Eighteenth Century Essays on Shakespeare

Chapter XII: Letter III: Sir, Feb. 8 (6)

Text size

Should we be silent and not speak, our raiment
And state of bodies would bewray what life
We’ve led since thy Exile. Think with thyself,
How more unfortunate than all living women
Are we come hither; since thy sight, which should
Make our eyes flow with joy, hearts dance with comforts,
Constrains them weep, and shake with fear and sorrow;
Making the mother, wife, and child to see
The son, the husband, and the father tearing
His Country’s bowels out: and to poor we
Thy enmity’s most capital; thou barr’st us
Our prayers to the Gods, which is a comfort
That all but we enjoy. For how can we,
Alas! how can we, for our Country pray,
Whereto we’re bound, together with thy Victory,
Whereto we’re bound? Alack! or we must lose
The Country, our dear nurse; or else thy Person,
Our comfort in the Country. We must find
An eminent calamity, though we had
Our wish, which side shou’d win. For either thou
Must, as a foreign Recreant, be led
With manacles thorough our streets; or else
Triumphantly tread on thy Country’s ruin,
And bear the palm, for having bravely shed
Thy wife and children’s blood. For myself, son,
I purpose not to wait on Fortune, ’till
These wars determine: if I can’t persuade thee
Rather to shew a noble grace to both parts,
Than seek the end of one; thou shalt no sooner
March to assault thy Country, than to tread
(Trust to’t, thou shalt not) on thy mother’s womb,
That brought thee to this world.

I will now give you the old Translation, which shall effectually confute Mr. Pope: for our Author hath done little more than throw the very words of North into blank verse.

“If we helde our peace (my sonne) and determined not to speake, the state of our poore bodies, and present sight of our rayment, would easely bewray to thee what life we haue led at home, since thy exile and abode abroad. But thinke now with thy selfe, howe much more unfortunately then all the women liuinge we are come hether, considering that the sight which should be most pleasaunt to all other to beholde, spitefull fortune hath made most fearfull to us: making my selfe to see my sonne, and my daughter here, her husband, besieging the walles of his natiue countrie. So as that which is the only comfort to all other in their adversitie and miserie, to pray unto the goddes, and to call to them for aide, is the onely thinge which plongeth us into most deepe perplexitie. For we cannot (alas) together pray, both for victorie, for our countrie, and for safety of thy life also: but a worlde of grievous curses, yea more than any mortall enemie can heappe uppon us, are forcibly wrapt up in our prayers. For the bitter soppe of most harde choyce is offered thy wife and children, to foregoe the one of the two: either to lose the persone of thy selfe, or the nurse of their natiue contrie. For my selfe (my sonne) I am determined not to tarrie, till fortune in my life time doe make an ende of this warre. For if I cannot persuade thee, rather to doe good unto both parties, then to ouerthrowe and destroye the one, preferring loue and nature before the malice and calamitie of warres: thou shalt see, my sonne, and trust unto it, thou shalt no soner marche forward to assault thy countrie, but thy foote shall tread upon thy mother’s wombe, that brought thee first into this world.”

The length of this quotation will be excused for its curiosity; and it happily wants not the assistance of a Comment. But matters may not always be so easily managed:—a plagiarism from Anacreon hath been detected:

The Sun’s a thief, and with his great attraction
Robs the vast Sea. The Moon’s an arrant thief,
And her pale fire she snatches from the Sun.
The Sea’s a thief, whose liquid surge resolves
The Moon into salt tears. The Earth’s a thief,
That feeds and breeds by a composture stol’n
From gen’ral excrements: each thing’s a thief.

“This,” says Dr. Dodd, “is a good deal in the manner of the celebrated _drinking Ode_, too well known to be inserted.” Yet it may be alleged by those who imagine Shakespeare to have been generally able to think for himself, that the topicks are obvious, and their application is different.—But for argument’s sake, let the Parody be granted; and “our Author,” says some one, “may be puzzled to prove that there was a Latin translation of Anacreon at the time Shakespeare wrote his _Timon of Athens_.” This challenge is peculiarly unhappy: for I do not at present recollect any _other Classick_ (if indeed, with great deference to Mynheer De Pauw, Anacreon may be numbered amongst them) that was _originally_ published with _two_ Latin translations.

But this is not all. Puttenham in his _Arte of English Poesie_, 1589, quotes some one of a “reasonable good facilitie in translation, who finding _certaine_ of Anacreon’s Odes very well translated by Ronsard the French poet—comes our Minion, and translates the same out of French into English”: and his strictures upon him evince the publication. Now this identical Ode is to be met with in Ronsard! and as his works are in few hands, I will take the liberty of transcribing it:

La terre les eaux va boivant,
L’arbre la boit par sa racine,
La mer salee boit le vent,
Et le Soleil boit la marine.
Le Soleil est beu de la Lune,
Tout boit soit en haut ou en bas:
Suivant ceste reigle commune,
Pourquoy donc ne boirons-nous pas?—Edit. Fol. p. 507.

I know not whether an observation or two relative to our Author’s acquaintance with Homer be worth our investigation. The ingenious Mrs. Lenox observes on a passage of _Troilus and Cressida_, where Achilles is roused to battle by the death of Patroclus, that Shakespeare must _here_ have had the _Iliad_ in view, as “the old Story, which in many places he hath faithfully copied, is absolutely silent with respect to this circumstance.”

And Mr. Upton is positive that the _sweet oblivious Antidote_, inquired after by Macbeth, could be nothing but the _Nepenthe_ described in the _Odyssey_,

Νηπενθές τ᾽ ἄχολόν τε, κακῶν ἐπίληθον ἁπάντων.

I will not insist upon the Translations by Chapman; as the first Editions are without date, and it may be difficult to ascertain the exact time of their publication. But the _former_ circumstance might have been learned from Alexander Barclay; and the _latter_ more fully from Spenser than from Homer himself.

“But Shakespeare,” persists Mr. Upton, “hath some _Greek Expressions_.” Indeed!—“We have one in _Coriolanus_,

——It is held
That valour is the chiefest Virtue, and
Most dignifies the _Haver_;——

and another in _Macbeth_, where Banquo addresses the _Weïrd-Sisters_,

——My noble Partner
You greet with present grace, and great prediction
Of noble _Having_.——

Gr. Ἔχεια,—and πρὸς τὸν Ἔχοντα, to the _Haver_.

