The Press. — London, England, 1856-04-26 00:00:00

APRIL 26, 1856. But, conceding as much as Mr. Collier couldfpos sibly desire, and conceding also to the reviewer that some of the emendations bear intrinsic evidence that they are not purely conjectural,—conceding further that some of them are of undoubted worth, and ought to he received into the text,—the question yet re mains, what [degree of "authority " can be allowed them? The MS. corrector may have been a thea trical manager, or author, or actor. He might have bad access to the stage copies of plays, more correct in some instances than the printed folio, or he might have derived some corrections from players in the course of their representations. In one respect we agree with the Edinburgh reviewer. The corrector . seems, his revision, to have been intent on the preparation of the plays for the stage, and to have made many of his corrections on the same principle that guides alterations, or mutilations, of the text in our own day,—the convenience of the stage. So much of "authority" may be conceded to the cor rections as would be derived from familiarity with the stage of the period, but no more. The supposition of the reviewer that the corrector had any part of the BIS. text of Shakespeare before him is not sup ported by a particle of evidence, and is against all probability. Unless special care be taken of MS. it soon disappears after it has been once printed, and the "papers " which Heminge and Condell profess to have received from Shakespeare formed probably but a small part of the copy they used, as it is likely his original MSS. were soon cast aside or worn out after copies had been taken for the use of the stage. The reviewer has unwarrantably exceeded the facts known in saying that Shakespeare "left his MSS. with his associates ;" and that Heminge and Condell " brought out the first folio edition of his plays, "professing to follow implicitly the MSS., which ac cording to their statement were so clearly written "as scarcely to admit of mistake." This is very wide of their statement that they "scarce received "from him a blot in his papers." Their desire to recommend their volume is so palpable, that it is likely they as far magnified the authenticity of the MSS. they had "gathered" and "collected," as they assuredly did the "care and pain" with which they published them. That the corrections could not have been made from the authority of original MSS. is clear from this,—tbat in many cases obvious corruptions of the text are left untouched ; and that in others, correc tions are made in gross ignorance of what the true reading should be. Our space does not admit of much detail, but we will say a few words on each point. _ _ _ In a previous article we took the play of The Tem pest to show that there was still room for further improvement in the text. We particularly noticed three instances where the corruption was obvious, and the true reading scarcely disputable. No notice is taken of either passage by Mr. Collier's corrector. Let us take another instance from that same scene (Tempest, act ii. sc. 2) whence two of our former instances were drawn. Antonio, when tempting Sebas tian to kill his brother, asks who is next heir to Naples, and is answered " Claribel." He then labours to show that Claribel being Queen of Tunis, is so far removed from Naples that it is impossible she should ever return to claim the crown : She that dwells Ten leagues beyond man's life; she that from Naples Can have no note unless the sun were post. • • • • • • A space whose every cubit Seems to cry out, " How shall that Claribel Measure us bock to Naples ?" Keep in Tunis And let Sebastian wake. The lovers of Shakespeare do not need to be told that he uses "measure " as a verb in the sense of to journey; or, as Johnson explains, " to pass through, " to judg e o f extent o f territory by marching over," as in the passages:— A true devoted pilgrim is not weary To measure kingdoms with his feeble steps. Haste away, For we must measure twenty miles to-day. The meaning of the above passage is plainly, " How "shall Ularibel come back to Naples? Let her keep "in Tunis, that Sebastian may be King." And if we substitute " her " for " us," we shall obtain the true reading : How shall that Claribel Measure her back to Naples ? Keep in Tunis And let Sebastian wake. In the same sense does Dryden use measure : The vessel loughs the And measures back with spe p ed her former sea way. This is precisely one of those cases which the corrector, had he had the original MS. before him, could not have mi sse d. Th e error is undoubted ; but likely to escape attention without comparison with the tr ue text, or without very careful scrutiny. We could point out a number of instances of the like kind, but we are compelled to