words," which had evidently become obsolete, e.g. which is changed to that; betwixt to between; thou wert to thou wast; yea to I (aye); moe to more, or other; you to thou; (6) there are besides certain minute verbal changes in the Folio, the reason for which is not so clear as in the previous cases, but probably in most instances they are due to euphony;* (7) the stage-directions in the Folio are fuller and more accurate than those in the Quarto.

Critics are divided on

Which is the best Authority? this point, some championing the cause of the Quartos, others of the Folios; the chief representatives of the former party are the Cambridge Editors; of the latter James Spedding, Delius, Daniel, etc.

(i.) According to the Cambridge Editors, some such scheme as the following will best account for the phenomena of the text:

Where A is the Author's original MS.; B1 a transcript by another hand with some accidental omissions and, of course, slips of the pen. From this transcript was printed the Quarto of 1597, while A. is the Author's original MS. revised by himself, with corrections and additions, interlinear, marginal, and on inserted leaves; Be a copy of this revised MS., made by another hand, probably after the death of the Author, and perhaps a very short time before 1623. From B. the Folio text was printed; the writer of Be had perhaps occasionally recourse to the Quarto of 1602 to supplement passages which, by its being frayed or *E.g. To bring (Folios, bear) this tidings to the bloody King,' (IV. iii. 22.)

'The imperial metal circling now thy brow' (Folios, head); (IV. iv. 382).

stained, had become illegible in A. (v. page x., Camb. ed.).

"Assuming the truth of this hypothesis," the Cambridge Editors conclude," the object of an editor must be to give in the text as near an approximation as possible to A, rejecting from F1 all that is due to the unknown writer of B. and supplying its place from Q1, which, errors of pen and press apart, certainly came from the hand of Shakespeare. In the construction of our text we have steadily borne this principle in mind, only deviating from it in a few instances where we have retained the expanded version of the Folio in preference to the briefer version of the Quarto, even when we incline to think that the earlier form is more terse, and therefore not likely to have been altered by its author. Cæteris paribus, we have adopted the reading of the Quarto."

(ii) James Spedding, in an exhaustive essay on the subject,* contested this view, maintaining "that the text of the Folio (errors being corrected or allowed for) represents the result of Shakespeare's own latest version, and approaches nearest to the form in which he wished it to stand," that the First Quarto was printed without preparation for the press or superintendence by himself, and that he began to prepare a corrected and amended copy, but had not leisure to complete this new version.t

Delius anticipated Spedding in his inquiry,‡ and came to an even more determined conclusion as regards the superiority of the Folio; according to him a nameless corrector had tampered with the original MS. before it went to the printer in 1597, while the true text appears in the Folio version.

Mr. Daniel (Facsimile Reprint of Quarto 1) is also in favour of the Folio " as the basis of the text "; after a

* On the corrected edition of Richard III., pp. 1-75, New Shakespere Society's Transactions, 1875-6.

† Ibid. v. p. 190, where Spedding summed up his views, after considering Mr. Pickersgill's objections (pp. 77-124).

v. German Shakespeare Society's Year Book, Vol. VII.

careful analysis of the early Quartos he comes to the conclusion that the Folio version was printed from a copy of Quarto 6, altered "in accordance with the theatrical MS. which the transcriber had before him."

(iii.) Surveying all the evidence, the present writer thinks it possible to take a somewhat neutral position; the partisanship of the two schools seems too determined in its devotion to the one text or the other. Whatever may be the history of the First Quarto it certainly goes back to the author's MS., probably abridged for acting purposes; but on the whole it is a careless piece of printing; whatever may be the history of the First Folio version, one can certainly trace in it the touch of a hand other than Shakespeare's; the editor did his work with insufficient caution, though comparatively few changes for the worse are intentionally his; he probably had a Third or Sixth Quarto collated with an unabridged MS., ordering an untrustworthy assistant to correct the printed copy, and to add the omitted passages; subsequently he probably read through the whole, amending here and there, and not troubling to consult the MS. too often. Hence the genuineness of most of the added passages, and the doubtful character of so many of the smaller changes.

The Date of Composition. Authorities are agreed in assigning Richard III. to 1594 or thereabouts, relying mainly on the internal evidence of style, especially the manifest influence of Marlowe; in considering this influence it must be borne in mind that the play belongs naturally to the group of history plays dealing with the

* E.g.

'My Lady Grey, his wife, Clarence, 'tis she

That tempts him to this harsh extremity' (I. i. 64).
Q. 1.' That tempers him to this extremity.'

I.

Q. 2.' That tempts him to this extremity.'

Q. 3.' That temps him to this extremity.

Spedding held there is nothing to choose between the two lines, but there seems all the difference in the world between the Folio

House of York, and links itself intimately to 2 Henry VI., and 3 Henry VI. Noteworthy Marlowan characteristics are the following:-(a) Richard, like Tamberlaine, or Faustus, or Barabas, monopolises the whole action of the 'Drama; (b) the characters of this play of passion seem intended, for the most part, merely to set off the hero's “ideal villainy"; (c) the absence of evolution of character in the hero; (d) the hero's consciousness and avowal of his villainy; (e) the tone of the play is often lyrical or epical rather than dramatic (e.g., the lamentation of the women, II. ii.; IV. i.); (f) blank verse is used throughout, while prose and the lyrical forms found in the earlier plays are conspicuously absent. The play of Richard III. was evidently Shakespeare's experimenthis only experiment-in the Marlowan method of tragedy, but in one respect, at least, Shakespeare shows himself no blind follower of Marlowe; he weaves Nemesis into the play and shows its consummation in Richard's fall, hence the significance of Margaret's fateful presence, haunting the scenes like some prophetic Chorus of ancient Drama.

In John Weever's Epigrammes, printed in 1599, but written in 1595, the 22nd Epigram, addressed Ad Gulielmum Shakespeare, mention is made of Romeo and Richard as well-known characters, and the reference is evidently to Richard III., and not to Richard II.* Possibly, too, the wooing of Estrild in the old play of Locrine is imitated, as Mr. Fleay (Shakespeare Manual) has suggested, from Richard III., I. ii.; Locrine was first printed in 1595.

The Source of the Plot. Sir Thomas More's Life of Richard the Third, incorporated by Hall & Holinshed in their histories, is the ultimate source of the play. Shakespeare evidently used the second edition of Holinshed, copying a mistake which occurs only in that edition. The *"Romeo, Richard; more, whose names I know not.”

wooing of Queen Anne, as well as Queen Margaret's part, are, however, purely imaginary (cp. Courtenay's Commentaries on the Historical Plays, II. 60-117).

Possibly Shakespeare borrowed a few hints from an earlier play written before 1588, and published in 1594, entitled "The True Tragedie of Richard the Third."* To Dr. Legge's Latin play (acted at Cambridge before 1583) he certainly owed nothing.

There were several other plays on this subject, probably

Interior of the Great Council Room on the upper storey of the White Tower. From an engraving by Fairholt.

* Reprinted by Shakespeare Society, 1844, from the only perfect copy extant.-N.B.-In the old play we find "A horse, a horse, a fresh horse," also, Richard's reference to the ghosts of his victims crying for revenge." The same Society printed Richard's Vision, a seventeenth century poem founded on Shakespeare's play, containing an interesting reference thereto.

66