This was the common language of Shakespeare’s time. “Lye in a water-bearer’s house!” says Master Mathew of Bobadil, “a Gentleman of his _Havings_!”

Thus likewise John Davies in his _Pleasant Descant upon English Proverbs_, printed with his _Scourge of Folly_, about 1612:

_Do well and have well!_—neyther so still:
For some are good _Doers_, whose _Havings_ are ill;

and Daniel the Historian uses it frequently. _Having_ seems to be synonymous with _Behaviour_ in Gawin Douglas and the elder Scotch writers.

_Haver_, in the sense of _Possessor_, is every where met with: tho’ unfortunately the πρὸς τὸν Ἔχοντα of Sophocles, produced as an authority for it, is suspected by Kuster, as good a critick in these matters, to have absolutely a different meaning.

But what shall we say to the learning of the Clown in _Hamlet_, “Ay, tell me that, and _unyoke_”? alluding to the Βουλυτὸς of the Greeks: and Homer and his Scholiast are quoted accordingly!

If it be not sufficient to say, with Dr. Warburton, that the phrase might be taken from Husbandry, without much depth of reading; we may produce it from a _Dittie_ of the workmen of Dover, preserved in the additions to Holingshed, p. 1546.

My bow is broke, I would _unyoke_,
My foot is sore, I can worke no more.

An expression of my Dame Quickly is next fastened upon, which you may look for in vain in the modern text; she calls some of the pretended Fairies in the _Merry Wives of Windsor_,

——_Orphan_ Heirs of fixed Destiny;

“and how elegant is this!” quoth Mr. Upton, supposing the word to be used, as a Grecian would have used it, “ὀρφανὸς ab ὀρφνὸς—acting in darkness and obscurity.”

Mr. Heath assures us that the bare mention of such an interpretation is a sufficient refutation of it: and his critical word will be rather taken in Greek than in English: in the same hands therefore I will venture to leave all our author’s knowledge of the _Old Comedy_, and his etymological learning in the word, _Desdemona_.

Surely poor Mr. Upton was very little acquainted with _Fairies_, notwithstanding his laborious study of Spenser. The last authentick account of them is from our countryman William Lilly; and it by no means agrees with the _learned_ interpretation: for the _angelical Creatures_ appeared in his _Hurst_ wood in a _most illustrious Glory_,—“and indeed,” says the Sage, “it is not given to very many persons to endure their _glorious aspects_.”

The only use of transcribing these things is to shew what absurdities men for ever run into, when they lay down an Hypothesis, and afterward seek for arguments in the support of it. What else could induce this man, by no means a bad scholar, to doubt whether _Truepenny_ might not be derived from Τρύπανον; and quote upon us with much parade an old Scholiast on Aristophanes?—I will not stop to confute him: nor take any notice of two or three more Expressions, in which he was pleased to suppose some learned meaning or other; all which he might have found in every Writer of the time, or still more easily in the vulgar Translation of the Bible, by consulting the Concordance of Alexander Cruden.

But whence have we the Plot of _Timon_, except from the Greek of Lucian?—The Editors and Criticks have been never at a greater loss than in their inquiries of this sort; and the source of a Tale hath been often in vain sought abroad, which might easily have been found at home: My good friend, the very ingenious Editor of the _Reliques of ancient English Poetry_, hath shewn our Author to have been sometimes contented with a legendary _Ballad_.

The Story of the _Misanthrope_ is told in almost every Collection of the time; and particularly in two books, with which Shakespeare was intimately acquainted; the _Palace of Pleasure_, and the _English Plutarch_. Indeed from a passage in an old Play, called _Jack Drum’s Entertainment_, I conjecture that he had before made his appearance on the Stage.

Were this a proper place for such a disquisition, I could give you many cases of this kind. We are sent for instance to Cinthio for the Plot of _Measure for Measure_, and Shakespeare’s judgement hath been attacked for some deviations from him in the conduct of it: when probably all he knew of the matter was from Madam Isabella in the _Heptameron_ of Whetstone. Ariosto is continually quoted for the Fable of _Much ado about Nothing_; but I suspect our Poet to have been satisfied with the _Geneura_ of Turberville. _As you like it_ was _certainly borrowed_, if we believe Dr. Grey, and Mr. Upton, from the _Coke’s Tale of Gamelyn_; which by the way was not _printed_ ’till a century afterward: when in truth the old Bard, who was no hunter of MSS., contented himself solely with Lodge’s _Rosalynd_ or Euphues’ _Golden Legacye_. 4to. 1590. The Story of _All’s well that ends well_, or, as I suppose it to have been sometimes called, _Love’s labour wonne_, is originally indeed the property of Boccace, but it came immediately to Shakespeare from Painter’s _Giletta of Narbon_. Mr. Langbaine could not conceive whence the Story of _Pericles_ could be taken, “not meeting in History with any such _Prince of Tyre_”; yet his legend may be found at large in old Gower, under the name of _Appolynus_.

_Pericles_ is one of the Plays omitted in the later Editions, as well as the early Folios, and not improperly; tho’ it was published many years before the death of Shakespeare, with his name in the Title-page. Aulus Gellius informs us that some Plays are ascribed absolutely to Plautus, which he only _re-touched_ and _polished_; and this is undoubtedly the case with our Author likewise. The revival of this performance, which Ben Jonson calls _stale_ and _mouldy_, was probably his earliest attempt in the Drama. I know that another of these discarded pieces, the _Yorkshire Tragedy_, had been frequently called so; but most certainly it was not written by our Poet at all: nor indeed was it printed in his life-time. The Fact on which it is built was perpetrated no sooner than 1604: much too late for so mean a performance from the hand of Shakespeare.

