XXXI. CYMBELINE.

MR. POPE supposed the story of this play to have been

sar and Pompey. William Alexander, afterwards earl quick succession of one personage to another, call the of Sterline, wrote a tragedy on the story, and with the mind forward without intermission from the first Act to title of Julius Cæsar. It may be presumed that Shak the last. But the power of delighting is derived priaspeare's play was posterior to his; for lord Sterline, when cipally from the frequent changes of the scene; for, exhe composed his Julius Cæsar, was a very young author, cept the feminine arts, some of which are too low, which and would hardly have ventured into that circle, within distinguish Cleopatra, no character is very strongly diswhich the most eminent dramatic writer of England had criminated. Upton, who did not easily miss what he dealready walked. The death of Cæsar, which is not ex- sired to find, has discovered that the language of Antony hibited but related to the audience, forms the catastrophe is, with great skill and learning, made pompous and suof his piece. In the two plays many parallel passages perb, according to his real practice. But I think his are found, which might, perhaps, have proceeded only diction not distinguishable from that of others: the most from the two authors drawing from the same source. How- tumid speech in the play is that which Cæsar makes to ever, there are some reasons for thinking the coincidence Octavia. The events, of which the principal are desmore than accidental. A passage in The Tempest, (p. 81,) || cribed according to history, are produced without any art seems to have been copied from one in Darius, another of connection or care of disposition. JOHNSON. = play of lord Sterline's, printed at Edinburgh, in 1603. His Julius Cæsar appeared in 1607, at a time when he was little acquainted with English writers; for both these pieces abound with scotticisms, which, in the subsequent folio edition, 1637, he corrected. But neither The Tempest nor the Julius Cæsar of our author was printed till 1623. It should also be remembered, that our author has several plays, founded on subjects which had been previously treated by others. Of this kind are King John, King Richard II., the two parts of King Henry IV., King Henry V., King Richard III., King Lear, Anthony and Cleopatra, Measure for Measure, The Taming of the Shrew, The Merchant of Venice, and, I believe, Hamlet, Timon of Athens, and the Second and Third Part of King Henry VI., whereas no proof has hitherto been produced, that any contemporary writer ever presumed to new model a story|| that had already employed the pen of Shakspeare. On all these grounds it appears more probable, that Shakspeare was indebted to lord Sterline, than that lord Sterline borrowed from Shakspeare. If this reasoning be just, this play could not have appeared before the year 1607. I believe it was produced in that year. MALONE. The real length of time in Julius Caesar is as follows: About the middle of February A. U. C. 709, a frantic festival, sacred to Pan, and called Lupercalia, was held in honour of Cæsar, when the regal crown was offered to him by Antony. On the 15th of March in the same year, he was slain. November 27, A. U. C. 710, the triumvirs met at a small island, formed by the river Rhenus, near Bono-worthy lord, (says the printer in his Epistle Dedicatory,) nia, and there adjusted their cruel proscription. A. U. C. 711, Brutus and Cassius were defeated near Philippi. || UPTON. Of this tragedy many particular passages deserve regard, and the contention and reconcilement of Brutus and Cassius is universally celebrated; but I have never been strongly agitated in perusing it, and think it somewhat cold and unaffecting, compared with some other of Shakspeare's plays: his adherence to the real story, and to Roman manners, seems to have impeded the natural vigour of his genius. JOHNSON. =

XXX. ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA. AMONG the entries in the books of the Stationers' Company, October 19, 1593, I find "A Booke entitled the Tragedie of Cleopatra." It is entered by Symon Waterson, for whom some of Daniel's works were printed; and therefore it is probably by that author, of whose Cleopatra there are several editions; and, among others, one in 1594. — In the same volumes, May 20, 1608, Edward Blount entered "A Booke called Anthony and Cleopatra." This is the first notice I have met with concerning any edition of this play more ancient than the folio, 1623. STEEVENS. Antony and Cleopatra was written, I imagine, in the year 1608 MALONE. This play keeps curiosity always busy, and the passions always interested. The continual hurry of the action, the variety of incidents, and the

