published from the depravations that obfcured them, or secure to the rest a better deftiny, by giving them to the world in their genuine ftate.'

But how aftonifhing is this indifference to the fate of his writings, in the Author of fuch admirable productions,-who could thus indolently refign+ his glorious compofitions to the horrible mangling of fuch Vandal publifhers! The tenderness of an Author for the fruit of his brain, hath often been compared to that of parents for their children: but, in the inftance before us, Shakespeare, so justly styled the great Poet of Nature, feems to have been, of all parents, the most unnatural ‡ !

What an amazing contraft does this negligence of fame afford to the anxiety of Cicero and Pliny, with respect to the celebrity which they hoped for, and even earneftly folicited, at the hands of their learned friends!

This new edition comes recommended to the public under the fanction of the two refpectable names which appear in the title-page. Dr. Johnfon's edition of Shakespeare was first printed

By the players, from no better copies, perhaps (as Mr. Pope remarks) than the prompter's bock, or piece-meal parts, written out for the ufe of the actors, whofe very names are fometimes, through careleffness, fet down, inftead of the Perfona Dramatis: while in others, the notes of direction to the property-men for their moveables, and to the players for their entries, are inferted into the text. From fuch inftances of ignorance and heedleffnefs in the copiers, who were not much outdone in care or fagacity by the first printers, are we to wonder how it could poffibly happen that Shakespeare's works fuffered more depravations, as Dr. J. expreffes it, than perhaps ever fell to the lot of any other Writer. But how wonderfully do the jewels emit their radiance thro' the rubbish in which they have been buried!

+ Dr. Johnson, however, has fuggefted a reafon for this feeming indifference in Shakespeare to literary fame, which is, we own, much more probable, as well as more honourable to the memory of the venerable Bard, than what we have, it is hoped, not ill-naturedly, faid of his want of natural affection to the offspring of his brain. The Doctor fuppofes it poffible that this great Poet's negligence of fame might proceed from that fuperiority of mind, which defpifed its own performances, when it compared them with its powers, and judged thofe works unworthy to be preferved, which the critics of following ages were to contend for the fame of reftoring and explaining.'

A Hint for the PAINTERS.

A good picture has been painted, reprefenting Garrick, courted by Tragedy and Comedy. Might not a fimilar thought employ the Fencil of a Gainsborough, a Hoare, or a Reynolds?-SHAKESPEARE, addreled by NATURE, and by FAME; and turning away, with a proper expreffion of indifference, from the latter.

E e 2

in

in 1765; and was amply confidered in our Reviews for that year. Mr. Steevens's feparate publication of the Twenty Plays came out in the year following, and was briefly but respectfully registered in our Journal, at the time of its appearance, as mentioned in the first note of this article.-As thofe performances may be deemed fufficient indications of what the Public might expect from the critical talents of these Gentlemen, it will probably be thought unneceflary for us to enlarge on the particular merits of an undertaking, executed under the joint aufpices of fcholiafts, whofe abilities for a work of this kind are fo well known, and fo generally admitted.

With respect to what has actually been performed by the prefent Editors, Mr. Steevens, who feems to have had by much the largest share in the undertaking, has given an account of it, in his preliminary advertisement. The detail of particulars would take up too much of our scanty room; and therefore we fhall only obferve on the whole, that enough, in our opinion, has been done to render this the best edition of Shakespeare's dramatic works which hath yet been offered to the Public.

The plays are preceded (as in Dr. Johnson's former edition) by a collection of prefaces, written by the most confiderable of Shakespeare's editors; and we cannot but commend the present publishers for ftill retaining them, as they unquestionably comprehend a great variety of remarks on the genius and writings. of the Author, many of them learned and inftructive-others ingenious and curious-and all of them entertaining to the attentive and critical reader.

Dr. Johnson's elaborate preface ftands first; and is here reprinted with no alteration, or addition, except a decent compliment to his colleague, introduced at the end of the piece.