abide by one example. We turn to L a t ease of corru pt ion , Co rruptly altered. THE PRESS. The Edinburgh reviewer selects from Timon of Athens an alteration of the corrector, to show that he could not have worked by guess alone. In act ii. sc. 2 Timon, at the end of his conference with the Athenian senators, instructs them how the citizens may avoid "wild Alcibiades' wrath " Whoso please To stop affliction, let him take his haste, Come hither, ere my tree hath felt the axe, And hang himself. The students of Shakespeare know that the phrase " take his haste " has often engaged the attention of commentators, and that corruption has been sus pected. Now Mr. Collier, in his edition of 1853, says that it comprised " the manuscript cor rections recently discovered by the editor;" and further, "the new readings of the old corrector of " the folio 1632, considerably exceeding a thousand, " are duly insetted in the places to which they be• " long." In this very edition the passage is printed as it appears above, just as it appears in all previous editions, ancient and modern. But the Edinburgh reviewer authoritatively informs us that there is " a " recent discovery in the folio which, from the pale " mess of the ink, and defaced state of many pages, " has not even yet been thoroughly examined." This "recent discovery " for "let him take his haste," substitutes "let him take his halter." And the reviewer triumphantly asks—" Can this be a guess!" The suggestion is itself extremely inge nious ; but we must say that the hint thus given us, that further " discoveries " are in progress, three years after Mr. Collier had professed to publish the whole of the corrections, tends more to raise our sus picions than any circumstance we have yet heard. Passing over that point, we wish to show that from other corrections in this same play it is impossible that the corrector could have bad, as the reviewer plainly intimates, the genuine text of Shakespeare before him. When Timon is first aroused to a sense of his ne cessity, he calls his servants and bids them follow his directions : Timon. I will despatch you severally.—Yon to Lord Lucius, to Lord Lucullus you ; I hunted with his honour to-day ; you to Sempronius: commend me to their loves ; and, I am proud to say, that my occasions have found time to use them toward a supply of money : let the request be fifty talents. Of the servants two are specially named. One is Flaminius, the other Servilius. The former pro ceeds to Lucullus; the latter to Lucius. Flaminius delivers his errand correctly, and says that his lord, " having great and instant occasion to use fifty " talents, bath sent to your lordship to furnish him." Servilius proceeds to Lucius ; and we print from Mr. Knight's last edition the text in dispute as it has usually been given : Servilius. May it please your honour, my lord bath sent— Lucius. Ha! what has he sent? I am so much en• deared to that lord ; he's ever sending: How shall I thank him, think'st thou? And what has he sent now? Set vilius. He has only sent his present occasion, now, my lord ;—requesting your lordship to supply his instant use with so many talents. Lucius. I know his lordship is but merry with me; he cannot want fifty-five hundred talents. Servilius. But in the meantime he wants less, my lord. If his occasion were not virtuous, I should not urge it half so faithfully. There can be no doubt that the passage is corrupt, and the wonder is that it should be so printed in all the standard editions. Let us see how Mr. Collier, with the aid of his MS. corrector, deals with it. We extract from his edition of 1853: Servilius. He has only sent his present occasion now, my lord ; requesting your lordshi, to supply his instant use with five hundred talents. Lucius. I know his lordship is but merry with me. He cannot want five hundred talents. Servilius. But in the meantime he wants less, my lord. If his occasion were not virtuous I should not urge it half so faithfully. This is the alteration of a corrector who we are re quired to believe had the very text of Shakespeare under his eye. So far from clearing the text, and restoring the original meaning, it makes confusion worse confounded. Servilius was sent to borrow fifty talents. Is it likely he would ask for five hundred ? Ann then what absolute nonsense is made of the subsequent reply of Servilius. "But in " the meantime he wants less, my lord." The corrector, going over the play superficially, was led into his gross blunder by the remark of Lucius, "He cannot want fifty-five hundred talents." The writer of this notice had long since proposed to read the whole passage as follows ; Servilius. He has only sent his present occasion now, my lord; requesting your lordship to:supply his instant use with fifty talents. Lucius. I know his