=

borrowed from a novel of Boccace; but he was mistaken, as an imitation of it is found in an old story-book entitled Westward for Smelts. This imitation differs in as many particulars from the Italian novelist, as from Shakspeare, though they concur in some material parts of the fable. It was published in a quarto pamphlet 1603. This is the only copy of it which I have hitherto seen. — - There is a late entry of it in the books of the Stationers' Company, Jan. 1619, where it is said to have been written by Kitt of Kingston. STEEVENS. The only part of the fable which can be pronounced with certainty to be drawn from the above, is, Imogen's wandering about after Pisanio has left her in the forest: her being almost famished: and being taken at a subsequent period, into the service of the Roman General as a page. The general scheme of Cymbeline is, in my opinion, formed on Boccace's novel (Day 2, Nov. 9.) and Shakspeare has taken a circumstance from it, that is not mentioned in the other tale. See Act II. sc. ii. It appears from the preface to the old translation of the Decamerone, printed in 1620, that many of the novels had before received an English dress, and had been printed separately: "I know, most

that many of them [the novels of Boccace] have long since been published before, as stolen from the original author, and yet not beautified with his sweet style and elocution of phrase, neither savouring of his singular moral applications." Cymbeline, I imagine, was written in the year 1609. The king, from whom the play takes its title, began his reign, according to Holinshed, in the 19th year of the reign of Augustus Cæsar; and the play commences in or about the twenty-fourth year of Cymbeline's reign, which was the forty-second year of the reign of Augustus, and the 16th of the Christian æra; notwithstanding which, Shakspeare has peopled Rome with modern Italians; Philario, Iachimo, &c. Cymbeline is said to have reigned thirty-five years, leaving at his death two sons, Guiderius and Arviragus. MALONE. An ancient translation, or rather, a deformed and interpolated imitation, of the ninth novel of the second day of the Decameron of Boccacio, has recently occurred. The title and Colophon of this rare piece, are as follows: "This mater treateth of a merchautes wyfe that afterwarde went lyke a mã and becam a great lorde and was called Frederyke of Jennen afterwarde." "Thus endeth this lytell story of lorde Frederyke. Impryted i Anwarpe by me John Dusborowhge, dwellynge besyde ye Camer porte in the yere of our lorde god a. M. CCCCC. and xviij. This novel exhibits the material features of its original; though the names of the characters are changed, their sentiments debased, and their conduct rendered still more improbable than in the scenes before us. John of Florence is the D*

Ambrogiulo, Ambrosius of Jennens the Bernabo of the story. Of the translator's elegance of imagination, and felicity of expression, the two following instances may be sufficient. He has converted the picturesque mole under the left breast of the lady, into a black wart on her left arm; and when at last, in a male habit, she discovers her sex, instead of displaying her bosom only, he obliges her to appear before the king and his whole court completely naked, save that she had a karcher of sylke before hyr members." The whole work is illustrated with wooden cuts representing every scene throughout the narrative. — I know not that any advantage is gained by the discovery of this antiquated piece, unless it serves to strengthen our belief that some more faithful translation had furnished Shakspeare with incidents which, in their original Italian, to him at least were inaccessible. STEEVENS. This play has many just sentiments, some natural dialogues, and some pleasing scenes, but they are obtained at the expence of much incongruity. To remark the folly of the fiction, the absurdity of the conduct, the confusion of the names, and manners of different times, and the impossibility of the events in any system of life, were to waste criticism upon unresisting imbecility, upon faults too evident for detection, and too gross for aggravation. JOHNSON.

XXXII. TITUS ANDRONICUS.

again April 19, 1602, by Tho. Pavyer. — The reader will
find it in Dr. Percy's Reliques of Ancient English Poetry,
Vol. I. Dr. Percy adds, that "there is reason to con-
clude that this play was rather improved by Shakspeare
with a few fine touches of his pen, than originally, writ
by him; for not to mention that the style is less figurative
than his others generally are, this tragedy is mentioned
with discredit in the induction to Ben Jonson's Bartho-
lomew Fair in 1614, as one that had then been exhibited
'five-and-twenty or thirty years:' which, if we take the
lowest number, throws it back to the year 1589, at which
time Shakspeare was but 25: an earlier date than can be
found for any other of his pieces, and if it does not clear
him entirely of it, shews at least it was a first attempt."
Though we are obliged to Dr. Percy for his attempt to
clear our great dramatic writer from the imputation of
having produced this sanguinary performance, yet I can-
not admit that the circumstance of its being discreditably
mentioned by Ben Jonson, ought to have any weight;
for Ben has not very sparingly censured The Tempest,
and other pieces which are undoubtedly among the most
finished works of Shakspeare. The whole of Ben's Pro-
logue to Every Man in his Humour, is a malicious sneer
on him. - Painter, in his Palace of Pleasure, Tom. II.
speaks of the story of Titus as well known, and parti-
cularly mentions the cruelty of Tamora: And, in A Knack
to know a Knave, 1594, is the following allusion to it:
"as welcome shall you be

