deceas to the first sonne of her bodie lawfullie yssue- | ing & to the heires Males of the bodie of the saied first Sonne lawfullie yssueing & for defalt of such issue to the second Sonne of her bodie lawfullie issueinge & to the heires males of the bodie of the saied Second Sonne lawfullie yssueinge and for defult of such heires to the third Sonne of the bodie of the saied Susanna Lawfullie yssueing & of the heires males of the bodie of the saied third sonne law fullie yssueing And for defalt of such issue the same soe to be & Remaine to the Fourth Fyfth sixte & Seaventh sonnes of her bodie lawfullie issueing one after Another & to the heires Males of the bodies of the saied Fourth fifth Sixte and Seaventh sonnes lawfullie yssueing in such manner as yt ys before Lymitted to be & Remaine to the first second & third Sonns of her bodie & to their heires Males And for defult of such issue the saied premisses to be & Remaine to my sayed Neece Hall & the heires Males of her bodie lawfullie yssueing & for defalt of such issue to my Daughter Judith & the heires Males of her body lawfullie issueinge And for defalt of such issue to the Right heires of me the saied William Shackspeare for ever Item I gyve vnto my

wief my second best bed with the furniture Item I gyve & bequeath to my saied Daughter Judith my broad silver gilt bole All the rest of my goodes Chattel Leases plate Jewels & household stuffe whatsoeuer after my Dettes and Legasies paied & my funerall expences discharged I gyve devise and bequeath to my Sonne in Lawe John Hall gent & my Daughter Susanna his wief whom I ordaine & make executours of this my Last will and testament And I doe intreat & Appoint the saied Thomas Russell Esquier & Frauncis Collins gent to be overseers hereof And doe Revoke All former wills & publishe this to be my last will and testament In Witness whereof I have herevnto put my hand the Daie & Yeare first aboue written. "By me William Shakspeare.

Witnes to the publishing
hercof Fra: Collyns
Julyus Shawe
John Robinson
Robert Whattcott

Hamnet Sadler

Probatum corā Magr Willim Byrde Dcore Comiss, &c. xxdo die mensis Junij Anno Dni 1616 Juramto Johannis Hall vnius ex &c Cui &c De bene &c Jurat Resvat ptate &c. Susanne Hall alt ex &c cu veñit &c petitur

(Invt ext)

THE TEMPEST.

"The Tempest" was first printed in the folio edition of Mr. William Shakespeare's Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies," bearing date in 1623, where it stands first, and occupies nineteen pages, viz., from p. 1, to p. 19 inclusive. It fills the same place in the folios of 1632, 1664, and 1685.]

A MATERIAL fact, in reference to the date of the first production of "The Tempest," has only been recently ascertained: we allude to the notice of the performance of it, before King James, on November 1, 1611, (the earliest date previously discovered for its performance being 1613,) which is contained in the" Extracts from the Accounts of the Revels at Court," edited by Mr. P. Cunningham for the Shakespeare Society: the memorandum is in the following form:

"Hallomas nyght was presented att Whithall before the Kinges Majestie a play called the Tempest."

In the margin is inserted the additional circumstance, that the performance was "by the King's Players;" and there can be no reasonable doubt that it was Shakespeare's drama, which had been written for that company. When it had been so written, is still a point of difficulty; but the probability, we think, is that it was selected by the Master of the Revels, for representation at Court in 1611, on account of its novelty and popularity on the public stage. Eleven other dramas, as appears by the same document, were exhibited between October 31, 1611, and the same day in the next year; and it is remarkable that ten of these (as far as we possess any information respecting them) were comparatively new plays, and with regard to the eleventh, it was not more than three years old. We may, perhaps, be warranted in inferring, therefore, that "The Tempest" was also not then an old play.

It seems to us, likewise, that the internal evidence, derived from style and language, clearly indicates that it was a late production, and that it belongs to about the same period of our great dramatist's literary history as his "Winter's Tale," which was also chosen for a Court-play, and represented at Whitehall only four days after "The Tempest" had been exhibited. In point of construction, it must be admitted at once that there is the most obvious dissimilarity, inasmuch as "The Winter's Tale" is a piece in which the unities are utterly disregarded, while in "The Tempest" they are strictly observed. It is only in the involved and parenthetical character of some of the speeches, and in psychological resemblances, that we would institute a comparison between "The Tempest" and the "Winter's Tale," and would infer from thence that they belong to about the same period.

