MINOR CORRESPONDENCE.

GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE.

Conjectural Emendations on the Text of Shakspere, with Observations on the Notes of the Commentators-(concluded).

(Continued from p. 132.)

WE have now brought our observations on certain passages in the text of Shakspere to a conclusion, not displeased with the permission of hanging up our little lamp among many others, on the walls of that resplendent temple in which the genius of our immortal poet is enshrined. Notes we know are necessary, but are necessary evils, and we are not vain enough of our endeavours to amend or correct the text, to suppose that ours will be all approved or admitted by those who are engaged in the same pursuit, cultivating the same art of criticism, and applying it to the doubtful and difficult passages of the same author.* Great latitude must be allowed in all matters of taste; few of the arrows that are shot exactly hit the mark; the best marksmen will often only come near it: there are propitious hours and "vernal equinoxes" for the critic as well as the poet; very rare qualities and endowments, such as we do not pretend to possess, are requisite to form an accomplished and successful editor; and no one ever possessed at once such variety of knowledge and such acuteness of conjecture, such subtlety in detecting the latent meaning of his author, and such happiness in restoring it to its former purity and brightness, as to render the labours of others unnecessary, or even to protect himself from the charge of alterations at once unnecessary and unfortunate. In fact, the great and extended province of criticism must be divided among various occupants, according to the bent of their genius, and the nature of their acquirements. He who possesses the poetical taste and sensibility which enable him to appreciate the beauties, and feel every delicate modification of thought and language, may be deficient in extent of knowledge, and may lament that he has not possessed a wider acquaintance with the literature contemporary with Shakspere, which could enable him to supply the defects that he observed ;† while another, possessing a more copious storehouse and magazine of acquired erudition, may not have the sagacity to direct it aright, nor taste to select what is immediately applicable to his purpose. No one would accuse Pope of wanting the poetical faculty that

* "Conjectural criticism (says Johnson) demands more than humanity possesses, and he that exercises it with most praise has very frequent need of indulgence." Again: "That a conjectural critic should often be mistaken cannot be wonderful if it be considered that in his art there is no system, no principal and axiomatical truth that regulates subordinate positions. His chance of error is renewed at every attempt; an oblique view of the passage, a slight misapprehension of a phrase, a casual inattention to the parts connected, is sufficient to make him not only fail, but fail ridiculously, and when he succeeds best he produces perhaps but one reading out of many probable, and he that suggests another will always be able to dispute his claims."

"I scarcely remember (says Malone) ever to have looked into a book of the age of Queen Elizabeth in which I did not find somewhat that tended to throw a light on these plays," &c. V. Preface.

was required to feel the beauties of Shakspere's genius, or to illustrate the allusions and few would think of asserting that he came to his task with a sufficient knowledge of the dramatic literature of the days of Elizabeth, or indeed with an industry prepared for the toilsome labours required of an editor; while animadversions in no way unjust might be passed on many learned and laborious scholars, whose erudition has been compiled without selection, and whose extensive acquaintance with languages and authors, seems only to encumber their efforts, and cloud and oppress their understanding. Thus the ancient Greek dramatists have been immured,

In the mild limbo of our father Heath,

and thus the most preposterous alterations have been suggested in the text of Shakspere by critics both old and new, who came to the work with minds unprepared by previous discipline, by acquaintance with the authentic rules of the art they practised, and by congenial pursuits and capabilities.