"To me, my daughters, and my son-in-law,
"As Titus was unto the Roman senators,

Ir is observable, that this play is printed in the quarto "When he had made a conquest on the Goths.” of 1611, with exactness equal to that of the other books Whatever were the motives of Heming and Condell for of those times. The first edition was probably corrected admitting this tragedy among those of Shakspeare, all it by the author, so that here is very little room for con- has gained by their favour is, to be delivered down to jecture or emendation; and accordingly none of the edi-posterity with repeated remarks of contempt, -a Thersites tors have much molested this piece with officious criticism. babbling among heroes, and introduced only to be derided. JOHNSON. There is an authority for ascribing this play|| STEEVENS. On what principle the editors of the first to Shakspeare, which I think a very strong one, though complete edition of our poet's plays admitted this into not made use of, as I remember, by any of his com- their volume, cannot now be ascertained. The most promentators. It is given to him, among other plays, which bable reason that can be assigned, is, that he wrote a are undoubtedly his, in a little book, called Palladis Ta- few lines in it, or gave some assistance to the author, mia, or the Second Part of Wit's Commonwealth, written in revising it, or in some other way aided him in bringby Francis Meres, Maister of Arts, and printed at Lon- ing it forward on the stage. The tradition mentioned don in 1598 The other tragedies, enumerated as his in by Ravenscroft in the time of King James II. warrants that book, are King John, Richard the Second, Henry the us in making one or other of these suppositions. "I Fourth, Richard the Third, and Romeo and Juliet. The have been told" (says he in his preface to an alteration comedies are, the Midsummer-Night's Dream, the Gentle- of this play published in 1687,) "by some anciently conmen of Verona, the Comedy of Errors, the Love's La- versant with the stage, that it was not originally his, but bour's Lost, the Love's Labour Won, and the Merchant brought by a private author to be acted, and he only of Venice. I have give this list, as it serves so far to gave some master-touches to one or two of the principal ascertain the date of these plays; and also, as it conparts or characters." "A booke entitled A noble Roman tains a notice of a comedy of Shakspeare, the Love's La- Historie of Titus Andronicus" was entered at Stationers' bour Won, not included in any collection of his works; Hall, Feb. 6, 1593-4. This was undoubtedly the play as nor, as far as I know, attributed to him by any other it was printed in that year (according to Langbaine, who authority. If there should be a play in being with that alone appears to have seen the first edition,) and acted title, though without Shakspeare's name, I should be glad by the servants of the earls of Pembroke, Derby, and to see it; and I think the editor would be sure of the Sussex. It is observable that in the entry no author's public thanks, even if it should prove no better than the name is mentioned, and that the play was originally perLove's Labour's Lost. TYRWHITT. = The work of cri- formed by the same company of comedians who exhibited ticism on the plays of our author, is, I believe, gener- the old drama, entitled The Contention of the Houses of ally found to extend or contract itself in proportion to Yorke and Lancaster, The old Taming of the Shrew, and the value of the piece under consideration; and we shall Marlowe's King Edward II. by whom not one of Shakalways do little where we desire but little should be done. speare's plays is said to have been performed. From I know not that this piece stands in need of much emen- Ben Jonson's Induction to Bartholomew Fair, 1614, we dation; though it might be treated as condemned criminals learn that Andronicus had been exhibited twenty-five or are in some countries, any experiments might be jus- thirty years before; that is, according to the lowest comtifiably made on it. — The author, whoever he was, might putation, in 1589; or taking a middle period, which is have borrowed the story, the names, the characters, &c. perhaps more just, in 1587. To enter into a long disfrom an old ballad, which is entered in the books of the quisition to prove this piece not to have been written by Stationers' Company immediately after the play on the Shakspeare, would be an idle waste of time. To those same subject. "John Danter] Feb. 6, 1593. A book en- who are not conversant with his writings, if particular titled A Noble Roman Historie of Titus Andronicus." passages were examined, more words would be necessary "Enter'd unto him also the ballad thereof." Entered than the subject is worth: those who are well acquainted

