Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

it fits not That any petty follower wag'd by us

Should have a tongue sound here," &c. The misprint for "follower" is fellow. • Princely fellows" is mere tautologyprincely princes.

P. 506.—By this, poor Wat,] So John Heywood in his tedious, but clever “Spider and Fly,” 1556, Sign. L iij :

“ Never was there yet any larke, or Wat,

Before hawke or dog flatter darde or squat,

Then by this answere al thy matter is.” Again, on Sign. Q ij b:

“And thant shall with a tabor take a Wat,

As sone as make me shrinke from thee in that." P. 509.-Look, how a bright star shooteth from the sky,] So Richard Barnfield in his “ Legend of Cassandra," at the end of his “Cynthia,” 1595:

· Looke how a brightsome planet in the sky," &c. P. 565.-Oh! let it not be hiLD] When the Rev. Mr. Dyce cites instances from Warner's “ Albion's England,” ed. 1596, of the use of “hild ” for held, be does not seem to have been aware that, that work, “bild " is the rule, and held the exception. We could add twenty others to the proofs he has quoted, but that it would be a mere waste of time and type.

P. 582.– The Romans PLAUSIBLY did give consent] Plausibly” is perhaps a misprint for plausively : in “ Mucedorus,” 1609, Sign. F 2 b, we meet with the word plausive :

“ Drums speake, bels ring,

Give plausive welcomes to our brother king." Shakespeare himself uses “plausive" in “ All's well that ends Well," A. i. sc. 2, and A. iv. sc. 1., and in “ Hamlet,” A. i. sc. 4.

P. 618.-Beated and chopp’d] We have an instance of the use of “beated” for beaten in Marston's “What You Will,” 1607, Sign. H 2 b, where the real Albano says, “ I am sworne out of myself, beated out of myself, baffled, jeer'd at.”

P. 656.— with thee partake] The word “partaker" in the sense of coadjutor, or confederate, is used by Whetstone in his “ English Myrror," 1586, p. 36, where he mentions the slaughter of the Goths at the instance of Stilicon, and says that the Goths “revenged this outrage with the death of Sawle, and the most of his partakers.”

P. 700.-Carl,] The reference for the use of “Carl ” ought to be vi. 349, instead of v. 349.

ܙܙ

THE TEMPEST.

VOL. I.

B

“The Tempest” was first printed in the folio edition of “Mr. William Shakespeare's Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies,” bearing date in 1623, where it stands first, and occupies nineteen pages, viz. from p. 1 to p. 19 inclusive. It fills the same place in the folios of 1632, 1664, and 1685.

INTRODUCTION.

A MATERIAL fact, in reference to the date of the first production of “The Tempest,” has been only recently ascertained: we allude to the notice of the performance of it, before King James, on Nov. 1st, 1611', which is contained in the “Extracts from the Accounts of the Revels at Court,” edited by Mr. P. Cunningham for the Shakespeare Society, p. 211: the memorandum is in the following form :“Hallomas nyght was presented att Whithall before the

Kinges Majestie a play called the Tempest." In the margin is inserted the additional circumstance, that the performance was “by the King's Players;" and there can be no reasonable doubt that it was Shakespeare's drama, which had been written for that company. When it had been so written, is still a point of difficulty; but the great probability, we think, is that it was selected by the Master of the Revels, for representation at Court in 1611, on account of its novelty and popularity on the public stage. Eleven other dramas, as appears by the same document, were exhibited between Oct. 31, 1611, and the same day in the next year; and it is remarkable that ten of these (as far as we possess any information respecting them) were comparatively new plays, and with regard to the eleventh, it was not more than three years old’. We may, perhaps, be warranted in inferring, therefore, that “The Tempest” was also not then an old play.

It seems to us, likewise, that the internal evidence, derived from style and language, clearly indicates that it was a late production, and that it belongs to about the same period of our great dramatist's literary history as his “Winter's Tale,” which was also chosen for a Court-play, and represented at Whitehall only

was

1 The earliest date hitherto discovered for the performance of “ The Tempest

“ the beginning of the year 1613,” which Malone established from Vertue's MSS. : it was then acted by “the King's company, before Prince Charles, the Princess Elizabeth, and the Prince Palatine," but where is not stated.

2 See note 2 to the Introduction to “The Winter's Tale," Vol. iii. p. 3. The particular play to which we refer is entitled in the Revels' Account “ Lucrecia," which may have been either T. Heywood's “Rape of Lucrece,” first printed in 1608, or a different tragedy on the same incidents.

4

four days after “ The Tempest” had been exhibited. In point of construction, it must be admitted at once that there is the most obvious dissimilarity, inasmuch as "The Winter's Tale" is a piece in which the unities are utterly disregarded, while in “The Tempest” they are most strictly observed. It is only in the involved and parenthetical character of some of the speeches, and in psychological resemblances, that we would institute a comparison between “ The Tempest” and “The Winter's Tale," and would infer from thence that they belong to about the same period.

Without here adverting to the real or supposed origin of the story, or to temporary incidents which may have suggested any part of the plot, we may remark that there is one piece of external evidence which strongly tends to confirm the opinion that “The Tempest” was composed not very long before Ben Jonson wrote one of his comedies : we allude to his “Bartholomew Fair," and to a passage in " the Induction,” frequently mentioned, and which we concur in thinking was intended as a hit not only at “The Tempest,” but at “The Winter's Tale.” Ben Jonson’s “Bartholomew Fair” was acted in 1614, and written perhaps in the preceding year", during the popularity of Shakespeare's two plays; and there we find the following words, which we reprint, for the first time, exactly as they stand in the original edition, where Italic type seems to have been used to make the allusions more distinct and obvious :-“If there bee never a Servant-monster i' the Fayre, who can helpe it, he sayes; nor a nest of Antiques ? Hee is loth to make Nature afraid in his Playes, like those that beget Tales, Tempests, and such like Drolleries.The words “servant-monster," "antiques," "Tales," "Tempests,” and “drolleries,” which last Shakespeare himself employs in “The Tempest” (Act iii. sc. 3) seem so applicable, that they can hardly relate to

any thing else.

It may be urged, however, that what was represented at Court in 1611 was only a revival of an older play, acted before 1596, and such may have been the case: we do not, however, think it probable, for several reasons. One of these is an apparently trifling circumstance, pointed out by Farmer; viz. that in “The Merchant of Venice,” written before 1598, the name of Stephano is invariably to be pronounced with the accent on the second syllable, while in “The Tempest” the proper pronunciation is as constantly required by the verse. It seems certain, therefore, that

as then

3 See “ The Alleyn Papers," printed by the Shakespeare Society, p. 67, where Daborne, under the date of Nov. 13th, 1613, speaks of " Jonson's play about to be performed. Possibly it was deferred for a short time, as the title-page states that it was acted in 1614. It may have been written in 1612, for performance in 1613.

« EdellinenJatka »