Shakspeare, that the question was not fully discussed by Mr. Johnson himself: what he sees intuitively, others must arrive at by a series of proofs; and I have not time to teach with precision: be contented therefore with a few cursory observations, as they may happen to arise from the chaos of papers, you have so often laughed at," a stock sufficient to set up an editor in form." I am convinced of the strength of my cause, and superior to any little advantage from sophistical arrangements. General positions without proofs will probably have no great weight on either side, yet it may not seem fair to suppress them: take them therefore as their authors occur to me, and we will afterward proceed to particulars. The testimony of Ben. stands foremost; and some have held it sufficient to decide the controversy: in the warmest panegyrick, that ever was written, he apologizes for what he supposed the only defect in his "beloved friend, Soul of the age! Th' applause! delight! the wonder of our stage!' whose memory he honoured almost to idolatry:" and conscious of the worth of ancient literature, like any other man on the same occasion, he rather carries his acquirements above, than below the truth. "Jealousy!" cries Mr. Upton; " people will allow others any qualities, but those upon which they highly value themselves." Yes, where there is a competition, and the competitor formidable: but, I think, this critick himself hath scarcely set in opposition the learning of Shakspeare and Jonson When a superiority is universally granted, it by no means appears a man's literary interest to depress the reputation of his antagonist. In truth the received opinion of the pride and malignity of Jonson, at least in the earlier part of life, is absolutely groundless: at this time scarce a play or a poem appeared without Ben's encomium, from the original Shakspeare to the translator of Du Bartas. But Jonson is by no means our only authority. Drayton, the countryman and acquaintance of Shakspeare, determines his excellence to the naturall braine only. Digges, a wit of the town, before our poet left the stage, is very strong to the purpose, 66 Nature only helpt him, for looke thorow 995 Suckling opposed his easier strain to the sweat of the learned Jonson. Denham assures us, that all he had was from old mother-wit. His native woodnotes wild, every one remembers to be celebrated by Milton. Dryden observes prettily enough, that "he wanted not the spectacles of books to read nature." He came out of her hand, as some one else expresses it, like Pallas out of Jove's head, at full growth and mature. In his Elegie on Poets and Poesie, p. 206. Folio, 1627. From his Poem upon Master William Shakspeare, intended to have been prefixed, with the other of his composition, to the folio of 1623 and afterward printed in several miscellaneous collections: particularly the spurious edition of Shakspeare's Poems, 1640, Some account of him may be met with in Wood's Athena. The ever memorable Hales of Eton, (who, notwithstanding his epithet, is, I fear, almost forgotten,) had too great a knowledge both of Shakspeare and the ancients to allow much acquaintance between them and urged very justly on the part of genius in opposition to pedantry, that "if he had not read the classicks, he had likewise not stolen from them; and if any topick was produced from a poet of antiquity he would undertake to show somewhat on the same subject, at least as well written by Shakspeare. Fuller a diligent and equal searcher after truth and quibbles, declares positively, that "his learning was very little,-nature was all the art used upon him, as he himself, if alive, would confess. And may we not say, he did confess it, when he apologized for his untutored lines to his noble patron the Earl of Southampton?-this list of witnesses might be easily enlarged; but I flatter myself, I shall stand in no need of such evidence. One of the first and most vehement assertors of the learning of Shakspeare, was the editor of his poems, the well-known Mr. Gildon ; and his steps 6 Hence perhaps the ill-starr'd rage between this critick and his elder brother, John Dennis, so pathetically lamented in the Dunciad. Whilst the former was persuaded, that "the man who doubts of the learning of Shakspeare, hath none of his own:" the latter, above regarding the attack in his private capacity, declares with great patriotick vehemence, that "he who allows Shakspeare had learning, and a learning with the ancients, ought to be looked upon as a detractor from the glory of Great Britain." Dennis was expelled his college for attempting to stab a man in the dark: Pope would have been glad of this anecdote.* * See this fact established against the doubts and objections of Dr. Kippis in the Biographia Britannica, in Dr. Farmer's Letter to me, printed in the European Magazine, June 1794, p. 412. REED. were most punctually taken by a subsequent labourer in the same department, Dr. Sewell. Mr. Pope supposed, "little ground for the common opinion of his want of learning :" once indeed he made a proper distinction between learning and languages, as I would be understood to do in my title-page; but unfortunately he forgot it in the course of his disquisition, and endeavoured to persuade himself that Shakspeare's acquaintance with the ancients might be actually proved by the same medium as Jonson's. Mr. Theobald is "very unwilling to allow him so poor a scholar, as many have laboured to represent him ;" and yet is " cautious of declaring too positively on the other side of the question." Dr. Warburton hath exposed the weakness of some arguments from suspected imitations; and yet offers others, which, I doubt not, he could as easily have refuted. Mr. Upton wonders" with what kind of reasoning any one could be so far imposed upon, as to imagine that Shakspeare had no learning;" and lashes with much zeal and satisfaction "the pride and pertness of dunces, who, under such a name would gladly shelter their own idleness and ignorance." He, like the learned knight, at every anomaly in grammar or metre, "Hath hard words ready to show why, "And tell what rule he did it by." How would the old bard have been astonished to have found, that he had very skilfully given the trochaic dimeter brachycatalectic, COMMONLY called the ithyphallic measure to the Witches in Macbeth! and that now and then a halting verse afforded a most beautiful instance of the pes proceleusmati cus! "But," continues Mr. Upton, "it was a learned age; Roger Ascham assures us, that Queen Elizabeth read more Greek every day, than some dignitaries of the church did Latin in a whole week." This appears very probable; and a pleasant proof it is of the general learning of the times, and of Shakspeare in particular. I wonder, he did not corroborate it with an extract from her injunctions to her clergy, that" such as were but mean readers should peruse over before, once or twice, the chapters and homilies, to the intent they might read to the better understanding of the people." Dr. Grey declares, that Shakspeare's knowledge in the Greek and Latin tongues cannot reasonably be called in question. Dr. Dodd supposes it proved, that he was not such a novice in learning and antiquity as some people would pretend. And to close the whole, for I suspect you to be tired of quotation, Mr. Whalley, the ingenious editor of Jonson, hath written a piece expressly on this side the question: perhaps from a very excusable partiality, he was willing to draw Shakspeare from the field of nature to classick ground, where alone, he knew, his author could possibly cope with him. These criticks, and many others their coadjutors, have supposed themselves able to trace Shakspeare in the writings of the ancients; and have sometimes persuaded us of their own learning, whatever became of their author's. Plagiarisms have been discovered in every natural description and every moral sentiment. Indeed by the kind assistance of the various Excerpta, Sententiæ, and Flores, this business may be effected with very little expence of time or sagacity; as Addison hath demonstrated in his comment on Chevy-chase, and Wagstaff on Tom |