||

with his works, cannot entertain a doubt on the question. || here exhibited, can scarcely be conceived tolerable to any -I will however mention one mode by which it may be audience; yet we are told by Jonson, that they were not easily ascertained. Let the reader only peruse a few only borne but praised. That Shakspeare wrote any part, lines of Appius and Virginia, Tancred and Gismund, The though Theobald declares it incontestible, I see no reaBattle of Alcazar, Jeronimo, Selimus Emperor of the son for believing. The testimony produced at the beTurks, the Wounds of Civil War, The Wars of Cyrus, ginning of this play, by which it is ascribed to ShakLocrine, Arden of Feversham, King Edward I., The Spanish || speare, is by no means equal to the argument against Tragedy, Soliman and Perseda, King Leir, the old King its authenticity, arising from the total difference of couJohn, or any other of the pieces that were exhibited be- duct, language, and sentiments by which it stands apart fore the time of Shakspeare, and he will at once per- from all the rest. Meres had probably no other evidence ceive that Titus Andronicus was coined in the same mint. than that of a title-page, which, though in our time it The testimony of Meres, mentioned in a preceding note, be sufficient, was then of no great authority; for all the alone remains to be considered. His enumerating this plays which were rejected by the first collectors of Shakamong Shakspeare's plays may be accounted for in the speare's works, and admitted in later editions, and again same way in which we may account for its being printed || rejected by the critical editors, had Shakspeare's name by his fellow-comedians in the first folio edition of his on the title, as we must suppose, by the fraudulence of works. Meres was in 1598, when his book appeared, in- the printers, who, while there were yet no gazettes, nor timately connected with Drayton, and probably acquainted || advertisements, nor any means of circulating literary inwith some of the dramatic poets of the time, from some telligence, could usurp at pleasure any celebrated name. or other of whom he might have heard that Shakspeare Nor had Shakspeare any interest in detecting the iminterested himself about this tragedy, or had written a posture, as none of his fame or profit was produced by few lines for the author. The internal evidence furnished the press. The chronology of this play does not prove by the piece itself, and proving it not to have been the it not to be Shakspeare's. If it had been written twentyproduction of Shakspeare, greatly outweighs any single five years, in 1614, it might have been written when testimony on the other side. Meres might have been Shakspeare was twenty-five years old. When he left misinformed, or inconsiderately have given credit to the Warwickshire I know not, but at the age of twenty-five rumour of the day. For six of the plays which he has it was rather too late to fly for deer-stealing. Ravensmentioned, (exclusive of the evidence which the repre- croft, who in the reign of James II. revised this play, sentation of the pieces themselves might have furnished,) || and restored it to the stage, tells us, in his preface, from he had perhaps no better authority than the whisper of a theatrical tradition, I suppose, which in his time might the theatre; for they were not then printed. He could be of sufficient authority, that this play was touched in not have been deceived by a title-page, as Dr. Johnson || different parts by Shakspeare, but written by some other supposes; for Shakspeare's name is not in the title-page poet. I do not find Shakspeare's touches very discernible. of the edition printed in quarto in 1611, and therefore JOHNSON. = we may conclude, was not in the title-page of that in 1594, of which the other was undoubtedly a re-impression. Had this mean performance been the work of Shakspeare, can it be supposed that the booksellers would not have endeavoured to procure a sale for it by stamping his name upon it ? — In short, the high antiquity of the piece, THE story on which this play is formed is of great anits entry on the Stationers' books, and being afterwards tiquity. It is found in a book, once very popular, enprinted without the name of our author, its being per- titled Gesta Romanorum, which is supposed by Mr. Tyrformed by the servants of Lord Pembroke, &c. the stately whitt, the learned editor of The Canterbury Tales of march of the versification, the whole colour of the com- Chaucer, 1775, to have been written five hundred years position, its resemblance to several of our most ancient ago. The earliest impression of that work (which I have dramas, the dissimilitude of the style from our author's seen) was printed in 1488; 5) in that edition the history undoubted compositions, and the tradition mentioned by of Appolonius King of Tyre makes the 153d chapter. It Ravenscroft, when some of his contemporaries had not is likewise related by Gower in his Confessio Amantis, been long dead, (for Lowin and Taylor, two of his fel- lib. viii. p. 175–85. edit. 1554. The Rev. Dr. Farmer has low-comedians, were alive a few years before the Re- in his possession a fragment of a MS. poem on the same storation, and Sir William D'Avenant, who had himself subject, which appears, from the handwriting and the written for the stage in 1629, did not die till April 1668;) metre, to be more ancient than Gower. There is also an all these circumstances combined, prove with irresistible ancient romance on this subject, called Kyng Appolyn of force that the play of Titus Andronicus has been erro- Thyre, translated from the French by Robert Copland, neously ascribed to Shakspeare. MALONE. In the library and printed by Wynkyn de Worde in 1510. In 1576 Wilof the duke of Bridgewater, at Ashridge, is a volume of liam Howe had a licence for printing The most excellent, old quarto plays, numbered R. 1. 7, in which the first is pleasant, and variable Historie of the strange Adventures Titus Andronicus. This Mr. Todd has collated with the of Prince Appolonius, Lucine his wyfe, and Tharsa his edition of 1793, and most of his collations may be seen daughter. The author of Pericles having introduced Gower in the edition of Shakspeare in 21 volumes, 1803, or in in his piece, it is reasonable to suppose that he chiefly that of 1811. They appear of very little value. Mr. Ma- followed the work of that poet. It is observable, that lone, in his edition, marks a few lines here and there, the hero of this tale is, in Gower's poem, as in the prewhich he supposes may have been written by Shakspeare; sent play, called Prince of Tyre; in the Gesta Romanobut these are of still less value, and might, in truth, rum, and Copland's prose Romance, he is entitled King. have been written by many of Shakspeare's contempora- || Most of the incidents of the play are found in the Conf. ries. We have therefore passed them over without no- Amant, and a few of Gower's expressions are occasionally tice. CHALMERS. = All the editors and critics agree with|| Mr. Theobald in supposing this play spurious. I see no reason for differing from them; for the colour of the style is wholly different from that of the other plays, and there is an attempt at regular versification, and artificial closes, not always inelegant, yet seldom pleasing. The barbarity of the spectacles, and the general massacre, which are

