BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

58See some cited at the close of this essay in another connection.

59B. II, Chap. 12.

60Act IV, Scene 3.

61"Le monde est un branloire perenne" (Book III, Essay 2). Florio translates that particular sentence: "The world runs all on wheels" a bad rendering.

62B. III, Chap. 3.

63B. II, Chap. 17.

64It may fairly be laid down as practically certain, from what we know of the habit of circulating works in manuscript at that period, and from what Florio tells us in his preface, that translations of some of the essays had been passed about before Florio's folio was printed.

65Varia Historia, XII, 23.

66The story certainly had a wide vogue, being found in Aristotle,Eudemian Ethics, iii, 1, and in Nicolas of Damascus; while Strabo (vii, ii. § 1) gives it further currency by contradicting it as regards the Cimbri.

67B. II, Chap. 5.

68B. II, Chap. 3.

69Richard III, I, 4; V, 3.

70The Influence of Seneca on Elizabethan Tragedy, 1893, p. 80-5.

71Actus III, 865-866.

72Actus IV, 1526-7.

73This in turn is an echo from the Greek. See note in Doering's edition.

74See Boswell's edition of Malone's Shakspere,in loc.

75Yet again, in Marston'sInsatiate Countess, the commentators have noticed the same sentiment."Death,From whose stern cave none tracks a backward path."It was in fact a poetic commonplace.

75Yet again, in Marston'sInsatiate Countess, the commentators have noticed the same sentiment.

"Death,From whose stern cave none tracks a backward path."

It was in fact a poetic commonplace.

76Act 5, Scene 6.

77Act v, sc. 1.

78I, 22.

792H. IV., iv. 3

80ii. 2

81ii. 10.

82So far as I remember, the idea of suicide as a desertion of one's post without the deity's permission is first found, in English literature, in Sidney, and he would find it in Montaigne's essay on theCustom of the Isle of Cea(edit. Firmin-Didot, i, 367).

83When this is compared with the shorter speech of similar drift in the anonymous play ofEdward III. ("To die is all as common as to live" etc., Act iv., sc. 4) it will be seen that the querying form as well as the elaboration constitutes a special resemblance between the speech in Shakspere and the passages in Montaigne

84Apology of Raimond Sebonde.

85ii, 6,Of Exercise or Practice.

86Apology.

87Ibid., near end.

88On Isis and Osiris, c. 26.

89Canto v.

90Canto xxxii.

91It would seem to be from those early monkish legends that the mediæval Inferno was built up. The torture of cold was the northern contribution to the scheme. Compare Warton,History of English Poetry, sec. 49, and Wright'sSaint Patrick's Purgatory, 1844, p. 18.

92Paradise Lost, B. II., 587-603.

93Edit. Firmin-Didot. i, 597-598.

94Ibid.p. 621.

95Act iv., sc. 5.

96iii. 3.

97B. v, cc. 8, 9, 10.Cf.vi. 2, 3.

98B. v, cc. 22-25.

99ii. 32.

100The arguments of Dr. Karl Elze, in hisEssays on Shakspere(Eng. tr., p. 15), to show that theTempestwas written about 1604, seem to me to possess no weight whatever. He goes so far as to assume that the speech of Prospero in which Shakspere transmutes four lines of the Earl of Stirling'sDariusmust have been written immediately after the publication of that work. The argument is (1) that Shakspere must have seenDariuswhen it came out, and (2) that he would imitate the passage then or never.

101Act v, sc. 3.

102i, 31.

103ii, 13.

104Act i, sc. 2.

105Act iv. sc. 3.

106i, 2.

107Hippolytus, 615 (607).

108See the Prologue toEvery Man in His Humour, first ed., preserved by Gifford.

109The 29th.

110See hisCharacteristics of English Poets, 2nd. ed. p. 222.

111The most elaborate and energetic attempt to prove Shakspere classically learned is that made in theCritital Observations on Shakspere(1746) of the Rev. John Upton, a man of great erudition and much random acuteness (shown particularly in bold attempts to excise interpolations from the Gospels), but as devoid of the higher critical wisdom as was Bentley, whom he congenially criticised. To a reader of to-day, his arguments from Shakspere's diction and syntax are peculiarly unconvincing.

