1810.] 
Dr. Johnson strangely supposes this to 
be a slip of attention; yet he expressly 
notices, that in the preceding scene, Pro- 
theus had an interview with Sylvia, and 
in high terms offered her his service. 
This would indeed be an extraordinary 
inadvertence on the part of the poet. 
But the passage is justly explained by 
}Ir. Stevens, as meaning only, that he 
had ‘seen her outward form, without be- 
ing long enough acquainted to judge of 
her mental accomplishments. ‘The pa- 
rallel quotation from Cymbeline, is a 
happy and decisive illustration of this 
sense of the words, if any doubt could 
reasonally be entertained : 
All of her that is out of doors most rich! 
if she be furnished with a mind so rare, &c. 
T agree, without the shadow of hesitation, 
in the opinion of Dr. Johnson, that this 
play, notwithstanding the great mixture 
of trash which it contains, and which, 
wholly irrelevant as it appears to the 
fable, might well be supposed unfairly 
foisted intu it, is rightly attributed to 
Shakespeare. ‘If it be taken from him, 
to whoin shall we give it?” ‘This ques- 
tion, says that great critic, may be 
asked of all the disputed plays, except 
Titus Andronicus, now universally given 
up as surreptitious. But that contemp- 
tible ‘* drum and trumpet thing,” the 
first part of Henry VI. was assuredly 
never written by Shakespeare, to what. 
ever pen it may be ascribed. And I 
cannot admit, that the Comedy of Errors 
exhibits any trace of the genius of the 
mighty dramatist, But the “ Two Gen- 
tlemen of Verona” comprises all the 
essentials of a pleasing and elegant pro- 
duction, however inferior in energy and 
effect to the generality of Shakespeare’s 
dramas. And numerous passages, and 
even whole scenes, may be cited, which 
could proceed from no other writer. 
The very first lines of this play, may be 
confidently adduced as a specimen of 
¢omposition truly Shakesperian; and 
every act will furnish similar examples : 
Cease to persuade my loving Protheus, 
|Home keeping youth have ever homely wits; 
Wer’t not affection chains thy tender days, 
To the sweet glances of thy honour’d love ; 
T rather would entreat thy company 
To see the wonders of the world abroad, 
| Than living dully sluggardized- at home, 
Wear out thy youth with shapeless idleness, 
“ct. I, Scene 1. 
Critical Remark $ On Shakespeare, 
327 
I knew him as myself; for from our infancy 
We have convers’d and spent our hours 
together 5 
His years but young, but his experience old; 
His head unmellowed, but his judgment ripe; 
And, in a word, for far behind his worth 
Come all the praises that I now bestow: 
He is complete in feature and in mind. 
éact. II, Scene 4, 
Much is the force of heaven-born poesy ; 
For Orpheus’ lute was strung with poet's 
sinews, 
Whose golden touch could soften steel and: 
stones; 
Make tygers tame, and huge leviathans 
Forsake unsounded deeps to dance on sands. 
Act. TIL, Scene 2. 
She in my judgment was as fair as you ; 
But since she did neglect her looking-glass, » 
And threw her sun expelling mask away, 
The air hath starv’d the roses in her cheek, 
And pinch’d the lily-tincture of her face. 
“ict. IV. Scene Be 
How use ¢oth breed a habit ina man, 
This shadowy desert, unfrequented woods, 
I better brook than flourishing peopled towns3 
Here can I sit alone, unseen of any, 
And to the nightingale’s complaining notes, 
Tune my distresses, and record my woes ! 
O thou that dost inhabit in my breast, 
Leave not the mansion so long tenantless, 
Lest growing ruinous the building-fall, 
And leave no memory of what it was; 
Repair me with thy presence Sylvia, . 
Thou gentle nymph cherish thy forlormswaims. 
Act. V. Scene 3. 
MERRY Wives or WInpsor. 
Act. IIT. Seene 2. 
“ What say you to young Mr. Fenton? 
He has eyes of youth; he writes verses, 
he speaks holiday, he smells April and 
May.” “He speaks holiday,” that is, 
says Dr. Warburton, “in a high-flowan - 
fustian style.” Qn the contrary the host’ 
means to compliment Mr. Fenton, by 
saying, that he expresses himself in 
choice and courtly language. Hotspur 
in his admirable description of a modish 
coxcomb, says, “ with many holiday and 
lady-terms he questioned me.” 
Ft may be observed that the Falstaff of 
the Merry Wives of Windsor, bears but 
a distant resemblance to the Falstaif of 
Henry IV. It is indeed a new delinea- 
tion, ski'fully adapted to the difference 
of situation and circumstances, rather 
than a modification of the original chae 
racter, 
: Though 
