346 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
[No. 22. 
I determined, if possible, to find it out. The first 
question I put to myself was, Had Shakspeare 
himself any concern in the older play? A second 
glance at the work sufficed for an answer in the 
negative. I next asked myself on what authority 
we called it an “older” play. The answer I found 
myself obliged to give was, greatly to my own sur- 
prise, On no authority whatever! But there was 
still a difficulty in conceiving how, with Shak- 
speare’s work before him, so unscrupulous an imi- 
tator should have made so poor an imitation. I 
should not have felt this difficulty had I then 
recollected that the play in question was not pub- 
lished; but, as the case stood, I carefully examined 
the two plays together, especially those passages 
which were identical, or nearly so, in both, and 
noted, in these cases, the minutest variations. The 
result was, that I satisfied myself that the original 
conception was invariably to be found in Shak- 
speare’s play. I have confirmed this result in a 
variety of ways, which your space will not allow 
me to enter upon; therefore, reserving such cir- 
cumstances for the present as require to be en- 
forced by argument, I will content myself with 
pointing out certain passages that bear out my 
view. I must first, however, remind your readers 
that while some plays, from their worthlessness, 
were never printed, some were withheld from the 
press on account of their very value; and of this 
latter class were the works of Shakspeare. The 
late publication of his works created the impres- 
sion, not yet quite worn out, of his being a later 
writer than many of his contemporaries, solely be- 
cause their printed works are dated earlier by 
twenty or thirty years. But for the obstinate 
effects of this impression, it is difficult to conceive 
how any one could miss the original invention of 
Shakspeare in the induction, and such scenes as 
that between Grumio and the tailor; the humour 
of which shines, even in the feeble reflection of the 
imitation, in striking contrast with those comic (?) 
scenes which are the undisputed invention of the 
author of the Taming of a Shrew. 
The first passage I take is from Act IV. Sc. 3. 
“ Grumio, Thou hast fae’d many things ? 
* Tailor. I have. 
“ Gru. Face not me: thou hast brav’d many men; 
brave not me. I will neither be fae’d nor bray’d.” 
~ In this passage there is a play upon the terms 
“ fne’d” and brav’d.” In the tailor’s sense, “things” 
may be “fac’d” and “men” may be “ bray’d;” 
and, by means of this play, the tailor is entrapped 
into an answer. The imitator, having probably 
seen the play represented, has carried away the 
words, but ‘by transposing them, and with the 
change of one expression—“ men” for “things”— 
has lost the spirit: there is a pun no longer. He 
might have played upon “brav’d,” but there he 
does not wait for the tailor’s answer; and “fae’d,” 
as he has it, can be understood but in one sense, 
and the tailor’s admission becomes meaningless. 
The passage is as follows :— 
“ Saudre. Dost thou hear, tailor? thou hast brav’d 
many men: brave not me, Th’ast fae’d many men, 
“ Tailor. Well, Sir? 
“ Saudre. Face not me: I'll neither be fac’d nor 
brav’d at thy hands, I can tell thee.”—p. 198. 
A little before, in the same scene, Grumio says, 
“‘ Master, if ever I said loose-bodied gown, sew me 
in the skirts of it, and beat me to death with a 
bottom of brown thread.” I am almost tempted 
to ask if passages such as this be not evidence 
sufficient. In the Taming of a Shrew, with the 
variation of “sew me in a seam” for “sew me in 
the skirts of it,” the passage is also to be found; 
but who ¢an doubt the whole of this scene to be 
by Shakspeare, rather than by the author of such 
scenes, intended to be comic, as one referred to in 
my last communication (No. 15. p. 227., numbered 
7.), and shown to be identical with one in Doctor 
Faustus 2 I will just remark, too, that the best 
appreciation of the spirit of the passage, which, 
one would think, should point out the author, is 
shown in the expression “ sew me in the skirts of 
it,’ which has meaning, whereas the variation has 
none. A little earlier, still in the same scene, the 
following bit of dialogue occurs :— 
“ Kath. Vl have no bigger ; this doth fit the time, 
And gentlewomen wear such caps as these. 
« Pet. When you are gentle, you shall have one too, 
And not till then.” 
Katharine’s use of the term “ gentlewomen” 
suggests here Petruchio’s “gentle.” In the other 
play the reply is evidently imitated, but with the 
absence of the suggestive cue : — 
« For I will home again unto my father’s house. 
“ Ferando. I, when y’are mecke and gentle, but not 
before.” — p. 194. 
Petruchio, having dispatched the tailor and 
haberdasher, proceeds — 
«Well, come my Kate; we will unto your father’s, 
Even in these honest mean habiliments ; 
Our purses shall be proud, our garments poor ; ” 
p- 198. 
throughout continuing to urge the vanity of out- 
ward appearance, in reference to the “ruffs, and 
cuffs, and farthingales and things,” which he had 
promised her, and with which the phrase “ honest 
mean habiliments” is used in contrast. The suf- 
ficiency to the mind of these, 
“ For ’tis the mind that makes the body rich,” 
is the very pith and purpose of the speech. Com- 
mencing in nearly the same words, the imitator 
entirely mistakes this, in stating the object of 
clothing to be to ‘‘shrowd us from the winter’s 
rage ;” which is, nevertheless, true enough, though 
completely beside the purpose. In Act I. Se. 1., 
Petruchio says, — 
EE 
