cumulate upon him; while the reading was yet not rectified, nor his allufions understood; yet then did Dryden pronounce, " that Shakespeare was the man, "who, of all modern and perhaps ancient poets, "had the largest and most comprehenfive foul. All "the images of nature were still prefent to him, and "he drew them not laboriously, but luckily: when "he defcribes any thing, you more than fee it, you "feel it too. Thofe, who accufe him to have wanted "learning, give him the greater commendation: he "was naturally learned: he needed not the spectacles "of books to read nature; he looked inwards, and "found her there. I cannot fay he is every where "alike; were he fo, I fhould do him injury to com66 pare him with the greatest of mankind. He is "many times flat and infipid; his comick wit de. "generating into clenches, his ferious fwelling into "bombaft. But he is always great, when fome great "occafion is prefented to him: no man can fay, he "ever had a fit fubject for his wit, and did not then "raife himself as high above the rest of poets,

"Quantum lenia folent inter viburna cupreffi."

It is to be lamented, that fuch a writer fhould want a commentary; that his language fhould become obfolete, or his fentiments obfcure. But it is vain to carry wishes beyond the condition of human things; that which muft happen to all, has happened to Shakespeare, by accident and time; and more than has been fuffered by any other writer fince the ufe of types, has been fuffered by him through his own negligence of fame, or perhaps by that fupe

riority

riority of mind, which despised its own performances, when it compared them with its powers, and judged those works unworthy to be preferved, which the criticks of following ages were to contend for the fame of reftoring and explaining.

Among these candidates of inferior fame, I am now to ftand the judgment of the publick; and with that I could confidently produce my commentary as equal to the encouragement which I have had the honour of receiving, Every work of this kind is by its nature deficient, and I fhould feel little folicitude about the sentence, were it to be pronounced only by the skilful and the learned,

Of what has been performed in this revifal, an ac+ count is given in the following pages by Mr. Steevens, who might have spoken both of his own diligence and fagacity, in terms of greater felf-approbation, without deviating from modefty or truth.

ADVERTISEMENT

TO THE

READER.

T

HE want of adherence to the old copies, which has been complained of, in the text of every modern republication of Shakespeare, is fairly deducible from Mr. Rowe's inattention to one of the first duties of an editor *. Mr. Rowe did not print from the earliest and most correct, but from the most remote and inaccurate of the four folios. Between the years 1623 and 1685 (the dates of the first and last) the errors in every play, at least, were trebled. Several pages in each of these ancient editions have been examined, that the affertion might come more fully fupported. It may be added, that as every fresh editor continued to make the text

*"I must not (fays Mr. Rowe in his dedication to the duke of Somerset) pretend to have reftor'd this work to the exactness of the author's original manufcripts: thofe are loft, or, at least, are gone beyond any inquiry I could make; fo that there was nothing left, but to compare the feveral editions, and give the true reading as well as I could from thence. This I have endeavour'd to do pretty carefully, and render'd very many places intelligible, that were not fo before. In fome of the editions, especially the laft, there were many lines (and in Hamlet one whole scene) left out together; thefe are now all fupply'd. I fear your grace will find fome faults, but I hope they are moftly litteral, and the errors of the prefs." Would not any one, from this declaration, fuppofe that Mr. Rowe (who does not appear to have confulted a single quarto) had at least compared the folios with each other?

of

of his predeceffor the ground-work of his own (never collating but where difficulties occurred) fome deviations from the originals had been handed down, the number of which are leffened in the impreffion before us, as it has been conftantly compared with the most authentic copies, whether collation was abfolutely neceffary for the recovery of fenfe, or not. The perfon who undertook this task may have failed by inadvertency, as well as thofe who preceded him; but the reader may be affured, that he, who thought it his duty to free an author from fuch modern and unneceffary innovations as had been cenfured in others, has not ventured to introduce any of his own.

It is not pretended that a complete body of various readings is here collected; or that all the diverfities which the copies exhibit, are pointed out; as near two thirds of them are typographical mistakes, or fuch a change of infignificant particles, as would crowd the bottom of the page with an oftentation of materials, from which at last nothing useful could be felected.

The dialogue might indeed fometimes be lengthened by other infertions than have hitherto been made, but without advantage either to its fpirit or beauty; as in the following instance:

Lear. No.

Kent. Yes.

Lear. No, I fay.

Kent. I fay, yea.

Here the quartos add:

Lear. No, no, they would not.

Kent. Yes, they have.

[E3]

By

By the admiffion of this negation and affirmation, has any new idea been gained?

The labours of preceding editors have not left room for a boast, that many valuable readings have been retrieved; though it may be fairly afferted, that the text of Shakespeare is reftored to the condition in which the author, or rather his first publishers, appear to have left it, fuch emendations as were abfolutely neceffary, alone admitted: for where a particle, indifpenfably neceffary to the fenfe, was wanting, fuch a fupply has been filently adopted from other editions; but where a fyliable, or more, had been added for the fake of the metre only, which at first might have been irregular, fuch interpolations are here conftantly retrenched, fometimes with, and fometimes without notice. Thofe fpeeches, which in the elder editions are printed as profe, and from their own construction are incapable of being compreffed into verfe, without the aid of fupplemental fyllables, are restored to profe again; and the meafure is divided afresh in others, where the mafs of words had been inharmoniously separated into lines.

The scenery, throughout all the plays, is regulated in conformity to a rule, which the poet, by his general practice feems to have propofed to himself, Several of his pieces are come down to us, divided into scenes as well as acts. Thefe divifions were probably his own, as they are made on fettled principles, which would hardly have been the case, had the task been executed by the players. A change of fcene, with Shakespeare, moft commonly implies a change of place, but always, an entire evacuation of

the