The Doctor's prefatory difcourfe is followed by an advertifement of confiderable length, from Mr. Steevens. This previous addrefs we have already mentioned. To this paper is fubjoined a very large catalogue of those translated authors, to many of whom reference has been made, in the difputes relating to a question which, by fome critics, hath been deemed of much importance, -the Learning of Shakespeare: a point which we join with Mr. Steevens in pronouncing to have been decifively fettled by the Rev. Mr. Farmer's judicious pamphlet: fee Review, vol. xxxvi. p. 153. Most of the obfervations contained in this ingenious tract are, we find, interspersed among the very numerous notes and various readings with which this edition is enriched.

Next to Mr. Steevens's preface, and the lift of those Greek and Roman poets, orators, &c. who had been rendered accelfible to Shakespeare, by the old English tranflations, we bave the dedication and preface of the two players, Heminge and

Condell

Condell, prefixed to the first folio edition, of 1623; which was printed feven years after the Author's death: and is the first collection of his works.

Mr. Pope's preface comes next; and then we have Mr. Theobald's. Following the order of time in which the editions appeared, Sir Thomas Hanmer's preface is given; and this is fucceeded by Bifhop Warburton's. Mr. Steevens's advertisement. to his edition of the Twenty Plays, follows the Bishop's critical performance; and the rear of this prefatory proceffion is brought up by Rowe's Life of Shakespeare. To Mr. Rowe's account + our Editors have added the following paffage, which, they inform us, Mr. Pope related, as communicated to him by Mr. Rowe: viz.

"In the time of Elizabeth, coaches being yet uncommon, and hired coaches not at all in ufe, thofe who were too proud, too tender, or too idle to walk, went on horfeback to any diftant business or diverfion. Many came on horfeback to the play, and when Shakespeare fled to London, from the terror of a criminal profecution, his firft expedient was to wait at the door of the playhouses, and hold the horfes of those who had no fervant, that they might be ready again after the perform-> ance. In this office he became fo confpicuous for his care and readiness, that in a fhort time every man as he alighted called for Will Shakespeare, and fcarcely any other waiter was trufted with a horfe while Will Shakefpeare could be had. This was the first dawn of better fortune. Shakespeare finding more horfes put into his hand than he could hold, hired boys to wait under his infpection, who, when Will was fummoned, were immediately to prefent themselves, I am Shakespeare's boy, Sir. In time Shakespeare found higher employment; but as long as the practice of riding to the playhoufe continued, the waiters that held the horfes retained the appellation of Shakefpeare's Boys."-This laft-mentioned circumftance is new.

To the tenth and laft volume of this edition is added a large Appendix, confifting of notes which were communicated by correpondents, or collected from published volumes, fince the

We had nearly forgotten to mention the copy of Shakespeare's Will, which is fubjoined to the collection of prefaces, &c. alfo the copy of an inftrument from the Heralds' Office, tranfmitted to the Editors by John Anftis, Efq; Garter King at Arms; relating to the grant of a Coat to Shakespeare, on the merits of his ancestors, and by which it appears that his family had, at that time, continued in Warwickshire," by fome defcents, in good reputation and credit."

+ Rowe's Life of Shakespeare, Dr. J. obferves, is written without elegance or fpirit; but he retains it as the best account that has been given of particulars not generally known before.

impreffion of the plays was completed. Among these communications we obferve a letter from the Rev. Mr. Farmer ‡ before-mentioned; containing a pretty long feries of annotations; wherein it has been a favourite point with the ingenious Author, to fupport Shakespeare's old text, against the attacks of for ner commentators: which is the grand object of Mr. Steevens himself.

In this Appendix too (but not among Mr. Farmer's notes) we find the curious difquifition concerning the provocative virtues of the potatoe with which the news paper wits have made themselves, if not their readers, fo extremely merry.

is certainly too much of this luxurious piece of natural history, with, perhaps, no truth for its foundation; and we apprehend qur learned Editors have gone pretty far out of their way to bring it in. The name of COLLINS ftands at the foot of this long note; which is given as a comment on a paffage in Troilus and Creffida, where Therfites talks of "The Devil Luxury, with bis fat rump and potatoe fuger." Shakespeare also strongly alludes to the fame fuppofed quality of this root, in the Merry Wives of Windfor: "Let the ky rain potatoes, bail kiffing comfits, and fnow eringoes ;-let a tempeft of provocation come.' All this ferves to fhew, however, that the root itself, whatever may be its qualities, has been longer known in England than is generally imagined.

