affects his own content, will answer, for a while, the same purpose. Thus the late Mr. Jennens of Gopsal in Leicestershire, for many years congratulated himself as owner of another genuine portrait of Shakspeare, and by Cornelius Jansen; nor was disposed to forgive the writer who observed that, being dated in 1610. it could not have been the work of an artist who never faw England till 1618. above a year after our author's death. So ready, however, are interested people in affisting credulous ones to impose on themselves, that we will venture to predict, - if some opulent dupe to the flimfy artifice of Chatterton, should advertise a confiderable fum of money for a portrait of the Pfeudo-Rowley, fuch a defideratum would foon emerge from the tutelary crypts of St. Mary Redcliff at Bristol, or a hitherto unheard of repofitory in the tomb of Syr Thybbot Gorges at Wraxal.* It would also come attested as a strong likeness of our archæological bard, on the faith of a parchment exhibiting the hand and feal of the dygne Master Wyllyam Canynge, fetting forth that Mayster Thomas Rowlie was so entyrely and passynge wele belovyd of himself, or our poetick knight, that one or the other caufyd hys semblaunce to be ryght conynglye depeyncten on a merveilloufe fayre table of wood, and enfevelyd wyth hym, that deth mote theym not clene departyn and putte afunder. - A fimilar imposition, however, would in vain be attempted on the editors of Shakspeare, who, with all the zeal of Rowleians, are happily exempt from their credulity. * A kindred trick had actually been paffed off by Chatterton on the late Mr. Barrett of Bristol, in whose back parlour was a pretended head of Canynge, most contemptibly scratched with a pen on a small square piece of yellow parchment, and framed and glazed as an authentick icon by the "curyous poyntil" of Rowley. But this fame drawing very foon ceased to be stationary, was alternately exhibited and concealed, as the wavering faith of its poffeffor shifted about, and was prudently withheld at last from the publick eye. Why it was not inserted in the late History of Bristol, as well as Rowley's plan and elevation of its ancient castle, (which all the rules of all the ages of architecture pronounce to be spurious) let the Rowleian advocates inform us. We are happy at least to have recolleted a fingle imposition that was too A former plate of our author, which was copied from Martin Droeshout's in the title-page to the folio 1623. is worn out; nor does fo "abominable an imitation of humanity" deserve to be restored. The smaller head, prefixed to the Poems in 1640.* is merely a reduced and reversed copy by Marshall from its predeceffor, with a few flight changes in attitude and dress. We boaft therefore of no exterior ornaments,t except those of better print gross for even these gentlemen to swallow.--Mr. Barrett, however, in the yeer 1776 affured Mr. Tyrwhitt and Mr. Steevens, that he received the aforesaid fcrawl of Canynge from Chatterton, who described it as having been found in the prolifick chest secured by fix, or fix-andtwenty keys, no matter which. *See Vol. I. p. 33. + They who wish for decorations adapted to this edition of Shak. Ipeare, will find them in Silvester Harding's Portraits and Views, &c. &c. (appropriated to the whole suite of our author's Historical Dramas, &c.) published in thirty numbers. and paper than have hitherto been allotted to any octavo edition of Shakspeare. Justice nevertheless requires us to fubjoin, that had an undoubted picture of our author been attainable, the Booksellers would most readily have paid for the best engraving from it that could have been produced by the most skilful of our modern artists; but it is idle to be at the charge of perpetuating illusions: and who shall offer to point out, among the numerous prints of Shakspeare, any one that is more like him than the reft? The play of Pericles has been added to this collection, by the advice of Dr. Farmer. To make room for it Titus Andronicus might have been omitted; but our proprietors are of opinion that fome ancient prejudices in its favour may still exist, and for that reason only it is preserved. We have not reprinted the Sonnets, &c. of Shakspeare, because the strongest act of Parliament that could be framed, would fail to compel readers into their service; notwithstanding these miscellaneous Poems have derived every poffible advantage from the literature and judgement of their only intelligent editor, Mr. Malone, whose implements of criticism, like the ivory rake and golden spade in Prudentius, are on this occafion disgraced by the objects of their culture. - Had Shakspeare 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 fonnetteer. * What remains to be added concerning this republication is, that a confiderable number of fresh remarks are both adopted and supplied by the present editors. They have persisted in their former track of reading for the illustration of their author, and cannot help observing that those who receive the benefit of explanatory extracts from ancient writers, little know at what expence of time and labour such atoms of intelligence have been collected. That the foregoing information, howeyer, may communicate no alarm, or induce the reader to suppose we have "bestowed our whole tediousness" on him, we should add, that many notes have likewife been withdrawn. A few, manifestly erroneous, are indeed retained, to show how much the tone of Shakspearian criticism is changed, or on account of the skill displayed in their confutation; for furely every editor in his * His fonnets, though printed without date, were entered in the year 1581 on the books of the Stationers' Company, under the title of "Watson's Paffions, manifesting the true frenzy of love." Shakspeare appears to have been among the number of his readers, having in the following passage of Venus and Adonis, 66 Leading him prifoner in a red-rose chain" borrowed an idea from his 83d Sonnet: "The Muses not long fince intrapping love Watson, however, declares on this occafion that he imitated Ronsard; and it must be confefsed, with equal truth, that in the present instance Ronsard had been a borrower from Anacreon, turn is occasionally entitled to be seen, as he would have shown himself, with his vanquished adversary at his feet. We have therefore been fometimes willing to "bring a corollary, rather than want a spirit." Nor, to confefs the truth, did we always think it justifiable to shrink our predecessors to pigmies, that we ourselves, by force of comparifon, might affume the bulk of giants. The present editors must also acknowledge, that unless in particular instances, where the voice of the publick had decided against the remarks of Dr. Johnson, they have hesitated to displace them; and had rather be charged with superstitious reverence for his name, than cenfured for a prefumptuous disregard of his opinions. As a large proportion of Mr. Monck Mason's strictures on a former edition of Shakspeare are here inserted, it has been thought necessary that as much of his Preface * as was designed to introduce them, should accompany their second appearance. Any formal recommendation of them is needless, as their own merit is fure to rank their author among the most diligent and sagacious of our celebrated Poet's annotators. It may be proper, indeed, to observe that a few of these remarks are omitted because they had been anticipated; and that a few others have excluded themselves by their own immoderate length; for he * Sce p. 371. |