« AnteriorContinuar »
that followed them. The same books are still to be compared; the work that has been done, is to be done again, and no single edition will supply the reader with a text on which he can rely as the best copy of the works of Shakspeare.
" The edition now proposed will at least have this advantage over others. It will exhibit all the observable varieties of all the copies that can be found; that, if the reader is not satisfied with the editor's determination, he may have the means of
, choosing better for himself.
" Where all the books are evidently vitiated, and collation can give no assistance, then begins the task of critical fagacity: and some changes may well be admitted in a text never settled by the author, and so long exposed to caprice and ignorance. But nothing shall be imposed, as in the Oxford edition, without notice of the alteration; nor shall conjecture be wantonly or unnecessarily indulged.
• It has been long found, that very specious emendations do not equally strike all minds with conviction, nor even the fame mind at different times; and therefore, though perhaps many alterations may be proposed as eligible, very few will be obtruded as certain. In a language so ungram
. matical as the English, and so licentious as that of Shakspeare , emendatory criticism is always hazardous; nor can it be allowed to any man who is not particularly versed in the writings of that age, and particularly studious of his author's diction. There is danger lest peculiarities should be mistaken for corruptions, and passages rejected as unintelligible which a narrow mind happens not to understand.
66 All the former criticks have been so much
employed on the correction of the text, that they have not sufficiently attended to the elucidation of passages obscured by accident or time. The editor will endeavour to read the books which the author read, to trace his knowledge to its source, and compare his copies with the originals. If in this part of his design he hopes to attain any degree of superiority to his predecessors, it must be considered, that he has the advantage of their labours; that part of the work being already done, more care is naturally bestowed on the other part; and that, to declare the truth, Mr. Rowe and Mr. Pope were very ignorant of the ancient English literature ; Dr. Warburton was detained by more important ftudies: and Mr. Theobald, if fame be just to his memory, considered learning only as an instrument of gain, and made no further inquiry after his author's meaning, when once he had notés sufficient to embellish his page with the expected decorations.
" With regard to obsolete or peculiar diction, the editor may perhaps claim fome degree of confidence, having had more inotives to consider the whole extent of our language than any other man from its first formation. He hopes, that, by comparing the works of Shakspeare with those of writers who lived at the same time, immediately preceded, or immediately followed him, he shall be able to ascertain his ambiguities, disentangle his intricacies, and recover the meaning of words now loit in the darkness of antiquity.
" When therefore any obscurity arises from an allusion to some other book, the passage will be quoted. When the diction is entangled, it will be cleared by a paraphrase or interpretation. When VOL. I.
the sense is broken by the suppression of part of the sentiment in pleasantry or passion, the connection will be supplied. When any forgotten cuftom is hinted, care will be taken to retrieve and explain it: The meaning assigned to doubtful words will be supported by the authorities of other writers, or by parallel passages of Shakspeare himself.
66 The observation of faults and beauties is one of the duties of an annotator, which some of Shakspeare's editors have attempted, and some have ne glected. For this part of his talk, and for this only, was Mr. Pope eminently and indisputably qualified: nor has Dr. Warburton followed him with less diligence or less success. But I never observed that mankind was much delighted or improved by their asterisks, commas, or double commas; of which the only effect is, that they preclude the plea. sure of judging for ourselves, teach the young and ignorant to decide without principles ; defeat curiosity and discernment by leaving them less to difcover; and, at last, shew the opinion of the critick, without the reasons on which it was founded, and without affording any light by which it may be examined.
“ The editor, though he may less delight his
. own vanity, will probably please his reader more, by suppofing him equally able with himself to judge of beauties and faults, which require no previous acquisition of remote knowledge. A description of the obvious scenes of nature, a representation of general life, a sentiment of reflection or experience, a deduction of conclusive argument, a forcible eruption of effervescent passion, are to be considered as proportionate to common apprehension, unaffifted
by critical officiousness; since to conceive them, nothing more is requisite than acquaintance with the general state of the world, and those faculties which he must always bring with him who would read Shakspeare.
" But when the beauty arises froin some adaptation of the sentiment to customs worn out of use, to opinions not universally prevalent, or to any accidental or minute particularity, which cannot be supplied by common understanding, or common observation, it is the duty of a commentator to lend his affiftance.
66 The notice of beauties and faults thus limited will make no distinct part of the design, being reducible to the explanation of obscure passages. .
The editor does not however intend to preclụde himself from the comparison of Shakspeare's sentiments or expression with those of ancient of modern authors, or from the display of any beauty not obvious to the students of poetry; for as he hopes to leave his author better understood, he wilhes likewise to procure him more rational approbation.
· The former editors have affected to flight their predecessors: bụt in this edition all that is valuable will be adopted from every commentator, that posterity may consider it as including all the rest, and exhibit whatever is hitherto known of the great father of the English drama.
Though Dr. Johnson has here pointed out with his usual perspicuity and vigour, the true course to be taken by an editor of Shakspeare, some of the positions which he has laid down may be controverted, and some are indubitably not true. It is
not true that the plays of this author were more incorrectly printed than those of any of his contemporaries: for in the plays of Marlowe, Marston, Fletcher, Maslinger, and others, as many errors may
be found. It is not true that the art of printing was in no other age in fo unskilful hands. Nor is it true, in the latitude in which it is stated,
these plays were printed from compilations made by chance or by stealth out of the separate parts written for the theatre: two only of all his dramas, The Merry. Wives of Windsor and King Henry V. appear to have been thus thrust into the world, and of the former it is yet a doubt whether it is a first sketch or an imperfect copy. I do not believe that words were then adopted at pleasure from the neighbouring languages, or that an antiquated diction was then employed by any poet but Spenser. That the obscurities of our author, whatever cause they may be referred, do not arise from the paucity of contemporary writers, the present edition may furnish indisputable evidence. And lastly, if it be true, that “ very few of Shakspeare's lines were difficult to his audience, and that he used such expressions as were then common," (a position of which I have not the smallest doubt,) it cannot be true, that o his reader is embarrassed at once with dead and with foreign languages, with obsoleteness and innovation."
When Mr. Pope first undertook the task of revi. sing these plays, every anomaly of language, and every expression that was not understood at that time , were considered as errors or corruptions, and the text was altered, or amended, as it was called, at pleasure. The principal writers of the early part