fingular good fortune to have been poffeffed of two or three different copies of all, when neither editors nor collectors, in the courfe of near fifty years, have been able fo much as to obtain the fight of one of the number*.

At the end of the laft volume I have added a tragedy of King Leir, published before that of Shakespeare, which it is not improbable he might have feen, as the father kneeling to the daughter, when the kneels to afk his bleffing is found in it; a circumstance two poets were not very likely to have hit on feparately; and which feems borrowed by the latter with his ufual judgment, it being the most natural paffage in the whole play; and is introduced in fuch a manner, as to make it fairly his own. The ingenious editor of The Reliques of Ancient English Poetry having never met with this play, and as it is not preferved in Mr. Garrick's collection, I thought it a curiofity worthy the notice of the publick.

I have likewife reprinted Shakespeare's Sonnets, from a copy published in 1600, by G. Eld, one of the printers of his plays; which, added to the confideration that they made their appearance with his name, and in his life-time, seems to be no flender proof of their authenticity. The same evidence might operate in favour of feveral more plays which are omitted here, out of refpect to the judgment of those who had omitted them before +.

It is to be wifhed that fome method of publication most favourable to the character of an author were once eftablifhed; whether we are to fend into the world all his

*It will be obvious to every one acquainted with the ancient English language, that in almost all the titles of plays in this catalogue of Mr. William Rufus Chetwood, the fpelling is constantly overcharged with fuch a fuperfluity of letters as is not to be found in the writings of Shakespeare or his contemporaries. A more bungling attempt at a forgery was never obtruded on the public. See the British Theatre 1750, reprinted by Dodfley in 1756, under the title of Theatrical Records, or an Account of English Dramatic Authors, and their Works," where all that is faid concerning an advertisement at the end of Romeo and Juliet 1597 is equally falfe, no copy of that play having been ever published by Andrew Wife.

† Locrine, 1595. Sir John Oldcastle, 1600. London Prodigal, 605, Pericles Prince of Tyre, 1609. Puritan, 1600. Thomas Lord Cromwell, 1613. Yorkshire Tragedy, 1608.

works

works without diftinction, or arbitrarily to leave ont what may be thought a difgrace to him. The firft editors, who rejected Pericles, retained Titus Andronicus; and Mr. Pope, without any reafon, named The Winter's Tale, a play that bears the strongest marks of the hand of Shakespeare, among those which he supposed to be fpurious. Dr. Warburton has fixed a ftigma on the three parts of Henry the Sixth, and fome others:

Inde Dolabella eft, atque hinc Antonius;

and all have been willing to plunder Shakespeare, or mix up a breed of barren metal with his pureft ore.

Joshua Barnes, the editor of Euripides, thought every fcrap of his author fo facred, that he has preserved with the name of one of his plays, the only remaining word of it. The fame reafon indeed might be given in his favour, which caused the preservation of that valuable trifyllable: which is, that it cannot be found in any other place in the Greek language. But this does not feem to have been his only motive, as we find he has to the full as carefully published feveral detached and broken fentences, the gleanings from fcholiafts, which have no claim to merit of that kind; and yet the author's works might be reckoned by fome to be incomplete without them. If then this duty is expected from every editor of a Greek or Roman poet, why is not the fame infifted on in respect of an English claffick? But if the cuftom of preferving all, whether worthy of it or not, be more honoured in the breach than the obfervance, the fuppreffion at least should not be confidered as a fault. The publication of fuch things as Swift had written merely to raise a laugh among his friends, has added fomething to the bulk of his works, but very little to his character as a writer. The four volumes that came out fince Dr. Hawkefworth's edition, not to look on them as a tax levied on the publick (which I think one might without injustice) contain not more than fufficient to have made one of real value; and there is a kind of difingenuity, not to give it a harfher title, in exhibiting what the author never meant fhould fee the light; for no motive, but a fordid one, can betray the furvivors to make that publick, which they themselves must be of opinion will be unfavourable to the memory of the

dead.

Life does not often receive good unmixed with evil. The benefits of the art of printing are depraved by the facility with which scandal may be diffused, and fecrets revealed; and by the temptation by which traffick folicits avarice to betray the weaknesses of paffion, or the confidence of friendship.

I cannot forbear to think thefe pofthumous publications injurious to fociety. A man confcious of literary reputation will grow in time afraid to write with tenderness to his fifter, or with fondnefs to his child; or to remit on the flighteft occafion, or most preffing exigence, the rigour of critical choice, and grammatical feverity. That esteem which preferves his letters, will at laft produce his disgrace; when that which he wrote only to his friend or his daughter fhall be laid open to the publick.

There is perhaps fufficient evidence, that most of the plays in queftion, unequal as they may be to the reft, were written by Shakespeare; but the reafon generally given for publifhing the lefs correct pieces of an author, that it affords a more impartial view of a man's talents or way of thinking, than when we only fee him in form, and prepared for our reception, is not enough to condemn, an editor who thinks and practises otherwife. For what is all this to fhew, but that every man is more dull at one time than another; a fact which the world would eafily have admitted, without afking any proofs in its fupport that might be destructive to an author's reputation.

To conclude; if the work, which this publication was meant to facilitate, has been already performed, the fatisfaction of knowing it to be so may be obtained from hence; if otherwife, let thofe who raised expectations of correctnefs, and through negligence defeated them, be justly expofed by future editors, who will now be in poffeffion of by far the greatest part of what they might have enquired after for years to no purpose; for in refpect of fuch a number of the old quartos as are here exhibited, the first folio is a common book. This advantage will at least arise, that future editors, having equally recourfe to the fame copies, can challenge diftinction and preference only by genius, capacity, industry, and learning.

As I have only collected materials for future artists, I confider what I have been doing as no more than an apparatus for their ufe. If the publick is inclined to receive

it as fuch, I am amply rewarded for my trouble; if otherwife, I fhall fubmit with chearfulness to the cenfure which fhould equitably fall on an injudicious attempt; having this confolation, however, that my defign amounted to no more than a wish to encourage others to think of preferving the oldest editions of the English writers, which are growing scarcer every day; and to afford the world all the affiftance or pleasure it can receive from the most authentick copies extant of its NOBLEST POET.

n

SOME

ACCOUNT of the LIFE, &c.

OF

Mr. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.

Τ

Written by Mr. ROW E.

IT feems to be a kind the

excellent men, especially of those whom their wit and learning have made famous, to deliver fome account of themselves, as well as their works, to pofterity. For this reafon, how fond do we see some people of difcovering any little perfonal story of the great men of antiquity! their families, the common accidents of their lives, and even their fhape, make, and features have been the subject of critical enquiries. How trifling foever this curiofity may seem to be, it is certainly very natural; and we are hardly fatisfied with an account of any remarkable perfon, till we have heard him defcribed even to the very cloaths he wears. for what relates to men of letters, the knowledge of an author may fometimes conduce to the better understanding his book; and though the works of Mr. Shakespeare may feem to many not to want a comment, yet I fancy fome little account of the man himself may not be thought improper to go along with them.

As

He was the fon of Mr. John Shakespeare, and was born at Stratford upon Avon, in Warwickshire, in April 1564. His family, as appears by the register and publick writings relating to that town, were of good figure and fashion there, and are mentioned as gentlemen. His father, who was a confiderable dealer in wool, had fo large a family, ten chil dren in all, that though he was his eldest fon, he could give