THE EDITORS OF SHAKESPEARE.

II. NICHOLAS ROWE.

Nicholas Rowe was really the first editor of Shakespeare. He was born in Little Berkford, Bedfordshire, England, in 1673. His father was John Rowe, sergeant-at-law. He first went to a school at Highgate, and afterward to Westminster, as a King's scholar under Dr. Busby. He left school when he was sixteen and entered the Middle Temple. He was afterward called to the bar, but his father dying about this time and leaving him a competency, rendered it unnecessary for him to practice in a profession which was distasteful to him, and he entered on the pursuits of literature, which were more congenial.

When he was twenty-seven he produced his first play, The Ambitious Stepmother (1700), which was received with much applause at Lincoln's Inn Fields. Tamerlane, acted in 1702, was his next play. The following year The Fair Penitent was produced. The Biter (1705) was not a success. Ulysses (1706), The Royal Convert (1708), Jane Shore (1714), and Lady Jane Grey (1715), were his other plays.

He also published a translation of Book I of Quillet's Callipodia in 1710, and an Ode to the New Year in 1716. After his death his poetical works were published in 1720.

He was appointed Under Secretary of State by the Duke of Queensbury, and held that position for nearly three years. In 1714 King George I made him Poet Laureate. He also held the post of Land Surveyor of the Port of London, was Clerk of the Closet to the Prince of Wales, and Secretary of the Presentations to Lord Chancellor Parker, afterward Lord Macclesfield. He died December 6th, 1718, and was buried in Westminster Abbey. A monument to his memory was erected by his widow, and Pope wrote an epitaph, but it was not inscribed on his tomb.

His edition of Shakespeare was published in 1709, and, as has been before stated, he was the first real editor of the poet.

The title-page of his edition reads as follows:

"The Works of Mr. William Shakespear; in Six Volumes, Adorn'd with Cuts. Revis'd and Corrected, with an Account of the Life and Writings of the Author. By N. Rowe, Esq. London: Printed for Jacob Tonson, within Gray's Inn Gate, next Gray's Inn Lane. MDCCIX."

The six volumes are of duodecimo size, and not well printed, nor

is the paper of good quality. The pagination is continuous from one volume to another, so that the last page of the sixth volume is numbered 3324, but there are numerous errors in the paging.

An engraving, by M. Vander Gucht, of the Chandos portrait of Shakespeare is prefixed to each of the six volumes. The portrait is in an oval, supported on a square pedestal. On either side are allegorical representations of Tragedy and Comedy, each holding a laurel wreath over the poet's head, and above is an allegorical picture of Fame, blowing a trumpet.

There is a separate title-page for each play, and an engraving, representing one of the scenes. Some of these are very peculiar, especially those which show the characters of the plays in the Court dress of the time of Rowe.

Rowe inscribed his volumes to the Duke of Somerset. In the dedication, speaking of the text of his author, he says:

"I have taken some Care to redeem him from the Injuries of former Impressions. I must not pretend to have restor'd this Work to the Exactness of the Author's Original Manuscripts: Those are lost, or, at least, are gone beyond any Inquiry I could make; so that there was nothing left, but to compare the several Editions, and give the true Reading as well as I could from thence. This I have endeavour'd to do pretty carefully, and render'd very many Places Intelligle, that were not so before. In some of the Editions, especially the last, there were many Lines, (and in Hamlet one whole Scene) left out together; these are now all supply'd. I fear Your Grace will still find some Faults, but I hope they are mostly litteral, [sic] and the Errors of the Press."

It will be seen from this that Rowe had a very good opinion of his work, but modern critics have not regarded it with much favor. He unfortunately chose the Fourth Folio to use in printing his edition, and that folio has the worst text of all the four. Though he specially states in his dedication that he compared "the several editions," it is demonstrable from a careful examination of his text that he did nothing of the kind. Had he referred to the First and Second Folios and the quartos, his edition would have been far superior to what it is. In the case of Romeo and Juliet, however, he prints the prologue to the play at the end of his text. This prologue is only found in the quartos, as all the folios omit it, and it proves that in this instance he consulted the quartos. But he did not compare the text of the quarto he used with the Fourth Folio.

Rowe was a man of education, and much experience in the drama, and, moreover, a dramatist himself of no mean ability. This enabled him to make many excellent emendations and corrections, and he also printed in his edition lists of dramatis personæ for the first time. He properly divided the plays into acts and scenes in many instances where the Fourth Folio was wrong, or where there was no division into

scenes, and supplied the entrances and exits of characters so often wanting in that folio. The spelling of many words, the punctuation, and, more important still, the grammar, were all improved by him. Dr. Johnson very truly says of him:

"At last an edition was undertaken by Rowe; not because a poet was to be published by a poet, for Rowe seems to have thought very little on correction or explanation, but that our author's works might appear like those of his fraternity, with the appendages of a life and recommendatory preface. Rowe has been clamorously blamed for not performing what he did not undertake, and it is time that justice be done him, by confessing, that though he seems to have had no thought of corruption beyond the printer's errors, yet he has made many emendations, if they were not made before, which his successors have received without acknowledgment, and which, if they had produced them, would have filled pages and pages with censures of the stupidity by which the faults were committed, with displays of the absurdities which they involved, with ostentatious expositions of the new reading, and self congratulations on the happiness of discovering it."

