GREEK,  as 
related  by  Diodorus  and  Thucydides ;  being  a  First  Greek  Reading 
Book,   with  explanatory  Notes,   Critical  and  Historical.     Third 
Edition,  with  a  Vocabulary.     I2mo.    3*.  6d. 
"A  good  plan  well  executed''' — GUARDIAN. 

A  HELP  TO  LATIN  GRAMMAR  ;  or,  The  Form  and  Use  of  Words 
in  Latin,  with  Progressive  Exercises.  Crown  8vo.  4^.  6d. 

THE  SEVEN  KINGS  OF  ROME.     An  Easy  Narrative,  abridged 
from  the  First  Book  of  Livy  by  the  omission  of  Difficult  Passages  ; 
being  a  First  Latin  Reading    Book,  with  Grammatical  Notes 
Fifth  Edition.     Fcap.  8vo.  3-r.      With  Vocabulary,  3*.  6d. 
"  The  Notes  are  abundant,  explicit,  and  full  of  such  grammatical  and 

other  information  as  boys  require" — ATHENAEUM. 

FIRST  LATIN  STEPS;  OR,  AN  INTRODUCTION  BY  A 
SERIES  OF  EXAMPLES  TO  THE  STUDY  OF  THE 
LATIN  LANGUAGE.  Crown  8vo.  5*. 

ATTIC  PRIMER.  Arranged  for  the  Use  of  Beginners.  Extra  fcap. 
8vo.  4J-.  6d. 


EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 


MATHEMATICS. 

Airy.— Works  by  SIR  G.  B.  AIRY,  K.C.B.,  Astronomer  Royal  :— 
ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  PARTIAL  DIFFERENTIAL 
EQUATIONS.     Designed  for  the  Use  of  Students  in  the  Univer 
sities.      With    Diagrams.      New    Edition.      Crown    8vo.    cloth. 
5-y.  6d. 

ON  THE  ALGEBRAICAL  AND  NUMERICAL  THEORY  OF 
ERRORS  OF  OBSERVATIONS  AND  THE  COMBINA 
TION  OF  OBSERVATIONS.  New  edition,  revised.  Crown 
8vo.  cloth.  6s.  6d. 

UNDULATORY  THE9RY  OF  OPTICS.  Designed  for  the  Use  oi 
Students  in  the  University.  New  Edition.  Crown  8vo.  cloth. 
6s.  6d. 

ON  SOUND  AND  ATMOSPHERIC  VIBRATIONS.  With  the 
Mathematical  Elements  of  Music.  Designed  for  the  Use  of  Students 
of  the  University.  Second  Edition,  Revised  and  Enlarged. 
Crown  8vo.  gs. 

A  TREATISE  OF  MAGNETISM.  Designed  for  the  use  of 
Students  in  the  University.  Crown  8vo.  gs.  6d. 

Airy  (Osmund) A    TREATISE    ON    GEOMETRICAL 

OPTICS.     Adapted  for  the  use  of  the  Higher  Classes  in  Schools. 
By  OSMUND  AIRY,  B.A.,  one  of  the  Mathematical  Masters  in 
Wellington  College.     Extra  fcap.  8vo.     3-y.  6d. 
"  Carefttlly  and  lucidly  written^  and  rendered  as  simple  as  possible  by 

the  use  in  all  cases  of  the  most  elementary  form  of  investigation. " — 

ATHENAEUM. 

Bayma.— THE  ELEMENTS  OF  MOLECULAR  MECHA- 
NICS.  By  JOSEPH  BAYMA,  S.  J.,  Professor  of  Philosophy, 
Stonyhurst  College.  Demy  8vo.  cloth.  los.  6d. 

Beasley. — AN   ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON   PLANE 

TRIGONOMETRY.  With  Examples.  By  R.  D.  BEASLEY, 
M.A.,  Head  Master  of  Grantham  Grammar  School.  Fourth 
Edition,  revised  and  enlarged.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  3-r.  6d. 

Blackburn  (Hugh).— ELEMENTS  OF  PLANE 

TRIGONOMETRY,  for  the  use  of  the  Junior  Class  of  Mathematics 
in  the  University  of  Glasgow.  By  HUGH  BLACKBURN,  M.A., 
Professor  of  Mathematics  in  the  University  of  Glasgow.  Globe 
8vo.  is.  6d. 

Boole. — Works  by  G.  BOOLE,  D.C.L.,  F.R.S.,  late  Professor  of 
Mathematics  in  the  Oueen's  University,  Ireland. 


MATHEMATICS. 


B  o  ole — continued. 

A  TREATISE  ON  DIFFERENTIAL  EQUATIONS.  New  and 
Revised  Edition.  Edited  by  I.  TODHUNTER.  Crown  8vo.  cloth. 
I4J. 

"A  treatise  incomparably^  superior  to  any  other  elementary  book  on 
the  same  subject  with  which  we  are  acquainted.'" — PHILOSOPHICAL 
MAGAZINE. 

A  TREATISE  ON  DIFFERENTIAL  EQUATIONS.      Supple- 
mentary  Volume.     Edited  by  I.  TODHUNTER.     Crown  8vo.  cloth. 
Ss .  6d. 
This  volume  contains  all  that  Professor  Booh  wrote  for  the  purpose  oj 

enlarging  his  treatise  on  Differential  Equations. 

THE  CALCULUS  OF  FINITE  DIFFERENCES.     Crown  8vo. 

cloth.     IDS.  6d.     New  Edition,  revised  by  J.  F.  MOULTON. 
"As  an  original  book  by  one  of   the  first  mathematicians    of  the 
age^  it  is  out  of  all  comparison   with  the  mere  second-hand  compilations 
which  have  hitherto  been  alone  accessible  to  the  student" — PHILOSOPHICAL 
MAGAZINE. 

Brook -Smith    (J.) — ARITHMETIC  IN  THEORY  AND 

PRACTICE.  By  J.  BROOK-SMITH,  M.A.,  LL.B.,  St  John's 
College,  Cambridge;  Barrister-at-Law ;  one  of  the  Masters  of 
Cheltenham  College.  New  Edition,  revised.  Complete,  Crown 
8vo.  4s.  6d.  Part  I.  3-r.  6d. 

"  A  valuable  Manual  of  Arithmetic  of  the  Scientific  kind.  The  best 
we  have  seen. "—LITERARY  CHURCHMAN.  "An  essentially  practical 
book,  providing  very  definite  help  to  candidates  for  almost  every  kind 
of  competitive  examination"  -BRITISH  QUARTERLY. 

Cambridge  Senate-House  Problems  and  Riders, 

WITH  SOLUTIONS  :— 

1848-1851.— RIDERS.     By  JAMESON.    8vo.  cloth.     ^.6d. 

1857.  —  PROBLEMS    AND    RIDERS.       By    CAMPION    and 

WALTON.     8vo.  cloth.     Ss.  6d. 
1864.— PROBLEMS  AND  RIDERS.     By  WALTON  and  WIL- 

KINSON.     8vo.  cloth.     ioj.  6d. 

CAMBRIDGE  COURSE  OF  ELEMENTARY  NATURAL 
PHILOSOPHY,  for  the  Degree  of  B.A.  Originally  compiled  by 
J.  C.  SNOWBALL,  M.A.,  late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  College. 
Fifth  Edition,  revised  and  enlarged,  and  adapted  for  tl 
Class  Examinations  by  THOMAS  LUND,  B.D.,  Late  Fellow  and 
Lecturer  of  St.  John's  College,  Editor  of  Wood's  Algebra,  *€. 
Crown  8vo.  cloth.  5-r. 

Candler.— HELP  TO  ARITHMETIC.     Designed  for  the  use  of 
Schools.      By    H.    CANDLER,   M.A.,    Mathematical    Master    ( 
Uppingham  School.    Extra  fcap.  8vo.     2s.  6d. 


8  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Cheyne.— Works  by  C.  H.  H.  CHEYNE,  M.A.,  F.R.A.S. 

AN    ELEMENTARY    TREATISE    ON    THE    PLANETARY 

THEORY.     With  a   Collection  of  Problems.     Second  Edition. 

Crown  8vo.  cloth.     6s.  6d. 

THE  EARTH'S  MOTION  OF  ROTATION.  Crown  8vo. 
y.  f>d. 

Childe.— THE  SINGULAR  PROPERTIES  OF  THE  ELLIP 
SOID  AND  ASSOCIATED  SURFACES  OF  THE  NTH 
DEGREE.  By  the  Rev.  G.  F.  CHILDE,  M.A.,  Author  of 
t(  Ray  Surfaces,"  "  Related  Caustics,"  &c.  8vo.  icxr.  6d. 

Christie.— A  COLLECTION  OF  ELEMENTARY  TEST- 
QUESTIONS  IN  PURE  AND  MIXED  MATHEMATICS  ; 

with  Answers  and  Appendices  on  Synthetic  Division,  and  on  the 
Solution  of  Numerical  Equations  by  Homer's  Method.  By  JAMES 
R.  CHRISTIE,  F.R.S.,  late  First  Mathematical  Master  at  the 
Royal  Military  Academy,  Woolwich.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  Ss.  6d. 

Cuthbertson — EUCLIDIAN    GEOMETRY.      By  FRANCIS 

CUTHBERTSON,  M.A.,  LL.D.,  late  Fellow  of  Corpus  Christ! 
College,  Cambridge  ;  and  Head  Mathematical  Master  of  the  City 
of  London  School.  Extra  fcap.  8vo.  $s.  6d. 

Dalton. — Works  by  the  Rev.  T.  DALTON,  M.A.,  Assistant 
Master  of  Eton  College. 

RULES  AND  EXAMPLES  IN  ARITHMETIC.  New  Edition. 
i8mo.  cloth.  2s.  6d.  Answers  to  the  Examples  are  appended. 

RULES  AND  EXAMPLES  IN  ALGEBRA.     Parti.     i8mo.     2s. 

This  work  is  prepared  on  the  same  plan  as  the  Arithmetic. 

Day. —  PROPERTIES  OF  CONIC  SECTIONS  PROVED 
GEOMETRICALLY.  PART  I.,  THE  ELLIPSE,  with 
Problems.  By  the  Rev.  H.  G.  DAY,  M.A.,  Head  Master  of 
Sedburgh  Grammar  School.  Crown  8vo.  3^.  6d. 

Dodgson.— AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  DETER- 

MINANTS,  with  their  Application  to  Simultaneous  Linear 
Equations  and  Algebraical  Geometry.  By  CHARLES  L.  DODGSON, 
M.A.,  Student  and  Mathematical  Lecturer  of  Christ  Church, 
Oxford.  Small  4to.  cloth,  icxr.  6d. 

"  A  -valuable  addition  to  the  treatises  we  possess  on  Modern  Algebra" 
— EDUCATIONAL  TIMES. 

Drew.— GEOMETRICAL  TREATISE  ON  CONIC  SEC- 
TIONS.  By  W.  H.  DREW,  M.  A.,  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge. 
Filth  Edition,  enlarged.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  5^ 

SOLUTIONS  TO  THE  PROBLEMS  IN  DREW'S  CONIC 
SECTIONS.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  4*.  far. 


MA  THEM  A  TJCS. 