Sometimes a very little matter detects a forgery. You may remember a Play called the _Double Falshood_, which Mr. Theobald was desirous of palming upon the world for a posthumous one of Shakespeare: and I see it is classed as such in the last Edition of the Bodleian Catalogue. Mr. Pope himself, after all the strictures of Scriblerus, in a Letter to Aaron Hill, supposes it of that age; but a mistaken accent determines it to have been written since the middle of the last century:

——This late example
Of base Henriquez, bleeding in me now,
From each good _Aspect_ takes away my trust.

And in another place,

You have an _Aspect_, Sir, of wondrous wisdom.

The word _Aspect_, you perceive, is here accented on the _first_ Syllable, which, I am confident, in _any_ sense of it, was never the case in the time of Shakespeare; though it may sometimes appear to be so, when we do not observe a preceding _Elision_.

Some of the professed Imitators of our old Poets have not attended to this and many other _Minutiæ_: I could point out to you several performances in the respective Styles of Chaucer, Spenser, and Shakespeare, which the _imitated_ Bard could not possibly have either read or construed.

This very accent hath troubled the Annotators on Milton. Dr. Bentley observes it to be “a _tone_ different from the present use.” Mr. Manwaring, in his _Treatise of Harmony and Numbers_, very solemnly informs us that “this Verse is defective both in Accent and Quantity, B. 3. V. 266.

His words here ended, but his meek _Aspéct_
Silent yet spake.——

Here,” says he, “a syllable is _acuted_ and _long_, whereas it should be _short_ and _graved_”!

And a still more extraordinary Gentleman, one Green, who published a Specimen of a _new Version_ of the _Paradise Lost_, into BLANK verse, “by which that amazing Work is brought somewhat nearer the Summit of Perfection,” begins with correcting a blunder in the fourth book, V. 540:

——The setting Sun
Slowly descended, and with right _Aspéct_—
Levell’d his evening rays.——

_Not so_ in the _New Version_:

Meanwhile the setting Sun descending slow—
Level’d with _áspect_ right his ev’ning rays.

Enough of such Commentators.—The celebrated Dr. Dee had a _Spirit_, who would sometimes condescend to correct him, when peccant in _Quantity_: and it had been kind of him to have a little assisted the _Wights_ above-mentioned.—Milton affected the _Antique_; but it may seem more extraordinary that the old Accent should be adopted in _Hudibras_.

After all, the _Double Falshood_ is superior to Theobald. One passage, and one only in the whole Play, he pretended to have written:

——Strike up, my Masters;
But touch the Strings with a religious softness:
Teach sound to languish thro’ the Night’s dull Ear,
Till Melancholy start from her lazy Couch,
And Carelessness grow Convert to Attention.

These lines were particularly admired; and his vanity could not resist the opportunity of claiming them: but his claim had been more easily allowed to _any other_ part of the performance.

To whom then shall we ascribe it?—Somebody hath told us, who should seem to be a _Nostrum-monger_ by his argument, that, let _Accents_ be how they will, it is called _an original Play of William Shakespeare_ in the _Kings Patent_, prefixed to Mr. Theobald’s Edition, 1728, and consequently there _could_ be no fraud in the matter. Whilst, on the contrary, the _Irish_ Laureat, Mr. Victor, remarks (and were it true, it would be certainly decisive) that the Plot is borrowed from a Novel of Cervantes, not published ’till the year after Shakespeare’s death. But unluckily the same Novel appears in a part of _Don Quixote_, which was printed in Spanish, 1605, and in English by Shelton, 1612.—The same reasoning, however, which exculpated our Author from the _Yorkshire Tragedy_, may be applied on the present occasion.

But you want _my_ opinion:—and from every mark of Style and Manner, I make no doubt of ascribing it to Shirley. Mr. Langbaine informs us that he left some Plays in MS.—These were written about the time of the _Restoration_, when the _Accent_ in question was more generally altered.

Perhaps the mistake arose from an _abbreviation_ of the name. Mr. Dodsley knew not that the Tragedy of _Andromana_ was Shirley’s, from the very same cause. Thus a whole stream of Biographers tell us that Marston’s Plays were printed at London, 1633, “by the care of _William Shakespeare_, the famous Comedian.”—Here again I suppose, in some Transcript, the real Publisher’s name, _William Sheares_, was _abbreviated_. No one hath protracted the life of Shakespeare beyond 1616, except Mr. Hume; who is pleased to add a year to it, in contradiction to all manner of evidence.

Shirley is spoken of with contempt in _Mac Flecknoe_; but his Imagination is sometimes fine to an extraordinary degree. I recollect a passage in the fourth book of the _Paradise Lost_, which hath been suspected of _Imitation_, as a _prettiness_ below the Genius of Milton: I mean, where _Uriel_ glides _backward and forward_ to Heaven on a _Sunbeam_. Dr. Newton informs us that this might possibly be hinted by a Picture of Annibal Caracci in the King of France’s Cabinet: but I am apt to believe that Milton had been struck with a Portrait in Shirley. Fernando, in the Comedy of the _Brothers_, 1652, describes Jacinta at _Vespers_:

Her eye did seem to labour with a tear,
Which suddenly took birth, but overweigh’d
With it’s own swelling, drop’d upon her bosome;
Which, by reflexion of her light, appear’d
As nature meant her sorrow for an ornament:
After, her looks grew chearfull, and I saw
A smile shoot gracefull upward from her eyes,
As if they had gain’d a victory o’er grief,
And with it many _beams_ twisted themselves,
Upon whose _golden threads_ the _Angels_ walk
_To and again from Heaven_.——

You must not think me infected with the spirit of Lauder, if I give you another of Milton’s Imitations:

——The Swan _with arched neck_
Between her white wings mantling proudly, rows
Her state with oary feet.—B. 7. V. 438, &c.

“The ancient Poets,” says Mr. Richardson, “have not hit upon this beauty; so lavish as they have been in their descriptions of the _Swan_. Homer calls the Swan _long-necked_, δουλιχοδείρον; but how much more _pittoresque_, if he had _arched_ this length of neck?”

For _this beauty_, however, Milton was beholden to Donne; whose name, I believe, at present is better known than his writings:

——Like a Ship in her full trim,
A _Swan_, so white that you may unto him
Compare all whitenesse, but himselfe to none,
Glided along, and as he glided watch’d,
And with his _arched neck_ this poore fish catch’d.—_Progresse of
the Soul_, St. 24.