It will then be admitted that any edition of an author like Shakspere, which should command public confidence, and acquire a solid reputation, must be formed of a variety of united labours. One man will excel in vigilance of attention, one in sagacity of illustration; the labours of one will supply what another has overlooked, and the conjecture in an auspicious moment of an inferior scholar, will sometimes prove right, when the critic of higher reputation has laboured in vain. Singly to do all that is required seems incompatible with the extent and nature of human powers. Successful labour is that which is accompanied with pleasure. We excel in the work that we love. One man is cheerfully employed in the cautious vigilance of collation; another delights in the bright illuminations he brings from distant sources, and in exciting at once surprise and pleasure by emendations so appropriate and just as to be admitted as soon as known. To those who go along with us in our remarks, the feeling will appear uncalled for and unjust which has of late times arisen against that collected body of critics, whose united researches form what is called the Variorum edition of Shakspere, and which, commencing with Rowe and Pope, were closed as it were for a period by the labours of Malone and Reed. But we must pause before we join in a disparaging judgment of those whom in our youthful days we remember all delighted to honour; for in the first place we acknowledge that they have all, in a greater or less degree, done service to their author; some by conjecture, some by illustration, some by superior fidelity of collation, and some by a deeper knowledge of doubtful idioms and verbal constructions.† A great mass of curious and remote learning has been brought to bear on the text, which seldom fails to instruct even when it does not convince, and delights us by the splendour of its collateral light, when its direct illumination has fallen wide of its object. But let us go

* Mr. Dyce has remarked in his Observations, &c. p. 143, "Here, as he sometimes did elsewhere, Steevens quoted what he did not understand;" and p. 206, "Malone's knowledge of our ancient language was very limited, even at the end of his career." See Gifford's Note on Ford's Works, vol. i. p. 90. Several of the commentators show little acquaintance with dramatic literature or language.

Yet the editors and commentators would do well, we think, to keep Steevens's remark constantly in their minds, "That as judgment without the aid of collation might have insufficient materials to work upon, so collation divested of judgment will be often wore than thrown away, because it introduces obscurity instead of light." p. 36. Nor should Dr. Johnson's observations be lost sight of, "That the art of writing notes is not of difficult attainment," and "That as I practised conjecture more, I learned to trust it less, for every day increases my doubt of my emendations."

further, and ask, Who among the new and latest school of critics has arisen so surpassing his predecessors that he can justly look down on them with indifference or contempt? Who has since appeared who has equalled Warburton in subtilty, Johnson in clearness and power of illustration, Steevens in variety of attainments, and Gifford in acuteness and rectitude of understanding? In their voluminous annotations they have brought together a vast mass of information, curious and apposite; and they have rectified innumerable passages that were previously intricate, obscure, or corrupt; they have opened the stores of many concealed treasures, and made us acquainted with numerous works and authors who lay very remote indeed from the beaten path of literature, and who would have remained, but for them, inaccessible and unknown. It is true that their information is not presented to us in what in present times we should consider the most correct and commodious form,-cleared of disputes and doubts, and disentangled from the controversies and mistakes which grew up around it; but that was a defect inherent in the nature of the subject. Genius springs up at once, but learning is the product of the accumulated toil of different ages, and only increases by continued labour and gradual acquisition. We cannot presume that the Variorum commentators ever considered their editions otherwise than as tentative and experimental,* as a foundation for more perfect ones, or expected that their controversies and altercations, their doubts and disputes, would remain as a permanent monument of their want of learning and temper. Theirs was "mixed grain, to be winnowed and fanned" by their successors; a raw material to be worked up and improved on; a copious supply collected from various reservoirs, which was to be cleared and filtered by the labour and attention of others. Reject all that is now known to be erroneous, abridge all that is superfluous, clear the arguments from the controversies attached to them, arrange them in a better and conciser form, give the acuteness of one without his asperity, and the industry of another without his tediousness, and then we should do justice to their labours, present a valuable foundation for future researches, and make a decided progress in attaining the object desired. The manner in which an edition of Shakspere should be prepared is not different from that of an ancient classical anthor;† first, by a diligent collation of manuscripts when they are to be obtained,‡ and of early editions; secondly, by an illustration from other works; and, thirdly, by the application of correct reasoning and ingenious conjecture; and when cases occur, as in the differences between the folios and quartos,§ which sometimes lie beyond the province of critical arbitration, the diffi

* Steevens says (vol. i. p. 33) justly, "Every reimpression of our great dramatic writer's works must be considered in some degree as experimental, for their corruptions and obscurities are still so numerous, and the progress of fortunate conjecture so tardy and uncertain, that our remote descendants may be perplexed by passages that have perplexed us, and the readings which have hitherto disunited the opinions of the learned may continue to disunite them as long as England and Shakspere have a name," &c.

