in oppofition to pedantry, that "if he had not read the clafficks, he had likewife not ftolen from them; and if any topick was produced from a poet of antiquity he would undertake to fhow fomewhat on the fame fubject, at least as well written by Shakspeare." Fuller a diligent and equal fearcher after truth and quibbles, declares pofitively, that " his learning was very little,-nature was all the art used upon him, as he himself, if alive, would confefs.” And may we not fay, he did confefs it, when he apologized for his untutored lines to his noble patron the Earl of Southampton?-this lift of witneffes might be easily enlarged; but I flatter myfelf, I fhall ftand in no need of fuch evidence. One of the firft and moft vehement affertors of the learning of Shakspeare, was the editor of his poems, the well-known Mr. Gildon; and his steps were moft punctually taken by a fubfequent labourer in the fame department, Dr. Sewell. Mr. Pope fuppofed "little ground for the common opinion of his want of learning :" once indeed he made a proper diftinction between learning and languages, as I would be understood to do in my title-page; but unfortunately he forgot it in the courfe of his difquifition, and endeavoured to perfuade himself that Shakspeare's acquaintance Hence perhaps the ill-ftarr'd rage between this critick and his elder brother, John Dennis, fo pathetically lamented in the Dunciad. Whilft the former was perfuaded, that "the man who doubts of the learning of Shakspeare, hath none of his own:" the latter, above regarding the attack in his private capacity, declares with great patriotick vehemence, that he who allows Shakspeare had learning, and a familiar acquaintance with the ancients, ought to be looked upon as a detractor from the glory of Great Britain." Dennis was expelled his college for attempting to ftab a man in the dark: Pope would have been glad of this anecdote, with the ancients might be actually proved by the fame medium as Jonfon's. Mr. Theobald is "very unwilling to allow him fo poor a scholar, as many have laboured to reprefent him;" and yet is " cautious of declaring too pofitively on the other fide of the question." Dr. Warburton hath expofed the weaknefs of fome arguments from fufpected imitations; and yet offers others, which, I doubt not, he could as cafily have refuted. Mr. Upton wonders" with what kind of reafoning any one could be fo far impofed upon, as to imagine that Shakspeare had no learning;" and lafhes with much zeal and fatisfaction "the pride and pertnefs of dunces, who, under fuch a name would gladly fhelter their own idlenefs and ignorance." He, like the learned knight, at every anomaly in grammar or metre, "Hath hard words ready to fhow why, "And tell what rule he did it by." How would the old bard have been aftonished to have found, that he had very skilfully given the trochaic dimeter brachycatalectic, COMMONLY called the ithyphallic meafure to the Witches in Macbeth! and that now and then a halting verfe afforded a moft beautiful inftance of the pes proceleufmaticus! "But, continues Mr. Upton, it was a learned age; Roger Afcham affures us, that Queen Elizabeth read more Greek every day, than fome dignitaries of the church did Latin in a whole week." This appears very probable; and a pleafant proof it is of the general learning of the times, and of Shakspeare in particular. I wonder, he did not corroborate it with an extract from her injunctions to her clergy, that "such as were but mean readers fhould peruse over before, once or twice, the chapters and homilies, to the intent they might read to the better understanding of the people.' Dr. Grey declares, that Shakspeare's knowledge in the Greek and Latin tongues cannot reafonably be called in queftion. Dr. Dodd fuppofes it proved, that he was not fuch a novice in learning and antiquity as fome people would pretend. And to clofe the whole, for I fufpect you to be tired of quotation, Mr. Whalley, the ingenious editor of Jonfon, hath written a piece exprefsly on this fide the question: perhaps from a very excufable partiality, he was willing to draw Shakspeare from the field of nature to claffick ground, where alone, he knew, his author could poffibly cope with him. These criticks, and many others their coadjutors, have fuppofed themselves able to trace Shakspeare in the writings of the ancients; and have fometimes perfuaded us of their own learning, whatever became of their author's. Plagiarisms have been difcovered in every natural defcription and every moral fentiment. Indeed by the kind assistance of the various Excerpta, Sententiæ, and Flores, this bufinefs may be effected with very little expence of time or fagacity; as Addifon hath demonftrated in his comment on Chevy-chafe, and Wagstaff on Tom Thumb; and I myfelf will engage to give you quotations from the elder English writers (for to own the truth, I was once idle enough to collect fuch,) which fhall carry with them at leaft an equal degree of fimilarity. But there can be no occafion of wafting any future time in this department: the world is now in poffeffion of the Marks of Imita tion. "Shakspeare however hath frequent allufions to the facts and fables of antiquity." Granted:-and as Mat. Prior fays, to fave the effufion of more Chriftian ink, I will endeavour to fhow, how they came to his acquaintance. It is notorious, that much of his matter of fact knowledge is deduced from Plutarch: but in what language he read him, hath yet been the queftion. Mr. Upton is pretty confident of his fkill in the original, and corrects accordingly the errors of his copyifts by the Greek ftandard. Take a few instances, which will elucidate this matter fufficiently. In the third act of Antony and Cleopatra, Octavius represents to his courtiers the imperial pomp of thofe illuftrious lovers, and the arrangement of their dominion, 66 Unto her "He gave the 'stablishment of Egypt, made her "Abfolute queen." Read Libya, fays the critick authoratively, as is plain from Plutarch, Πρώτην μὲν ἀπέφηνε Κλεοπάτραν βασίλισσαν Αιγύπια καὶ Κύπρα καὶ ΛΙΒΥΗΣ, και κοίλης Συρίας. This is very true: Mr. Heath accedes to the correction, and Mr. Johnfon admits it into the text: but turn to the tranflation, from the French of Amyot, by Thomas North, in folio, 1579,' and you will at once see the origin of the mistake. 8 It is extraordinary, that this gentleman fhould attempt fo voluminous a work, as the Revifal of Shakspeare's Text, when, he tells us in his Preface, "he was not fo fortunate as to be furnished with either of the folin editions, much lefs any of the ancient quartos:" and even Sir Thomas Hanmer's performance was known to him only by Mr. Warburton's representation." 9 I find the character of this work pretty early delineated: " "Twas Greek at firft, that Greek was Latin made, "First of all he did establish Cleopatra queene of Egypt, of Cyprus, of Lydia, and the lower Syria." Again, in the fourth act: -My meffenger "He hath whipt with rods, dares me to perfonal combat, "I have many other ways to die; mean time "What a reply is this?" cries Mr. Upton, " 'tis acknowledging he fhould fall under the unequal combat. But if we read, Let the old ruffian know • He hath many other ways to die; mean time we have the poignancy and the very repartee of Cæfar in Plutarch." This correction was first made by Sir Thomas Hanmer, and Mr. Johnson hath received it. Most indisputably it is the sense of Plutarch, and given fo in the modern tranflation: but Shakspeare was misled by the ambiguity of the old one: "Antonius fent again to challenge Cæfar to fight him: Cæfar answered, That he had many other ways to die, than fo." In the third act of Julius Cæfar, Antony, in his well-known harangue to the people, repeats a part of the emperor's will: "To every Roman citizen he gives, "To every fev'ral man, feventy-five drachmas.- "His private arbours, and new-planted orchards, "Our author certainly wrote," fays Mr. Theobald," On that fide Tiber • Trans Tiberim-prope Cæfaris hortos.' |