Those highly finished Landscapes, the _Seasons_, are indeed copied from Nature: but Thomson sometimes recollected the hand of his Master:

——The stately-sailing Swan
Gives out his snowy plumage to the gale;
_And, arching proud his neck, with oary feet_
Bears forward fierce, and guards his osier Isle,
Protective of his young.——

But _to return_, as we say on other occasions—Perhaps the Advocates for Shakespeare’s knowledge of the Latin language may be more successful. Mr. Gildon takes the Van. “It is plain that He was acquainted with the Fables of antiquity very well: that some of the Arrows of Cupid are pointed with Lead, and others with Gold, he found in Ovid; and what he speaks of Dido, in Virgil: nor do I know any translation of these Poets so ancient as Shakespeare’s time.” The passages on which these sagacious remarks are made occur in the _Midsummer Night’s Dream_; and exhibit, we see, a clear proof of acquaintance with the Latin Classicks. But we are not answerable for Mr. Gildon’s ignorance; he might have been told of Caxton and Douglas, of Surrey and Stanyhurst, of Phaer and Twyne, of Fleming and Golding, of Turberville and Churchyard! but these Fables were easily known without the help of either the originals or the translations. The Fate of Dido had been sung very early by Gower, Chaucer, and Lydgate; Marloe had even already introduced her to the Stage: and Cupid’s arrows appear with their characteristick differences in Surrey, in Sidney, in Spenser, and every Sonnetteer of the time. Nay, their very names were exhibited long before in the _Romaunt of the Rose_: a work you may venture to look into, notwithstanding Master Prynne hath so positively assured us, on the word of John Gerson, that the Author is most certainly damned, if he did not care for a serious repentance.

Mr. Whalley argues in the same manner, and with the same success. He thinks a passage in the _Tempest_,

—— High Queen of State,
Great Juno comes; I know her by her _Gait_,

a remarkable instance of Shakespeare’s knowledge of ancient Poetick story; and that the hint was furnished by the _Divum incedo Regina_ of Virgil.

You know, honest John Taylor, the _Water-poet_, declares that _he never learned his Accidence_, and that _Latin and French_ were to him _Heathen-Greek_; yet, by the help of Mr. Whalley’s argument, I will prove him a _learned_ Man, in spite of every thing he may say to the contrary: for thus he makes a _Gallant_ address his _Lady_,

“Most inestimable Magazine of Beauty—in whom _the Port and Majesty of Juno_, the Wisdom of Jove’s braine-bred Girle, and the Feature of Cytherea, have their domestical habitation.”

In the _Merchant of Venice_, we have an oath “By _two-headed Janus_”; and here, says Dr. Warburton, Shakespeare shews his knowledge in the Antique: and so again does the _Water-poet_, who describes Fortune,

Like a _Janus_ with a _double-face_.

But Shakespeare hath somewhere a _Latin Motto_, quoth Dr. Sewel; and so hath John Taylor, and a whole Poem upon it into the bargain.

You perceive, my dear Sir, how vague and indeterminate such arguments must be: for in fact this _sweet Swan of Thames_, as Mr. Pope calls him, hath more scraps of Latin, and allusions to antiquity, than are any where to be met with in the writings of Shakespeare. I am sorry to trouble you with trifles, yet what must be done, when grave men insist upon them?

It should seem to be the opinion of some modern criticks, that the personages of classick land began only to be known in England in the time of Shakespeare; or rather, that he particularly had the honour of introducing them to the notice of his countrymen.

For instance,—_Rumour painted full of tongues_ gives us a Prologue to one of the parts of _Henry the fourth_; and, says Dr. Dodd, Shakespeare had doubtless a view to either Virgil or Ovid in their description of Fame.

But why so? Stephen Hawes, in his _Pastime of Pleasure_, had long before exhibited her in the same manner,

A goodly Lady envyroned about
With _tongues_ of fyre;——

and so had Sir Thomas More in one of his _Pageants_,

_Fame_ I am called, mervayle you nothing
Though with _tonges_ I am compassed all rounde;

not to mention her elaborate Portrait by Chaucer, in the _Boke of Fame_; and by John Higgins, one of the Assistants in the _Mirour for Magistrates_, in his Legend of King Albanacte.

A very liberal Writer on the _Beauties of Poetry_, who hath been more conversant in the ancient Literature of other Countries than his own, “cannot but wonder that a Poet, whose classical Images are composed of the finest parts, and breath the very spirit of ancient Mythology, should pass for being illiterate:

See, what a grace was seated on his brow!
Hyperion’s curls: the front of Jove himself:
An eye like Mars to threaten and command:
A station like the herald Mercury,
New lighted on a heaven-kissing hill.—_Hamlet._”

_Illiterate_ is an ambiguous term: the question is, whether Poetick History could be only known by an Adept in _Languages_. It is no reflection on this ingenious Gentleman, when I say that I use on this occasion the words of a _better_ Critick, who yet was not willing to carry the _illiteracy_ of our Poet _too far_:—“They who are in such astonishment at the _learning_ of Shakespeare, forget that the Pagan Imagery was familiar to all the Poets of his time; and that abundance of this sort of learning was to be picked up from almost every English book that he could take into his hands.” For not to insist upon Stephen Bateman’s _Golden booke of the leaden Goddes_, 1577, and several other laborious compilations on the subject, all this and much more Mythology might as perfectly have been learned from the _Testament of Creseide_, and the _Fairy Queen_, as from a regular Pantheon, or Polymetis himself.

Mr. Upton, not contented with _Heathen_ learning, when he finds it in the text, must necessarily superadd it, when it appears to be wanting; because Shakespeare most certainly hath lost it by accident!

In _Much ado about Nothing_, Don Pedro says of the insensible Benedict, “He hath twice or thrice cut Cupid’s bow-string, and the little _Hangman_ dare not shoot at him.”

This mythology is not recollected in the Ancients, and therefore the critick hath no doubt but his Author wrote “_Henchman,—a Page, Pusio_: and _this_ word seeming too hard for the Printer, he translated the little Urchin into a _Hangman_, a character no way belonging to him.”