It may be urged, however, that what was represented at Court in 1611 was only a revival of an older play, acted before 1596, and such may have been the case we do not, however, think it probable, for several reasons. One of these is an appa

rently trifling circumstance, pointed out by Farmer; viz., that in "The Merchant of Venice," written before 1598, the name of Stephano is invariably pronounced with the accent on the second syllable, while in "The Tempest," the proper pronunciation It seems is as constantly required by the verse. certain, therefore, that Shakespeare found his error in the interval, and he may have learnt it from Ben Jonson's "Every Man in his Humor," in which Shakespeare performed, and in the original list of characters to which, in the edition of 1601, the names not only of Stephano, but of Prospero occur.

We cannot agree with the Rev. Mr. Hunter, (in his "Disquisition on the Tempest,") in thinking that he has established, that nothing was suggested to Shakespeare by the storm, in July, 1609, which dispersed the fleet under Sir George Somers and Sir Thomas Gates, of which an account was published by a person of the name of Jourdan in the following year. This point was, to our mind, satisfactorily made out by Malone, and the mention of "the still-vexed Bermoothes" by Shakespeare seems directly to connect the drama with Jourdan's "Discovery of the Bermudas, otherwise called the Isle of Devils," printed in 1610.

No novel, in prose or verse, to which Shakespeare resorted for the incidents of" The Tempest," has yet been discovered. We have turned over the pages of, we believe, every Italian novelist, anterior to the age of Shakespeare, in hopes of finding some story containing traces of the incidents of "The Tem pest," but without success. The ballad entitled "The Inchanted Island," printed in "Farther Particulars regarding Shakespeare and his Works," is a more modern production than the play, from which it varies in the names, as well as in some points of the story, as if for the purpose of concealing its connection with a production which was popular on the stage. Our opinion decidedly is, that it was founded upon "The Tempest," and not upon any ancient narrative to which Shakespeare also might have been indebted.

Coleridge tells us (Lit. Rem.) that "The Tempest' is a species of drama, which owes no allegiance to time or space, and in which, therefore, errors of chronology and geography-no mortal sins in any species-are venial faults, and count for nothing: it addresses itself entirely to the imaginative faculty." This opinion was delivered in 1818; and three years earlier Coleridge had spoken of "The Tempest," as certainly one of Shakespeare's latest works, judging from the language only: Schlegel was of the same opinion, without, however, assigning any distinct reason, and instituted a comparison between "The Tempest" and "Midsummer-Night's Dream," adding, "The preponderance of thought in 'The Tempest,' exhibited in its profound and original characterization, strikes us at once; but we must also admire the deep sense of the art (tiefsinnige Kunst) which is apparent in the structure of the whole, in the wise economy of its means, and in the skill with which the scaffolding is raised to sustain the marvellous aerial structure.'

THE

TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA.

["The Two Gentlemen of Verona" was first printed in the

folio of 1623, where it occupies nineteen pages, viz., from It p. 20 to p. 38, inclusive, in the division of "Comedies," is there divided into Acts and Scenes. It also stands second in the later folios.]

both instances for a bookseller of the name of Arthur Johnson: Arthur Johnson acquired the right to publish it from John Busby, and the original entry, and the assignment of the play, run thus in the Registers of the Stationers' Company:

"18 Jan. 1601. John Busby] An excellent and pleasant conceited commedie of Sir John Faulstof, and the Merry wyves of Windesor.

"Arth. Johnson] By assignment from Jno. Busbye a. B. An excellent and pleasant conceited comedie of Sir John Faulstafe, and the merry wyves of Windsor.'

January, 1601, according to our present mode of

It would, we think, be idle to attempt to fix upon any particular year: it is unquestionably the work of a young and unpractised dramatist, and the conclusion is especially inartificial and abrupt. It may have been written by our great dramatist very soon after he joined a theatrical company; and at all events we do not think it likely that it was composed subsequently to 1591. We should be inclined to place it, as indeed it stands in the work of Meres, immediately before "Love's Labor's Lost." Meres

calls it the "Gentlemen of Verona."

If "The Two Gentlemen of Verona" were not the offspring merely of the author's invention, we have yet to discover the source of its plot. Points of resemblance have been dwelt upon in connection with Sir Philip Sidney's "Arcadia," 1590, and the "Diana" of Montemayor, which was not translated into English by B. Yonge until 1598; but the incidents, common to the drama and to these two works, are only such as might be found in other romances, or would present themselves spontaneously to the mind of a young poet. The notion of some critics, that "The Two Gentlemen of Verona" contains few or no marks of Shakespeare's hand, is a strong proof of their incompetence to form a judg

ment.

