fettled principle, that the reading of the ancient books is probably true, and therefore is not to be difturbed for the fake of elegance, perfpicuity, or mere improvement of the fenfe. For though much credit is not due to the fidelity, nor any to the judgment of the publishers, yet they who had the copy before their eyes, were more likely to read it right, than we who only read it by imagination. But it is evident that they have often made strange mistakes by ígnorance or negligence, and that therefore fomething may be properly attempted by criticism, keeping the middle way between prefumption and timidity. Such criticism I have attempted to practise, and where any paffage appeared inextricably perplexed, have endeavoured to discover how it may be recalled to sense, with least violence. But my first labour is, always to turn the old text on every fide, and try if there be any interstice, through which light can find its way; nor would Huetius himself condemn me, as refufing the trouble of research, for the ambition of alteration. In this modeft industry I have not been unsuccessful. I have rescued many lines from the violations of temerity, and secured many scenes from the inroads of correction. I have adopted the Roman fentiment, that it is more honourable to fave a citizen, than to kill an enemy, and have been more careful to protect than to attack. I have preferved the common diftribution of the plays into acts, though I believe it to be in almost all the plays void of authority. Some of those which are divided in the later editions have no divifion in the first folio, and fome that are divided in the folio have no divifion in the preceding copies. The fettled mode of the theatre requires four intervals in the play, but few, if any, of our authour's VOL. I. d compofitions can be properly distributed in that manner. An act is fo much of the drama as paffes without intervention of time or change of place. A paufe makes a new act. In every real, and therefore in every imitative action, the intervals may be more or fewer, the reftriction of five acts being accidental and arbitrary. This Shakespeare knew, and this he practifed; his plays were written, and at first printed in one unbroken continuity, and ought now to be exhibited with fhort pauses, interpofed as often as the scene is changed, or any confiderable time is required to pass. This method would at once quell a thousand abfurdities. In restoring the authour's works to their integrity, I have confidered the punctuation as wholly in my power; for what could be their care of colons and commas, who corrupted words and fentences? Whatever could be done by adjusting points is therefore filently performed, in fome plays with much diligence, in others with lefs; it is hard to keep a busy eye steadily fixed upon evanefcent atoms, or a discursive mind upon evanefcent truth. The fame liberty has been taken with a few particles, or other words of flight effect. I have fometimes inferted or omitted them without notice. I have done that sometimes, which the other editors have done always, and which indeed the state of the text may fufficiently justify. The greater part of readers, instead of blaming us for paffing trifles, will wonder that on mere trifles so much labour is expended, with fuch importance of debate, and fuch folemnity of diction. To thefe I answer with confidence, that they are judging of an art which they do not underftand; yet cannot much reproach them with their ignorance, nor promise that they would become in general, by learning criticism, more useful, happier or wiser. As I practifed conjecture more, I learned to truft it lefs; and after I had printed a few plays, refolved to infert none of my own readings in the text. Upon this caution I now congratulate myself, for every day encreases my doubt of my emendations. Since I have confined my imagination to the margin, it muft not be confidered as very reprehenfible, if I have fuffered it to play fome freaks in its own dominion. There is no danger in conjecture, if it be proposed as conjecture; and while the text remains uninjured, those changes may be fafely offered, which are not confidered, even by him that offers them, as neceffary or safe. If my readings are of little value, they have not been oftentatiously displayed or importunately obtruded. I could have written longer notes, for the art of writing notes is not of difficult attainment. The work is performed, firft by railing at the ftupidity, negligence, ignorance, and afinine taftelessness of the former editors, and fhewing, from all that goes before and all that follows, the inelegance and abfurdity of the old reading; then by propofing fomething, which to fuperficial readers would feem fpecious, but which the editor rejects with indignation; then by producing the true reading, with a long paraphrafe, and concluding with loud acclamations on the discovery, and a fober wish for the advancement and prosperity of genuine criticism. All this may be done, and perhaps done fometimes without impropriety. But I have always fufpected that the reading is right, which requires many words to prove it wrong; and the emendation wrong, that cannot without fo much labour appear to be right. The juftness of a happy restoration ftrikes at once, and the moral precept may be well applied to criticism, quod dubitas ne feceris. To dread the fhore which he fees spread with wrecks, is natural to the failor. I had before my eye so many critical adventures ended in miscarriage, that caution was forced upon me. I encountred in every page Wit struggling with its own fophiftry, and Learning confused by the multiplicity of its views. I was forced to cenfure those whom I admired, and could not but reflect, while I was difpoffeffing their emendations, how foon the fame fate might happen to my own, and how many of the readings which I have corrected may be by fome other editor defended and eftablished. Criticks, I faw, that other's names efface, And fix their own, with labour, in the place; POPE. That a conjectural critick should often be mistaken, cannot be wonderful, either to others or himself, if it be confidered, that in his art there is no fyftem, no principal and axiomatical truth that regulates fubordinate pofitions. His chance of errour is renewed at every attempt; an oblique view of the paffage, a flight mifapprehenfion of a phrase, a cafual inattention to the parts connected, is fufficient to make him not only fail, but fail ridiculously; and when he fucceeds beft, he produces perhaps but one reading of many probaule, and he that fuggefts another will always be able to difpute his claims. It is an unhappy ftate, in which danger is hid under pleafure. The allurements of emendation are scarcely refiftible. Conjecture has all the joy and all the pride of invention, and he that has once started a happy change, is too much delighted to confider what objections may rise against it. Yet conjectural criticism has been of great use in the learned world; nor is it my intention to depreciate a study, that has exercised so many mighty minds, from the revival of learning to our own age, from the Bishop of Aleria to English Bentley. The criticks on ancient authours have, in the exercise of their fagacity, many affistances, which the editor of Shakespeare is condemned to want. They are employed upon grammatical and settled languages, whose conAtruction contributes so much to perfpicuity, that Homer has fewer paffages unintelligible than Chaucer. The words have not only a known regimen, but invariable quantities, which direct and confine the choice. There are commonly. more manuscripts than one; and they do not often conspire in the fame mistakes. Yet Scaliger could confess to Salmafius how little fatisfaction his emendations gave him. Illudunt nobis conjecturæ noftræ, quarum nos pudet, pofteaquam in meliores codices incidimus. And Lipfius could complain, that criticks were making faults, by trying to remove them, Ut olim vitiis, ita nunc remediis laboratur. And indeed, where mere conjecture is to be used, the emendations of Scaliger and Lipfius, notwithstanding their wonderful fagacity and erudition, are often vague and difputable, like mine or Theobald's. Perhaps I may not be more cenfured for doing wrong, than for doing little; for raifing in the publick expectations, which at laft I have not answered. The expectation of ignorance is indefinite, and that of knowledge is often tyrannical. It is hard to fatisfy those who know not what to demand, or those who demand by defign what they think impoffible to be done. I have indeed disappointed no opinion more than my own; yet I have endeavoured to perform my task with no flight folicitude. Not a fingle paffage in the |