But this character was not borrowed from the Ancients;—it came from the _Arcadia_ of Sir Philip Sidney:

Millions of yeares this old drivell Cupid lives;
While still more wretch, more wicked he doth prove:
Till now at length that Jove an office gives,
(At Juno’s suite who much did Argus love)
In this our world a _Hangman_ for to be
Of all those fooles that will have all they see.—B. 2. Ch. 14.

I know it may be objected on the authority of such Biographers as Theophilus Cibber, and the Writer of the Life of Sir Philip, prefixed to the modern Editions, that the _Arcadia_ was not published before 1613, and consequently too late for this imitation: but I have a Copy in my own possession, printed for W. Ponsonbie, 1590, 4to. which hath escaped the notice of the industrious Ames, and the rest of our typographical Antiquaries.

Thus likewise every word of antiquity is to be cut down to the classical standard.

In a Note on the Prologue to _Troilus and Cressida_ (which, by the way, is not met with in the _Quarto_), Mr. Theobald informs us that the very _names_ of the gates of Troy have been barbarously demolished by the Editors: and a deal of learned dust he makes in setting them right again; much however to Mr. Heath’s satisfaction. Indeed the learning is modestly withdrawn from the later Editions, and we are quietly instructed to read,

Dardan, and Thymbria, Ilia, Scæa, Troian,
And Antenorides.

But had he looked into the _Troy boke_ of Lydgate, instead of puzzling himself with Dares Phrygius, he would have found the horrid demolition to have been neither the work of Shakespeare nor his Editors.

Our excellent friend Mr. Hurd hath born a noble testimony on our side of the question. “Shakespeare,” says this true Critick, “owed the felicity of freedom from the bondage of classical superstition to the _want_ of what is called the _advantage_ of a learned Education.—This, as well as a vast superiority of Genius, hath contributed to lift this astonishing man to the glory of being esteemed the most original _thinker_ and _speaker_, since the times of Homer.” And hence indisputably the amazing Variety of Style and Manner, unknown to all other Writers: an argument of _itself_ sufficient to emancipate Shakespeare from the supposition of a _Classical training_. Yet, to be honest, _one_ Imitation is _fastened_ on our Poet: which hath been insisted upon likewise by Mr. Upton and Mr. Whalley. You remember it in the famous Speech of Claudio in _Measure for Measure_:

Ay, but to die and go we know not where! &c.

Most certainly the Ideas of a “Spirit bathing in fiery floods,” of residing “in thrilling regions of thick-ribbed ice,” or of being “imprisoned in the viewless winds,” are not _original_ in our Author; but I am not sure that they came from the _Platonick Hell_ of Virgil. The Monks also had their hot and their cold Hell, “The fyrste is fyre that ever brenneth, and never gyveth lighte,” says an old Homily:—“The seconde is passyng colde, that yf a grete hylle of fyre were casten therin, it sholde torne to yce.” One of their Legends, well remembered in the time of Shakespeare, gives us a Dialogue between a Bishop and a Soul tormented in a piece of ice, which was brought to cure _a grete brenning heate_ in his foot: take care you do not interpret this the _Gout_, for I remember M. Menage quotes a _Canon_ upon us,

Si quis dixerit Episcopum PODAGRA laborare, Anathema sit.

Another tells us of the Soul of a Monk fastened to a Rock, which the winds were to blow about for a twelve-month, and purge of it’s Enormities. Indeed this doctrine was before now introduced into poetick fiction, as you may see in a Poem, “where the Lover declareth his pains to exceed far the pains of Hell,” among the many miscellaneous ones subjoined to the Works of Surrey. Nay, a very learned and inquisitive Brother-Antiquary, our Greek Professor, hath observed to me on the authority of Blefkenius, that this was the ancient opinion of the inhabitants of Iceland; who were certainly very little read either in the _Poet_ or the _Philosopher_.

After all, Shakespeare’s curiosity might lead him to _Translations_. Gawin Douglas really changes the _Platonick Hell_ into the “punytion of Saulis in Purgatory”: and it is observable that when the Ghost informs Hamlet of his Doom there,

Till the foul crimes done in his days of nature
Are _burnt and purg’d away_,——

the Expression is very similar to the Bishop’s: I will give you his Version as concisely as I can; “It is a nedeful thyng to suffer panis and torment—Sum in the wyndis, Sum under the watter, and in the fire uthir Sum:—thus the mony Vices—

Contrakkit in the corpis be _done away_
_And purgit_.——_Sixte Booke of Eneados._ Fol. p. 191.

It seems, however, “that Shakespeare _himself_ in the _Tempest_ hath translated some expressions of _Virgil_: witness the _O Dea certe_.” I presume we are here directed to the passage where Ferdinand says of Miranda, after hearing the Songs of Ariel,

——Most sure, the Goddess
On whom these airs attend;

and so _very small Latin_ is sufficient for this formidable translation, that if it be thought any honour to our Poet, I am loth to deprive him of it; but his honour is not built on such a sandy foundation. Let us turn to a _real Translator_, and examine whether the Idea might not be fully comprehended by an English reader; _supposing_ it necessarily borrowed from Virgil. Hexameters in our own language are almost forgotten; we will quote therefore this time from Stanyhurst:

O to thee, fayre Virgin, what terme may rightly be fitted?
Thy tongue, thy visage no mortal frayltie resembleth.
——_No doubt, a Godesse_!—Edit. 1583.

Gabriel Harvey desired only to be “_Epitaph’d_, the Inventor of the _English Hexameter_,” and for a while every one would be _halting on Roman feet_; but the ridicule of our Fellow-Collegian Hall, in one of his _Satires_, and the reasoning of Daniel, in his _Defence of Rhyme_ against Campion, presently reduced us to our original Gothic.

But to come nearer the purpose, what will you say if I can shew you that Shakespeare, when, in the favourite phrase, he had a Latin Poet _in his Eye_, most assuredly made use of a Translation?

Prospero in the _Tempest_ begins the Address to his attendant _Spirits_,

Ye Elves of Hills, of standing Lakes, and Groves.