Edgar  (J.  H.)  and  Pritchard  (G.  S.)— NOTE-BOOK  ON 

PRACTICAL  SOLID  OR  DESCRIPTIVE  GEOMETRY. 
Containing  Problems  with  help  for  Solutions.  By  J.  H.  EDGAR, 
M.A.,  Lecturer  on  Mechanical  Drawing  at  the  Royal  School  of 
Mines,  and  G.  S.  PRITCHARD,  late  Master  for  Descriptive 
Geometry,  Royal  Military  Academy,  Woolwich.  Third  Edition, 
revised  and  enlarged.  Globe  8vo.  3-r. 

Ferrers.— AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  TRILINEAR 
CO-ORDINATES,  the  Method  of  Reciprocal  Polars,  and  the 
Theory  of  Projectors.  By  the  Rev.  N.  M.  FERRERS,  M.  A.,  Fellow 
and  Tutor  of  Gonville  and  Caius  College,  Cambridge.  Third 
Edition.  Crown  8vo.  6s.  6d. 

FrOSt. — Works  by  PERCIVAL  FROST,  M.A.,  formerly  Fellow 
of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge;  Mathematical  Lecturer  of 
King's  College. 

AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  CURVE  TRACING.  By 
PERCIVAL  FROST,  M.A.  8vo.  I2J. 

THE  FIRST  THREE  SECTIONS  OF  NEWTON'S  PRINCIPIA. 
With  Notes  and  Illustrations.  Also  a  collection  of  Problems, 
principally  intended  as  Examples  of  Newton's  Methods.  By 
PERCIVAL  FROST,  M.A.  Second  Edition.  8vo.  cloth.  IDS.  6d. 

Frost.— SOLID  GEOMETRY.  By  PERCIVAL  FROST,  M.A. 
A  New  Edition,  revised  and  enlarged,  of  the  Treatise  by  FROST 
and  WOLSTENHOLME.  In  2  Vols.  Vol.  I.  8vo.  i6s. 

Godf ray  .—Works  by  HUGH  GODFRAY,  M.A.,  Mathematical 

Lecturer  at  Pembroke  College,  Cambridge. 
A   TREATISE  ON   ASTRONOMY,  for  the  Use  of  Colleges  and 

Schools.     New  Edition.     8vo.  cloth.     I2.r.  6d. 
AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  THE  LUNAR  THEORY, 

with  a  Brief  Sketch  of  the  Problem  up  to  the  time  of  Newton. 

Second  Edition,  revised.      Crown  8vo.  cloth.     $s.  6d. 

Hemming.— AN   ELEMENTARY  TREATISE   ON   THE 

DIFFERENTIAL  AND  INTEGRAL  CALCULUS,  for  the 
Use4  of  Colleges  and  Schools.  By  G.  W.  HEMMING,  M.A., 
Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge.  Second  Edition,  with 
Corrections  and  Additions.  8vo.  cloth,  ys. 

Jackson. — GEOMETRICAL  CONIC  SECTIONS.  An  Eiemen- 

tary  Treatise  in  which  the  Conic  Sections  are  denned  as  the  Plane 
Sections  of  a  Cone,  and  treated  by  the  Method  of  Projection. 
By  J.  STUART  JACKSON,  M.A.,  late  Fellow  of  Gonville  and  Caius 
College,  Cambridge.  4*-  &d. 

Jellet  (John  H.)— A  TREATISE  ON  THE  THEORY  OF 

FRICTION.  By  JOHN  H.  JELLET,  B.D.,  Senior  Fellow  of 
Trinity  College,  Dublin ;  President  of  the  Royal  Irish  Academy. 
8vo.  8s.  6d. 


io  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Jones  and  Cheyne.— ALGEBRAICAL  EXERCISES,  Pro 
gressively  arranged.  By  the  Rev.  C.  A.  JONES,  M.A.,  and  C.  H. 
CHEYNE,  M.A.,  F.R.A.S.,  Mathematical  Masters  of  Westminster 
School.  New  Edition.  i8mo.  cloth.  2s.  6d. 

Kelland  and  Tait.  —  INTRODUCTION  TO  QUATER 
NIONS,  with  numerous  examples.  By  P.  KELLAND,  M.A., 
F.R.S.,  formerly  Fellow  of  Queen's  College,  Cambridge;  and 
P.  G.  TAIT,  M.A.,  formerly  Fellow  of  St.  Peter's  College,  Cam 
bridge;  Professors  in  the  department  of  Mathematics  in  the 
University  of  Edinburgh.  Crown  8vo.  7*.  6d. 

Kitchener — A  GEOMETRICAL   NOTE-BOOK,  containing 

Easy  Problems  in  Geometrical  Drawing  preparatory  to  the  Study 
of  Geometry.  For  the  Use  of  Schools.  By  F.  E.  KITCHENER, 
M.  A.,  Mathematical  Master  at  Rugby.  New  Edition.  410.  2s. 

Morgan.— A  COLLECTION  OF  PROBLEMS  AND  EXAM- 
PLES  IN  MATHEMATICS.  With  Answers.  By  H.  A. 
MORGAN,  M.A.,  Sadlerian  and  Mathematical  Lecturer  of  Jesus 
College,  Cambridge.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  6s.  6d. 

Newton's  PRINCIPl  A.     Edited  by  Professor  Sir  W.  THOMSON 

and  Professor  BLACKBURN.     410.  cloth.     31;.  6</. 
"  Undoubtedly  the  finest  edition  of  the  text  of  the  ( Prindpia  '  which  has 

hitherto  appeared. " — EDUCATIONAL  TIMES. 

Parkinson.— Works  by  S.  PARKINSON,  D.D.,  F.R.S.,  Tutor  and 
Praelector  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge. 

AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  MECHANICS.  For  the 
Use  of  the  Junior  Classes  at  the  University  and  the  Higher  Classes 
in  Schools.  With  a  Collection  of  Examples.  Fifth  edition,  revised. 
Crown  8vo.  cloth.  ys.  6d. 

A  TREATISE  ON-  OPTICS.  Third  Edition,  revised  and  enlarged. 
Crown  8vo.  cloth.  IDS.  6d. 

Phear.— ELEMENTARY  HYDROSTATICS.  With  Numerous 
Examples.  By  J.  B.  PHEAR,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  late  Assistant 
Tutor  of  Clare  College,  Cambridge.  Fourth  Edition.  Crown 
8vo.  cloth.  5_y.  6d. 

Pirie. — LESSONS  ON  RIGID  DYNAMICS.    By  the  Rev.  G. 

PIRIE,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Queen's  College,  Cambridge. 
Crown  8vo.  6s. 

Pratt.— A  TREATISE  ON  ATTRACTIONS,  LAPLACE'S 
FUNCTIONS,  AND  THE  FIGURE  OF  THE  EARTH. 
By  JOHN  H.  PRATT,  M.A.,  Archdeacon  of  Calcutta,  Author  of 
'  *  The  Mathematical  Principles  of  Mechanical  Philosophy. "  Fourth 
Edition.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  6s.  6d. 

Puckle.— AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  CONIC  SEC- 
TIONS  AND  ALGEBRAIC  GEOMETRY.  With  Numerous 
Examples  and  Hints  for  their  Solution  ;  especially  designed  for  the 
Use  of  Beginners.  By  G.  H.  PUCKLE,  M.A.  New  Edition, 
revised  and  enlarged.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  Js.  6d. 


MATHEMATICS.  T1 


Rawlmson.— ELEMENTARY  STATICS,  by  the  Rev.  GEORGE 
RAWLINSON,  M.  A.   Edited  by  the  Rev.  EDWARD  STURGES,M.A 
of  Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge,  and  late  Professor  of  the  Applied 
Sciences,  Elphinstone  College,  Bombay.    Crown  8vo.  cloth.    4*.  6d. 

Reynolds.— MODERN    METHODS    IN    ELEMENTARY 

GEOMETRY.  By  E.  M.  REYNOLDS,  M.A.,  Mathematical 
Master  in  Clifton  College.  Crown  8vo.  3*.  6d. 
Routh. — AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  THE  DYNA- 
MICS  OF  THE  SYSTEM  OF  RIGID  BODIES.  With 
Numerous  Examples.  By  EDWARD  JOHN  ROUTH,  M.A.,  late 
Fellow  and  Assistant  Tutor  of  St.  Peter's  College,  Cambridge; 
Examiner  in  the  University  of  London.  Second  Edition,  enlarged. 
Crown  8vo.  clbth.  14*. 

WORKS 
By    the    REV.  BARNARD    SMITH,    M.A., 

Rector  of  Glaston^  Rutland,  late  Fellow  and  Senior  Bursar 

of  St.*  Peter's  College,  Cambridge. 

ARITHMETIC  AND   ALGEBRA,    in  their  Principles  and  Appli 
cation  ;   with  numerous  systematically  arranged  Examples  taken 
from  the  Cambridge  Examination  Papers,  with  especial  reference 
to  the  Ordinary  Examination  for  the  B.A.  Degree.      Thirteenth 
Edition,  carefully  revised.     Crown  8vo.  cloth,     los.  6d. 
"To  all  those  whose  minds  are  sufficiently  developed  to  comprehend  the 
simplest   mathematical  reasoning,   and  who  have   not  yet   thoroughly 
mastered  the  principles  of  Arithmetic  and  Algebra,  it  is  calcidatcd  to 
be  of  great  advantage" — ATHEN^UM.     "Mr.  Smith's  work  is  a  most 
useful  publication.       The  rules  are  stated  with  great  clearness.       The 
examples  are  well  selected,  and  worked  out  with  just  sufficient  detail, 
without  being  encumbered  by  too  minute  explanations  :  and  there  prevails 
throughout  it  that  just  proportion  of  theory  and  practice  which  is  tkt 
crowning  excellence  of  an  elementary  work."  — DEAN  PEACOCK. 
ARITHMETIC    FOR    SCHOOLS.      New   Edition.      Crown  8vo. 
cloth.     4J.  6d.     Adapted  from  the  Author's  work  on  "  Arithmetic 
and  Algebra." 

"Admirably  adapted  for  instruction,  combining  just  sufficient  theory 
with  a  large  and  well-selected  collection    of  exercises  for  practice" — 
JOURNAL  OF  EDUCATION. 
A   KEY    TO    THE    ARITHMETIC    FOR    SCHOOLS.      Tenth 

Edition.     Crown  8vo.  cloth.     Ss.  6d. 
EXERCISES   IN  ARITHMETIC.      With  Answers.      Crown  8vo. 

limp  cloth,     zs.  6d. 

Or  sold  separately,  Part  I.  \s.  ;  Part  II.  is.;  Answers,  6d. 
SCHOOL  CLASS-BOOK  OF  ARITHMETIC.     i8mo.  cloth.     3*. 
'    Or  sold  separately,  Parts  I.  and  II.  lod.  each;  Part  III.  is. 
KEYS  TO  SCHOOL  CLASS-BOOK  OF  ARITHMETIC.     Com- 
plete  in  one  volume,   i8mo.  cloth,  6s.  6d.;  or  Parts  I.,  II.,  and 
III.,  2s.  6d.  each. 


12  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Barnard  Smith — continued. 

SHILLING  BOOK  OF  ARITHMETIC  FOR  NATIONAL  AND 
ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS.  i8mo.  cloth.  Or  separately, 
Part  I.  2d.  j  Part  II.  3^.;  Part  III.  7^.  Answers,  6d 

THE  SAME,  with  Answers  complete.     i8mo.  cloth,     is.  6d. 