THE

MERRY WIVES OF WINDSOR. ["A Most pleasaunt and excellent conceited Comedie, of Syr John Falstaffe, and the merrie Wiues of Windsor. Entermixed with sundrie variable and pleasing humors, of Syr Hugh the Welch knight, Justice Shallow, and his wise Cousin M. Slender. With the swaggering vaine of Auncient Pistoll, and Corporal Nym. By William Shakespeare. As it hath bene diuers times Acted by the right Honorable my Lord Chamberlaines seruants. Both be fore her Maiestie, and elsewhere. London Printed by T. C. for Arthur Johnson, and are to be sold at his shop in Powles Church-yard, at the signe of the Flower de Leuse

and the Crowne. 1602." 4to. 27 leaves.

"A Most pleasant and excellent conceited Comedie, of Sir John Falstaffe, and the Merry Wines of Windsor. With the swaggering vaine of Ancient Pistoll, and Corporall Nym. Written by W. Shakspeare. Printed for Arthur Johnson, 1619." 4to. 28 leaves. The 4to. of 1630, was "printed by T. H. for R. Meighen." &c. In the folio, 1623, The Merry Wives of Windsor" occupies twenty-two pages, viz, from p. 39 to p. 60 inclueive, in the division of "Comedies." It also stands third in the three later folios.]

THIS comedy was printed for the first time in a perfect state in the folio of 1623: it had come out in an imperfect state in 1602, and again in 1619, in

"most pleasaunt and excellent conceited comedie of Syr John Falstaffe, and the merrie Wives of Windsor," (the title-page following the description in the entry) appeared in quarto with the date of 1602. It has been the custom to look upon this edition as the first sketch of the drama, which Shakespeare afterwards enlarged and improved to the form in which it appears in the folio of 1623. After the most minute examination, we are not of that opinion: it has been universally admitted that the 4to. of 1602 was piratical; and our conviction is that, like the first edition of " Henry V." in 1600, it was fraudulently made up, for the purpose of sale, partly from notes taken at the theatre, and partly from memory, without even the assistance of any of the parts as delivered out by the copyist of the theatre to the actors. It is to be observed, that John Busby, who assigned "The Merry Wives of Windsor" to Arthur Johnson in 1602, was the same bookseller who, two years before, had joined in the publication of the undoubtedly surreptitious "Hen1y V."

The title-page states, that it had been acted "by the Lord Chamberlain's servants" before the Queen "and elsewhere:" "elsewhere," was perhaps at the Globe on the Bankside, and we may suppose, that it had been brought out in the commencement of the summer season of 1600, before the death of Sir Thomas Lucy. If the "dozen white luces" in the first scene were meant to ridicule him, Shakespeare would certainly not have introduced the allusion after the death of the object of it. That it continued a favorite play we can readily believe, and we learn that it was acted before James 1., not long after he came to the throne: the following memorandum is contained in the accounts of the "Revels at Court" in the latter end of 1604:

"

"By his Majestie's plaiers. The Sunday followinge A Play of the Merry Wiues of Winsor.' This representation occurred on lowing" November 1st, 1604.

"the Sunday fol

What has led some to imagine that the surreptitious impression of 1602 was the comedy as it first came from the hands of Shakespeare, is a tradition respecting the rapidity with which it was composed. This tradition, when traced to its source, can be carried back no farther than 1702: John Dennis in that year printed his "Comical Gallant," founded upon "The Merry Wives of Windsor," and in the dedication he states, that "the comedy was written at the command of Queen Elizabeth, and by her direction; and she was so eager to see it acted, that she commanded it to be finished in fourteen days." Dennis gives no authority for any part of this assertion, but because he knew Dryden, it is supposed to have come from him; and because Dryden was acquainted with Davenant, it has been conjectured that the latter might have communi

It has been a disputed question in what part of the series of dranias in which Falstaff is introduced, "The Merry Wives of Windsor" ought to be read: Johnson thought it came in between "Henry IV.," part ii., and "Henry V. " Malone, on the other hand, argued that it should be placed between the two parts of " Henry IV. ;" but the truth is, that almost insuperable difficulties present themselves to either hypothesis, and we doubt much whether the one or the other is well founded. Shakespeare, having for some reason been induced to represent Falstaff in love, considered by what persons he might be immediately surrounded, and Bardolph, Pistol, Nym, and Mrs. Quickly, naturally presented themselves to his mind: he was aware that the audience, with whom they had been favorite characters, would expect them still to be Falstaff's companions; and though Shakespeare had in fact hanged two of them in "Henry V.," and Mrs. Quickly had died, he might trust to the forgetfulness of those before whom the comedy was to be represented, and care little for the consideration, since so eagerly debated, in what part of the series "The Meny Wives of Windsor" ought to be read. With regard to the supposed sources of the plot, our opinion is, that the true original of the story (if Shakespeare did not himself invent the incidents) has not come down to us.

feeling, and employment of language.