This speech Dr. Warburton rightly observes to be borrowed from Medea in Ovid: and “it proves,” says Mr. Holt, “beyond contradiction, that Shakespeare was perfectly acquainted with the Sentiments of the Ancients on the Subject of Inchantments.” The original lines are these,

Auræque, & venti, montesque, amnesque, lacusque,
Diique omnes nemorum, diique omnes noctis adeste.

It happens, however, that the translation by Arthur Golding is by no means literal, and Shakespeare hath closely followed it;

Ye Ayres and Winds; _Ye Elves of Hills_, of Brookes, of Woods
alone,
_Of standing Lakes_, and of the Night, approche ye everych one.

I think it is unnecessary to pursue this any further; especially as more powerful arguments await us.

In the _Merchant of Venice_, the Jew, as an apology for his cruelty to Anthonio, rehearses many _Sympathies_ and _Antipathies_ for which _no reason can be rendered_,

Some love not a gaping Pig——
And others when a _Bagpipe_ sings i’ th’ nose
Cannot contain their urine for _affection_.

This incident Dr. Warburton supposes to be taken from a passage in Scaliger’s _Exercitations against Cardan_, “Narrabo tibi jocosam Sympathiam Reguli Vasconis Equitis: Is dum viveret, audito _Phormingis_ sono, urinam illico facere cogebatur.” “And,” proceeds the Doctor, “to make this jocular story still more ridiculous, Shakespeare, I suppose, translated _Phorminx_ by _Bagpipes_.”

Here we seem fairly caught;—for Scaliger’s work was never, as the term goes, _done into English_. But luckily in an old translation from the French of Peter le Loier, entitled, _A treatise of Specters, or straunge Sights, Visions and Apparitions appearing sensibly unto men_, we have this identical Story from Scaliger: and what is still more, a marginal Note gives us in all probability the very fact alluded to, as well as the word of Shakespeare, “Another Gentleman of this quality liued of late in Deuon neere Excester, who could not endure the playing on a _Bagpipe_.”

We may just add, as some observation hath been made upon it, that _Affection_ in the sense of _Sympathy_ was formerly _technical_; and so used by Lord Bacon, Sir Kenelm Digby, and many other Writers.

A single word in Queen Catherine’s Character of Wolsey, in _Henry the eighth_, is brought by the Doctor as another argument for the learning of Shakespeare:

——He was a man
Of an unbounded Stomach, ever ranking
Himself with Princes; one that by _Suggestion_
Ty’d all the kingdom. Simony was fair play.
His own opinion was his law, i’ th’ presence
He would say untruths, and be ever double
Both in his words and meaning. He was never,
But where he meant to ruin, pitiful.
His promises were, as he then was, mighty;
But his performance, as he now is, nothing.
Of his own body he was ill, and gave
The Clergy ill example.

“The word _Suggestion_,” says the Critick, “is here used with great propriety, and _seeming_ knowledge of the Latin tongue”: and he proceeds to settle the sense of it from _the late Roman writers and their glossers_. But Shakespeare’s knowledge was from Holingshed, whom he follows _verbatim_:

“This Cardinal was of a great stomach, for he compted himself equal with princes, and by craftie _Suggestion_ got into his hands innumerable treasure: he forced little on simonie, and was not pitifull, and stood affectionate in his own opinion: in open presence he would lie and saie untruth, and was double both in speech and meaning: he would promise much and performe little: he was vicious of his bodie, and gaue the clergie euil example.” Edit. 1587. p. 922.

Perhaps after this quotation you may not think that Sir Thomas Hanmer, who reads _Tyth’d_ instead of _Ty’d all the kingdom_, deserves quite so much of Dr. Warburton’s severity.—Indisputably the passage, like every other in the Speech, is intended to express the meaning of the parallel one in the Chronicle: it cannot therefore be credited that any man, when the _Original_ was produced, should still chuse to defend a _cant_ acceptation; and inform us, perhaps, _seriously_, that in _gaming_ language, from I know not what practice, to _tye_ is to _equal_! A sense of the word, as far as I have yet found, _unknown_ to our old Writers; and, if _known_, would not surely have been used in _this_ place by our Author.

But let us turn from conjecture to Shakespeare’s authorities. Hall, from whom the above description is copied by Holingshed, is very explicit in the demands of the Cardinal: who, having insolently told the Lord Mayor and Aldermen, “For sothe I thinke that _halfe_ your substaunce were to litle,” assures them by way of comfort at the end of his harangue, that _upon an average_ the _tythe_ should be sufficient; “Sers, speake not to breake that thyng that is concluded, for _some_ shal not paie the _tenth_ parte, and _some_ more.”—And again; “Thei saied, the Cardinall by Visitacions, makyng of Abbottes, probates of testamentes, graunting of faculties, licences, and other pollyngs in his Courtes legantines, had made his _threasore egall with the kynges_.” Edit. 1548. p. 138. and 143.

Skelton, in his _Why come ye not to Court_, gives us, after his rambling manner, a curious character of Wolsey:

——By and by
He will drynke us so dry
And sucke us so nye
That men shall scantly
Haue penny or halpennye
God saue hys noble grace
And graunt him a place
Endlesse to dwel
With the deuill of hel
For and he were there
We nead neuer feare
Of the feendes blacke
For I undertake
He wold so brag and crake
That he wold than make
The deuils to quake
To shudder and to shake
Lyke a fier drake
And with a cole rake
Bruse them on a brake
And binde them to a stake
And set hel on fyre
At his own desire
He is such a grym syre!—Edit. 1568.

Mr. Upton and some other Criticks have thought it very _scholar-like_ in Hamlet to swear the Centinels on a _Sword_: but this is for ever met with. For instance, in the _Passus primus_ of _Pierce Plowman_,

Dauid in his daies dubbed knightes,
And did hem _swere on her sword_ to serue truth euer.

And in _Hieronymo_, the common Butt of our Author, and the Wits of the time, says Lorenzo to Pedringano,

Swear on this cross, that what thou sayst is true—
But if I prove thee perjured and unjust,
This very _sword_, whereon thou took’st thine oath,
Shall be the worker of thy Tragedy!