KEY  TO  SHILLING  BOOK  OF  ARITHMETIC.  i8mo.  cloth. 
4*.  6d. 

EXAMINATION  PAPERS  IN  ARITHMETIC.  i8mo.  cloth. 
is.  6d.  The  same,  with  Answers,  i8mo.  is.  yd. 

KEY    TO     EXAMINATION     PAPERS     IN     ARITHMETIC. 

l8mo.  cloth.     4-f.  6d. 
THE  METRIC  SYSTEM  OF  ARITHMETIC,  ITS  PRINCIPLES 

AND    APPLICATION,    with     numerous     Examples,     written 

expressly  for  Standard  V.  in  National  Schools.     Fourth  Edition. 

i8mo.    cloth,  sewed.     3^. 
A  CHART  OF  THE  METRIC   SYSTEM,  on  a  Sheet,  size  42  in. 

by  34  in.  on  Roller,  mounted  and  varnished,  price  3-r.  6d.     Fourth 

Edition. 

"  We  do  not  remember  that  ever  we  have  seen  teaching  by  a  chart  more 
happily  carried  out." — SCHOOL  BOARD  CHRONICLE. 

Also  a  Small  Chart  on  a  Card,  price  id. 
EASY    LESSONS    IN    ARITHMETIC,    combining    Exercises    in 

Reading,  Writing,  Spelling,  and  Dictation.     Part  I.  for  Standard 

I.  in  National  Schools.     Crown  8vo.     gd. 
Diagrams  for  School-room  walls  in  preparation. 

* '  We  should  strongly  advise  everyone  to  study  carefully  Mr.  Barnard 
Smith's  Lessons  in  Arithmetic,  Writing  and  Spelling.  A  more  excel 
lent  little  work  for  a  first  introduction  to  knowledge  cannot  well  be 
written.  Mr.  Smith's  larger  Text-books  on  Arithmetic  and  Algebra  are 
already  most  favourably  known,  and  he  has  proved  now  that  the  difficulty 
of  writing  a  text-book  which  begins  ab  ovo  is  really  surmountable  ;  but  we 
shall  be  much  mistaken  if  this  little  book  has  not  cost  its  author  more 
thought  and  mental  labour  than  any  of  his  more  elaborate  text-books. 
The  plan  to  combine  arithmetical  lessons  with  those  in  reading  and  spelling 
is  perfectly  novel,  and  it  is  worked  out  in  accordance  with  the  aims  of  our 
National  Schools  ;  and  we"*are  convinced  that  its  general  introduction  in 
all  elementary  schools  throughout  the  country  will  produce  great  educa 
tional  advantages" — WESTMINSTER  REVIEW. 
EXAMINATION  CARDS  IN  ARITHMETIC.  (Dedicated  to  Lord 

Sandon).     With  Answers  and  Hints. 

Standards  I.  and  II.  in  box,  is.  6d.     Standards  III.  IV.  and  V.  in 

boxes,  is.  6d.  each.     Standard  VI.  in  Two  Parts,  in  boxes,  is.  6d. 

each. 

A  and  B  papers,  of  nearly  the  same  difficulty,  are  given  so  as  to' 
prevent  copying,  and  the  Colours  of  the  A  and  B  papers  differ  in  each 
Standard,  and  from  those  of  every  other  Standard,  so  that  a  master  or 
mistress  can  see  at  a  glance  whether  the  children  have  the  proper  papers. 


MATHEMATICS.  13 

Snowball.— THE  ELEMENTS  OF  PLANE  AND  SPHERI 
CAL  TRIGONOMETRY;  with  the  Construction  and  Use  of 
Tables  of  Logarithms.  By  J.  C.  SNOWBALL,  M.A.  Tenth  Edition. 
Crown  8vo.  cloth.  7^.  6d. 

SYLLABUS  OF  PLANE  GEOMETRY  (corresponding  to  Euclid, 
Books  I. — VI.)  Prepared  by  the  Association  for  the  Improvement 
of  Geometrical  Teaching.  Crown  8vo.  is. 

Tait  and  Steele.— A  TREATISE  ON  DYNAMICS  OF  A 

PARTICLE.  With  numerous  Examples.  By  Professor  TAIT  and 
Mr.  STEELE.  New  Edition,  enlarged.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  IDS.  6d. 

Tebay. — ELEMENTARY  MENSURATION  FOR  SCHOOLS. 

With  numerous  Examples.  By  SEPTIMUS  TEBAY,  B.A.,  Head 
Master  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  Grammar  School,  Rivington.  Extra 
fcap.  8vo.  3-r.  6d. 

WORKS 
By  I.  TODHUNTER,  M.A.,  F.R.S., 

Of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge. ' 

"  Mr.  Todhunter  is  chiefly  known  to  students  of  Mathematics  as  the 
author  of  a  series  of  admirable  mathematical  text-books,  which  possess  the 
rare  qualities  of  being  clear  in  style  and  absolutely  free  from  mistakes, 
typographical  or  other."— SATURDAY  REVIEW. 
THE  ELEMENTS   OF  EUCLID.     For  the  Use  01  Colleges  and 

Schools.     New  Edition.     i8mo.  cloth.     3*.  6d. 
MENSURATION  FOR  BEGINNERS.    With  numerous  Examples. 

New  Edition.     i8mo.  cloth.     2s.  6d. 
ALGEBRA  FOR  BEGINNERS.    With  numerous  Examples.*    New 

Edition.     i8mo.  cloth.    2s.  6d. 
KEY  TO  ALGEBRA  FOR  BEGINNERS.      Crown  8vo.   cloth. 

6s.  6d. 
TRIGONOMETRY  FOR  BEGINNERS.  With  numerous  Examples. 

New  Edition.     i8mo.  cloth.     2s.  6d. 
KEY  TO   TRIGONOMETRY  FOR  BEGINNERS.     Crown  8vo. 

Ss.  6d. 
MECHANICS   FOR  BEGINNERS.      With  numerous  Examples. 

New  Edition.     iSmo.  cloth.     4^.  6d. 
ALGEBRA     For  the  Use  of  Colleges  and  Schools.    Seventh  Edition, 

containing  two   New  Chapters  and  Three  Hundred  miscellanea 

Examples.     Crown  8vo.  cloth.     7*.  6d. 
KEY  TO  ALGEBRA  FOR  THE   USE   OF  COLLEGES  AND 

SCHOOLS.     Crown  8vo.     icw.  6d. 
AN    ELEMENTARY    TREATISE    ON    THE    THEORY    OF 

EQUATIONS.       Third  Edition,    revised.      Crown  8vo.  cloth. 

is.  6d. 


i4  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Todhunter  (I.) — continued. 

PLANE  TRIGONOMETRY.      For  Schools  and  Colleges.      Fifth 

Edition.     Crown  8vo.  cloth.     $s. 

KEY  TO  PLANE  TRIGONOMETRY.     Crown  8vo.      los.  6d. 
A   TREATISE   ON    SPHERICAL   TRIGONOMETRY.       Third 

Edition,  enlarged.     Crown  8vo.  cloth.     $s.  6d. 
PLANE  CO-ORDINATE  GEOMETRY,  as  applied  to  the  Straight 

Line  and  the  Conic  Sections.     With  numerous  Examples.     Fifth 

Edition,  revised  and  enlarged.     Crown  8vo.  cloth,     'js.  6d. 
A  TREATISE  ON  THE  DIFFERENTIAL  CALCULUS.     With 

numerous  Examples.  Seventh  Edition.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.    los.  6d. 
A  TREATISE  ON  THE  INTEGRAL  CALCULUS  AND  ITS 

APPLICATIONS.     With  numerous  Examples.    Fourth  Edition, 

revised  and  enlarged.     Crown  8vo.  cloth.     IO.T.  6d. 

EXAMPLES  OF  ANALYTICAL  GEOMETRY  OF  THREE 
DIMENSIONS.  Third  Edition,  revised.  Crown  8vo.  cloth.  4?. 

A  TREATISE  ON  ANALYTICAL  STATICS.  With  numerous 
Examples.  Fourth  Edition,  revised  and  enlarged.  Crown  8vo. 
cloth.  IOJ.  6d. 

A  HISTORY  OF  THE  MATHEMATICAL  THEORY  OF 
PROBABILITY,  from  the  time  of  Pascal  to  that  of  Laplace. 
8vo.  iSs. 

RESEARCHES    IN    THE    CALCULUS     OF     VARIATIONS, 

principally  on  the  Theory  of  Discontinuous  Solutions :  an  Essay 
to  which  the  Adams  Prize  was  awarded  in  the  University  of  Cam 
bridge  hi  1871.  8vo.  6s. 

A    HISTORY    OF    THE    MATHEMATICAL    THEORIES   OF 
ATTRACTION,   AND  THE   FIGURE   OF   THE   EARTH, 
from  the  time  of  Newton  to  that  of  Laplace.     2  vols.     8vo.      24*. 
"Such  histories  are  at  present  more  valuable   than  original  work. 
They  at  once  enable  the  Mathematician  to  make  himself  master  of  all  that 
has  been  done  on  the  subject,  and  also  give  him  a  clue  to  the  right  method 
of  dealing  -with  the  subject  in  future  by  shouuing  him  the  paths  by  which 
advance  has  been  made  in  the  past  .  .   .  It  is  with  unmingled  satisfaction 
that  we  see  this  branch  adopted  as  his  special  subject  by  one  whose  cast  of 
wind  and  self  culture  have  made  him  one  of  the  most  accurate,  as  he  cer 
tainly  is  the  most  learned,  of  Cambridge  Mathematicians" — SATURDAY 
REVIEW. 

AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE  ON  LAPLACE'S,  LAME'S, 
AND  BESSEL'S  FUNCTIONS.  Crown  8vo.  icw.  6d. 


Wilson  (J.  M.)— ELEMENTARY  GEOMETRY.  Books 
I.  II.  III.  Containing  the  Subjects  of  Euclid's  first  Four  Books. 
New  Edition,  following  the  Syllabus  of  the  Geometrical  Associa 
tion.  By  J.  M.  WILSON.,  MA.,  late  Fellow  of  St.  John's  Col- 


SCIENCE.  15 


Wilson  (J.  M.)—  continued. 

lege,   Cambridge,  and   Mathematical    Master  of  Rugby   School. 
Extra  fcap.  8vo.     %s.  6d. 

SOLID  GEOMETRY  AND  CONIC  SECTIONS.  With  Appen- 
dices  on  Transversals  and  Harmonic  Division.  For  the  use  of 
Schools.  By  J.  M.  WILSON,  M.A.  Second  Edition.  Extra  fcap. 
8vo.  3*.  6d. 

Wilson   (W.    P.)  — A  TREATISE  ON  DYNAMICS.      By 

W.  P.  WILSON,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge, 

and  Professor  of  Mathematics  in  Queen's  College,  Belfast.     8vo. 

gs.  6d. 

"This  treatise  supplies  a  great  educational  need."— EDUCATIONAL 

TIMES. 

Wolstenholme. — A   BOOK   OF   MATHEMATICAL 

PROBLEMS,  on  Subjects  included  In  the  Cambridge  Course. 
By  JOSEPH  WOLSTENHOLME,  Fellow  of  Christ's  College,  some 
time  Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  and  lately  Lecturer  in  Mathe 
matics  at  Christ's  College.     Crown  8vo.  cloth.     Bs.  6d. 
"  Judicious,  symmetrical,  and  well  arranged."—  GUARDIAN. 