We perceive, since we wrote the above, that Theobald in his Preface says, "Shakspere's case has in a great measure resembled that of a corrupt classic, and consequently the method of cure was likewise to bear a resemblance," &c.

Mr. Dyce has in various places shown in his Remarks, &c. the value of the original MSS. of plays, the important and authentic readings they afford, and the corrections they give of the printed copies. This makes us deeply lament that so few have survived.

§ Pope had observed "that a number of beautiful passages which are extant in the first single editions (i. e. the Quartos) are omitted in the folios, as it seems, without any other reason than the actor's willingness to shorten some scenes," &c.

culties must be faithfully recorded and left to the reader's arbitration and judgment. Let us hear what one of the most sagacious and accomplished critics has said on this subject : "Scis enim, neque te præterit curiosissimè perscrutatum, quicquid habet vetustas quod doceat, non tam præclarè nobiscum agi, ut in tractandis his facundiæ priscæ monumentis, nodi, moræ, scrupuli, etiam illis quibus id unum opus ætatem fuit, difficiles passim non occurrant. Multa planissime dicta, cum scriberentur, nunc numeris sunt obscuriora Platonicis, ignoratione alicujus ritus, moris, casus, fabulæ, quondam omnibus notissimæ. Alibi, glossemata, voces rariores eoque significationis dubitatæ, alibi verba vulgaria, sed usu ac vi secretiore vix que etiam intentis obvio, responsant. Sæpe librariorum manus calui ac frustrari nescio quem soporem potuisse apparet, et non modo vocabulis, versibusve omissis cruciamur sed est et ubi literis aut syllabis dissimulatis, repetitis, trajectis gangræna succreverit ; est ubi quod explanaturis aut memoriæ suæ causa studiosus ad marginem alleverat, in corpus auctoris transierit, et molestiam creet. Nec vero qui primi formis exprimendis scriptores veteres dederunt, semper exprobatissimo quisque exemplari transtulerunt aut non interdum nimium in corrigendis, quæ non assequabantur, et propterea mendosa putabant, sibi permiserunt, et qui deinde renovatis identidem editionibus inchoatum ab illis munus proficere voluerunt, ut complura in quibus priores defecerunt præclare procuravere ita in non paucis offenderunt ipsi; et aliquid et rectius inveniendi occasionem præbuere secuturis." By pursuing this plan with diligence, by mutual co-operation and assistance, improvement will gradually take place, difficulties will be lessened, obscurities removed, and a more pure and authentic text established. But let not any one person suppose that it is in his power, separately and independently, to present an edition to the public which shall so surpass its predecessors and contemporaries, as to render future improvement hopeless, to defy the attacks of criticism, and to authorise a deviation from temperate discussion with his opponents, or a modest though proper reliance on his own judgment, learning, and competence for his task. Every critic is engaged in the deliberation of doubtful points, which are not to be settled by the mere weight of authoritative dogmatism or angry recrimination. In all probability, from the time in which any one of the Greek tragedians, say Euripides, was first published by the Aldine press, including those of separate plays, at least a hundred editions have subsequently appeared, with various degrees of improvement, each profiting by the labours of the past, according to the knowledge of the editor, and the general progress and advance of critical knowledge and taste. Some time elapses before individual and particular observations are collected into general rules-then new canons of criticism are established, which are the solid stepping stones of future improvement; and as they are verified in their truth and increase in their number, so an approximation towards the perfection of the work is made, and the rapidity of the future progress insured. As regards what is called "The Variorum Commentators," their defects, like their merits, are of various kinds. Antiquarian literature, and researches into the shy and remote recesses of black letter volumes, were not much in vogue. Johnson in his Dictionary seldom deviates from the authority of the most common authors, and thus he left an ample field of discovery to his successors. From the time of Charles the Second, we may say that our old authors-the resplendent stars that illuminated the reigns of

*See J. F. Gronovii Dedicatio Livii Historiæ. For this dedication, we have heard that Gronovius received from his episcopal patron a thousand broad pieces of gold!