* TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA. ] Some of the incidents in this play may be supposed to have been taken from The Arcadia, Book I. chap. 6, where Pyrocles consents to head the Helots. (The Arcadia was entered on the books of the Stationers' Company, Aug. 23d, 1588.) The love-adventure of Julia resembles that of Viola in Twelfth Night, and is indeed common to many of the ancient novels. STEEVENS.

I

Mrs. Lenox obferves, and I think not improbably, that the ftory of Proteus and Julia might be taken from a fimilar one in the Diana of George of Montemayor." This paftoral romance," says she, was tranflated from the Spanish in Shakfpeare's time." have seen no earlier tranflation than that of Bartholomew Yong, who dates his dedication in November 1598; and Meres, in his Wit's Treasury, printed the fame year, exprefsly mentions the Two Gentlemen of Verona. Indeed Montemayor was tranflated two or three years before, by one Thomas Wilfon; but this work, I am perfuaded, was never published entirely; perhaps fome parts of it were, or the tale might have been tranflated by others. However, Mr. Steevens says, very truly, that this kind of love-adventure is frequent in the old novelists. FARMER.

There is no earlier tranflation of the Diana entered on the books of the Stationers' Company, than that of B. Younge, Sept. 1598. Many tranflations, however, after they were licensed, were capriciously suppressed. Among others, "the Decameron of Mr. John Boccace, Florentine," was recalled by my lord of Canterbury's commands." STEEVENS.

It is obfervable (I know not for what cause,) that the style of this comedy is less figurative, and more natural and unaffected, than the greater part of this author's, though supposed to be one of the first he wrote. POPE.

It may very well be doubted whether Shakspeare had any other hand in this play than the enlivening it with fome speeches and lines thrown in here and there, which are easily diftinguished, as being of a different stamp from the rest. HANMER.

To this obfervation of Mr. Pope, which is very just, Mr. Theobald has added, that this is one of Shakspeare's worst plays, and is less corrupted than any other. Mr. Upton peremptorily determines, that if any proof can be drawn from manner and flyle, this play must be fent, packing, and feek for its parent elsewhere. How otherwise, says he, do painters distinguish copies from originals? and have not authors their peculiar style and manner, from which a true critic can form as unerring judgement as a painter? I am afraid this illuftration of a critic's science will not prove what is defired. A painter knows a copy from an original by rules fomewhat refembling those by which critics know a translation, which if it be literal, and literal it must be to resemble the copy of a picture, will be easily diftinguished. Copies are known from originals, even when the painter copies his own picture; fo, if an author should literally tranflate his work, he would lose the manner of an original.

Mr. Upton confounds the copy of a picture with the imitation of a painter's manner. Copies are eafily known; but good imitations are not deteaed with equal certainty, and are, by the best judges, often mistaken. Nor is it true that the writer has always peculiarities equally distinguishable with those of the painter. The peculiar manner of each arifes from the defire, natural to every performer, of facilitating his fubfequent work by recurrence to his former ideas; this recurrence produces that repetition which is called habit. The painter, whose work is partly intellectual and partly manual, has habits of the mind, the eye, and the hand; the writer has only habits of the mind. Yet, fome painters have differed as much from themselves as from any other; and I have been told, that there is little resemblance between the first works of Raphael and the last. The fame variation may be expected in writers; and if it be true, as it feems, that they are lefs fubject to habit, the difference between their works may be yet greater.

But by the internal marks of a composition we may discover the author with probability, though seldom with certainty. When I read this play, I cannot but think that I find, both in the ferious and ludicrous scenes, the language and fentiments of Shakspeare. It is not indeed one of his most powerful effusions; it has neither many diversities of character, nor ftriking delineations of life; but it abounds in γνωμαί beyond most of his plays, and few have more lines or passages, which, fingly confidered, are eminently beautiful. I am yet inclined to believe that it was not very fuccessful, and suspect that it has escaped corruption, only because, being feldom played, it was less exposed to the hazards of transcription. JOHNSON.

This Comedy, I believe was written 1595. Sce An Attempt to afcertain the order of Shakespeare's Piazs, Vol. L. MALONE.

>

PERSONS reprefented,

Duke of Milan, father to Silvia.

Valentine,

Proteus,

Gentlemen of Verona,

Antonio, father to Proteus.

Thurio, a foolish rival to Valentine.
Eglamour, agent for Silvia in her escape.
Speed, a clownish fervant to Valentine.

Launce, fervant to Proteus.

Panthino, fervant to Antonio.
Host, where Julia lodges in Milan.
Out-laws.

Julia, a lady of Verona beloved by Proteus.
Silvia, the duke's daughter, beloved by Valentine,
Lucetta, waiting-woman to Julia,

Servants, musicians,

SCENE, fometimes in Verona; Sometimes in Milan; and on the frontiers of Mantua.

• Proteus,] The old copy has-Protheus; but this is merely the antiquated mode of spelling Proteus. Shakspeare's character was fo called, from his difpofition to change. STEEVENS.

3 Panthino, In the enumeration of characters in the old copy, this attendant on Antonio is called Panthion, but in the play, always Panthino, STEEVENS.

44

OF

VERONA.

ACT I. SCENE I.

An open place in Verona.

Enter VALENTINE and PROTEUS.

VAL. Cease to perfuade, my loving Proteus; Home-keeping youth have ever homely wits: Wer't not, affection chains thy tender days To the sweet glances of thy honour'd love, I rather would entreat thy company, To fee the wonders of the world abroad, Than, living dully fluggardiz'd at home, Wear out thy youth with shapeless idleness.' But, fince thou lov'st, love still, and thrive therein, Even as I would, when I to love begin.

PRO. Wilt thou be gone? Sweet Valentine, adieu! Think on thy Proteus, when thou, haply, feeft Some rare note-worthy object in thy travel:

2 Hame-keeping youth have ever homely wits:] Milton has the fame play on words, in his Masque at Ludlow Castle:

" It is for homely features to keep home,

"They had their names thence," STEEVENS,

3-shapeless idleness.) The expreffion is fine, as implying that idleness prevents the giving any form or character to the manners. WARBURTON.