SCIENCE. 

ELEMENTARY   CLASS-BOOKS. 

IT  is  the  intention  of  the  Publishers  to  produce  a  com 
plete  series  of  Scientific  Manuals,  affording  full  and  ac 
curate  elementary  information,  conveyed  in  clear  and 
lucid  English.  The  authors  are  well  known  as  among 
the  foremost  men  of  their  several  departments ;  and  their 
names  form  a  ready  guarantee  for  the  high  character  of  the 
books.  Subjoined  is  a  list  of  those  Manuals  that  have 
already  appeared,  with  a  short  account  of  each.  Others 
are  in  active  preparation ;  and  the  whole  will  constitute  a 
standard  series  specially  adapted  to  the  requirements  of  be 
ginners,  whether  for  private  study  or  for  school  instruction. 
ASTRONOMY,  by  the  Astronomer  Royal. 

POPULAR  ASTRONOMY.    With  Illustrations.     By  SIR  G.  B. 
AIRY,    K.C.B.,    Astronomer    Royal.       New   Edition.      i8mo. 

S^l^ctur^s' intended  "  to  explain  to  intelligent  persons  the  principles 
on  which  the  instruments  of  an   Observatory  are  constructed,  and  the 


16  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Elementary  Class- Books — continued. 

principles  on  which  the  observations  made  with  these  instruments  are 
treated  for  deduction  of  the  distances  and  weights  of  the  bodies  of  the 
Solar  System" 

ASTRONOMY. 

ELEMENTARY  LESSONS  IN  ASTRONOMY.  With 
Coloured  Diagram  of  the  Spectra  of  the  Sun,  Stars,  and 
Nebulae,  and  numerous  Illustrations.  By  J.  NORMAN  LOCKYER, 
F.R.S.  New  Edition.  i8mo.  $s.  6d. 

"  Full9  clear,  sound,  and  worthy  of  attention,  not  only  as  a  popular  expo 
sition,  but  as  a  scientific  'Index?" — ATHEN^UM.     "  The  most  fasci 
nating  of  elementary  books  on  the  Sciences." — NONCONFORMIST. 
QUESTIONS    ON    LOCKYER'S    ELEMENTARY    LESSONS 
IN  ASTRONOMY.    For  the  Use  of  Schools.    By  JOHN  FORBES- 
ROBERTSON.     i8mo.  cloth  limp.     is.  6d. 

PHYSIOLOGY. 

LESSONS     IN    ELEMENTARY     PHYSIOLOGY.        With 
numerous  Illustrations.       By  T.  H.  HUXLEY,  F.R.S.,  Professor 
of  Natural  History  in  the  Royal  School  of  Mines.     New  Edition. 
i8mo.  cloth.     4^.  6d. 
« '  Pure  gold  throughout.  "—GUARDIAN.     « '  Unquestionably  the  clearest 

and  most  complete  elementary  treatise  on  this  subject  that  we  possess  in 

any  language." — WESTMINSTER  REVIEW. 

QUESTIONS  ON  HUXLEY'S  PHYSIOLOGY  FOR  SCHOOLS. 
By  T.  ALCOCK,  M.D.  i8mo.  is.  6d. 

BOTANY. 

LESSONS  IN  ELEMENTARY  BOTANY.  By  D.  OLIVER, 
F.  R.  S.,  F.L.  S.,  Professor  of  Botany  in  University  College,  London. 
With  nearly  Two  Hundred  Illustrations.  New  Edition.  i8mo. 
cloth.  4J-.  6d. 

CHEMISTRY. 

LESSONS  IN  ELEMENTARY  CHEMISTRY,  INORGANIC 
AND  ORGANIC.     By  HENRY  E.  ROSCOE,  F.R.S.,  Professor  of 
Chemistry  in  Owens  College,  Manchester.     With  numerous  Illus 
trations  and  Chromo-Litho  of  the  Solar  Spectrum,  and  of  the  Al 
kalies  and  Alkaline  Earths.     New  Edition.     i8mo.  cloth.    43.  6d. 
"  As  a  standard  general  text-book  it  deserves  to  take  a  leading  place." — 
SPECTATOR.     "  We  unhesitatingly  pronounce  it  the  best  of  all  our 
elementary  treatises  on  Chemistry"— MEDICAL  TIMES. 

A  SERIES  OF  CHEMICAL  PROBLEMS,  prepared  with  Special 
Reference  to  the  above,  by  T.  E.  THORPE,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of 
Chemistry  in  the  Yorkshire  College  of  Science,  Leeds.  Adapted  for 
the  preparation  of  Students  for  the  Government,  Science,  and 
Society  of  Arts  Examinations.  With  a  Preface  by  Professor 
ROSCOE.  i8mo.  w.  Key.  is. 


SCIENCE.  I7 


Elementary  Class- Books — continued. 

POLITICAL   ECONOMY. 

POLITICAL  ECONOMY  FOR  BEGINNERS.  By  MILLICENT 

G.  FAWCETT.     New  Edition.     i8mo.     2s.  6d. 
"  Clear,  compact,  and  comprehensive" — DAILY  NEWS.   "  The  relations 
of  capital  and  labour  have  never  been   more  simply  or  more  clearly 
expounded.  "—CONTEMPORARY  REVIEW. 

LOGIC. 

ELEMENTARY  LESSONS  IN  LOGIC  ;  Deductive  and  Indue- 
tive,  with  copious  Questions  and  Examples,  and  a  Vocabulary  of 
Logical  Terms.  By  W.  STANLEY  JEVONS,  M.  A.,  Professor  of  Logic 
in  Owens  College,  Manchester.  New  Edition.  i8mo.  3^.  6d. 

lt  Nothing  can  be  better  for  a  school-book" — GUARDIAN. 

"A  manual  alike  simple,  interesting,  and  scientific." — ATHEN/EUM. 

PHYSICS. 

LESSONS  IN  ELEMENTARY  PHYSICS.  By  BALFOUR 
STEWART,  F.R.S.,  Professor  of  Natural  Philosophy  in  Owens 
College,  Manchester.  With  numerous  Illustrations  and  Chromo- 
liths  of  the  Spectra  of  the  Sun,  Stars,  and  Nebulae.  New  Edition. 
i8mo.  4^.  6d. 

.    "  The  beau-ideal  of  a  scientific  text-book,  clear,  accurate,  and thorough ." 

EDUCATIONAL  TIMES. 

PRACTICAL     CHEMISTRY. 

THE  OWENS  COLLEGE  JUNIOR  COURSE  OF  PRAC- 
TICAL  CHEMISTRY.  By  FRANCIS  JONES,  Chemical  Master 
in  the  Grammar  School,  Manchester.  With  Preface  by  Professor 
ROSCOE.  With  Illustrations.  New  Edition.  i8mo.  2s.  6d. 

ANATOMY. 

LESSONS  IN  ELEMENTARY  ANATOMY.    By  ST.  GEORGE 
MIVART,  F.R.S.,  Lecturer  in  Comparative  Anatomy  at  St.  Mary's 
Hospital.    With  upwards  of  400  Illustrations.     i8mo.  6s.  6d. 
1    "It  may  be  questioned  whether  any  other  work  on  Anatomy  contains 
in  like  compass  so  proportionately  great  a  mass  of  information  "— LANCET. 
"  The  work  is  excellent,  and  should  be  in  the  hands  of  every  student  of 
human  anatomy." — MEDICAL  TIMES. 

STEAM. — AN  ELEMENTARY  TREATISE.  By  JOHN  PERRY, 
Bachelor  of  Engineering,  Whitworth  Scholar,  etc.,  late  Lecturer  in 
Physics  at  Clifton  College.  With  numerous  Woodcuts  and 
Numerical  Examples  and  Exercises.  i8mo.  4*.  6<t. 


i8  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

MANUALS    FOR    STUDENTS. 
Flower  (W.  H.)— AN  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  OSTE- 

OLOGY  OF  THE  MAMMALIA.  Being  the  substance  of 
the  Course  of  Lectures  delivered  at  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons 
of  England  in  1870.  By  W.  H.  FLOWER,  F.R.S.,  F.R.C.S., 
Hunterian  Professor  of  Comparative  Anatomy  and  Physiology, 
With  numerous  Illustrations.  Globe  8vo.  'js.  6d. 

Hooker    (Dr.) — THE  -  STUDENT'S   FLORA   OF   THE 

BRITISH  ISLANDS.  By  J.  D.  HOOKER,  C.B.,  F.R.S., 
M.D.,  D.C.L.,  President  of  the  Royal  Society.  Globe  8vo. 
IQS.  6d. 

"  Cannot  fail  to  perfectly  fulfil  the  purpose  for  which  it  is  intended" — 
LAND  AND  WATER. — "  Containing  the  fullest  and  most  accurate 
manual  of  the  kind  that  has  yet  appeared." — PALL  MALL  GAZETTE. 

Oliver  (Professor). — FIRST  BOOK  OF  INDIAN  BOTANY. 

By  DANIEL  OLIVER,  F.R.S.,  F.L.S.,  Keeper  of  the  Herbarium 
and  Library  of  the  Royal  Gardens,  Kew,  and  Professor  of  Botany 
in  University  College,  London.  With  numerous  Illustrations. 
Extra  fcap.  8vo.  6s.  6d. 

"  It  contains  a  well -digested  summary  of  all  essential  knowledge  pertain- 
ing  to  Indian  botany,  wrought  out  in  accordance  with  the  best  principles 
of  scientific  arrangement"— ALLEN'S  INDIAN  MAIL. 

Other  volumes  of  these  Manuals  will  follow . 


NATURE  SERIES. 

THE    SPECTROSCOPE  AND    ITS   APPLICATIONS.      By  J. 

NORMAN  LOCKYER,  F.  R.  S.    With  Coloured  Plate  and  numerous 

illustrations.     Second  Edition.     Crown  8vo.     3^.  6d. 
THE  ORIGIN  AND   METAMORPHOSES   OF   INSECTS.     By 

SIR  JOHN  LUBBOCK,  M.P.,  F.R.S.     With  numerous  Illustrations. 

Second  Edition.     Crown  8vo.  3-r.  6d. 

"  We  can  most  cordially  recommend  it  to  young  naturalists" — ATHE- 
N^EUM. 

THE  BIRTH  OF  CHEMISTRY.     By  G.  F.  RODWELL,  F.R.A.S., 
F.C.S.,  Science  Master  in  Marlborough  College.     With  numerous 
Illustrations.     Crown  8vo.     %s.  6d. 
"  We  can  cordially  recommend  it   to  all  Students  of  Chemistry."— 

CHEMICAL  NEWS. 

THE  TRANSIT  OF  VENUS.  By  G.  FORBES,  M.A.,  Professor  of 
Natural  Philosophy  in  the  Andersonian  University,  Glasgow. 
Illustrated.  Crown  8vo.  3^.  6d. 

THE  COMMON  FROG.  By  ST.  GEORGE  MIVART,  F.R.S.,  Lec 
turer  in  Comparative  Anatomy  at  St.  Mary's  Hospital.  With 
numerous  Illustrations.  Crown  8vo.  3*.  6d. 


SCIENCE.  19 


Nature  Series  —  continued. 

