staff, and charge this great magician, this daring 'practicer of arts inhibited,' in the name of Aristotle, to surrender; whilst Aristotle himself, disowning his wretched officer, would fall prostrate at his feet, and acknowledge his supremacy.-O supreme of dramatic excellence! (might he say,) not to me be imputed the insolence of fools. The bards of Greece were confined within the narrow circle of the chorus, and hence they found themselves constrained to practise, for the most part, the precision, and copy the details of nature. I followed them, and knew not that a larger circle might be drawn, and the drama extended to the whole reach of human genius. Convinced, I see that a more compendious nature may be obtained; a nature of effects only, to which neither the relations of place, nor continuity of time, are always essential. Nature, condescending to the faculties and apprehensions of man, has drawn through human life a regular chain of visible causes and effects; but poetry delights in surprise, conceals her steps, seizes at once upon the heart, and obtains the sublime of things without betraying the rounds of her ascent: true poesy is magic, not nature; an effect from causes hidden or unknown. To the Magician I prescribed no laws; his law and his power are one; his power is his law. Him, who neither imitates, nor is within the reach of imitation, no precedent can or ought to bind, no limits to contain. If his end be obtained, who shall question his course? Means, whether apparent or hidden, are justified in poesy by success; but then most perfect and most admirable when most concealed." After quoting this passage, which rivals in its tone and manner what has since been so eloquently expressed by Schlegel and other German critics on the character of Shakspeare, and which seemed to me so analogous to the primary object of my volume as to warrant its insertion here as a prefatory portrait, I proceed to notice, though necessarily very briefly, those who have since contributed to enrich this pleasing province of Shakspearian criticism. In 1785 were printed some ingenious remarks on the characters of Richard the Third and Macbeth, written by Mr. Whately, and controverted the succeeding year by the celebrated actor John Philip Kemble under the title of "Macbeth Reconsidered;" the former attributing the scruples and remorse of Macbeth to constitutional timidity, and the latter denying the charge. Nearly at the same time appeared the Rev. Martin Sherlock's "Fragment on Shakspeare, extracted from Advice to a young Poet;" a little work originally written by the author in Italian, with the view of counteracting on the continent the prejudices so widely circulated against our great bard by Voltaire. The Fragment on Shakspeare was soon translated into French, and from French into English, and cer p Pages 58 ad 62, and 66 ad 71. tainly, though written in a peculiar warmth of style, displays a correct estimate of the powers of a poet whom, to adopt the language of Mr. Sherlock, Nature made, and then broke the mould. In the course of the two succeeding years, 1787 and 1788, Mr. Felton presented the public with his Imperfect Hints towards a new Edition of Shakspeare;" a work written chiefly in the year 1782, with the object of recommending and furnishing instructions for a splendid and highly embellished edition of the poet; and brought forward at a period when Boydell's magnificent Shakspeare was in preparation, and in the hope of contributing some useful hints towards that national undertaking. Mr. Felton has displayed in this production a very intimate acquaintance with all that has been effected for the Bard of Avon, through the medium of the painter and engraver, from the first prints connected with the page of Shakspeare in the edition by Rowe in 1709, to the era of the noble picture-gallery in Pall Mall. It is, indeed, a work of considerable interest, written with great judgment and knowledge of the various branches of the art of design, and with a deep and enthusiastic feeling for the beauties of the admirable poet whom its author is so anxious to illustrate. That the strictures of Mr. Felton have contributed towards promoting a correct taste and increased love for graphic embellishment, as connected with the dramas of Shakspeare, there can be little doubt; and how gratifying is it to reflect on the splendid homage which, during the last forty years, has been paid to the genius of our immortal bard by the pencils of the most accomplished of our artists, by such men as Reynolds, West, Romney, Fuseli, and Smirke! 66 The next publication in this department, which, from the novelty of its object, has a claim to our attention, proceeds from the pen of the Rev. James Plumptre, M. A., who, in the year 1796, printed Observations on Hamlet, and on the Motives which most probably induced Shakspeare to fix upon the Story of Amleth, from the Danish Chronicle of Saxo Grammaticus, for the Plot of that Tragedy. Being an Attempt to prove that he designed it as an indirect Censure on Mary Queen of Scots." This was followed the succeeding year by an Appendix, containing some farther arguments in support of the hypothesis. Much ingenuity and research, and perhaps some play of fancy, have been exhibited by the author of these pamphlets in maintaining the fresh ground on which he has ventured to take his stand; and it will, I think, be allowed that, notwithstanding several assaults, and some of them powerful ones, have been brought against his position, he has by no means been compelled to relinquish it. Indeed I have some reason to believe that he meditates by additional proofs a farther corroboration of his opinion, assuredly not lightly assumed, nor illogically supported. The editor has much pleasure in placing before his readers the following summary of the age of Shakspeare from the pen of the very ingenious author of these pamphlets, viz. : With peculiar pleasure I now turn to the production of a pamphlet written by Mr. Octavius "A Chronological Table of some of the Principal Events connected with Shakspeare and his Plays. By the Rev. James Plumptre, M. A. The Chronology of the plays according to the system of Dr. Drake: A. D. 1533. Queen Elizabeth born, Sept. 7th. 36. Anne Boleyn beheaded, May 19th. 42. Mary Queen of Scots born Dec. 8th. Lost her father a few days after. 48. Sent into France. 50. Edward (Lord) Coke born. 53. Edmund Spenser born. 54. Queen Elizabeth prisoner at Woodstock. 58. Mary Queen of Scots married to Francis II. of France, April 14th. Queen Elizabeth ascended the throne of England, 60. Francis II. died Dec. 4th. 61. Mary Queen of Scots returned from France, Aug. 9th. 64. SHAKSPEARE born April 23d. Belleforest began to publish his Novels, which in the end amounted to 7 vols. In one of these is the History of Hamlet from the Danish Chronicle of Saxo Grammaticus. 65. Mary Queen of Scots married to Lord Darnley, July 29th. 66. Rizzio murdered, March 9th. James VI. born, June 19th. 67. Monday morning, Feb. 10th. King Henry (Lord Darnof his age. year ley) murdered in the 21st May 14th. Mary married to Bothwell; Mary aged 24, June 15th. Mary surrendered to the Rebels, and sent to |