We have therefore no occasion to go with Mr. Garrick as far as the French of Brantôme to illustrate this ceremony: a _Gentleman_ who will be always allowed the _first Commentator_ on Shakespeare, when he does not carry us beyond _himself_.

Mr. Upton, however, in the next place, produces a passage from _Henry the sixth_, whence he argues it to be very plain that our Author had not only _read_ Cicero’s _Offices_, but even more _critically_ than many of the Editors:

——This Villain here,
Being Captain of a _Pinnace_, threatens more
Than Bargulus, the strong Illyrian Pirate.

So the _Wight_, he observes with great exultation, is named by Cicero in the Editions of Shakespeare’s time, “Bargulus Illyrius latro”; tho’ the modern Editors have chosen to call him Bardylis:—“and _thus_ I found it in _two_ MSS.”—And _thus_ he might have found it in _two_ Translations, before Shakespeare was born. Robert Whytinton, 1533, calls him, “Bargulus a Pirate upon the see of Illiry”; and Nicholas Grimald, about twenty years afterward, “Bargulus the Illyrian Robber.”

But it had been easy to have checked Mr. Upton’s exultation, by observing that Bargulus does not appear in the _Quarto_.—Which also is the case with some fragments of Latin verses, in the different _Parts_ of this _doubtful_ performance.

It is scarcely worth mentioning that two or three more Latin passages, which are met with in our Author, are immediately transcribed from the Story or Chronicle before him. Thus in _Henry the fifth_, whose right to the kingdom of France is copiously demonstrated by the Archbishop:

——There is no bar
To make against your Highness’ claim to France,
But this which they produce from Pharamond:
In terram Salicam mulieres ne succedant;
No Woman shall succeed in Salike land:
Which Salike land the French unjustly gloze
To be the realm of France, and Pharamond
The founder of this law and female bar.
Yet their own authors faithfully affirm
That the land Salike lies in Germany,
Between the floods of Sala and of Elve, &c.

Archbishop Chichelie, says Holingshed, “did much inueie against the surmised and false fained law Salike, which the Frenchmen alledge euer against the kings of England in barre of their just title to the crowne of France. The very words of that supposed law are these, In terram Salicam mulieres ne succedant, that is to saie, Into the Salike land let not women succeed; which the French glossers expound to be the realm of France, and that this law was made by King Pharamond: whereas yet their owne authors affirme that the land Salike is in Germanie, between the rivers of Elbe and Sala,” &c. p. 545.

It hath lately been repeated from Mr. Guthrie’s _Essay upon English Tragedy_, that the _Portrait_ of Macbeth’s _Wife_ is copied from Buchanan, “whose spirit, as well as words, is translated into the Play of Shakespeare: and it had signified nothing to have pored only on Holingshed for _Facts_.”—“Animus etiam, per se ferox, prope quotidianis conviciis uxoris (quæ omnium consiliorum ei erat conscia) stimulabatur.”—This is the whole that Buchanan says of the _Lady_; and truly I see no more _spirit_ in the Scotch than in the English Chronicler. “The wordes of the three weird Sisters also greatly encouraged him [to the Murder of Duncan], but specially his wife lay sore upon him to attempt the thing, as she that was very ambitious, brenning in unquenchable desire to beare the name of a Queene.” Edit. 1577. p. 244.

This part of Holingshed is an Abridgment of Johne Bellenden’s translation of the _noble clerk_, Hector Boece, imprinted at Edinburgh, in Fol. 1541. I will give the passage as it is found there. “His wyfe impacient of lang tary (_as all wemen are_) specially quhare they ar desirus of ony purpos, gaif hym gret artation to pursew the thrid weird, that sche micht be ane quene, calland hym oft tymis febyl cowart and nocht desyrus of honouris, sen he durst not assailze the thing with manheid and curage, quhilk is offerit to hym be beniuolence of fortoun. Howbeit sindry otheris hes assailzeit sic thinges afore with maist terribyl jeopardyis, quhen they had not sic sickernes to succeid in the end of thair laubouris as he had.” p. 173.

But we can _demonstrate_ that Shakespeare had not the Story from Buchanan. According to _him_, the Weïrd-Sisters salute Macbeth, “Una Angusiæ Thamum, altera Moraviæ, tertia _Regem_.”—Thane of Angus, and of Murray, &c., but according to Holingshed, immediately from Bellenden, as it stands in Shakespeare: “The first of them spake and sayde, All hayle Makbeth, Thane of Glammis,—the second of them said, Hayle Makbeth, Thane of Cawder; but the third sayde, All hayle Makbeth, that hereafter shall be _king of Scotland_.” p. 243.

_1 Witch_. All hail, Macbeth! Hail to thee, Thane of Glamis!

_2 Witch_. All hail, Macbeth! Hail to thee, Thane of Cawdor!

_3 Witch_. All hail, Macbeth! that shalt be King hereafter!

Here too our Poet found the equivocal Predictions, on which his Hero so fatally depended. “He had learned of certain wysards, how that he ought to take heede of Macduffe;—and surely hereupon had he put Macduffe to death, but a certaine witch, whom he had in great trust, had tolde that he should neuer be slain with _man borne of any woman_, nor vanquished till the Wood of Bernane came to the Castell of Dunsinane.” p. 244. And the Scene between Malcolm and Macduff in the fourth act is almost literally taken from the Chronicle.

Macbeth was certainly one of Shakespeare’s latest Productions, and it might possibly have been suggested to him by a little performance on the same subject at Oxford, before King James, 1605. I will transcribe my notice of it from Wake’s _Rex Platonicus_: “Fabulæ ansam dedit antiqua de Regia prosapia historiola apud Scoto-Britannos celebrata, quæ narrat tres olim Sibyllas occurrisse duobus Scotiæ proceribus, Macbetho & Banchoni, & illum prædixisse Regem futurum, sed Regem nullum geniturum; hunc Regem non futurum, sed Reges geniturum multos. Vaticinii veritatem rerum eventus comprobavit. Banchonis enim e stirpe Potentissimus Jacobus oriundus.” p. 29.