POLARISATION   OF  LIGHT.     By  W.  SPOTTISWOODE,  F.R.S. 
With  many  Illustrations.     Crown  8vo.     35.  6d. 

ON    BRITISH    WILD  FLOWERS    CONSIDERED  IN    RELA 
TION  TO  INSECTS.    By  SIR  JOHN  LUBBOCK,  Bart.,  F.R.S. 
With  numerous  Illustrations.   Second  Edition.  Crown  8vo.  4^.  6d. 
Other  "volumes  to  follow. 

Ball    (R.   S.,   A.M.)  —  EXPERIMENTAL  MECHANICS. 

A  Course  of  Lectures  delivered  at  the  Royal  College  of  Science 
for  Ireland.  By  R.  S.  BALL,  A.M.,  Professor  of  Applied 
Mathematics  and  Mechanics  in  the  Royal  College  of  Science 
for  Ireland.  Royal  8vo.  i6s. 

Blanford.—  THE    RUDIMENTS    OF    PHYSICAL   GEO 

GRAPHY  FOR  THE  USE  OF  INDIAN  SCHOOLS  ;  with  a 
Glossary  of  Technical  Terms  employed.  By  H.  F.  BLANFORD, 
F.R.S.  Filth  edition,  with  Illustrations.  Globe  8vo.  2s.  6d. 
Gordon.  _  AN  ELEMENTARY  BOOK  ON  HEAT.  By 
J.  E.  H.  GORDON,  B.A.,  Gonville  and  Caius  College,  Cambridge. 
Crown  8vo.  2s. 

Huxlev   &   Martin.—  A  COURSE  OF  PRACTICAL  IN- 

STRUCTION  IN  ELEMENTARY  BIOLOGY.  By  Professor 
HUXLEY,  F.R.S.,  assisted  by  H.  N.  MARTIN,  M.B.,  D.Sc.  Crown 
8vo.  6s. 

SCIENCE  PRIMERS  FOR  ELEMENTARY 
SCHOOLS. 

In  these  Primers  the  authors  have  aimed,  not  so  much  to  give  informa 
tion  as  to  endeavour  to  discipline  the  mind  in  a  way  which  has  not 
hUherto  been  customary,  by  bringing  it  into  immediate  contact  wUh 
Nature  herself  For  this  purpose  a  series  of  simple  experiments  (to  be 
^rmfdbythe  teacher^  has  been  devised  leading  uP  to  the  W**** 
of  each  Science.  Thus  the  power  of  observation  in  the  pupils  will  be 
LakLd  and  strengthened.  Each  Manual  is  copiously  Mustrated,  and 
^ndld  are  lists  of  all  the  necessary  apparatus,  with  prices,  ana 
Melons  astohL  they  may  be  obtained.  Professor  Huxley's  introdu^ 


By  H.   E.  ROSCOE,   Professor  of 
Manchester.     With  numerous  IHus- 


20  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

PRIMER  OF  PHYSICAL  GEOGRAPHY.  By  ARCHIBALD 
GEIKIE,  F.R.S.,  Murchison- Professor  of  Geology  and  Mineralogy 
at  Edinburgh.  With  numerous  Illustrations.  New  Edition. 
i8mo.  is. 

PRIMER  OF  GEOLOGY.  By  PROFESSOR  GEIKIE,  F.R.S.  With 
numerous  Illustrations.  New  Edition.  i8mo.  cloth,  is. 

PRIMER  OF  PHYSIOLOGY.  By  MICHAEL  FOSTER,  M.D., 
F.R.S.  With  numerous  Illustrations.  New  Edition.  i8mo.  u. 

PRIMER  OF  ASTRONOMY.  ByJ.  NORMAN  LOCKYER,  F.R.S. 
With  numerous  Illustrations.  New  Edition.  i8mo.  is. 

PRIMER  OF  BOTANY.  By  J.  D.  HOOKER,  C.B.  F.R.S.,  Presi 
dent  of  the  Royal  Society.  With  numerous  Illustrations .  i8mo. 
is. 

In  preparation : — 
INTRODUCTORY.     By  PROFESSOR  HUXLEY.     6-v.  &c. 


MISCELLANEOUS. 

Abbott.— A  SHAKESPEARIAN  GRAMMAR.  An  Attempt  to 
illustrate  some  of  the  Differences  between  Elizabethan  and  Modern 
English.  By  the  Rev.  E.  A.  ABBOTT,  M.A.,  Head  Master  of  the 
City  of  London  School.  For  the  Use  of  Schools.  New  and 
Enlarged  Edition.  Extra  fcap.  8vo.  6s. 

"  A  critical  inquiry,  conducted  with  great  skill  and  knowledge,  and 
with  all  the  appliances  of  modern  philology ....  " — PALL  MALL 
GAZETTE.  "  Valuable  not  only  as  an  aid  to  the  critical  study  of 
Shakespeare,  but  as  tending  to  familiarize  the  reader  with  Elizabethan 
English  in  general" — ATHENAEUM. 

Baldwin.— INTRODUCTION  TO  PRACTICAL  FARMING 
FOR  THE  USE  OF  SCHOOLS.  By  T.  BALDWIN,  M.R.I. A. 
Superintendent  of  the  Agricultural  Department  of  National  Educa 
tion  in  Ireland.  i8mo.  is.  6d. 

Barker.— FIRST     LESSONS    IN    THE    PRINCIPLES     OF 

COOKING.  By  LADY  BARKER.  i8mo.  is. 
"  An  unpretending  but  invaluable  little  work  ....  The  plan  is 
admirable  in  its  completeness  and  simplicity  ;  it  is  hardly  possible  that 
anyone  who  can  read  at  all  can  fail  to  understand  the  practical  lessons  on 
bread  and  beef,  fish  and  vegetables  ;  while  the  explanation  of  the  chemical 
composition  of  our  food  must  be  intelligible  to  all  who  possess  sufficient 
education  to  follow  the  argument,  in  which  the.  fewest  possible  technical 
terms  are  used."— SPECTATOR. 


MISCELLANEO  US.  21 

Berners.— FIRST  LESSONS  ON  HEALTH.    By  j.  BER. 

NERS.     i8mo.      is.     Fourth  Edition. 

Besant.— STUDIES  IN  EARLY  FRENCH  POETRY.  By 

WALTER  BESANT,  M.A.     Crown  8vo.     Ss.  6d. 
"  In  one  moderately  sized  volume  he  has  contrived  to  introduce  us  to  the 
very  best,  if  not  to  all  of  the  early  French  poets."— ATHEN^UM. 

Breymann.— Works  by  HERMANN  BREYMANN,  Ph.D.,  late 
Lecturer  on  French  Language  and  Literature  at  Owens  College, 
Manchester,  and  now  Professor  of  Philology  in  the  University  of 
Munich. 

A     FRENCH     GRAMMAR    BASED     ON     PHILOLOGICAL 

PRINCIPLES.  Second  Edition.  Extra  fcap.  8vo.  4*.  6d. 
"  We  dismiss  the  work  with  every  expression  of  satisfaction.  It  can 
not  fail  to  be  taken  into  use  by  all  schools  which  endeavour  to  make  the 
study  of  French  a  means  towards  the  higher  culture" — EDUCATIONAL 
TIMES.  "  A  good,  sound,  valuable  philological  grammar.  The  author 
presents  the  pupil  by  his  method  and  by  detail,  with  an  enormous  amount 
of  information  about  French  not  usually  to  be  found  in  grammars,  and 
the  information  is  all  of  it  of  real  practical  value  to  the  student  who 

m  really  wants  to  know  French  well,  and  to  understand  its  spirit." — 

'  SCHOOL  BOARD  CHRONICLE. 

FIRST  FRENCH  EXERCISE  BOOK.     Extra  fcap.  8vo.    4*.  6d. 
SECOND  FRENCH  EXERCISE  BOOK.     Extra  fcap.  8vo.     2s.  6d. 

Calderwood.-— HANDBOOK  OF  MORAL  PHILOSOPHY. 

By  the  Rev.  HENRY  CALDERWOOD,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Moral 
Philosophy,  University  of  Edinburgh.  Fourth  Edition.  Crown 
8vo.  6-r. 

"  A  compact  and  useful  work  ....  will  be  an  assistance  to  many 
students  outside  the  author 's  own  University." — GUARDIAN. 

Delamotte.— -A  BEGINNER'S  DRAWING  BOOK.  By  P.  H. 

DELAMOTTE,    F.S.A.      Progressively  arranged.      New  Edition, 
improved.     Crown  8vo.     3-r.  6d. 
"A  concise,  simple,   and  thoroughly  practical  work."— GUARDIAN. 

Fawcett. — TALES  IN  POLITICAL  ECONOMY.   By  MILLI- 

CENT  GARRETT  FAWCETT.     Globe  8vo.  3-$-. 

"  The  idea  is  a  good  one,  and  it  is  quite  wonderful  what  a  mass  of 
economic  teaching  the  author  manages  to  compress  info  a  small  space"— 
ATHENAEUM. 

Goldsmith. — THE  TRAVELLER,  or  a  Prospect  of  Society; 
and  THE  DESERTED  VILLAGE.  By  OLIVER  GOLDSMITH. 
With  Notes  Philological  and  Explanatory,  by  J.  W.  HALES,  M.A. 
Crown  8vo.  6d. 


22  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Hales.— LONGER  ENGLISH  POEMS,  with  Notes,  Philological 
and  Explanatory,  and  an  Introduction  on  the  Teaching  of  English. 
Chiefly  for  use  in  Schools.  Edited  by  T.  W.  HALES,  M.A., 
Lecturer  in  English  Literature  and  Classical  Composition  at  King's 
College  School,  London,  &c.  &c.  Third  Edition.  Extra  fcap. 
8vo.  4J.  6d. 
"  The  notes  are  verv  full  and  good,  and  the  book,  edited  by  one  of  our 

most  cultivated  English  scholars,  is  probably  the  best  "volume  of  selections 

ever  made  for  the  use  of  English  schools.'" — PROFESSOR  MORLEY'S  First 

Sketch  of  English  Literature. 

Helfenstein  (James). — A   COMPARATIVE   GRAMMAR 

OF  THE  TEUTONIC  LANGUAGES.  By  JAMES  HELFEN 
STEIN,  Ph.D.  8vo.  iSs. 

Hole.— A  GENEALOGICAL  STEMMA  OF  THE  KINGS  OF 
ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE.  By  the  Rev.  C.  HOLE.  On 
Sheet,  is. 

Jephson.— SHAKESPEARE'S  "TEMPEST."   With  Glossarial 
and  Explanatory  Notes.     By  the  Rev.  J.  M.  JEPHSON.     Second 
Edition.     i8mo.     ij. 
Literature  Primers. — Edited  by   JOHN    RICHARD    GREEN. 

Author  of  "A  Short  History  of  the  English  People." 
ENGLISH  GRAMMAR.     By  the  Rev.  R.  MORRIS,  LL.D.,  Presk' 

dent  of  the  Philological  Society.     i8mo.  cloth,     is. 
"  A   work  quite  precious  in   its  way.  .  .   .  An   excellent   English 
Grammar  for  the  lowest  form" — EDUCATIONAL  TIMES. 
THE      CHILDREN'S      TREASURY     OF     ENGLISH    SONG. 
Selected  and  arranged  with  Notes  by  FRANCIS  TURNER  PALGRAVE. 
In  Two  Parts.     i8mo.     is.  each. 