XXXIII. PERICLES.

borrowed. However, I think it is not unlikely, that there may have been (though I have not met with it) an early prose translation of this popular story, from the Gest. Roman. in which the name of Appolonius was changed to Pericles; to which, likewise, the author of this drama

5) There are several editions of the Geata Romanorum before 1488.

Douce.

t

1

.

In this play we have exhibited more variations of text than in any other. This arises not only from the greater licence avowedly taken by Messrs. Steevens and Malone with the erroneous old copies, but from the pleasure these gentlemen always had in differing from each other; of what importance their various readings are, it|| would be unnecessary to state. CHALMERS. = To a former edition of this play were subjoined two Dissertations: one written by Mr. Steevens, the other by me. In the latter I urged such arguments as then appeared to me to have weight, to prove that it was the entire work of Shakspeare, and one of his carliest compositions. Mr. Steevens on the other hand maintained, that it was originally the production of some elder playwright, and afterwards improved by our poet, whose hand was acknowledged to be visible in many scenes throughout the play. On a review of the various arguments which each of us produced in favour of his own hypothesis, I am now convinced that the theory of Mr. Steevens was right, and have no difficulty in acknowledging my own to be erroneous. — This || play was entered on the Stationers' books, together with Antony and Cleopatra, in the year 1608, by Edward Blount, a bookseller of eminence, and one of the publishers of the first folio edition of Shakspeare's works. It was printed with his name in the title-page, in his lifetime; but this circumstance proves nothing; because by the knavery of booksellers other pieces were also ascribed to him in his lifetime, of which he indubitably wrote not a line. Nor is it necessary to urge in support of its genuineness, that at a subsequent period it was ascribed to him by several dramatic writers. I wish not to rely on any circumstance of that kind; because in all questions of this nature, internal evidence is the best that can be produced, and to every person intimately acquainted with our poet's writings, must in the present case be decisive. The congenial sentiments, the numerous expressions bearing a striking similitude to passages in his undisputed plays, some of the incidents, the situation of many of the persons, and in various places the colour of the style, all these combine to set the seal of Shakspeare on the play before us, and furnish us with internal and irresistible proofs, that a considerable portion of this piece, as it now appears, was written by him. The greater part of the last three acts, may, I think, on this ground be safely ascribed to him; and his hand may be traced occasionally in the other two divisions. Το alter, new-model, and improve the unsuccessful dramas of preceding writers, was, I believe, much more common in the time of Shakspeare than is generally supposed. This piece having been thus new-modelled by our poet, and enriched with many happy strokes from his pen, is unquestionably entitled to that place among his works, which it has now obtained. MALONE.=