A stronger argument hath been brought from the Plot of _Hamlet_. Dr. Grey and Mr. Whalley assure us that for _this_ Shakespeare _must_ have read _Saxo Grammaticus_ in Latin, for no translation hath been made into any modern Language. But the truth is, he did not take it from _Saxo_ at all; a Novel called the _Hystorie of Hamblet_ was his original: a fragment of which, in _black Letter_, I have been favoured with by a very curious and intelligent Gentleman, to whom the lovers of Shakespeare will some time or other owe great obligations.

It hath indeed been said that, “IF _such an history exists_, it is almost impossible that any poet unacquainted with the Latin language (supposing his perceptive faculties to have been ever so acute) could have caught the characteristical madness of Hamlet, described by _Saxo Grammaticus_, so happily as it is delineated by Shakespeare.”

Very luckily, our Fragment gives us a part of Hamlet’s Speech to his _Mother_, which sufficiently replies to this observation:—“It was not without cause, and juste occasion, that my gestures, countenances, and words seeme to proceed from a madman, and that I desire to haue all men esteeme mee wholy depriued of sence and, reasonable understanding, bycause I am well assured that he that hath made no conscience to kill his owne brother (accustomed to murthers, and allured with desire of gouernement without controll in his treasons) will not spare to saue himselfe with the like crueltie, in the blood and flesh of the loyns of his brother, by him massacred: and therefore it is better for me to fayne madnesse then to use my right sences as nature hath bestowed them upon me. The bright shining clearnes therof I am forced to hide vnder this shadow of dissimulation, as the sun doth hir beams vnder some great cloud, when the wether in summer time ouercasteth: the face of a mad man serueth to couer my gallant countenance, and the gestures of a fool are fit for me, to the end that, guiding my self wisely therin, I may preserue my life for the Danes and the memory of my late deceased father, for that the desire of reuenging his death is so ingrauen in my heart, that if I dye not shortly, I hope to take such and so great vengeance, that these Countryes shall for euer speake thereof. Neuerthelesse I must stay the time, meanes, and occasion, lest by making ouer great hast I be now the cause of mine owne sodaine ruine and ouerthrow, and by that meanes end, before I beginne to effect my hearts desire: hee that hath to doe with a wicked, disloyall, cruell, and discourteous man, must vse craft, and politike inuentions, such as a fine witte can best imagine, not to discouer his interprise: for seeing that by force I cannot effect my desire, reason alloweth me by dissimulation, subtiltie, and secret practises to proceed therein.”

But to put the matter out of all question, my communicative Friend above-mentioned, Mr. Capell (for why should I not give myself the credit of his name?), hath been fortunate enough to procure from the Collection of the Duke of Newcastle a _complete_ Copy of the _Hystorie of Hamblet_, which proves to be a translation from the French of Belleforest; and he tells me that “all the chief incidents of the Play, and all the capital Characters, are there in _embryo_, after a rude and barbarous manner: sentiments indeed there are none that Shakespeare could borrow; nor any expression but _one_, which is, where Hamlet kills Polonius behind the arras: in doing which he is made to cry out, as in the Play, ‘_a rat, a rat!_’ ”—So much for _Saxo Grammaticus_!

It is scarcely conceivable how industriously the puritanical Zeal of the last age exerted itself in destroying, amongst better things, the innocent amusements of the former. Numberless _Tales_ and _Poems_ are alluded to in old Books, which are now perhaps no where to be found. Mr. Capell informs me (and he is in these matters the most able of all men to give information) that our Author appears to have been beholden to some Novels which he hath yet only seen in French or Italian: but he adds, “to say they are not in some English dress, prosaic or metrical, and perhaps with circumstances nearer to his stories, is what I will not take upon me to do: nor indeed is it what I believe; but rather the contrary, and that time and accident will bring some of them to light, if not all.”——

W. Painter, at the conclusion of the second _Tome_ of his _Palace of Pleasure_, 1567, _advertises_ the Reader, “bicause sodaynly (contrary to expectation) this Volume is risen to greater heape of leaues, I doe omit for this present time _sundry Nouels_ of mery deuise, reseruing the same to be joyned with the rest of an other part, wherein shall succeede the remnant of Bandello, specially sutch (suffrable) as the learned French man François de Belleforrest hath selected, and the choysest done in the Italian. Some also out of Erizzo, Ser Giouanni Florentino, Parabosco, Cynthio, Straparole, Sansouino, and the best liked out of the Queene of Nauarre, and other Authors. Take these in good part, with those that haue and shall come forth.”—But I am not able to find that a _third Tome_ was ever published: and it is very probable that the Interest of his Booksellers, and more especially the prevailing Mode of the time, might lead him afterward to print his _sundry Novels_ separately. If this were the case, it is no wonder that such _fugitive Pieces_ are recovered with difficulty; when the _two Tomes_, which Tom. Rawlinson would have called _justa Volumina_, are almost annihilated. Mr. Ames, who searched after books of this sort with the utmost avidity, most certainly had not seen them when he published his _Typographical Antiquities_; as appears from his blunders about them: and possibly I myself might have remained in the same predicament, had I not been favoured with a Copy by my generous Friend, Mr. Lort.

Mr. Colman, in the Preface to his elegant Translation of Terence, hath offered some arguments for the Learning of Shakespeare, which have been retailed with much confidence, since the appearance of Mr. Johnson’s Edition.

“Besides the resemblance of particular passages scattered up and down in different plays, it is well known that the _Comedy of Errors_ is in great measure founded on the _Menæchmi_ of Plautus; but I do not recollect ever to have seen it observed that the disguise of the _Pedant_ in the _Taming of the Shrew_, and his assuming the name and character of _Vincentio_, seem to be evidently taken from the disguise of the _Sycophanta_ in the _Trinummus_ of the said Author; and there is a quotation from the _Eunuch_ of Terence also, so familiarly introduced into the Dialogue of the _Taming of the Shrew_, that I think it puts the question of Shakespeare’s having read the Roman Comick Poets in the _original_ language out of all doubt,

Redime te captum, quam queas, minimo.”

Previous Next

Comments

Eighteenth Century Essays on ShakespeareChapter XII: Letter III: Sir, Feb. 8 (6)

0%36 min left in chapter