ENGLISH  LITERATURE.  By  the  Rev.  STOPFORD  BROOKE,  M.A. 
i8mo.     is. 
In  preparation  : — 

LATIN  LITERATURE.  By  the  Rev.  Dr.  FARRAR,  F.R.S. 
GREEK  LITERATURE.     By  PROFESSOR  JEBB,  M.A. 
SHAKSPERE.     By  PROFESSOR  DOWDEN. 
PHILOLOGY.    By  J.  PEILE,  M.A. 
BIBLE  PRIMER.     By  G.  GROVE,  D.C.L. 
CHAUCER.     By  F.  J.  FURNIVALL,  M.A. 
GREEK  ANTIQUITIES.  By  the  Rev.  J.  P.  MAHAFFY,M.A. 
Martin.— THE  POET'S  HOUR :  Poetry  Selected  and  Arrangedfor 
Children.  By  FRANCES  MARTIN.  Second  Edition.    i8mo.  2s.  6d. 
SPRING-TIME  WITH  THE  POETS.    Poetry  selected  by  FRANCES 
MARTIN.     Second  Edition.     i8mo.     3*.  6d. 

Masson  (Gustave).— A  COMPENDIOUS  DICTIONARY 

OF  THE  FRENCH  LANGUAGE  (French-English  and  English- 
French).  Followed  by  a  List  of  the  Principal  Diverging  Deriva 
tions,  and  preceded  by  Chronological  and  Historical  Tables.  By 
GUSTAVE  MASSON,  Assistant-Master  and  Librarian,  Harrow 
School.  Second  Edition.  Square  half-bound,  6s. 


MISCELLANEOUS.  23 

"By  many  degrees  the  most  useful  Dictionary  that  the  student  can 
obtain." — EDUCATIONAL  TIMES. 

"A  book  which  any  student,  whatever  may  be  the  degree  of  his  ad 
vancement  in  the  language,  would  do  well  to  have  on  the  table  close  at 
hand  while  he  is  reading." — SATURDAY  REVIEW. 
Morris. — Works  by  the   Rev.   R.   MORRIS,  LL.D.,  Lecturer  on 

English  Language  and  Literature  in  King's  College  School. 
HISTORICAL     OUTLINES     OF    ENGLISH    ACCIDENCE, 
comprising  Chapters  on  the  History  and   Development  of   the 
Language,  and  on  Word-formation.     Third  Edition.    Extra  fcap. 
8vo.     6s. 

"  It  makes  an  era  in  the  study  of  the  English  tongue." — SATURDAY 
REVIEW.     "A  genuine  and  sound  book. "— ATHENJEUM. 
ELEMENTARY     LESSONS     IN     HISTORICAL    ENGLISH 
GRAMMAR,  Containing  Accidence  and  Word-formation.  Second 
Edition.      i8mo.     2s.  6d. 

PRIMER  OF  ENGLISH  GRAMMAR.     i8mo.     is. 
Oliphant. — THE    SOURCES    OF    STANDARD    ENGLISH. 

By  ].  KINGTON  OLIPHANT.     Extra  fcap.  8vo.    6s. 
"  Mr.  Oliphanfs  book  is,  to  our  mind,  one  of  the  ablest  and  most 
scholarly  contributions  to  our  standard  English  we  have  seen  for  many 
years.  .  .  .    The  arrangement  of  the  work  and  its  indices  make  it  in 
valuable  as  a  work  of  reference,  and  easy  alike  to  study  and  to  store,  when 
studied,   in  the  memory."— SCHOOL  BOARD   CHRONICLE. 
nearer  to  a  history  of  the  English  language  than  anything  that  we  have 
seen  since  such  a  history  could  be  written  without  confusion  and  con- 
tradictions. "—SATURDAY  REVIEW. 

Oppen. — FRENCH   READER.     For  the  Use  of  Colleges  and 

Schools.     Containing  a  graduated  Selection  from  modern  Authors 

in  Prose  and  Verse;  and  copious  Notes,  chiefly  Etymological.    By 

EDWARD  A.  OPPEN.     Fcap.  8vo.  cloth.    4*.  6d. 

Otte.— SCANDINAVIAN  HISTORY.     By  E.  C.  OTTE.    With 

Maps.     Globe  8vo.  6s.  „ 

"A    readable,    well-arranged,   complete,    and    accurate  volume.  - 
LITERARY  REVIEW. 

Paterave.— THE  CHILDREN'S  TREASURY  OF  ENGLISI 

SONG    Selected  and  Arranged  with  Notes  by  FRANCIS  TURNER 
PALGRAVE.  In  Two  Parts.     i8mo.     is.  each. 
Whikindeed  a  treasure  Jor  intelligent  children,  it  u  also  a  work 
will  be  glad  to  ^."-SATURDAY  REVIEW. 


2s.  6d. 


24  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Reading  Books.— Adapted  to  the  English  and  Scotch  Codes  for 
1875.     Bound  in  Cloth. 

PRIMER.     i8mo.     (48pp.)     2d. 


BO 

OK 

9 

> 
9 
f 

I.  for  Sta 
II. 
III. 
IV. 
V. 
VI. 

ndard      I. 
II. 
III. 
IV. 
V. 
VI. 

i8mo. 
i8mo. 
i8mo. 
i8mo. 
l8mo. 
Crown 

(96pp.)     y. 
(144  pp.)     4d. 
(160  pp.)     6d. 
(i  76  pp.)     &/. 
(380  pp.)     is. 
8vo.     (430  pp.) 

2S. 

Book  VI.   is  fitted  for  higher  Classes,  and  as  an  Introduction  to 
English  Literature. 

Sonnenschein    and    Meiklejohn;  —  THE   ENGLISH 

METHOD  OF  TEACHING  TO  READ.  By  A.  SONNENSCHEIN 
and  J.  M.  D.  MEIKLEJOHN,  M.A.     Fcap.  8vo. 

COMPRISING  : 

THE  NURSERY  BOOK,  containing  all  the  Two-Letter  Words  in 
the  Language,      id.      (Also  in  Large  Type  on  Sheets  for 
School  Walls.     5.*.) 
THE  FIRST  COURSE,  consisting  of   Short  Vowels  with  Single 

Consonants.     3^. 

THE  SECOND   COURSE,  with  Combinations    and   Bridges,  con 
sisting  of  Short  Vowels  with  Double  Consonants.     4^. 
THE    THIRD    AND    FOURTH     COURSES,    consisting    of   Long 

Vowels,  and  all  the  Double  Vowels  in  the  Language.    6d. 
"  These  are  admirable  books,  because  they  are  constructed  on  a  principle, 
and  that  the  simplest  principle  on  which  it  is  possible  to  learn  to  read 
English" — SPECTATOR. 

Taylor. — WORDS    AND     PLACES  ;    or,    Etymological    Illus 
trations  of  History,   Ethnology,  and   Geography.     By  the  Rev. 
ISAAC  TAYLOR,  M.A.     Third  and  cheaper  Edition,  revised  and 
compressed.    With  Maps.     Globe  8vo.     6s. 
Already  been  adopted  by  many  teachers,  and  prescribed  as  a  text-book  in 

the  Cambridge  Higher  Examinations  for  Women. 

Thring. — Works  by  EDWARD  THRING,  M.A.,  Head  Master  of 
Uppingham. 

THE  ELEMENTS  OF  GRAMMAR  TAUGHT  IN  ENGLISH, 

with  Questions.     Fourth  Edition.     i8mo.     2s. 

THE  CHILD'S  GRAMMAR.  Being  the  Substance  of  "The 
Elements  of  Grammar  taught  in  English,"  adapted  for  the  Use  of 
Junior  Classes.  A  New  Edition.  i8mo.  is. 

SCHOOL  SONGS.  A  Collection  01  Songs  for  Schools.  With  the 
Music  arranged  for  four  Voices.  Edited  by  the  Rev.  E.  THRING 
and  H.  RicciUS.  Folio,  *js.  6d. 


HISTORY.  25 


Trench  (Archbishop). —Works  by  R.   C.  TRENCH,  D.D., 

Archbishop  of  Dublin. 
HOUSEHOLD  BOOK  OF  ENGLISH    POETRY.     Selected  and 

Arranged,  with  Notes.    Extra  fcap.  8vo.     5-r.  6d.  Second  Edition. 
"  The  Archbishop  has  conferred  in  this  delightful  volume  an  import 
ant  gift  on  the  whole  English-speaking  population  of  the  world." — PALL 
MALL  GAZETTE. 
ON  THE  STUDY   OF  WORDS.    Lectures  addressed  (originally) 

to    the   Pupils  at    the    Diocesan  Training  School,   Winchester. 

Fifteenth  Edition,  revised.    Fcap.  8vo.      4*.  6d. 
ENGLISH,   PAST   AND   PRESENT.       Ninth    Edition,   revised 

and  improved.     Fcap.  8vo.     5*. 
A  SELECT  GLOSSARY  OF  ENGLISH  WORDS,  used  formerly 

in  Senses  Different  from  their  Present.     Fourth  Edition,  enlarged. 

Fcap.  8vo.     45-.  6d. 

Vaughan  (C.  M.)— A  SHILLING  BOOK  OF  WORDS 

FROM  THE  POETS.     By  C.  M.  VAUGHAN.     i8mo.  cloth. 

Whitney. — Works  by  WILLIAM  D.  WHITNEY,  Professor  of  San 
skrit  and  Instructor  in  Modern  Languages  in  Yale  College  ;  first 
President  of  the  American  Philological  Association,  and  hon. 
member  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  ; 
and  Correspondent  of  the  Berlin  Academy  of  Sciences. 

A  COMPENDIOUS  GERMAN  GRAMMAR.     Crown  8vo.    6s. 

A  GERMAN  READER  IN  PROSE  AND  VERSE,  with  Notes  and 
Vocabulary.  Crown  8vo.  7-r.  6d. 

Yonge  (Charlotte    M.)— THE  ABRIDGED  BOOK  OF 

GOLDEN  DEEDS.  A  Reading  Book  for  Schools  and  General 
Readers.  By  the  Author  of  "The  Heir  of  Redclyffe."  i8mo. 
cloth,  is. 


HISTORY. 

Freeman    (Edward    A.)— OLD -ENGLISH  HISTORY. 

By  EDWARD  A.  FREEMAN,  D.C.L.,  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Oxford.  With  Five  Coloured  Maps.  Fourth  Edition. 
Extra  fcap.  8vo.  half-bound.  6s. 

" I  have,  I  hope,"  the  author  says,  "shown  that  it  is  perfectly  easy  to 
teach  children,  from  the  very  first,  to  distinguish  true  history  alike  from 
legend  and  from  wilful  invention,  and  also  to  understand  the  nature  of 
historical  authorities  and  to  weigh  one  statement  against  another.  I  have 
throughout  striven  to  connect  the  history  of  England  with  the  general 
history  of  civilized  Europe,  and  I  have  especially  tried  to  make  the 
book  serve  as  an  incentive  to  a  more  accurate  study  of  historical 
geography."  In  the  present  edition  the  whole  has  been  carefully 


26  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

and  such  improvements  as  suggested  themselves  have  been  introduced. 
* '  The  book  indeed  is  full  of  instruction  and  interest  to  students  of  all 
ages,  and  he  must  be  a  well-informed  man  indeed  who  will  not  rise  /from 
its  perusal  with  clearer  and  more  accurate  ideas  of  a  too  much  neglected 
portion  of  English  History. " — SPECTATOR. 