lordship is but merry with me. He cannot want fifty hundred talents. _ Servilius. But in the meantime he wants less, my lord. If his occasion were not virtuous, I should not urge it half so faithfully. Between these readings we leave the lovers of Shakespeare to decide. Some alteration is plainly wanted in the common text The alteration we pro• pose is but slight, and may be supposed not un reasonably to restore what Shakespeare wrote, though there must always be a doubt whether we should read "fifty hundred talents," or "fifty five hundred talents." The alteration of the corrector is consi derable, and, beyond all manner of doubt, wanders farther from the pure text of Shakespeare than the error it pretends to amend. We had not intended to return to the subject again. But we find we cannot include in this paper some remarks which appear to us necessary to coun teract the very pernicious tendency of the Edinburgh article, evidently intended to cry up the worth of Mr. Collier's "discovery ;" and the question raised by the reviewer is of too great importance to be hastily die missed. The text of Shakespeare cannot be too diligently examined, or too scrupulously guarded; and it will be tolerably safe so long as it is preserved from the plague of spurious " authoritative correc tion," since it is not possible for any alterations to be generally received until they obtain general con sent. Since criticism first exercised its vigilance on Shakespeare's page the text has been in continual process of purification ; and persons must be grossly ignorant of what "conjectural emendation " has achieved since the first folio who would disparage its labours. The mind which has the finest feeling for Shakespeare must always be most successful in per ceiving his sense, and in clearing it from disfiguring errors. After the Bible, his works are the most im portant book in our language--the most widely read, and the most universal in their humanity. It was Pope, if we recollect rightly, who said that if the world and its inhabitants were destroyed, the being of another sphere might gather an adequate idea of the nature of man, and of his life on this planet, if a copy of Shakespeare's works had escaped the general wreck. Nothing can be trivial which con cerns the integrity of his text, or is likely to elucidate disputed points; though on the whole we have reason to he thankful that Heminge and Condell fulfilled their part so well as they did. To invest the corrections of Mr. Collier's folio with authority would be to involve the text of Shakespeare in irremediable confusion. We therefore propose to make some further remarks on this subject, and shall be happy to hear from any of our readers who feel interested in it, or who have suggestions on the text of Shakespeare to propose. PUBLICATIONS RECE I V ED.-Asir. 24. BOOKS. Modern Society in Rome. A Novel. J. R. Beste, Esq Hurst and Blacken History of the Ottoman Turks. E. S. Creasy, M.A. Two Vols. Vol. 11. Bentley Siberes Wold. J. W. Parker and Sou The Heirs of Blackbridge Manor: A Tale of the Past and Present. Chapman and Hall Elsie Seymour, or, the Contrast. A. Wygorn. Nee by Modern Accomplishments. Catherine Sinclair. Simpkin and Marshall A Manual of Quotations from the Ancient, Modern, and Oriental Languages. J. Crockford The Seaside Lesson-Book. Groombridge and Sons The Chinese and their Bebe.llion+, with an Essay on Civili sation. Smith and Elder Leonora. Mrs. Moberly. Ditto The Island of Cuba. A. liumbolt. Sampson Low and Co. brad in the Past, the Present, and the Future,te. Tauo and Leonora. Hamilton and Co. Hall and Virtue Memoiro, : lournai,and Corrcapcndence of Thomas Moore. Vols. VIE. and VIII. Physiology and Calisthenics Ju Schools and Families. Sampson Low and Co. Longman' A Reply to Mr. George Coombe's Pamphlet on the Currency. Smith and Eider Ridgway Prevention and Reformation. Ekciro-Chemical Treatment of Acute and Chronic Disease;. Piper and Co. Obserrations on the Debate in the House of Lords on Marriages within Certain of the Prohibited Degrees of Affinity. Benning and Co. The Pr;sent Crisis in Administrative Reform. Smith and Elder Manual of Educational Requirements Necessary fur the Civil Service. unx)mbritige and Son _ . A Letter to the Right Honourable Viscount Palmerston, M.P. Hegliu PERIODICALS. The North American Review. Old T'iniri. No. 1. Sampson Low and Co. Piper and Co. situ 4rts. NEW SOCIETY OF WATER-COLOURS. THE twenty-second exhibition of this society was opened to the public on Monday. With few excep tions the three hundred works displayed in the Gallery in Pall•mall fully sustain the reputation of the society, and while there is a decided increase in the subject.s taken from history and poetry, and in genre, the landscapes still maintain their ancient numerical supremacy.