As to the date when "Measure for Measure" was written, we have no positive information, but we now know that it was acted at Court on St. Stephen's night, (26th December,) 1604.

In the column of the account headed "The Poets

which mayd the Plaies," we find the name of "Shaxberd" entered, which was the mode in which the ignorant scribe, who prepared the account, spelt the name of our great dramatist. Malone conjec tured from certain allusions (such as to "the war" with Spain," the sweat," meaning the plague, &c.), that "Measure for Measure" was written in 1603; and if we suppose it to have been selected for performance at Court on the 26th December, 1604, on account of its popularity at the theatre after its production, his supposition will receive some confirma

tion.

Of "Measure for Measure," Coleridge observes in his "Literary Remains:" "This play, which is Shakespeare's throughout, is to me the most painful, say rather, the only painful part of his genuine works. The comic and tragic parts equally border on the onTsov-the one being disgusting, the other horrible; and the pardon and marriage of Angelo not merely baffles the strong indignant claim of justice (for cruelty, with lust and damnable baseness, can not be forgiven, because we cannot conceive them as being morally repented of), but it is likewise degrading to the character of woman."

MEASURE FOR MEASURE. ["Measure for Measure" was first printed in the folio of Mr. William Shakespeare's Comedies, Histories, & Tragedies," 1623, where it occupies twenty-four pages, viz., from p. 61 to p. 84, inclusive, in the division of Comedies." It was, of course, reprinted in the later folios of 1632, 1664, and 1685.]

seems

In the " History of English Dramatic Poetry," III., 68, it is remarked, that "although clear that Shakespeare kept Whetstone's 'Promos and Cassandra' in his eye, while writing Measure for Measure,' it is probable that he also made use of some other dramatic composition or novel, in which the same story was treated." I was led to form this opinion from the constant habit of dramatists of that period to employ the productions of their predecessors, and from the extreme likelihood, that when our old play-writers were hunting in all directions for stories which they could convert to their purpose, they would not have passed over the novel by Giraldi Cinthio, which had not only been translated, but actually converted into a drama nearly a quarter of a century before the death of Elizabeth. Whetstone's "Promos and Cassandra,” a play in two parts, was printed in 1578, though, as far as we know, never acted, and he subsequently introduced a translation of the novel (which he admitted to be its origin), in his "Heptameron of Civil Discourses." 4to. 1582.

The Title of Cinthio's novel, the fifth of the eighth Decad of his Hecatommithi, gives a sufficient account of the progress of the story as he relates it. Whetstone adopts its incidents pretty exactly in his "Promos and Cassandra;" but Shakespeare varies from them chiefly by the introduction of Mariana, and by the final union between the duke and Isabella. Shakespeare was not indebted to Whetstone for a single thought, nor for a casual expression, excepting as far as similarity of situation may be said to |

THE COMEDY OF ERRORS.

[" The Comedie of Errors" was first printed in the folio of 16:23. where it occupies sixteen pages, viz., from p. 85 to p. 100, inclusive, in the division of "Comedies." It was reprinted in the three subsequent impressions of the same volume.]

WE have distinct evidence of the existence of an old play called "The Historie of Error," which was acted at Hampton Court, on New-Year's night, 1576-7. The same play, in all probability, was repeated at Windsor on Twelfth-night, 1582-3, though, in the accounts of the Master of the Revels, it is called, "The Historie of Ferrar," the clerk who prepared the account probably writing the title by his ear. Thus we see that, shortly before Shakespeare is supposed to have come to London, a play was in course of performance upon which his own "Comedy of Errors" might be founded. Historie of Error" was, probably, an early adapta tion of the Menæchmi of Plautus, of which a free translation was published in 1595.

cause

"The

Ritson was of opinion, "that Shakespeare was not under the slightest obligation" to the translation of the Menæchmi, by W. W., supposed, by Ant. Wood, to be W. Warner; and most likely Ritson was right, not from want of resemblance, but be"The Comedy of Errors" was, in all probability, anterior in point of date, and because Shakespeare may have availed himself of the old drama which, as has been noticed, was performed at court in 1676-7, and in 1582-3. That court-drama, we may infer, had its origin in Plautus; and it was, perhaps, the popularity of Shakespeare's "Comedy of Errors" which induced Creede to print Warner's version of the Menæchmi in 1595.

Sir W. Blackstone entertained the belief, from the "long hobbling verses" in the "Comedy of Errors," that it was among Shakespeare's more

66