Green.— A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PEOPLE. 

By  JOHN  RICHARD  GREEN.     With  Coloured  Maps,  Genealogical 
Tables,    and    Chronological    Annals.        Crown   8vo. .        Ss.   6d. 
Thirty-fourth  Thousand. 
"  Stands  alone  as  the  one  general  history  of  the  country,  for  the  sake  of 

which  all  others,  if  young  and  old  are  wise,  will  be  speedily  and  surely  set 

aside. " — ACADEMY. 

Historical  Course   for   Schools. — Edited  by   EDWARD 

A.  FREEMAN,  D.C.L.,  late  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  Oxford. 
The  object  of  the  present  series  is  to  put  forth  clear  and  correct  views 
of  history  in  simple  language,  and  in  the  smallest  space  and  cheapest 
form  in  which  it  could  be  done.  It  is  meant  in  the  first  place  for 
Schools ;  but  it  is  often  found  that  a  book  for  schools  proves  useful 
for  other  readers  as  well,  and  it  is  hoped  that  this  may  be  the  case 
with  the  little  books  the  first  instalment  of  which  is  now  given  to 
the  world. 

I.  GENERAL    SKETCH    OF    EUROPEAN     HISTORY.      By 
EDWARD  A.  FREEMAN,  D.C.L.     Fourth  Edition.     i8mo.  cloth. 
3J.fcT. 

"It  supplies  the  great  want  of  a  good  foundation  for  historical  teach 
ing.  The  scheme  is  an  excellent  one,  and  this  instalment  has  been 
executed  in  a  way  that  promises  much  for  the  volumes  that  are  yet  to 
appear" — EDUCATIONAL  TIMES. 

II.  HISTORY   OF  ENGLAND.     By  EDITH  THOMPSON.     Fifth 
Edition.     i8mo.     2s.  6d. 

"  Freedom  from  prejudice,  simplicity  of  style,  and  accuracy  of  statetnent, 
are  the  characteristics  of  this  little  volume.  It  is  a  trustworthy  text-book 
and  likely  to  be  generally  serviceable,  in  schools" — PALL  MALL  GAZETTE. 
"  Upon  the  whole,  this  manual  is  the  best  sketch  of  English  history  for  the 
use  oj  young  people  we  have  yet  met  with." — ATHENAEUM. 

III.  HISTORY  OF  SCOTLAND.     By  MARGARET  MACARTHUR. 
i8mo.     2s. 

"An  excellent  summary,  unimpeachable  as  to  facts,  and  putting  them  in 
the  clearest  and  most  impartial  light  attainable. " — GUARDIAN.  "  Miss 
Macarthur  has  performed  her  task  with  admirable  care,  clearness,  and 
fulness,  and  we  have  now  for  the  first  time  a  really  good  School  History 
of  Scotland" — EDUCATIONAL  TIMES. 

IV.  HISTORY  OF  ITALY.    By  the  Rev.  W.  HUNT,  M.A.     i8mo. 

3s- 

"  //  possesses  the  same  solid  merit  as  its  predecessors  ....  the  same 
scrupulous  care  about  fidelity  in  details.  .  ,  .  It  is  distinguished ',  too,  by 


HISTORY.  27 

Historical  Course  for  Schools  —  continued. 

information  on  art,  architecture,  and  social  politics,  in  -which  the  writer's 
grasp  is  seen  by  the  firmness  and  clearness  of  his  touch."  —  EDUCATIONAL 


TIMES. 


. 

V.  HISTORY  OF   GERMANY.     By  J.  SIME,  M.A.     i8mo.     3*. 
"  A  remarkably  clear  and  impressive  History  of  Germany.     Its  great 

events  are  wisely  kept  as  central  figures,  and  the  smaller  events  are  carefully 
kept,  not  only  subordinate  and  subservient,  but  most  skilfully  woven  into 
the  texture  of  the  historical  tapestry  presented  to  the  eye."  —  STANDARD. 

VI.  HISTORY  OF  AMERICA.    By  JOHN  A.  DOYLE.    With  Maps. 
i8mo.     4J.  6d. 

"  Mr.  Doyle  has  performed  his  task  with  admirable  care,  fulness,  and 
clearness,  and  for  the  first  time  we  have  for  schools  an  accurate  and  inter 
esting  history  of  America,  from  the  earliest  to  the  present  time.  — 
STANDARD. 

The  following  will  shortly  be  issued  :  — 

FRANCE.    By  CHARLOTTE  M.  YONGE. 
GREECE.    By  J,  ANNAN  BRYCE,  B.A. 

History  Primers.—  Edited  by  JOHN  RICHARD  GREEN.  Author 

of  "A  Short  History  of  the  English  People.'' 
ROME.     By  the  Rev.   M.   Creighton,   M.A.,  Fellow  and  Tutor  of 

Merton  College,  Oxford.     With  Eleven  Maps.     i8mo.     is.  _ 
"  The  Author  has  been  curiously  successful  in  idling  in  an  intelli 
gent  way  the  story  of  Rome  from  first  to  Aw/."—  SCHOOL    BOARD 

GRE°ECKE<By  C.  A.  Fyffe,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  late  Tutor  of  Uni- 

versity  College,  Oxford.     With  Five  Maps.     i8mo.     is. 
"We  give  our   unqualified  praise  to  this  little  manual.  - 

MASTER. 

In  preparation  :— 

EUROPE.     By  E.  A.  FREEMAN,  D.C.L.,  LL.D. 
ENGLAND.    By  J.  R.  GREEN,  M.A. 
FRANCE.    By  CHARLOTTE  M.  YONGE. 
GEOGRAPHY.     By  GEORGE  GROVE,  D.C.L. 
Michelet.-A  SUMMARY  OF  MODERN  HISTORY. 

lated  from  the  French  of  M.  Michelet,  and  continued  to  the  Present 
Time  bv  M   C.  M.  Simpson.     Globe  8vo.     4*.  Wfc 
"  mirezlad  to  see  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  useful  summaries  of 
Eur^nhiftory  put  into  the  hands  of  English  readers.     The  trans 
lation  is  excellent—  STANDARD. 
Yonge   (Charlotte   M.)-A  PARALLEL  HISTORY  0 

FRANCE  AND  ENGLAND  :  consisting  of  Outlines  and  Dates. 
If  CHARLOTTE  M.  YONGE,  Author  of  "The  Heir  of  Redclvffe, 

r,nent  little  book.  "-EDUCATIONAL  TIMES. 


28  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Yonge  (Charlotte  M.) — continued. 

CAMEOS  FROM  ENGLISH  HISTORY.     From  Rollo  to  Edward 
II.     By  the  Author  of  "The  Heir  of  Redclyffe."    Extra  fcap. 
8vo.     Third  Edition,  enlarged.     $s. 
A  book  for  young  people  just  bevond  the  elementary  histories  of  England, 

and  able  to  enter  in  some  degree  into  the  real  spirit  of  events,  and  to  be 

struck  with  characters  and  scenes  presented  in  some  relief.     "  Instead  of 

dry  details,  we   have  living  pictures,  faithful,  vivid,  [and  striking" — 

NONCONFORMIST. 

A  SECOND  SERIES  OF  CAMEOS  FROM  ENGLISH  HISTORY. 

THE  WARS  IN  FRANCE.     Third  Edition.     Extra  fcap.  8vo.     5-r. 
"  Though  mainly  intended  for  young  readers,  they  will,  if  we  mistake 

not,   be  found  very  acceptable  to  those  of  more  mature  years,  and  the 

life  and  reality  imparted  to  the  dry  bones  of  history  cannot  fail  to  be 

attractive  to  readers  of  every  age." — JOHN  BULL. 

EUROPEAN  HISTORY.  Narrated  in  a  Series  of  Historical  Selec 
tions  from  the  Best  Authorities.  Edited  and  arranged  by  E.  M. 
SEWELL  and  C.  M.  YONGE.  First  Series,  1003 — 1154.  Third 
Edition.  Crown  8vo.  6s.  Second  Series,  1088 — 1228.  Crown 
8vo.  6s.  Third  Edition. 
"  We  know  of  scarcely  anything  which  is  so  likely  to  raise  to  a  higher 

level  the  average  standard  of  English  education" — GUARDIAN. 


DIVINITY. 

\*  For  other  Works  by  these  Authors,  see  THEOLOGICAL  CATALOGUE. 

Abbott  (Rev.   E.  A.) — BIBLE   LESSONS.    By  the  Rev. 

E.  A.  ABBOTT,  M.A.,  Head  Master  of  the  City  of  London  School. 

Second  Edition.     Crown  8vo.     4-r.  6d. 

"  Wise,  suggestive,"  and  really  profound  initiation  into  religious  thought." 
— GUARDIAN.  "  I  think  nobody  could  read  them  without  being  both  the 
better  for  them  himself,  and  being  also  able  to  see  how  this  difficult  duty  of 
imparting  a  sound  religious  education  may  be  effected" — BISHOP  OF  ST. 
DAVID'S  AT  ABERGWILLY. 

Arnold. —  A   BIBLE-READING    FOR    SCHOOLS.     The 

GREAT  PROPHECY  OF  ISRAEL'S  RESTORATION  (Isaiah,  Chapters 
40 — 66).  Arranged  and  Edited  for  Young  Learners.  By  MAT 
THEW  ARNOLD,  D.C.L.,  formerly  Professor  of  Poetry  in  the 
University  of  Oxford,  and  Fellow  of  Oriel.  Fourth  Edition.  i8mo. 
cloth,  is. 

"  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  will  be  found  excellently  calculated  to 
further  instruction  in  Biblical  literature  in  any  school  into  which  it  may 
be  introduced ;  and  we  can  safely  say  that  whatever  school  uses  the  book, 
it  zuili  enable  its  pupils  to  unaersiand  Isaiah,  a  great  advantage  compared 
with  ether  establishments  which  do  not  avail  themselves  of  it" — TIMES. 


DIVINITY.  29 


Arnold.— ISAIAH  XL.-LXVI.  With  the  Shorter  Prophecies 
allied  to  it.  Arranged  and  Edited  with  Notes  by  MATTHEW 
ARNOLD.  Crown  8vo.  $s. 

Golden  Treasury  Psalter.— students'  Edition.    Being  an 

Edition    of   "The    Psalms    Chronologically  Arranged,  by  Four 
•     Friends,"  with  briefer  Notes.     i8mo.     3*.  6d. 

Hardwick. — A  HISTORY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH. 

Middle  Age.  From  Gregory  the  Great  to  the  Excommunication 
of  Luther.  Edited  by  WILLIAM  STUBBS,  M.  A.,  Regius  Professor 
of  Modern  History  in  the  University  of  Oxford.  With  Four  Maps 
constructed  for  this  work  by  A.  KEITH  JOHNSTON.  Fourth  Edition. 
Crown  8vo.  los.  6d. 

For  this  edition  Professor  Stubbs  has  carefully  revised  both  text  and 
notes,  making  suck  corrections  of  facts,  dates,  and  the  like  as  the  results 
of  recent  research  warrant.  The  doctrinal,  historical,  and  generally 
speculative  views  of  the  late  author  have  been  preserved  intact.  "  As  a 
manual  for  the  student  of  ecclesiastical  history  in  the  Middle  Ages,  we 
know  no  English  work  which  can  be  compared  to  Mr.  Hardwuk's 
book. " — GUARDIAN. 

