the copy to be as correct, as other books of the time; and probably revised by the author himself; but furely Shakspeare would not have taken the greatest care about infinitely the worst of his performances ! Nothing more can be faid, except that it is printed by Heminge and Condell in the first folio: but not to infift, that it had been contrary to their intereft to have rejected any play, ufually call'd Shakspeare's, though they might know it to be fpurious; it does not appear that their knowledge is at all to be depended upon; for it is certain, that in the first copies, they had intirely omitted the play of Troilus and Creffida. It has been faid, that this play was first printed for G. Elves, 1594. I have seen in an old catalogue of tales, &c. the hiftory of Titus Andromicus. FARMER. I have already given the reader a fpecimen of the changes made in this play by Ravenfcroft, who revived it with fuccefs in the year 1687; and may add, that when the empress ftabs her child, he has fupplied the Moor with the following lines: "She has out-done me, ev'n in mine own art, "Out-done me in murder; kill'd her own child: It rarely happens that a dramatic piece is altered with the fame fpirit that it was written; but Titus Andronicus has undoubtedly fallen into the hands of one whofe feelings were congenial with thefe of its original author. In the courfe of the notes on this performance, I have pointed out a paffage or two, which, in my opinion, fufficiently prove it to have been the work of one who was acquainted both with Greek and Roman literature. It is likewife deficient in fuch internal marks as diftinguish the tragedies of Shakspeare from thofe of other writers; I mean, that it prefents no struggles to introduce the vein of humour fo conftantly interwoven with the bufinefs of his ferious dramas. It can neither boaft of his ftriking excellencies, nor his acknowledged defects; for it offers not a single interefting fituation, a natural character, or a string of quibbles, from the firft scene to the laft. That Shakspeare should have written without commanding our attention, moving our paffions, or fporting with words, appears to me as improbable, as that he should have ftudiously avoided diflyllable and triffyllable terminations in this play, and in no other. Let it likewife be remembered that this piece was not published with the name of Shakspeare, till after his death. The quarto in 1611 is anonymous. Could the use of particular terms employed in no other of his pieces, be admitted as an argument that he was not its author, more than one of these might be found; among which is paliiament for robe, a Latiniẩm which I have not met with elfewhere in any English writer, whether ancient or modern; though it must have originated from the mint of a scholar. I may add that Titus Andronicus will be found on examination to contain a greater number of claffical allufions, &c. than are scattered over all the rest of the performances on which the VOL. X. Hh feal feal of Shakspeare is undubitably fixed-Not to write any and about this fufpected thing, let me obferve that the glitte paffages in it has perhaps milled the judgment of those wh have known that both fentiment and defcription are more duced than the interefting fabrick of a tragedy. Without th tages, many plays have fucceeded; and many have failed, they have been dealt about with the moft lavish profufion. follow, that he who can carve a frieze with minuteness, ele eafe, has a conception equal to the extent, propriety, and g a temple. STEEVENS. Dr. Johnfon not quite accurate in what he has afferted c the feven fpurious plays, which the printer of the folio in properly admitted into his volume. The name of Shakspear only in the title-pages of four of them; Pericles, Sir John The London Prodigal, and The Yorkshire Tragedy. To the word palliament mentioned by Mr. Steevens in the note, may be added the words, accite, candidatus, and facre fenfe of accurfed; and the following allufions, and scraps which are found in this lamentable tragedy: As hateful as Cocytus mifty mouth More ftern and bloody than the Centaurs' feast. But fure fome Tereus hath deflowred thee, That, I like the ftately Phœbe 'mong her nymphs, No man fhed tears for noble Mutius, He lives in fame, that dy'd in virtue's caufer I tell you younglings, not Enceladus, I'll dive into the burning lake below, I come, Semiramis; nay, barbarous Tamora. And fafter bound to Aaron's charming eyes, Per Styga, per manes vebor,— Ad manes fratrum facrifice his flesh. Suum cuique is our Roman juftice. -Magne dominator poli, Tam lentus audis fcelera ? tam lentus vides? Terras Aftraa reliquit. Similar fcraps of Latin are found in the old play of King John, and in many other of the dramatick pieces written by our authour's prede ceffors. It must prove a circumftance of confummate mortification to the living criticks on Shakspeare, as well as a difgrace on the memory of those who have ceafed to comment and collate, when it fhall appear from the fentiments of one of their own fraternity, (who cannot well be fufpected of afinine tasteleffness, or Gothic prepoffeffions,) that we have been all mistaken as to the merits and the authour of this play. It is fcarce neceffary to obferve that the perfon exempted from these fufpicions is Dr. Gapel, who delivers his opinion concerning Titus Andronicus in the following words: "To the editor's eye [i. e. his own,] Shakspeare ftands confefs'd: the third at in particular may be read with admiration even by the most delicate; who, if they are not without feelings, may chance to find themselves touch'd by it with fuch paffions as tragedy fhould excite, that is,-terror and pity."-It were injuftice not to remark that the grand and pathetick, circumstances in this third act, which we are told cannot fail to excite fuch vehement emotions, Hh 2 |