112It may not be out of place here to say a word for Farmer in passing, as against the strictures of M. Stapfer, who, after recognising the general pertinence of his remarks, proceeds to say (Shakspere and Classical Antiquity, Eng. trans, p. 83) that Farmer "fell into the egregious folly of speaking in a strain of impertinent conceit: it is as if the little man for little he must assuredly have been—was eaten up with vanity." This is in its way as unjust as the abuse of Knight. M. Stapfer has misunderstood Farmer's tone, which is one of banter against, not Shakspere, but those critics who blunderingly ascribed to him a wide and close knowledge of the classics. Towards Shakspere, Farmer was admiringly appreciative—and in the preface to the second edition of his essay he wrote: "Shakspere wanted not the stilts of languages to raise him above all other men."

113Ch. iv. of vol. cited.

114The Influence of Seneca on Elizabethan Tragedy, pp. 66-67.

115Hercules Furens, ad fin. (1324-1329.).

116Hippolytus, Act. II, 715-718 (723-726.)

117Choephori, 63-65.

118Carm. lxxxviii,In Gellium. See the note in Dœring's edition.

119Gerusalemme, xviii, 8.

120The Insatiate Countess, published in 1613.

121Hamlet, Act iv. sc. 3.

122Agamemnon, 152-153.

123ii, 3 (near beginning.)

124Hercules Furens, Act. V. 1261-2.

125Act iv, Sc. 3.

126Hercules Furens, 1258-61.

127Macbeth, Act v, Sc. 2.

128Ibid.Act iv, Sc. 2.

129Ibid.Act i, sc. 7.

130B. ii. ch. 10.

131Tschischwitz,Shakspere-Forschungen, i, 1868, S. 52.

132"Es ist ubrigens nicht zu bedauern dass Shakspere Brunos Komodie nicht durchweg zum Muster genommen, den sie enthält so masslose Obscönitaten, dass Shakspere an seinen stärksten Stellen daneben fast jungfräulich erscheint" (Work cited, S. 52).

133Work cited, S. 57. I follow Dr. Tschischwitz's translation, so far as syntax permits.

134Act i, Sc. 4.

135Work cited, Sc. 59.

136See Frith'sLife of Giordano Bruno, 1889, pp. 121-128.

137Act v, Sc. 1.

138Cited by Noack, art.Bruno, inPhilosophie-geschichtliches Lexikon.

139Act i, Sc. 2.

140Work cited, p. 90.

141It would be unjust to omit to acknowledge that Dr. Furnivall seeks to frame an inductive notion of Shakspere, even when rejecting good evidence and proceeding on deductive lines; that in the works of Professor Dowden on Shakspere there is always an effort towards a judicial method, though he refuses to take some of the most necessary steps; and that the work of Mr. Appleton Morgan, President of the New York Shakspere Society, entitledShakspere in Fact and Criticism(New York, 1888), is certainly not open to the criticism I have passed. Mr. Morgan's essentially rationalistic attitude is indicated in a sentence of his preface: "My own idea has been that William Shakspere was a man of like passions with ourselves, whose moods and veins were influenced, just as are ours, by his surroundings, employments, vocations ... and that, great as he was, and oceanic as was his genius, we can read him all the better because he was, after all, a man...." In recognising the good sense of Mr. Morgan's general attitude, I must not be understood to endorse his rejection of the "metrical tests" of Mr. Fleay and other English critics. These seem to me to be about the most important English contribution to the scientific comprehension of Shakspere. On the other hand, it may be said that the naturalistic conception of Shakspere as an organism in an environment was first closely approached in the present century by French critics, as Guizot and Chasles (Taine's picture of the Elizabethan theatre, adopted by Green, having been founded on a study by Chasles); that the naturalistic comprehension ofHamlet, as an incoherent whole resulting from the putting of new cloth into an old garment, was first reached by the German Rümelin (Shakspere Studien); and that the structural anomalies ofHamletas an acting play were first clearly put by the German Benedix (Die Shakspereomanie) these two critics thus making amends for much vain discussion ofHamletby their countrymen before and since; while the naturalistic conception of the man Shakspere is being best developed at present in America. The admirable work of Messrs. Clarke and Wright and Fleay in the analysis of the text and the revelation of its non-Shaksperean elements, seems to make little impression on English culture; while such a luminous manual as Mr. Barrett Wendell'sWilliam Shakspere: a Study in Elizabethan Literature(New York, 1894), with its freshness of outlook and appreciation, points to decided progress in rational Shakspere-study in the States, though, like theShakspere Primerof Professor Dowden, it is not consistently scientific throughout.