A  HISTORY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH  DURING  THE 
REFORMATION.  By  ARCHDEACON  HARDWICK.  Fourth 
Edition.  Edited  by  Professor  STUBBS.  Crown  8vo.  los.  6d. 

Maclear. — Works  by  the  Rev.  G.  F.  MACLEAR,  D.D.,  Head 

Master  of  King's  College  School. 
A  CLASS-BOOK  OF  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY.      Eighth 

Edition,  with  Four  Maps.     i8mo.  cloth.     4^.  6d. 
"A  careful  and  elaborate  though  brief  compendium  oj  all  that  modern 
research  has  done  for  the  illustration  of  the  Old  Testament.     We  know 
of  no  work  which  contains  so  much  important  information  in  so  small 
a  compass."— BRITISH  QUARTERLY  REVIEW. 

A  CLASS-BOOK  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  HISTORY,  including 

the  Connexion  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament.    With  Four  Maps. 

Fifth  Edition.     i8mo.  cloth.     $s.  6d. 

"A  singularly  clear  and  orderly  arrangement  of  the  Sacred  Story. 
His  work  is  solidly  and  completely  done"— ATHENE  UM. 
A  SHILLING  BOOK    OF    OLD    TESTAMENT    HISTORY, 

for  National  and  Elementary   Schools.      With  Map.       i8mo. 

cloth.     New  Edition. 
A   SHILLING    BOOK   OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    HISTORY, 

for    National    and  Elementary  Schools.       With  Map.       i8mo. 

cloth.     New  Edition. 
r  These  works  have  been  carefully  abridged  from  the  author's  larger 


30  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Maclear — continued. 

CLASS-BOOK  OF  THE  CATECHISM  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF 
ENGLAND.    New  and  Cheaper  Edition.     i8mo.  cloth,     is.  6d. 
"  It  is  indeed  the  work  of  a  scholar  and  divine,  and  as  such,  though 
extremely  simple,  it  is  also  extremely  instructive.     Tliere  are  few  clergy 
men  who   would  not  find  it  useful  in  preparing  candidates  for  Confir 
mation  ;  and  there  are  not  a  few  who  would  find  it  useful  to  themselves 
as  well." — LITERARY  CHURCHMAN. 

A  FIRST  CLASS-BOOK  OF  THE  CATECHISM  OF  THE 
CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND,  with  Scripture  Proofs,  for  Junior 
Classes  and  Schools.  i8mo.  6d.  New  Edition. 
A  MANUAL  OF  INSTRUCTION  FOR  CONFIRMATION  AND 
FIRST  COMMUNION.  With  Prayers  and  Devotions.  Royal 
32mo.  cloth  extra,  red  edges.  2s. 

"  It  is  earnest,  orthodox,  and  affectionate  in  tone.      The  form  of  self- 
examination  is  particularly  good." — JOHN  BULL. 

THE  ORDER  OF  CONFIRMATION,  WITH  PRAYERS  AND 
DEVOTIONS.     32mo.     6<£ 

FIRST  COMMUNION,  WITH  PRAYERS  AND  DEVOTIONS 
FOR  THE  NEWLY  CONFIRMED.     32mo.     6<t. 

Maurice. — THE  LORD'S  PRAYER,  THE  CREED,  AND 

THE  COMMANDMENTS.  A  Manual  for  Parents  and  School 
masters.  To  which  is  added  the  Order  of  the  Scriptures.  By  the 
Rev.  F.  DENISON  MAURICE,  M.A.  i8mo.  cloth  limp.  u. 

Procter.— A  HISTORY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON 

PRAYER,  with  a  Rationale  of  its  Offices.  By  FRANCIS  PROCTER, 
M.A.  Twelfth  Edition,  revised  and  enlarged.  Crown  8vo. 
los.  6d. 

Procter    and    Maclear.— AN  ELEMENTARY  INTRO- 

DUCTION  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON  PRAYER. 
Re-arranged  and  supplemented  by  an  Explanation  of  the  Morning 
and  Evening  Prayer  and  the  Litany.  By  the  Rev.  F.  PROCTER 
and  the  Rev.  G.  F.  MACLEAR.  New  Edition.  i8mo.  2s.  6d. 

Psalms  of  David  Chronologically  Arranged.     By 

Four    Friends.       An   Amended    Version,    with     Historical 
Introduction    and    Explanatory   Notes.       Second    and    Cheaper 
Edition,  with  Additions  and  Corrections.     Crown  8vo.     8^.  6d. 
"  One  of  the  most  instructive  and  valuable  book's  that  has  been  published 
for  many  years." — SPECTATOR. 

Ramsay. — THE  CATECHISER'S  MANUAL;  or,  the  church 

Catechism  Illustrated  and  Explained,  for  the  use  of  Clergymen, 
Schoolmasters,  and  Teachers.  By  the  Rev.  ARTHUR  RAMSAY, 
M.A.  Second  Edition.  i8mo.  is.  6et. 


DIVINITY.  31 


Simpson. — AN  EPITOME  OF  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE 
CHRISTIAN  CHURCH.  By  WILLIAM  SIMPSON,  M.A. 
Fifth  Edition.  Fcap.  8vo.  3*.  6d. 

Swainson.—  A  HANDBOOK  to  BUTLER'S  ANALOGY.    By 

C.  A.   SWAINSON,  D.D.,   Canon  of  Chichester.     Crown  8vo. 
is.  6d. 

Trench.— SYNONYMS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.   By 

R.    CHENEVIX  TRENCH,   D.D.,    Archbishop  of  Dublin.     New 
Edition,  enlarged.     8vo.  cloth.     \2s. 
WestCOtt.— Works  by  BROOKE  FOSS   WESTCOTT,  B.D., 

Canon  of  Peterborough. 

A     GENERAL     SURVEY    OF     THE    HISTORY    OF    THE 
CANON    OF  THE    NEW   TESTAMENT    DURING  THE 
FIRST  FOUR  CENTURIES.     Fourth  Edition.     With  Preface 
on  "  Supernatural  Religion."     Crown  8vo.      IDJ.  6d. 
*    "  Theological  students,  and  not  they  only,  hit  the  general  public,  owe  a 
deep   debt  of  gratitude  to  Mr.   Westcott  for   bringing  this  subject  fairly 
before  them  in  this  candid  and  comprehensive  essay As  a  theo 
logical,  work  it  is  at  once  perfectly  J air  and  impartial,  and  imbued  with 
a  thoroughly  religious  spirit',    and  as  a  manual  it  exhibits,  in  a  lucid 
form  and  in  a  narrow  compass,  the  results  of  extensive  research  and 
accurate  thought.     We  cordially  recommend  it. " — SATURDAY  REVIEW. 
INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  STUDY  OF  THE  FOUR  GOSPELS. 

Fifth  Edition.    Crown  8vo.     IQJ.  6d. 

"  To  learning  and  accuracy  which  commands  respect  and  confidence, 
he  unites  what  are  not  always  lobe  found  in  union  with  these  qualities,  the 
no  less  valuable  faculties  of  lucid  arrangement  and  graceful  and  facile  ex 
pression." — LONDON  QUARTERLY  REVIEW. 

THE   BIBLE  IN  THE   CHURCH.      A   Popular  Account  of  the 
Collection  and  Reception  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  the  Christian 
Churches.     New  Edition.     i8mo.  cloth.    4^.  6d. 
"We  would  recommend  every  one  who  loves  and  studies  the  Bible  to  read 
and  ponder    this   exquisite  little  book.      Mr.    Westcotfs  account  of  the 
1  Canon'  is  true  history  in  its  highest  sense" — LITERARY  CHURCHMAN. 
THE  GOSPEL  OF  THE  RESURRECTION.     Thoughts  on  its 
Relation  to  Reason  and  History.     New  Edition.     Crown  8vo. 
.       6s. 

Wilson.— THE  BIBLE  STUDENT'S  GUIDE  to  the  more  Correct 
Understanding  of  the  English  translation  of  the  Old  Testament, 
by  reference  to  the  Original  Hebrew.     By  WILLIAM  WILSON, 
D  D.,   Canon  of  Winchester,   late  Fellow   of  Queen's  College, 
Oxford.     Second  Edition,  carefully  Revised.     4to.  cloth.     25*. 
"  For  all  earnest  students  of  the  Old   Testament   Scriptures  it   is  a 
most  -valuable  Manual.      Its  arrangement  is  so  simple  that  those  who 
possess  only  their   mother-tongue,  if  they  will  take  a  little  pains,   may 
employ  it  with  great  profit"— NONCONFORMIST. 


32   .  EDUCATIONAL  BOOKS. 

Yonge  (Charlotte  M.)— SCRIPTURE  READINGS  FOR 

SCHOOLS  AND  FAMILIES.      By  CHARLOTTE  M.  YONGE, 
Author  of  "The  Heir  of  Redclyffe."     FIRST  SERIES.    Genesis 
to  Deuteronomy.    Globe  8vo.     is.  6d.    With  Comments.    Second 
Edition.     3*.  6d. 
SECOND   SERIES.     From   JOSHUA   to    SOLOMON.     Extra  fcap. 

8vo.     is.  6d.     With  Comments,  3-r.  6d. 
THIRD  SERIES.     The  KINGS  and  the  PROPHETS.     Extra  fcap. 

8vo.     is.  6d.     With  Comments,  3-y.  6d. 

Actual  need  has  led  the  author  to  endeavour  to  prepare  a  reading  book  con  - 
venient  jor  study  with  children,  containing  the  very  words  of  the  Bible,  with 
only  a  few  expedient  omissions,  and  arranged  in  Lessons  of  such  length  as  by 
experience  she  has  found  to  suit  with  children's  ordinary  power  of  accurate 
attentive  interest.  The  verse  form  has  been  retained,  because  of  its  con 
venience  for  children  reading  in  class,  and  as  more  resembling  their  Bibles  ; 
but  the  poetical  portions  have  been  given  in  their  lines.  When  Psalms  or 
portions  from  the  Prophets  illustrate  or  fall  in  with  the  narrative  they  are 
given  in  their  chronological  sequence.  The  Scripture  portion,  with  a  very 
few  notes  explanatory  of  mere  words,  is  bound  up  apart,  to  be  used  by 
children,  while  the  same  is  also  supplied  with  a  brief  comment,  the  purpose 
of  which  is  either  to  assist  the  teacher  in  explaining  the  lesson,  or  to  be 
used  by  more  advanced  young  people  to  whom  it  may  not  be  possible  to  give 
access  to  the  authorities  whence  it  has  been  taken.  Professor  Huxley,  at  a 
meeting  of  the  London  School  Board,  particularly  mentioned  the  selection 
made  by  Miss  Yonge  as  an  example  of  how  selections  might  be  made  from 
the  Bible  for  School  Reading.  See  TIMES,  March  30,  1871. 


LONDON:  R.  CLAY.  SONS,  AND  TAYLOR,  PRINTERS. 


CT  PR 


2895 
F55 


Fleay,  Frederick  Gard 
Shakespeare  manual 


PLEASE  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
CARDS  OR  SLIPS  FROM  THIS  POCKET 

UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO  LIBRARY