4811.] 
Cromwell; and at parting, as we are 
told, Sir Oliver presented his royal guest, 
swho was much attached to the sports of 
the field, with “ six hawks of an excellent 
wing.” 
—— No more of that, 
I prithee, do not strive against my vows, 
I was compell’d to her. Act IP. Ssone 3. 
Dr. Johnson endeavours to obviate the 
difficulty of this passage, by exchanging 
the word strive, for drive or shrive; nei- 
ther of which alterations can claim any 
preference to the present reading. ‘Do 
Mot strive against my vows,” &c. appa- 
rently means, Do not let my vows be the 
‘obstacle against which your virtue strives 
r contends; for, being compelled to her, 
they were involuntary and consequently 
gavalid. 
_ Berirs How have I sworn? 
Dian. °*Tis not the many oaths that make 
the truth, 
But the plain single vow that is vow’d 
true; j 
What is not holy that we swear not by, 
But take the Highest to witnesse=then pray 
tell me 
a should swear by Jove’s great attributes 
loy’d you dearly, would you believe my 
oaths 
When I did love you ill? This has no hold- 
ing 
‘To swear by him whom I protest to love, 
Phat I will work against him: therefore, your 
i oaths 
Are words, and poor conditions but unsealed. 
a did. Ib. 
The scope of Diana’s reasonings in this 
speech have been entirely mistaken; and 
the alterations proposed by the learned 
commentators, Warburton and Johnson, 
however specious, are beyond all ques- 
tion inadmissible. Bertram, to obviate 
the charge of inconstancy, says, ‘* how 
have [ sworn?” to which Diana replies, 
«Tis not the many vows that make the 
truth,” &c. that is, ’Tis not the mualtipli« 
city nor the solemnity of your protesta- 
tions that can evince your fidelity, for, 
‘to make such appeals to Heaven, is easy 
and common, But would you yourself, 
whose oaths are offered as demonstrati- 
pus, give me credit, if I should swear by 
all that is sacred my love to you was sin- 
cere, when my conduct contradicted my 
professions? Oaths such as your’s are, in 
their own nature, void of all title to con- 
fidence, which swear by him whom you 
profess to reverence, that you will be true 
to engayements contracted in opposition 
fo his will. Therefore your oaths, &c. 
_ ‘The cvunclysion is here very justly and 
Critical Remarks on Shakespeares 63) 
forcibly deduced from the premises. 
Since this note was written, ] have the 
satisfaction to find, that the author of the 
Revisal has offered a similar interpretation 
of the passage. 
Act. V. Scene 8.—Dr. Johnson’ ob- 
serves, that Parolles has many of the 
lineaments of Falstaff, a fellow that had 
more wit than virtue; and though justice 
required that he should be detected and 
exposed, yet his vices sit so fit in him, that 
he is not at last suffered to starve.” I 
confess, however, that I see but little re- 
semblance between these two characters, 
It is true, they are equally destitute of 
virtue; but, as to the wit of Parolles, Iam 
yet to learn where it is tobe found, He 
Jena scruples not to say that she “ thinks 
him a great way fool;” and: the vices 
which sit so fit in him, are totally differ- 
ent from those which enter into the com- 
position of Falstaff. He recommends 
himself to Bertram, who is himself re- 
presented as a man of no great penetra- 
tiun, by his servile complaisance and pa- 
rasitical obsequiousness; and imposes 
upon him, by a superficial parade of 
knowledge and stentation of valour, 
These are vices with which Falstaff is not 
chargeable; for the braggardism of Fal- 
staff, whichis mere flighty,rhodomontade 
not calculated or intended for serious be- 
lief, is not, at all akin to the grave and 
pompous lies of Parolles. Noristherea 
eingle trait in. the character of this pale 
troon, which bears any analogy to the hu- 
mour, the hilarity, the sagacity, of the fat 
knight, to his vigour and force of mind, 
or the irresistible attraction of his com. 
pany and conversation: and we may cer=- 
tainly add also, to his natural fortitude 
and courage: though the unlucky and lu- 
dicrous circumstances in which he is ine 
volved, render this part of his character 
liable to strong apparent imputations. 
A most able analysis of this extraordinary 
dramatic personage, is to be found in 
the admirable Essay on the Character 
af Sir John Falstaff, written by the late 
Mr. Morgan, 
Macpetn, 
The observations of Dr, Johnson, 
which precede the first and fourth acts 
of this tragedy, upon the new almost 
obsolete subject of witchcraft, are very 
masterly; and exhibit a curious compen 
dium of the once popular system of en, 
chantment, upon which the play is 
founded. 
There I go to meet Macbeth. 
Act ‘I, Scene 1. 
This 