We fhall now close this article, in the words of Mr. Farmer, as they stand at the beginning of his letter to Mr. Steevens:"The edition you now offer to the Public, approaches much nearer to perfection than any that has yet appeared; and, i doubt not, will be the ftandard of every future one." The fentence does not terminate elegantly; but we heartily adopt the writer's opinion.

This gentleman is of Emanuel College, Cambridge.

G.

ART. II. Mifcellany Sermons, extracted chiefly from the Works of Divines of the laft Century. 8vo. Vols. 1. Boards. Cadell. 1773.

TH

HE fermons compofed by many of the English Proteft int divines of the laft age, may be read with peculiar advantage, by all who have a prevailing regard for manly fenfe, and plain truth, delivered in honeft and blunt language. They were not, indeed, of the delicate race of your refined court preachers, who "fcorn to mention hell to ears polite." Not fo the worthy champions of the church who fought the good fight a century ago. They were not only difpofed to render to God the things that were God's, but they thought it incumbent on them alfo to give Satan his due; and if a profpect of the blifs of heaven would not tempt men to tread the paths of righteoufnefs, they fcrup'ed

not

not to display to their view, the fatal alternative, in all its terrors. In truth, provided reformation was wrought, they were not over-nice about the means ufed for accomplishing fo defirable a purpose. Whether Hope or Fear were the moving principle, the choice or difference of the motive gave them little concern. If the flock were edified by either means, the venerable fhepherd was happy in the idea of his own inftrumentality toward effecting fo good a work.

It would be no unprofitable amufement, to confider the changes that have happened in the modes of English preaching, fince the full establishment of the reformation, in the happy reign of Elizabeth. On this head, the Editor of the collection before us hath the following very fenfible obfervations; which we fhall transcribe from his preface:

The method of intruction from the pulpit, fince the revival of literature in this kingdom, hath undergone various changes. Du. ring the reigns of King Henry the Eighth, Edward the Sixth, Queen Mary, and Queen Elizabeth, it was, from the circumftances of the times, merely controverfial; as it was alfo in a great measure in the reign of King James the Firft, but altered for the worse, by an oftentation of learning, a quaintnefs of expreffion, and an affectation of puns and quibbles. In the former part of the reign of King Charles the First, the ftyle became more rational and temperate. But during that whole procefs of time, thofe fermons, which Kings and Queens conftantly frequented and liftened to with attention, were what would have been thought at this day unfufferably tedious and infipid.

Upon the downfall of epifcopacy, in the latter end of the reign of King Charles the First, came in an unlettered tribe, who did not mend the matter at all. They did not indeed (for a very obvious reason) weary the audience with Latin and Greek quotations from the Fathers, but what they could they did; they ranfacked the bible from one end to the other for proofs and illuftrations, which was an inexhaustible fund for ekeing out an extemporary effufion to any given length; and an hour-glafs was placed by them, whereby to eltimate the quantity of their labour.

But though they preached extempore, yet it was not commonly without fome kind of preconceived plan, which contained the sketch and outlines of their intended difcourfe; which, for the fake of memory, was divided and fubdivided into numberless branches. And this indeed was the cafe in a great measure of their more learned To furnish out a fermon of an hour, or (as it fomepredeceffors. times happened) two hours long, it was neceffary to take a large compafs, and divide the fubject into many-heads, and thofe into others and others again; and the fame notes of transition, as 2dly, 3dly, 4thly, recurring over and over, the hearer was bewildered, and what was intended for perfpicuity became the occafion of confufion.

The reign of Charles the Second was efteemed, and not undefervedly, an age of learning; not from any extraordinary MæcenasEe 4

like