142Life of Shakspere, 1886, p. 128.

143See Mr. Appleton Morgan'sShakspere's Venus and Adonis: a Study in Warwickshire Dialect.

144Professor Dowden notes in hisShakspere Primer(p. 12) that before 1600 the prices paid for plays, by Henslowe, the theatrical lessee, vary from £4 to £8, and not till later did it rise as high as £20 for a play by a popular dramatist.

145Compare the 78th Sonnet, which ends;—But thou art all my art, and dost advanceAs high as learning my rude ignorance.

Compare the 78th Sonnet, which ends;—

But thou art all my art, and dost advanceAs high as learning my rude ignorance.

146Life of Shakspere, pp. 29, 128.

147See it in hisLife of Shakspere, pp. 120-124. Mr. Fleay's theory, though perhaps the best "documented" of all, has received little attention in comparison with Mr. Tyler's, which has the attraction of fuller detail.

148Only in Chaucer (e.g.,The Book of the Duchess) do we find before his time the successful expression of the same perception; and Chaucer counted for almost nothing in Elizabethan letters.

149See Fleay'sLife of Shakspere, pp. 130-1.

150Cp. theEssays, ii, 17: iii, 2. (Edit. cited, vol. ii, pp. 40, 231.)

151Essays, i, 25;cf.i, 48. (Edit. cited, vol. i, pp. 304, 429.)

152ii, 4. (Edit. cited, i, 380.)

153ii, 10. (Edit. cited, i, 429.)

154Pensées Diverses.Less satisfying is the furtherpenséein the same collection:—"Les quatre grand poëtes, Platon,Malebranche,Shaftesbury, Montaigne."

155Edition cited, i, 622-623.

156Port Royal, 4ième édit., ii. 400,note.

157B. iii, Chap. 13.

158"In the midst of our compassion, we feel within I know not what bitter sweet touch of malign pleasure in seeing others suffer." (Comp. La Rochefoucauld,Pensée104.)

159B. iii, Chap. 1.

160i, Chap. 38.

161L'Angleterre au Seizième Siècle, p. 133.

162This seems to be the ideal implied in the criticisms even of Mr. Lowell and Mr. Dowden.

163Hamlet: ein Tendenzdrama Sheakspere's[sicthroughout book]gegen die skeptische und cosmopolitische Weltanschanung des Michael de Montaigne, von G. F. Stedefeld, Kreisgerichtsrath, Berlin. 1871.

164B. i, Chap. 26.

165It is not disputed that the plot existed beforehand in Whetstone'sPromos and Cassandra; and there was probably an intermediate drama.

166Edit. Firmin-Didot, i, 590.

167Oxford Essays, p. 279. Sterling, from his Christian-Carlylese point of view, declared of Montaigne that "All that we find in him of Christianity would be suitable to apes and dogs rather than to rational and moral beings" (London and Westminster Review, July, 1838, p. 340.)

168Sainte-Beuve has noted how in the essay on Prayer he added many safeguarding clauses in the later editions.

169See Mr. Spedding's essay, so entitled, in theCornhill Magazine, August, 1880.

170Art. cited,end.

171Note cited by Mr. Spedding. Cp. Introd. toLeopoldShakspere p. lxxxvii.

172Lear once (iii. 4) says he will pray; but his religion goes no further.

173See the passage cited above in section iii in connection withMeasure for Measure.

174Act iv., Sc. 2.

175Act i, Sc. 2.

176B. i, Chap. 20.

177B. i, Chap. 30.

178Edit. Firmin-Didot, i, 202.

179Ibid., pp. 477-478.

180Here, it may be said, there is a trace of the influence of Bruno's philosophy; and it may well be that Shakspere did not spontaneously strike out the thought for himself. But I am not aware that any parallel passage has been cited.

181Fleay'sLife, pp. 138, &c.

182B. i, Chap. 42.

183B. ii, Chap. 12. (Edit. cited, i, 501.)

184Midsummer Nights Dream, Act ii. Sc. 2.