Many of Rowe's emendations of the text were entirely unnecessary, and had he consulted the First Folio he would have been able to correct the passages without exercising his ingenuity. Take, for instance, the line in The Comedy of Errors, V, i, 138:

66

At your important letters.

The First Folio printed "important," which is correct; the Second Folio "impoteant," the Third and Fourth Folios "impotent," and Rowe printed all-potent." Had he referred to the First Folio he would have found the right word, and would not have made his conjecture.

There is reason to believe that Rowe occasionally consulted some of the "Player's Quartos," as they are called-that is, those quarto editions of the plays published after Shakespeare's death. It is needless to say that they are of no authority.

Rowe's life of Shakespeare occupies forty duodecimo pages of large type. He modestly called it "some account of the life, &c., of Mr. William Shakespear."

It is short but valuable, chiefly because it is the sole authority for some of the meagre details of the great poet's life that have come down to us. When we consider, however, the sources of information which were open to Rowe, we cannot but regret that he did not exert himself to use them to more advantage than he did. Thomas Betterton, the celebrated actor, was born in 1635, only nineteen years after Shakespeare's death, and lived until 1710. He must have retained his memory until the last, for as late as April, 1709, we find him playing the part of Valentine in Love for Love. Betterton must have heard many details concerning the life of the

great poet, and Rowe

informs us that he was indebted to that actor for "the most considerable part of the Passages" of Shakespeare's biography.. Betterton probably could have given him more than he did, and, at any rate, Rowe must have missed the opportunity of recording much that the world is now ignorant of. Our present biographies of the poet are largely made up of extracts from old documents, but Rowe is silent concerning most of these.

Some copies of Rowe's edition of Shakespeare are on large paper. Rowe did not include the poems in his edition, and to remedy this omission, in 1710 a book was published with this title :

"The Works of Mr. William Shakespear. Volume the Seventh. Containing, Venus & Adonis, Tarquin & Lucrece And His Miscellany Poems. With Critical Remarks on his Plays &c. to which is Prefix'd an Essay on the Art, Rise, and Progress of the Stage in Greece, Rome and England. London: Printed for E. Curll at the Dial and Bible against St. Dunstan's Church, and E. Sanger at the Post-House at the Middle-Temple Gate. MDCCX."

The type of the title-page and other parts of this volume is an imitation of Rowe's edition of Shakespeare, and, as it is often found with copies of that work, it is frequently attributed to Rowe. He is believed to have had nothing to do with its publication, however. The dedication is signed "S. R."

A second edition of Rowe's Shakespeare appeared in 1714 in nine duodecimo volumes. The difference between the two editions is extremely small, but here and there changes are made in the text which indicate that they are the work of Rowe, and not the printer. Some of the variations, however, are undoubtedly due to the latter.

There are no notes in either of the editions.

It is stated that Rowe was paid £36 10s. for his editorial work on his first edition of Shakespeare, by Tonson, his publisher.

J. Parker Nomi's

SHAKESPEARE'S AND GREEK TRAGEDY.

III.

The story of Edipus and the calamities that befel his family occupied as notable a place in Greek tragedy as did the fortunes of the house of Atreus, which have been referred to. Upon the circumstances of this story one play of Eschylus, three of Sophocles, and one of Euripides remain. They are among the noblest specimens of Greek poetry and drama. Even at the risk of repeating what is well known, it is necessary to give a brief outline of this old Greek tale.

Edipus-the son of Laius and Jocasta, King and Queen of Thebes -exposed to perish in the bushy dells of Mount Citharon, was rescued by a shepherd and carried to Polybus, King of Corinth, who reared the foundling and allowed him to believe that he was his son. After reaching manhood, Edipus fled from Corinth to escape the misfortunes predicted by an oracle, which prophesied that he would kill his father and marry his mother. In the course of his journeying he encountered King Laius and killed him in a quarrel, without knowing who he was. Coming afterward to Thebes, he delivered that city from the persecution of the Sphinx by solving the monster's riddle. For this deliverance, and ignorant of his kindred to the Queen, he received the hand of his own mother in marriage. Made King of Thebes, affairs prospered with him for several years, during which two sons, Polynices and Eteocles, and two daughters, Antigone and Ismene, were born to him and Queen Jocasta, and grew up to manhood and womanhood. But circumstances brought about the discovery of his kinship to the Queen, upon learning which, the latter hanged herself, and Edipus, in despair, tore out his eyes and abandoned the throne. The Princes, Polynices and Eteocles, agreed to reign by yearly turns; but at the end of the first year Eteocles refused to give up the authority to his brother, as he had promised, and that brother came against Thebes with an Argive army to enforce his claim. The brothers met in battle and perished, each by the other's hand, but the victory was to the Thebans. To make an effective example of Polynices' unpatriotic act of bringing war against his native city, it was decreed by the Thebans that his body should be refused the rites of sepulture and cast out to wolves and birds of prey; and an edict was published threatening extreme penalties against any one who should attempt to bury the corpse of the dishonored Prince. But the Prin