negligence, and that therefore fomething may be properly attempted by criticifm, keeping the middle way between prefumption and timidity. Such criticism I have attempted to practife, and where any paffage appeared inextricably perplexed, have endeavoured to difcover how it may be recalled to fenfe, with leaft violence. But But my firft labour is, always to turn the old text on every fide, and try if there be any interftice, through which light can find its way; nor would Huetius himself condemn me, as refusing the trouble of research, for the ambition of alteration. In this modeft induftry, I have not been unsuccessful. I have refcued many lines from the violations of temerity, and fecured many fcenes from the inroads of correction. I have adopted the Roman fentiment, that it is more honourable to fave a citizen, than to kill an enemy, and have been more careful to protect than to attack. I have preferved the common diftribution of the plays into acts, though I believe it to be in almost all the plays void of authority. Some of those which are divided in the later editions have no divifion in the firft folio, and fome that are divided in the folio have no divifion in the preceding copies. The fettled mode of the theatre requires four intervals in the play, but few, if any, of our author's compofitions can be properly diftributed in that manner. An act is fo much of the drama as paffes without intervention of time, or change of place. A paufe makes a new act. In every real, and therefore in every imitative action, the intervals may be more or fewer, the reftriction of five acts being accidental and arbitrary. This Shakspeare knew, and this he practifed; his plays' were written, and at firft printed in one unbroken continuity, and ought now to be exhibited with fhort paufes, interpofed as often as the fcene is changed, or any confiderable time is required to pafs. This method would at once quell a thoufand abfurdities. In reftoring the author's works to their integrity, I have confidered the punctuation as wholly in my power; for what could be their care of colons and commas, who corrupted words and fentences. Whatever could be done by adjufting points, is therefore filently performed, in fome plays, with much diligence, in others with lefs; it is hard to keep a bufy eye fteadily fixed upon evanefcent atoms, or a difcurfive mind upon evanefcent truth. The fame liberty has been taken with a few particles, or other words of flight effect. I have fometimes inferted or omitted them without notice. I have done that sometimes, which the other editors have done always, and which indeed the state of the text may fufficiently justify. The greater part of readers, inftead of blaming us for paffing trifles, will wonder that on mere trifles fo much labour is expended, with fuch importance of debate, and fuch folemnity of diction. To these I answer with confidence, that they are judging of an art which they do not understand; yet cannot much reproach them with their ignorance, nor promise that they would become in general, by learning criticifm, more useful, happier, or wifer. As I practifed conjecture more, I learned to truft it lefs; and after I had printed a few plays, refolved to infert none of my own readings in the text. Upon this caution I now congratulate myself, for every day encreases my doubt of my emendations. Since I have confined my imagination to the mar gin, it must not be confidered as very reprehenfible, if I have fuffered it to play fome freaks in its own dominion. There is no danger in conjecture, if it be proposed as conjecture; and while the text remains uninjured, thofe changes may be fafely offered, which are not confidered even by him that offers them as neceffary or fafe. If my readings are of little value, they have not been oftentatiously displayed or importunately obtruded. I could have written longer notes, for the art of writing notes is not of difficult attainment. The work is performed, firft by railing at the ftupidity, negligence, ignorance, and afinine tafteleffness of the former editors, fhowing, from all that goes before and all that follows, the inelegance and abfurdity of the old reading; then by propofing fomething, which to fuperficial readers would feem fpecious, but which the editor rejects with indignation; then by producing the true reading, with a long paraphrafe, and concluding with loud acclamations on the difcovery, and a fober with for the advancement and profperity of genuine criticism. All this may be done, and perhaps done fometimes without impropriety. But I have always suspected that the reading is right, which requires many words to prove it wrong; and the emendation wrong, that cannot without fo much labour appear to be right. The juftness of a happy restoration ftrikes at once, and the moral precept may be well applied to criticifm, quod dubitas ne feceris. To dread the fhore which he fees fpread with wrecks, is natural to the failor. I had before my eye, fo many critical adventures ended in mif VOL. I. X carriage, that caution was forced upon me. encountered in every page wit ftruggling with its own fophiftry, and learning confufed by the multiplicity of its views. I was forced to cenfure those whom I admired, and could not but reflect, while I was difpoffeffing their emendations, how foon the fame fate might happen to my own, and how many of the readings which I have corrected may be by fome other editor defended and eftablished. "Criticks I faw, that other's names efface, "And fix their own, with labour, in the place; That a conjectural critick fhould often be miftaken, cannot be wonderful, either to others, or himself, if it be confidered, that in his art there is no fyftem, no principal and axiomatical truth that regulates fubordinate pofitions. His chance of error is renewed at every attempt; an oblique view of the paffage, a flight mifapprehenfion of a phrafe, a cafual inattention to the parts connected, is fufficient to make him not only fail, but fail ridiculously; and when he fucceeds beft he produces perhaps but one reading of many probable, and he that fuggefts another will always be able to difpute his claims. It is an unhappy state, in which danger is hid under pleasure. The allurements of emendation are fcarcely refiftible. Conjecture has all the joy and all the pride of invention, and he that has once ftarted a happy change, is too much delighted to confider what objections may rife againft it. Yet conjectural criticifm has been of great ufe in the learned world; nor is it my intention to depreciate a study, that has exercifed fo many mighty minds, from the revival of learning to our own age, from the Bifhop of Aleria 5 to English Bentley. The criticks on ancient authors have, in the exercise of their fagacity, many affiftances, which the editor of Shakspeare is condemned to want. They are employed upon grammatical and fettled languages, whofe conftruction contributes fo much to perfpicuity, that Homer has fewer paffages unintelligible than Chaucer. The words have not only a known regimen, but invariable quantities, which direct and confine the choice. There are commonly more manuscripts than one; and they do not often confpire in the fame miftakes. Yet Scaliger could confefs to Salmafius how little fatisfaction his emendations gave him. Illudunt nobis conjecturæ, quarum nos pudet, pofteaquam in meliores codices incidimus. And Lipfius could complain, that criticks were making faults, by trying to remove them, Ut olim vitiis, ita nunc reme diis laboratur. And indeed, when mere conjecture is to be used, the emendations of Scaliger and Lipfius, notwithstanding their wonderful fagacity and erudition, are often vague and difputable, like mine or Theobald's. Perhaps I may not be more cenfured for doing wrong, than for doing little; for raifing in the 5 the Bishop of Aleria] John Andreas. He was fecretary to the Vatican Library during the papacies of Paul II. and Sixtus IV. By the former he was employed to fuperintend fuch works as were to be multiplied by the new art of printing, at that time brought into Rome. He publifhed Herodotus, Strabo, Livy, Aulus Gellius, &c. His fchool-fellow, Cardinal de Cufa, procured him the bishoprick of Accia, a province in Corfica; and Paul II. afterwards appointed him to that of Aleria in the fame island, where he died in 1493. See Fabric. Bibl, Lat. Vol. III. 894. STEEVENS. |