none of his uncontefted dramas were reprefented; the colour, diction, and verfification of thefe old plays; the various circumftances, lines, and fpeeches, that are found in them, and not in our author's new-modification of them, as published in folio by his original editors; the resemblances that have been noticed between his other works and fuch parts of thefe dramas as are only exhibited in their folio edition; the difcordances (in matters of fact) between certain parts of the old plays printed in quarto and Shakspeare's undoubted performances; the tranfpofitions that he has made in thefe pieces; the repetitions, and the peculiar Shakfpearian inaccuracies, and phrafeology, which may be traced in the folio, and not in the old quarto plays; thefe and other circumstances, whieh have been ftated in the foregoing pages, form, when united, fuch a body of argument and proofs, in fupport of my hypothefis, as appears to me, (though I will not venture to affert that "the probation bears no hinge nor loop to hang a doubt on,) to lead directly to the door of truth." It is obfervable that feveral portions of the English History had been dramatized before the time of Shakfpeare. Thus, we have King John in two parts, by an anonymous writer; Edward I. by George Peele; Edward II. by Chriftopher Marlowe; Edward III. anonymous; Henry IV. containing the depofition of Richard II. and the acceffion of Henry to the crown, anonymous"; Henry V. and Richard III. both by anonymous authors". Is it not then highly probable, that the whole of the ftory of Henry VI. had also been brought upon the scene? and that the firft of the plays now in queftion, formerly (as I believe) called The hiftorical play of King Henry Vİ. and now named The First Part of King Henry VI., as well as The first part of the Contention of the two houses of Yorke and Lancaster, &c. and The true Tragedie of Richard duke of Yorke, &c. (which three pieces comprehend the entire reign of that king from his birth to his death,) See Vol. V. p. 4, n. I. 9 Entered on the Stationers' books in 1594. were were the compofition of fome of the authors, who had produced the historical dramas above enumerated? In confequence of an hafty and inconfiderate opinion formed by Mr. Pope, without any minute examination of the fubject, K.John in two parts, printed in 1591, and The old Taming of a Shrew, which was entered at Stationers' Hall in 1594, and printed in 1607, paffed for half a century for the compofitions of Shakspeare. Further inquiries have shown that they were the productions of earlier writers; and perhaps a more profound investigation of this fubject than I have been able to make, may hereafter prove decifively, that the first of the three Henries printed in folio, and both the parts of The Whole Contention of the two famous houfes of Yorke and Lancaster, as exhibited in quarto, and printed in 1600, ought to be claffed in the fame predicament with the two old plays above mentioned. For my own part, if it should ever be thought proper to reprint the old dramas on which Shakspeare founded fome of his plays, which were published in two volumes a few years ago, I have no doubt that The first part of the Contention of the two houses of Yorke and Lancaster, &c. and The true Tragedie of the duke of Yorke, &c. fhould be added to the number, Gildon fomewhere fays, that "in a converfation between Shakspeare and Ben Jonson, Ben asked him the reason why he wrote his hiftorical plays." Our author (we are told) replied, that " finding the nation generally very ignorant of hiftory, he wrote them in order to inftruct the people in that particular." This anecdote, like many other traditional ftories, ftands on a very weak foundation; or to fpeak more juftly, it is certainly a fiction. The malignant Ben does indeed, in his Devil's an Afs, 1616, fneer at our author's historical pieces, which for twenty years preceding had been in high reputation, and probably were then the only hiftorical dramas that had poffeffion of the theatre; but from the lift above given, it is clear that Shakspeare was not the first who dramatized our old chronicles; and that the principal events of the English History were familiar to the ears of his his audience, before he commenced a writer for the stage': though undoubtedly at this day whatever knowledge of our annals is difperfed among the people, is derived from the frequent exhibition of our author's historical plays. This point is established not only by the lift referred to, but by a paffage in a pamphlet already quoted, entitled Pierce Pennilesse bis Supplication to the Devil, written by Thomas Nafhe, quarto, 1592: "Whereas the afternoone being the eldest time of the day, wherein men that are their owne masters (as gentlemen of the Court, the Innes of court, and the number of captaines and foldiers about London) do wholly bestow themselves upon pleasure, and that pleasure they divide (how virtuously it skilles not,) into gaming, following of harlots, drinking, or feeing a play; is it not then better, fince of foure extreames all the world cannot keepe them but they will choose one, that they should betake them to the leaft, which is Playes? Nay, what if I prove playes to be no extreame, but a rare exercife of vertue? First, for the fubject of them; for the most part it is borrowed out of our ENGLISH CHRONICLES, wherein our fore-fathers' valiant actes, that have been long buried in ruftic brasse and worme eaten bookes, are revived, and they themselves raifed from the grave of oblivion, and brought to plead their aged honours in open prefence; than which, what can be a sharper reproofe to these degenerate dayes of ours ?” After an elogium on the brave Lord Talbot, and on the actor who had perfonated him in a popular play of that time, "before ten thoufand fpectators at the leaft;" (which has already been printed in a former page,) and after obferving "what a glorious thing it is to have King Henry the Fifth reprefented on the ftage, leading the French king prifoner, and forcing both him and the Dolphin to swear fealty,”the writer adds these words: "In playes, all coufenages, all cunning drifts, over-guilded with outward holineffe, all ftratagems of warre, all the canker-wormes that breed in the ruft of peace, are most lively anatomized. They thew the ill fucceffe of treafon, the fall of hafty climbers, the wretched end of ufurpers, the miferie of civil diffention, and how juft God is evermore in punishing murder. And to prove every one of these allegations, could I propound the circumftances of this play and that, if I meant to handle this theame otherwise than obiter." It is highly probable that the words, " the miferie of civil diffention," allude to the very plays which are the fubjects of the prefent difquifition, The first part of the Contention of the two bouses, &c. and The true Tragedie of Rickarde duke of Yorke; as, by the wretched end of Ufurpers", and the juftice of God in "punishing murder," old plays on the fubject of King Richard III. and that of Hamlet, prior to those of Shakspeare, were, I believe, alluded to He He certainly did not confider writing on fables that had already been formed into dramas, as any derogation from his fame; if indeed fame was ever an object of his thoughts. We know that plays on the fubjects of Measure for Meafure, The Taming of the Shrew, The Merchant of Venice, King John, King Richard II. King Henry IV. King Henry V. King Richard III. King Lear, Antony and Cleopatra, and, I strongly fufpect, on thofe of Hamlet, Timon of Athens, and Julius Cæfar, existed before he commenced a dramatick author; and perhaps in process of time it may be found, that many of the fables of his other plays alfo had been unskilfully treated, and produced upon the stage, by preceding writers. Such are the only lights that I am able to throw on this very dark fubject. The arguments which I have ftated have entirely fatisfied my own mind; whether they are entitled to bring conviction to the minds of others, I fhall not prefume to determine. I produce them, however, with the more confidence, as they have the approbation of one who has given fuch decifive proofs of his tafte and knowledge, by afcertaining the extent of Shakspeare's learning, that I have no doubt his thoughts on the prefent question alfo, will have that weight with. the publick to which they are undoubtedly entitled. It is almost unneceffary to add, that I mean my friend Dr. Farmer; who many years ago delivered it as his opinion, that thefe plays were not written originally by Shakspeare. MALONE. * See An Attempt to ascertain the order of Shakspeare's Plays, Vol. I. |