traditions that were floating nearly a century after the author's death. Some inaccuracies in his account have been detected in the valuable notes of Mr. Steevens and Mr. Malone, who, in other parts of their respective editions have scattered a few brief notices which we have incorporated in the present sketch. The whole, however, is unsatisfactory. Shakspeare in his private character, in his friendships, in his amusements, in his closet, in his family, is no where before us; and such was the nature of the writings on which his fame depends, and of that employment in which he was engaged, that being in no important respect connected with the history of his age, it is in vain to look into the latter for any information concerning him.

Mr. Capell is of opinion that he wrote some prose works, because "it can hardly be supposed "that he, who had so considerable a share in "the confidence of the Earls of Essex and "Southampton, could be a mute spectator only " of controversies in which they were so much "interested." This editor, however, appears to have taken for granted a degree of confidence with these two statesmen which he ought first to have proved. Shakspeare might have enjoyed the confidence of their social hours, but it is mere conjecture that they admitted him into the con

fidence of their state affairs. Mr. Malone, whose opinions are entitled to a higher degree of credit, thinks that his prose compositions, if they should be discovered, would exhibit the same perspicuity, the same cadence, the same elegance and vigour, which we find in his plays. It is unfortunate, however, for all wishes and all conjectures, that not a line of Shakspeare's manuscript is known to exist, and his prose writings are no where hinted at. We have only printed copies of his plays and poems, and those so depraved by carelessness or ignorance that all the labour of all his commentators has not yet been able to restore them to a probable purity. Many of the greatest difficulties attending the perusal of them, yet remain, and will require, what it is scarcely possible to expect, greater sagacity and more happy conjecture than have hitherto been employed.

Of his POEMS, it is perhaps necessary that some notice should be taken, although they have never been favourites with the publick, and have seldom been reprinted with his plays. Shortly after his death, Mr. Malone informs us, a very incorrect impression of them was issued out, which in every subsequent edition was implicitly followed,, until he published a correct edition in 1780 with illustrations, &c. But the peremptory

decision of Mr. Steevens on the merits of these poems must be our apology for omitting them in the present abridgement of that critic's labours. "We have not reprinted the Sonnets, &c. of "Shakspeare, because the strongest act of par"liament that could be framed would fail to "compel readers into their service. Had Shak

speare produced no other works than these, his "name would have reached us with as little celebrity as time has conferred on that of Thomas. "Watson, an older and much more elegant son"netteer."

The elegant preface of Dr. Johnson gives an account of the attempts made in the early, part of the last century to revive the memory and reputation of our poet, by Rowe, Pope, Theobald, Hanmer, and Warburton, whose respective merits he has characterised with candour, and with singular felicity of expression. Shakspeare's works may be overloaded with criticism, for what writer has excited so much curiosity, and so many opinions? but Johnson's preface is an paniment worthy of the genius it celebrates.His own edition followed in 1765, and a second, in conjunction with Mr. Steevens, in 1773. The third edition of the joint editors appeared in 1785, the fourth in 1793, and the last and most complete, in 1803, in 21 volumes octavo. Mr.

accom

Malone's edition was published in 1790 in 10 volumes crown octavo, and is now become exceedingly scarce. His original notes and improvements, however, are incorporated in the editions of 1793 and 1803. by Mr. Steevens. Mr. Malone says, that from the year 1716 to the date of his edition in 1790, that is, in seventy-four years, "above 30,000 copies of Shakspeare have been "dispersed through England." To this we may add with confidence, that since 1790 that number has been doubled. During last year no fewer than nine editions were in the press, belonging to the proprietors of this work; and if we add the editions printed by others, and those published in Scotland, Ireland, and America, we may surely fix the present as the highest æra of Shakspeare's popularity. Nor among the honours paid to his genius, ought we to forget the very magnificent edition undertaken by Messrs. Boydell. Still less ought it to be forgotten how much the reputation of Shakspeare was revived by the unrivalled excellence of Garrick's performance. His share in directing the publick taste towards the study of Shakspeare was perhaps greater than that of any individual in his time, and such was his zeal and such his success in this laudable attempt that he may readily be forgiven the foolish mummery of the Stratford Jubilee.

When publick opinion had begun to assign to Shakspeare the very high rank he was destined to hold, he became the promising object of fraud and imposture. This, we have already observed, he did not wholly escape in his own time, and he had the spirit or policy to despise it.* It was reserved for modern impostors, however, to avail themselves of the obscurity in which his history is involved. In 1751 a book was published, entitled "A Compendious or briefe examina"tion of certayne ordinary Complaints of diuers "of our Countrymen in those our days: which "although they are in some Parte unjust and "frivolous, yet are they all by way of dialogue

46

throughly debated and discussed by William "Shakspeare, Gentleman." This had been originally published in 1581, but Dr. Farmer has clearly proved that W. S. gent. the only authority for attributing it to Shakspeare in the reprinted edition, meant William Stafford, gent.Theobald, the same accurate critic informs us, was desirous of palming upon the world a play called "Double Falsehood," for a posthumous one of Shakspeare. In 1770 was reprinted at

* Mr. Malone has given a list of 14 plays ascribed to Shakspeare, either by the editors of the two later folios, or by the compilers of ancient catalogues. Of these Periales has found advocates for its admission into his works.