XXXIV. KING LEAR.

--

sons must have been borrowed from Sidney's Arcadia, as I have not found the least trace of it in any other work. For the first King Lear, see likewise Six old Plays on which Shakspeare founded, &c. published for S. Leacroft, Charing Cross. The reader will also find the story of K. Lear, in the second book and 10th canto of Spenser's Fairy Queen, and in the 15th chapter of the third book of Warner's Albion's England, 1602. — The whole of this play, however, could not have been written till after 1603. Harsnet's pamphlet, to which it contains so many references, was not published till that year. STEEVENS, Camden, in his Remains, (p. 306. edit. 1674,) tells a similar story to this of Leir or Lear, of Ina king of the West Saxons; which, if the thing ever happened, probably was the real origin of the fable. See under the head of Wise Speeches. PERCY. The story told by Camden in his Remaines, 4to. 1605, is this: — “Ina, king of West Saxons, had three daughters, of whom upon a time he demanded whether they did love him, and so would do during their lives, above all others: the two elder sware deeply they would; the youngest, but the wisest, told her father flatly, without flattery, that albeit she did love, honour, and reverence him, and so would whilst she lived, as much as nature and daughterly datie at the uttermost could expect, yet she did think that one day it would come to passe that she should affect another more fervently, meaning her husband, when she were married; who being made one flesh with her, as God by commandment had told, and nature had taught her, she was to cleave fast to, forsaking father and mother, kiffe and kinne. [Anonymous.] One referreth this to the daughters of King Leir.". It is, I think, more probable that Shakspeare had this passage in his thoughts, when he wrote Cordelia's reply concerning her future marriage, than The Mirror for Magistrates, as Camden's book was published recently before he appears to have composed this play, and that portion of it which is entitled Wise Speeches, where the foregoing passage is found, furnished him with a hint in Coriolanus. - The story of King Leir and his three daughters was originally told by Geoffrey of Monmouth, from whom Holinshed transcribed it; and in his Chronicle || Shakspeare had certainly read it, as it occurs not far from that of Cymbeline; though the old play on the same subject probably first suggested to him the idea of making it the ground-work of a tragedy. — Geoffrey of Monmouth says, that Leir, who was the eldest son of Bladud, "nobly governed his country for sixty years." According to that historian, he died about 800 years before the birth of Christ. — The name of Leir's youngest daughter, which in Geoffrey's history, in Holinshed, The Mirror for Magistrates, and the old anonymous play, is Cordeilla, Cordila, or Cordella, Shakspeare found softened into Corde. lia, by Spenser, in his Second Book, Canto X. The names of Edgar and Edmund were probably suggested by Holinshed. See his Chronicle, Vol. I. p. 122. “Edgar, the son of Edmund, brother of Athelstane," &c. This tragedy, I believe, was written in 1605. MALONE. The tragedy of Lear is deservedly celebrated among the dramas of Shakspeare. There is perhaps no play which keeps the attention so strongly fixed; which so much agitates our passions, and interests our curiosity. The artful in

THE story of this tragedy had found its way into many ballads and other metrical pieces; yet Shakspeare seems to have been more indebted to The True Chronicle History of King Leir and his Three Daughters, Gonorill, || volutions of distinct interests, the striking oppositions of Ragan, and Cordella, 1605, than to all the other performances together. It appears from the books at Stationers' Hall, that some play on this subject was entered by Edward White, May 14, 1594. "A booke entituled, The moste famous Chronicle Hystorie of Leire King of England, and his three Daughters." A piece with the same title is entered again, May 8, 1605; and again, Nov. || 26, 1607. From The Mirror of Magistrates, 1587, Shakspeare has, however, taken the hint for the behaviour of the steward, and the reply of Cordelia to her father concerning her future marriage. The episode of Gloster and his

contrary characters, the sudden changes of fortune, and the quick succession of events, fill the mind with a perpetual tumult of indignation, pity, and hope. There is no scene which does not contribute to the aggravation of the distress or conduct of the action, and scarce a line which does not conduce to the progress of the scene. So powerful is the current of the poet's imagination, that the mind which once ventures within it, is hurried irresistibly along. On the seeming improbability of Lear's conduct, it may be observed, that he is represented according to histories at that time vulgarly received as true.