185See his Conversations with Drummond of Hawthornden

186Halliwell-Phillipps,Outlines of the Life of Shakspere, 5th ed., p. 175.

187I find even Mr. Appleton Morgan creating a needless difficulty on this head. In hisShakspere in Fact and Criticism, already cited, he writes (p. 316): "I find him ... living and dying so utterly unsuspicious that he had done anything of which his children might care to hear, that he never even troubled himself to preserve the manuscript of or the literary property in a single one of the plays which had raised him to affluence." As I have already pointed out, there is no reason to suppose that Shakspere could retain the ownership of his plays any more than did the other writers who supplied his theatre. They belonged to the partnership. Besides, he could not possibly have published ashisthe existing mass, so largely made up of other men's work. His fellow-players did so without scruple after his death, being simply bent on making money.

188Sonnet 110. Compare the next.

189B. ii, Chap. 10.

190B. i, Chap. 38.

191This may be presumed to have been written between 1603 and 1609, the date of the publication of the Sonnets. As Mr. Minto argues, "the only sonnet of really indisputable date is the 107th, containing the reference to the death of Elizabeth" (Characteristics, as cited, p. 220). As the first 126 sonnets make a series, it is reasonable to take those remaining as of later date.

192It more particularly echoes, however, two passages in the nineteenth essay: "There is no evil in life for him that hath well conceived, how the privation of life is no evil. To know how to die, doth free us from all subjection and constraint." "No man did ever prepare himself to quit the world more simply and fully ... than I am fully assured I shall do. The deadest deaths are the best"

193ii, 12.

194iii, 11.

195iii, 4.

196In all probability this character existed in the previous play, the name being originally, as was suggested last century by Dr. Farmer, a mere variant of "Canibal."

197iii, 4.

198Act ii, Sc. 2.

199iii, 9.

BUCKLE AND HIS CRITICS: A Study in Sociology.

THE SAXON AND THE CELT: A Study in Sociology.

ESSAYS TOWARDS A CRITICAL METHOD: New Series.

MODERN HUMANISTS.

THE FALLACY OF SAVING: A Study in Economics.

THE EIGHT HOURS QUESTION: A Study in Economics.

CHRIST AND KRISHNA: A Study in Mythology. Etc. Etc.

Pall Mall Gazette,May31, 1897:

"... That, of a surety, is an unpleasant indictment; and, having thus genially introduced himself to his reader, the author goes bald-headed for Mrs. Grundy, Mr. Podsnap, and public opinion as voiced according to the oracles of Mrs. Smith and Brown, of Little Muddleton Road, and for all the cherished fetishes of Suburbia."

Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper,May30, 1897:"To persons who like hard hitting, vigorous English levelled at the cant of Grundyism, this book will come as a great treat."

Weekly Times and Echo,May30, 1897: "'The Blight of Respectability,' by Geoffrey Mortimer, is well worth reading, and by more of us, perhaps, than imagine it. The shoddy god has votaries in England,where one would least expect to find them."

Daily Chronicle:

Although the title of this book defines its scope, it does not indicate its main purpose. That is to show that the Celtic race has been misrepresented by a number of historians, from Mommsen to Froude, as incapable of self-government; and to prove, by inference, its fitness for Home Rule.... The major argument is based by Mommsen and his school on the assumption of permanent distinctions among races; and therefore Mr. Robertson applies himself, with a large measure of success, to the task of showing that the theory of innate persistent qualities marking off one people from another has no ethnological justification.... Mr. Robertson is able to make short and easy work of the loose writing which sums up those (imaginary) characters in epithet or epigram.... Mr. Robertson's lively style and happy allusiveness keep the reader interested to the end...

The Sun,March31, 1897:

The author of "Pseudo-Philosophy" handles his weapons well, and seems to us in many instances to occupy positions which, with our present human intelligence, are almost unassailable. On the other hand, of course, champions of orthodoxy, as a rule, frankly admit that some of their tenets and the justice of certain aspects of the divine policy cannot be comprehended by the natural man. But Mr. Cecil's strong feelings occasionally carry him too far, as when in the preface he seems to use "religious obscurantism" as a synonym for religion generally. The former may have been opposed to social progress, as he says. To contend that the same charge will stand against the latter is only to ignore the fact, if not indeed the law, that the great social awakenings have almost invariably followed hard upon the great religious revivals.

Back to Index Next